SLC - 1997 loan agreement

[troggie]

Hello all,

First post and I'm a little overwhelmed by the volume of info so thought I'd just ask.....

I received a letter (Notice of Sums in Arrears) today from SLC... I have been making arrangements to pay back the arrears I accrued every three months or so as they weren't willing to set a permanent agreement as the amount I have been paying is tiny (and all I can afford) - even though my loan has been deferred as I'm not earning enough to pay the loans back. They have emailed me a income and expenditure form and whilst on the phone I made a verbal request for the original agreement as I don't have a copy any more. Should I send a written request?

The point is, the woman I spoke to said that the government has set a deadline to pay the amount outstanding back before the next deferral date!!!! This is not possible and while she was very sympathetic to that has told me that the amount I've been paying won't be accepted. What can I do about that? It seems to me that even if I complete the form and prove that I can't pay much more, they're not going to be happy...I've been trying to keep on top of this for years but I'm beginning to feel really down about having this hanging over me all the time, start dreading the post coming etc...I live in Spain so feel that this forum is a real help.

Can anyone tell me if the statement about this 'deadline' from the government is true/legal?:?

Many thanks in advance

Troggie

[bambiissimon]

Hi Troggie,

 

There is a lot of information in this forum and, it is almost overwhelming, it is well worth spending a long time going through it. It is very reassuring when you learn that you are not the only one in your situation and that there are things that you can do.

 

Please understand that my answer is based on what I have learned from this forum and other (mostly internet-based) sources and not from any legal training at all.

 

First of all, I do not believe that the government have or ever would set a deadline for repayments. I, personally, would not believe this information and so do not worry about it. If you remain concerned, mention it to the next rep you speak to and ask for documentary evidence that this is the case. If you are in email contact with the SLC, then ask for it via email as well and keep you message as a record.

 

If I understand your situation correctly, it sounds like you have a student loan and that some arrears have accrued. I guess that the main part of the loan is deferred, but the SLC require immediate repayment of the arrears. This is similar to my situation (in my case, the arrears were the result of an error by the SLC, so I am disputing them), and I have spoken to a lot of SLC representatives who have given conflicting advice.

 

If you accept that the arrears need to be repaid, but can only afford to do so with a repayment plan, then I think it is appropriate for the SLC to request an income and expenditure form. This is how you and they can determine a suitable repayment amount. When you do this, be brutally honest with yourself. Don't underestimate how much you spend on food, and car fuel. Don't forget to include annual payments (eg home insurance, car insurance, car servicing, etc). Include absolutely everything. You will then, hopefully, be able to agree a suitable repayment plan with the SLC.

 

Now, the only helpful SLC rep I ever spoke to told me that if I genuinely could not afford to pay back the arrears, then they could also be deferred. As I disputed the arrears themselves, I never pursued that option, but it is worth asking about. I guess that you would have to demonstrate (with some evidence) your income and expenditure for this to happen.

 

Another thing to remember is record and keep everything. If you can, physically record telephone calls, otherwise make a note of the date and time of the call, who you spoke to, what was said and what was agreed. You could also then email the SLC saying, “To confirm today’s conversation with Mr Smith of your company at 9:15am, we agreed that . . .”. This will be invaluable if the situation deteriorates and you and up going to court, especially if you and the SLC dispute what has been agreed.

 

I hope this helps for now.

[troggie]

Many thanks for that reply and support,

I too found it hard to believe that there has been a deadline set so will ask for more information.

What I was very concerned about was the refusal to continue my repayments as they were and the threat of not accepting them, I was also interested in the subject access report that would show any 'excess' or 'unreasonable' charges that I am currently paying off.

I am going to try to maintain my correspondence via email for now as it seems like the best way to have a written record of the situation.

Thanks again

[troggie]

Hi (again)

I have just spoken to someone at the SLC who told me that the 'Government deadline' mentioned before was for internal target purposes....and so therefore can be adjusted after I do the whole Income & Expenditure. One grey area clarified at least.

I was also informed that the documentation I requested (proof of debt/ signed agreement) was in an envelope and will be on its way tomorrow. We'll see....what do I need to look for when it arrives? The idea I had gleaned from previous posts on here was that if it can't be provided, the debt is null and void - if they can provide it, then at least I can look for ways to defend myself under the Terms & Conditions.No?

I am also going to make a Subject Access Request to make sure the arrears I'm paying are 100% valid. I'm not saying that I think I can wipe them away but over the years of charged letters that I haven't queried the pounds may have added up!

All the best

[troggie]

Next stage...

I just received a photocopy of the 'Credit agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974' signed by me but with no other signatures - I thought that the agreement needed to be signed by both parties in order for it to be valid. Any ideas?

Many thanks

[bambiissimon]

My Credit Agreements weren't signed by the SLC either.

 

I don't know what the precise legal technicalities are about the SLC not signing them, but I was advised by a magistrate that I know that a judge would be unlikely to accept this as a good enough reason to make the agreement null and void.

[disgruntledofcornwall]

1. Find out if there are any charges on the account at all. A subject access request, SAR, is all that is required.

 

2. Their charges are totally uneforable. I have had over £1200 of them refunded over the years. Now they don't even bother to attempt to charge me.

 

3. If the charges have been made, put them into a spread sheet and work out the statutory interest of 8% on the charges from the day they were levied. At this point you may be surprised to find that the total is either a substantial amout of the arrears or would clear them and leave you enough for a few beers.

 

4. IF charges are involved or there is any dispute about the timings of deferals - do not forget the SCL "loose" most of the forms, and in fact, every form I ever sent them by fax, post, recorded delivery....PUT THE ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE. This means they can not persue you for the debt during this time. Oh, they will try to ignore your request but do not give up.

 

5. I really wish that no one would ever call the SLC. They lie, manipulate and cheat all the time. The one bit of advice I can give you and beg you to follow is it only ever contact them in writing.

 

Emails are fine. Never ever talk to them. It just confuses the issue and is a waste of your time and money. They usually take the opportunity to deny you contacted them anyway. With email, you then have a properly auditable trail of lies rather than hearsay and it is consting you nothing. Also, taped conversations may not be admissable as evidence in most cases if it comes to that. Also consider this - if you catch them lying or misleading you in some way, offering to make a formal complaint often just makes the charges and arrears melt away as if by majic because if you have their lies in writing, they could be other "issues".

 

They will bluster and swear blind that the charges are enforcable, but the are not!!!!! They even told me that the "test case proves that our charges are legal and there is nothing you can do about it"!! For the love of *** what a load of rubbish. Be extremely polite, they really hate that.

 

Stand your ground if charges are involved and you will actually find you may have no arrears at all. Hope this helped.

[disgruntledofcornwall]

Any further news, can I help you any more?

[disgruntledofcornwall]

My Credit Agreements weren't signed by the SLC either.

 

I don't know what the precise legal technicalities are about the SLC not signing them, but I was advised by a magistrate that I know that a judge would be unlikely to accept this as a good enough reason to make the agreement null and void.

 

Have a look at the Manchester test case thread, I subscribed to it and have read all the posts now, though you can probably not have the agreement thrown out as a claimant, the company, it is my understanding, would find it very very difficult to gain a CCJ or go beyond a default notice in court without the original documents.

 

There is so much that can be said about the SLC, I think it deserves it's own forum area. They are an astoundingly creative company. My file on them goes back 11 years and I have had many successes against them.

 

Your No1 advantage over them if you have the ability to challenge them and know your rights and the law behind the CCA and the unique legal framework of the SLC loans, is that they are non too bright and often fail to comply with basic legal process.

 

This makes life quite easy.

 

I have a new SLC thread to go up soon. They try it on every year. This year they went just a bit too far...like unlawful entry to a CRA, (they can not do this under the terms of the agreements at all), DN not issued but debt sold on to DCA while in provable dispute, (i.e., emails repllied to from Smith Lawson AKA the SLC telling me I have no right to dispute etc then saying I never did dispute the debt with my dispute notice on the bottom of their email etc etc, priceless) along with a complex series of idiocy leading to most of the loans being deferred but one not and then selling the debt on, the list is endless.

 

I just find it amusing now.

[troggie]

HI there

 

just got a mountain of paper (SAR) and am trawling through it...no outrageous charges found as yet. I have realised that they got in touch with my parents who passed my address on to them in 2002. My loans were from '95 & '96...would that mean that they could have been statute barred??? can 'Statute barred' still be claimed even though I deferred after and have made payments - ie acknowledged the debt?

Bye for now - and thanks for the help

[troggie]

My signed agreements (terrible copies but I can just about make out my signature - only 1 is signed by SLC) are on 20/01/95, 09/01/96 & 04/11/96 and the letter to my parents was dated 05/11/02 - so I didn't make contact with them until after they sent me a letter dated 18/11/02. Would all of these loans have been statute barred - if only I'd known about such things in past...although according to the green box that pops up it when I go over the expression 'statute barred' it seems that the debt cannot be revived after lapsing...have I been paying out unnecessarily?

Any ideas?

Thnx

[troggie]

I just checked out the Limitation Act 1980 (see below) and don't quite know where the student loans 'fit' (re points 2 a&b) - the SLC agreement makes it clear that you start repayments when you are earning over x amount - if you've never earned over that amount...does that mean that as there's no 'fixed' date to start repayments there can be a more open interpretation - to the benefit of SLC about when the loans would be eligible to class as statute barred?

 

I'm a complete novice so excuse dumb questions!

 

 

Limitation Act 1980

 

Special time limit for actions in respect of certain loans

 

(1)Subject to subsection (3) below, section 5 of this Act shall not bar the right of action on a contract of loan to which this section applies.

(2)This section applies to any contract of loan which—

(a)does not provide for repayment of the debt on or before a fixed or determinable date; and

(b)does not effectively (whether or not it purports to do so) make the obligation to repay the debt conditional on a demand for repayment made by or on behalf of the creditor or on any other matter;

except where in connection with taking the loan the debtor enters into any collateral obligation to pay the amount of the debt or any part of it (as, for example, by delivering a promissory note as security for the debt) on terms which would exclude the application of this section to the contract of loan if they applied directly to repayment of the debt.

(3)Where a demand in writing for repayment of the debt under a contract of loan to which this section applies is made by or on behalf of the creditor (or, where there are joint creditors, by or on behalf of any one of them) section 5 of this Act shall thereupon apply as if the cause of action to recover the debt had accrued on the date on which the demand was made.