We're going ona Bear Hunt
-
Posts
23 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
I am just drafting a complaint to Erudio ... Deja vu!! This seems to be what the ICO requires before they will look at a complaint. Am going to give the info they requested - name, address and postcode... they've got it already!!! And will also enclose copy of the SAR again.
-
This is my husband's one - I haven't sent one off for me yet - I got a bit side tracked by my hip operation. I thought it a wee bit odd too. I have just been on the ICO website and I clicked on the "make a complaint " link. You answer various questions, about the time frame etc, and then the answer came up " Repeat your request to the organisation". I have then been trying to navigate the site to see where I can actually instigate a notification of a breach, and try another route to start a complaint but seem to be having a few problems with their site at the moment- it doesn't seem to want to load, and I don't think its problems my end, as everything else is working. I'll try again in a little bit.
-
Thank-you both for your responses. We've been at the same address for the last 25 years.I'll check the original agreements and see what's on them. I was thinking that it was a bit sneaky saying to ring them. I'll check out the ICO guidance, and see where I go and let you know.
-
Time for an update: apologies for radio silence, I had a hip replacement and was trying to forget about Erudio for a few weeks! My husband received a letter from DFF saying that they had received the PAP reply and the account was currently on hold. He has since received a notice of arrears letter for each year of loans (from Erudio). Today a letter came regarding the SAR - which made me realise I hadn't been keeping an eye on the time frame for that one. It is an "identification and verification request". This strikes me as odd, as they are asking for the following : Full name 1st Line of address Postcode date of birth Address provided to SLC Contact phone numbers: Home and Mobile The letter then says that the "easiest and most efficient way of supplying your information... is... on the number provided..." It states that "Its important to note that if we have not been able to satisfy our identification and verification to validate your request within 14 days from the date of this letter ..." (which is the 20th NOV) "then we would not be able to proceed further at this point". I am wondering whether this needs to be provided, and are they just stalling, and do I just need to complain straight away to the Information commissioner.
-
That's the thing, the wording is as follows: "The present regulations provide for (a) cancellation of repayments, if you die and (b) cancellation of repayments ( so long as you are not in breach of any obligation to us) if (i) you are aged under forty when you last enter an agreement to borrow from from us and you attain age fifty or all or part of your last borrowing from us has been outstanding for at least 25 years or (ii) you are aged at least forty when you last enter an agreement to borrow from us and you attain age sixty." The problem being that Erudio say that we are in breach of obligations. (They have the discretion under the contract to say we are not.) There is discretion for "Time and indulgence". Which is what we requested in Sept 2015, and Erudio effectively ignored us. The wording is as follows: " Without any obligation on us to do so, we shall be entitled to grant time or other indulgence for the payment or satisfaction of any of your liabilities without affecting any of our rights or operating as a waiver of such rights in whole or in part. We will do this only if we are satisfied that this represents a more effective means of recovering the sums due under this Agreement than instituting legal proceedings would be. The problem as I see it, is that this will never go away. Erudio don't seem to like the time and indulgence option as often this would mean accepting late deferment forms or SLC deferment forms: and then they would not get any money. Michael Chessum, the ULU (University of London Union) president, said privatisation of the loan book stemmed from "a poisonous ideological motive to make students consumers, with a lifetime of increasingly malign debt". And that is what will happen. I believe it will take court cases to sort this out. In the meantime, how to deal with them...
-
All gone off now, just wondering, going forward, which course of action to take: Nothing - as I had been doing for last two years - in the hope it gets to 6 yrs ; or send off SLC deferment forms at the correct time - (next ones due in November, then April) and thereby acknowledging the debt every year.
-
Thank you so very much for all your input, I will get them in the post today. I'm sure I'll be back here once I get a response. It has been massively helpful to have someone to guide me through- thank-you, thank-you, thank-you!!! I have also got all my papers in order now, just in case something kicks off.
-
Okay, cool, have done SAR and that is ready to go. Have filled in the PAP reply form as follows: Box D ( ticked ) I dispute the debt: pls see attached sheet : There have been ongoing communications with Erudio regarding this matter, with numerous complaints, since they took over the administration of the loans from the Student Loans Company. I have been eligible for deferral to re-pay the sums borrowed for the whole period that Erudio have handled the matter. Copies of the relevant deferral forms for each year are enclosed. Erudio have previously denied receiving relevant communications from me with regard to this matter. I dispute the debt because the conditions required for its enforceability (ie income threshold) have not been met. Box H (ticked) I have enclosed copies of deferal forms Box I (ticked) I have requested by way of an SAR all the information that Erudio hold regarding my case. name and date printed at bottom and not signed.
-
I'm thinking the SAR is to Erudio and not drydens?
-
Just to clarify , with the PAP reply form, am I only disputing the debt at this point- and not requesting more documents? Box D ticked and sending copies of SLC deferment forms. (Don't sign the form) Just a couple of further queries - should I redact the 4 individual loan refs on the copies of the deferment forms (or leave them on) and/or just use the one customer ref no that Erudio use for all the loans? Should the deferment form signatures be redacted? Just thinking whilst looking through documents- How come its okay for Erudio to somehow "remedy" the account just before threatening you with court action by providing statements that they should have been providing annually? Backdated. So... Couldn't we all send "Remedy of account letters" and send all the backdated SLC deferment forms? Just playing by the same rules as them.
-
Thanks again. I will get on with that - is there any need to hurry with it? I was thinking to get it all ready to go and pop in the post just before the 30 day deadline.
-
Do you think I should send copies of the tax credits awards that would have been sent with the deferment forms?
-
OK then - thank-you.
-
I am thinking something along the lines of : Also enclosed are copies of my deferment forms, showing eligibility for deferment. I am also sending copies of these to Erudio, for their records.
-
I was thinking the same thing myself... Erudio denied receiving letters that we sent to them before and when we complained to the ombudsman they said we didn't send them. From other posts on the forum it seems that they don't always include your letters/communications when you do an SAR too. Perhaps we should all play by their rules...
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS