Govt sells old style SLC loans to Erudio [Arrow global DCA]

[National Debtline]

as the old style SL could be killed off by a bankruptcy.

 

Hello there,

 

Old-style loans cannot be included within a bankruptcy either anymore.

 

Best wishes,

 

David @ NDL.

[brassnecked]

Thanks David, I am interested in the position of those whose loans have been correctly deferred, and have never earned enough to repay anything significant, and reaching the age threshold, have had the loan properly written off.

 

What are the chances of Arrow resurrecting these loans and demanding payment, even though they no longer exist as such as they were written off under the rules.

 

Incidentally, will SLC still be responsible for processing deferrments, as they are at present, so the graduate will apply to SLC who will tell Arrow it is deferred, and Arrow will ignore the deferment and still demand payments?

[National Debtline]

Hi there,

 

I understand that the write-off/cancellation rules would still remain the same. Here they are:

 

Your loan may be cancelled if:

- you were under the age of 40 when your last agreement for a student loan was made and you reach the age of 50;

- you were aged 40 when your last agreement for a student loan was made and you reach the age of 60; or

- your last agreement for a student loan has been outstanding for 25 years.

 

In addition, if you are permanently unfit for work and can provide evidence that you receive a disabilityrelated benefit, you may also be able to have your liability to repay your loan cancelled.

 

I would hope Arrow wouldn't do that, and I cannot see how they would be able to.

 

That's a really good question regarding deferments, I'm not sure what the answer to that would be. What I do know is that the deferment rules shouldn't change.

 

- David

[brassnecked]

"I would hope Arrow wouldn't do that, and I cannot see how they would be able to. "

 

There is a distinct likelihood given their track record and MO, that they will do just that.

[HCEOs]

I knew this was coming after this eloquent chap voiced his concerns on his Youtube channel. Be warned there is some choice language.

 

 

Seems he had his figures wrong though if tomtubby is correct with the £900M.

 

I'm sure some on here will enjoy this and his other rants too....

[Guest]

Hi there,

 

I understand that the write-off/cancellation rules would still remain the same. Here they are:

 

Your loan may be cancelled if:

- you were under the age of 40 when your last agreement for a student loan was made and you reach the age of 50;

- you were aged 40 when your last agreement for a student loan was made and you reach the age of 60; or

- your last agreement for a student loan has been outstanding for 25 years.

 

In addition, if you are permanently unfit for work and can provide evidence that you receive a disabilityrelated benefit, you may also be able to have your liability to repay your loan cancelled.

 

I would hope Arrow wouldn't do that, and I cannot see how they would be able to.

 

That's a really good question regarding deferments, I'm not sure what the answer to that would be. What I do know is that the deferment rules shouldn't change.

 

- David

 

ditto, surely if has been sold on (assigned) then the original terms etc signed up for should subsist with the new owners who now just become the creditor in name? wouldn't that be a condition re the sale? or can they change things?

[dx100uk]

bet they'll try the same trick link/thesis does

 

add compounded interest back to day one too!!

 

dx

[brassnecked]

bet they'll try the same trick link/thesis does

 

add compounded interest back to day one too!!

 

dx

 

What is the Thesis trick DX?

[Bazooka Boo]

Add 'compound interest' to the initial date of when the loan was taken out.

[dx100uk]

typically on these loans the interest does not start UNTIL the person can start to pay.

 

what link have done on numerous occasions is add compounded interest from day one of the loan

and claim they are correct in doing so.

[Surfer01]

So if you dispute the loan under OFT guidance who do they send the loan back to? It should be fairly easy to raise a dispute as the onus will be on them to prove that the loan was not deferred for a period of time.

[reallymadwoman]

I wonder if it would be worth anyone who might be affected doing an SAR to Student Loans now as no doubt they will not pass on paperwork to the DCA and it could be 'archived' fairly soon.

 

If anything detrimental showed up I don't see any reason why you would feel obliged to pass it on, but it would be very worthwhile obtaining whatever proof of deferments etc exists before the information disappears.

[WarrenBuffet]

reallymadwoman,

 

"I wonder if it would be worth anyone who might be affected doing an SAR to Student Loans now as no doubt they will not pass on paperwork to the DCA and it could be 'archived' fairly soon."

 

 

If you SAR the SLC then before they send you a copy of your SAR they will send a copy of the SAR they are sending you to the DCA first and at your expense ie: you have paid £10 for the SAR and your DCA receive it for free. Trust me when i tell you that the SLC and DCA's are in cahoots together so trust neither.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

This sounds most unlikely be a serious breach of the DPA.

[reallymadwoman]

And even if they did send copies of everything to the DCA they're probably not set up for paper files so they'd just bin it.

[WarrenBuffet]

BRIGADIER2JCS & reallymadwoman,

 

i recently sent the SLC a SAR as regards my student loans (Pre-1998), upon receiving my SAR from SLC there is diary of events as and when they happened regarding your account, in mine it shows SAR request received one day and the following week it shows SAR sent to Link via email and a week later there is an entry that shows that the SAR had been posted to me. Then when i sent a CCA to Link they sent me out the same documents that SLC had already sent me!?

 

Can you please educate me as to how this is a breach of the DPA as that will add more ammo to my fight against them ... Please.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

A Subject Access request is for 'Personal Data' and should not be provided to any 3rd party.

 

That's what the 'Subject' part means you are the 'Data Subject' not a DCA.

[WarrenBuffet]

Thanks BRIGADIER2JCS, how would you recommend i tackle this as i have it in black & white from SLC and Link sent me a copy of my original student loan form when i applied for the loan back in 1993 as proof of agreement between me and them for my CCA. ..........These two companies are rotten organisations

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

The agreement/app form would not form part of the SAR and SLC would have supplied a copy of it to send to you if you sent them the CCA request.

 

There may be data in the SAR that Link should not be privy to.

 

I suggest a formal complaint to SLC regarding their sending the data to Link.

[dpick]

Hi I agree with BRIG there could well be info as to why your loan was deferred etc personal info that a DCA has no right to see especially if it's to do with your salary at time of deferment or health, mental state etc.

 

 

dpick

[WarrenBuffet]

Thanks BRIGADIER2JCS and others,

 

my blood was boiling on Friday when this thread made me aware that there was a clear breach of DPA, i contacted SLC and luckily spoke with a very decent chap who told me that i did have a complaint and he would be happy to take this on. Have contacted Thesis/Link today and had asked them that the 'Business Support Team' contact me as it was they who had sent me my CCA. i was told that they refused to speak to me and if i had any issues as regards my CCA i should put this in writing or email!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????

 

( I have a thread that runs just below this one on the Student Loans Forum - 'Hello from ireland ...' thread.

[billy_79]

typically on these loans the interest does not start UNTIL the person can start to pay.

 

what link have done on numerous occasions is add compounded interest from day one of the loan

and claim they are correct in doing so.

 

I'm not sure I follow you on this - with these mortgage loans interest has been added monthly (at rate linked to RPI) from the day they were taken out. It's itemised month by month on the annual statements that SLC send out. Or are you saying that link jack up the interest rate if you default, and then back date it?

 

I've just had my paperwork (10 pages of it) through about the sell off. I've not read it in detail yet as it's been scanned and email to me, and it's sideways on my screen. The main gist of it is that the transfer date is 10th March, and after that Erudio "own, manage and are fully responsible for loans until repaid in full". Erudio will be handling the deferments (along with everything else), SLC will have no further involvement. It mentions that Erudio become the data controller, and it sounds like all SLC's records are being handed over to them.

 

There is even a direct debit guarantee statement, and the letter mentions that the DDs will be transferred to Erudio automatically, without even needing them to setup a new one.

 

It's all a bit of a balls up - I'm sure the annual deferment dates are coming up (as it hints about in several places in the letter). But Erudio can't do anything before the 10th March when they take over, and presumably SLC aren't interested in sending out deferment forms for next year. Letter states, amongst other stuff:

 

"If you are able to evidence your eligibility in line with Erudio's deferment process, you may defer your loan payments for up to 12 months at a time. Please contact Erudio on or after the 10th March for more details".

 

"Your account will be reported to credit reference agencies..." At present there is absolutely nothing on my credit records about my student loans, although I've read somewhere that SLC only bothered with credit references if there was something negative to add. But Erudio could well do it either way. And how would that affect me getting credit in the future, specifically a mortgage? Student loans were never reckoned to be taken into account, but if it's on my file, it'll be hard for them to ignore.

 

I've always deferred my loan through low income (think the threshold for deferment is £28,775 for next year). I'm nowhere near that, and in the past I've just submitted the last 3 months of payslips to SLC. Are Erudio going to be a lot more demanding with evidence requirements?

 

I'm almost tempted to jack the whole thing off and and avoid/ignore Erudio, to see if I can get it to statute barred. Or is that totally unrealistic? It's a year since I've communicated with SLC, and they don't have my current address on record (everything still gets sent to my parents address), although it would be pretty easy to track me down.

 

At the very least, I think I'll cancel the direct debit instruction, to make sure Erudio don't start taking payments before they give me chance to renew my deferment.

[dx100uk]

I'm not sure I follow you on this - with these mortgage loans interest has been added monthly (at rate linked to RPI) from the day they were taken out. It's itemised month by month on the annual statements that SLC send out. Or are you saying that link jack up the interest rate if you default, and then back date it?

 

I've just had my paperwork (10 pages of it) through about the sell off. I've not read it in detail yet as it's been scanned and email to me, and it's sideways on my screen. The main gist of it is that the transfer date is 10th March, and after that Erudio "own, manage and are fully responsible for loans until repaid in full". Erudio will be handling the deferments (along with everything else), SLC will have no further involvement. It mentions that Erudio become the data controller, and it sounds like all SLC's records are being handed over to them.

 

There is even a direct debit guarantee statement, and the letter mentions that the DDs will be transferred to Erudio automatically, without even needing them to setup a new one.

 

It's all a bit of a balls up - I'm sure the annual deferment dates are coming up (as it hints about in several places in the letter). But Erudio can't do anything before the 10th March when they take over, and presumably SLC aren't interested in sending out deferment forms for next year. Letter states, amongst other stuff:

 

"If you are able to evidence your eligibility in line with Erudio's deferment process, you may defer your loan payments for up to 12 months at a time. Please contact Erudio on or after the 10th March for more details".

 

"Your account will be reported to credit reference agencies..." At present there is absolutely nothing on my credit records about my student loans, although I've read somewhere that SLC only bothered with credit references if there was something negative to add. But Erudio could well do it either way. And how would that affect me getting credit in the future, specifically a mortgage? Student loans were never reckoned to be taken into account, but if it's on my file, it'll be hard for them to ignore.

 

I've always deferred my loan through low income (think the threshold for deferment is £28,775 for next year). I'm nowhere near that, and in the past I've just submitted the last 3 months of payslips to SLC. Are Erudio going to be a lot more demanding with evidence requirements?

 

I'm almost tempted to jack the whole thing off and and avoid/ignore Erudio, to see if I can get it to statute barred. Or is that totally unrealistic? It's a year since I've communicated with SLC, and they don't have my current address on record (everything still gets sent to my parents address), although it would be pretty easy to track me down.

 

At the very least, I think I'll cancel the direct debit instruction, to make sure Erudio don't start taking payments before they give me chance to renew my deferment.

 

it might well be in your interest to start your own thread

 

and scan up what you have.

 

behind the scenes there are indeed severe doubts Erudio can actually do anything to you...

 

don't forget

 

they are ARROWS DCA in sheeps clothing.

 

dx

[plong979]

Some details about the sale...

 

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4923210&page=235#4685

 

More good news - the sale & purchase agreement finally arrived from BIS earlier this evening! What with the dire complaints data, it's not been a good day for BIS/Erudio As mentioned by ICO, there's a lot to get through, but there are a few gems so far in there on credit checks/reporting to CRAs, authorising Erudio to adopt different deferment procedures to maximise returns on loans, ability to change procedures and policies/exercise rights differently, etc. Also states that BIS must approve Erudio's DAF in writing, and we must be given the DAF 8 weeks in advance. And that's just for starters.

 

Part 1

The Sale and Purchase Agreement

Disclosure letter

Shared borrower loan side letter

Master Definitions Schedule

 

Part 2

Transitional Services Agreement (split into 6 files)

Redactions for parts 1 and 2

[unclebulgaria67]

Can't see how they can change the loan terms. Some on MSE are suggesting government lied and Erudio have been given changes to make it easier for them to collect payments.