Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Cheesusrice

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Thanks dx. Just wanted to update this case - it was stayed after Drydens failed to respond to my defence. They did respond to my CCA request back in December, but didn't submit anything to the court. Nothing received by the court since. Should now be SB'd as I last deferred in June 2013 when it was still with SLC. Despite this, Erudio sent me another notice of sums in arrears earlier this month.
  2. Thanks dx. Appreciate your help and not trying to be awkward. Just curious as to the ins and outs of credit agreements.
  3. OK. Point taken. I was interested for future reference and for other forum users. This is my proposed defence so far: 1. The claim is for the sum of £4000 in respect to monies owing by the defendant on a credit agreement held by the defendant with the Student Loans Company under account number ############### upon which the defendant failed to maintain payments. 2. A default notice was served upon the defendant and has not been complied with. 3. The balance owed was assigned from the Student Loans Company to the claimant, and the defendant has been notified of the assignmen
  4. Yeah I get what you're saying dx. But it is an interesting point and not sure whether anyone knows the answer to this?
  5. Thanks again, dx. I'll send that SAR on Monday. I suspect that some of the similar claim forms on this forum have exactly the same issue. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?491546-Erudio-Shoosmiths-Claimform-1995-98-SLC-Loans-ignored-or-returned-everything-since-2013 https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?491501-erudio-drydens-claimform-old-SLC-1997-2000-ignored-everything-since-2013
  6. That's right. I received one claim form for multiple loans. The POC quoted an A/C# that was actually the Erudio one and not the SLC one (see posts 6 & 10)and made no mention of there being more than one loan. The CCA request I sent quoted the A/C# they had put on the POC. The D/N and termination notice I received bundled everything together too, instead of being one for each loan.
  7. Thanks dx. So I'll send separate CCA requests using the original SLC numbers (which were not listed on the claim form). Am wondering if the returned PO is a trick and whether I should send new ones with the new requests just to cover my arse?
  8. Only just realised this - not sure if I've made a terrible error or not. The CCA request I sent referred to the Erudio reference number, and not the original SLC ones. So I only sent one CCA for the bundled account (with the Erudio a/c#). Is this likely to be a problem?
  9. Understood, dx. Also, thanks, Unclebulgaria. I wasn't planning on relying on the A/C no discrepancy, but would certainly use it as part of my defence. At the end of the day, I always deferred successfully with SLC and have never earned over their threshold.
  10. Worth having a read of the guidance re Right of Access from the ICO website (For organisations/Guide to the General Data Protection Regulation/Individual Rights). I can't post the link because I haven't posted enough times on this forum yet. Check this section of the guidance out: "Can we extend the time for a response? You can extend the time to respond by a further two months if the request is complex or you have received a number of requests from the individual. You must let the individual know within one month of receiving their request and explain why the extension is necessar
  11. Hi Dx. Yeah, I did the AoS last week. Just preparing my defence now. I was wondering if the issue of the account number was a valid point to raise?
  12. Just a quick update - I sent the CCA and the CPR 33.14 requests. Dryden have sent me the following: We refer to the above matter and your recent communications with this office. Please be advised that we have placed your file on hold whilst we seek our client's instructions. We can also confirm that we have issued a request to our client for the copy documents to which you refer in your letter. We will contact you further once we are in receipt of their response. Also, the POC refers to an account number that is an Erudio one, and not the original SLC ones. They have bundled mult
  13. Thanks, but that's the same link as you posted above (referring to post 17 on that thread). Is there something new on there? The fundamental differences between mine and paperphobia are that my loans were taken out earlier than his (meaning that my agreement specifies that they can assign rights and duties to a third party), the amount I "owe" is only half that of his, and I have never entered into any correspondence with Erudio.
  • Create New...