Jump to content

gm256

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About gm256

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. good point. I suppose I was thinking that the approach with the combined numbers was a 'hope for the best' approach and gives them a second chance if it goes wrong. The point you made about never earning enough anyway stands whatever they decide to throw at me I guess.
  2. Again, thankyou. That's very reassuring to read. Much appreciated Can they put a new claim through with the actual account numbers if they decide to?
  3. Thanks dx100uk, makes sense and I've seen this advice across the other posts too. I'm still keen to better understand how these issues would play into it if they did decide to lift the stay (and I appreciate that so far no case has been seen through so this is hypothetical). Any thoughts?
  4. Hi Guys, I appreciate this is yet another Erudio post, but having rewad them all and taken action it seems there is something different going on here with mine with various underhand and dodgy practices. To summarise my situation: -Took out a total of four slc loans 96/97/98 as normal, which were sold to Erudio - I had always deferred due to low income and Erudio let me defer for a year before their new contract appeared - I refused to sign, they pushed - I eventually sent back a signed agreement with the dodgy terms crossed out, which they refused - I complained officially, which they rejected - Eventually (in 2014) I gave in to their pressure and they let me defer after signing - We moved and notified everyone - Didn't hear anything from Erudio for four years untill this January when the claimform arrived with a letter from Shoosmiths. - I followed good protocols and filed a defense along with SSR & CCA - They eventually complied and it seems the case is stayed right now. It is the examination of the aSAR content that has shown me some dodginess. Obviously there are the are the common things posted on here about a lot such as the 'Master Reference Number' on the claim form, but here's what else I found: - Erudio did a credit search on me, which I found on my credit file, a year before any of this court stuff began. My guess is that they found my correwct address then since I've always remained on the electoral register etc. BUT this search does not appear on the Erudio activity print-out. It looks to me to have been removed before they sent out the SAR to me. nb, the claim form relied on my not responding to their letters, which obvs were sent to the old address. - Next was from the Shoosmiths SAR bit. Erudio had asked me for ID such as a marriage certificate in order to do the SAR. I agreed since my name changed when I got married. I sent it to them. The SAR shows that Erudio told Shoosmiths - "hey, we have her marriage certificate, you could use it to save the £100 you normally charge us for a name change' Then Shoosmiths wrote to the court on my behalf claiming that I'd made an article 16 GDPR request for rectification. They included my marriage certificate. They also followed up their request to the court with a second letter. Lhe most recent letter I have from the court is addressed to my married name. So, my main queation is can they do that? I never made a request for rectification. Also, if it is as dodgy as I think what can I do to make some noise about it? Thanks guys, these posts have really helped me so far!
×
×
  • Create New...