Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Honestly you are all amazing on this site, thank you so much for your help and time. ill keep an eye out and only return when i receive a claim letter for sure also, i updated my address with amex and tsb before i even missed payments. the initial address was my family home but i dont reside there. to avoid a bombardment of letters there i have now updated my address, will they send all threats etc to the new address? Or old address?   do you reccomend i send both tsb and amex my update in address via a letter?
    • Your point 4 deals with that and puts them to strict proof .....but realistically they are not in a position to state that within their particulars they were not the creditor at the time of default but naturally assume the OC would have...so always worth challenging and if you get a DJ who knows his onions on the day may ask for further evidence from the OC internal accounts system. 
    • I see, shame, I think if a claim is 'someone was served' then proof of that should be mandatory. Appreciate your input into the WS whenever you get chance, thanks in advance
    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.     .    
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 24/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Student loan sold to Eruido


Janmarie35
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3275 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Still having issues with these people.

 

They are now demanding I pay over £2,100 + in arrears.

 

I applied for the CCA 2 months before I was due to renew my deferment back in March 2014.

 

Finally after a year of ignoring all my letters, and me receiving threatening letters and phone calls from them they sent my CCA..

 

However now they say that because I am in arrears [from May 2014]

I have lost the right to defer,

lost the right to age related cancellation and

lost the right to payment by installments.

 

Surely while the account was in dispute there should NOT have been any payments due or am I totally wrong here

 

I really need your help with this.

 

JMG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just waiting for a CCA is not a dispute that prevents you being liable to make payments under the agreement. A court may not have been able to technically enforce the agreement while you waited, but everything else about the agreement continued to run and be valid. If you refused to pay or defer then arrears would have rightly built up.

 

If you are in arrears, as you are, then they can call in the loan in full if they choose, and they can then refuse your age write off at 60.

 

As you were 40 when your last loan was taken out then it would have been 60 not 50 for the age related write off, which now can't happen anyway as it sounds as if they have demanded payment in full due to your refusal to pay meaning you can not not get out of arrears.

 

15. If the borrower does not make a repayment under the agreement when it is due, the lender may ask him to repay the loan in full immediately. The lender may do this even if the borrower’s obligation to make other repayments is currently deferred.

 

So if they have done that due to your arrears, then you have lost the right to defer as.

 

9. Each year the lender will tell the borrower the new deferment level for the period between 1st September and the following 31st August. The borrower can defer making repayments of the loan if—

 

(a) the lender has not already asked him to repay the loan in full, and

 

(b) he can show—

 

(i) that his gross income for the relevant month is not more than the deferment level, and

 

(ii) if the lender asks, that his gross average monthly income during the 3 months immediately following the relevant month will not or is unlikely to be more than the deferment level.

 

As you are behind with payments you have also lost the right to the age related write off.

 

12. The lender will cancel the borrower’s liability to repay the loan if the borrower—

 

(a)dies,

 

(b) is not behind on any repayments under any agreement for a student loan and—

 

(i)was under the age of 40 when his last agreement for a student loan was made and he reaches the age of 50 or when the last agreement for a student loan has been outstanding for not less than 25 years, whichever is the sooner, or

 

(ii)was aged 40 or older when his last agreement for a student loan was made and he reaches the age of 60, or

 

©if the borrower can show the lender that he gets a disability related benefit and because of his disability is permanently unfit for work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

how does this all sit with the unfitness to work clause?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

how does this all sit with the unfitness to work clause?

 

 

dx

 

hmm. I had missed the post earlier where they said they were on long term disability.

 

Part © of the write off T&Cs is:

 

©if the borrower can show the lender that he gets a disability related benefit and because of his disability is permanently unfit for work.

 

as does not seem to be negated should you be behind in payments as part (b) would be.

 

So if they can show that © applies it seems a write off on those grounds could still be on the cards?

 

Worth exploring if so, as that would put an end to things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read the comments given in reply to my last post and I am confused and quite upset!

 

Not having any legal knowledge, I like many others relied on the people in the know posting on this website, to advise accordingly.

 

On numerous occasions I was advised not to communicate with Erudio until they honored my CCA request.

 

I was advised not to send in a deferment form and to just sit tight.

 

I was also informed that while the CCA was outstanding my account would be frozen.

 

Now I am told that wasn't the case and not only have i lost the right to defer

and have it cancelled when i reach 60 but i could also be liable to pay the full amount owed?

 

How many other people will find themselves in the same predicament ?

 

My last hope it seems is going down the disability route

I am currently in consultation with my GP and Health Workers to see how I can achieve this.

 

JMG

Link to post
Share on other sites

since you first started the thread more than a year ago

and more recently returned - a lot has moved on

including Erudio being investigated and carpeted by the FOS and

which is still on going , the FCA.

 

 

post 28 bar far sums up the best option.

 

 

pers I'd let it run.

 

 

as indicated earlier

 

 

your loan is just one of two hundred and fifty thoussand sold to Erudio,

indeed every student loan taken between 1990 and 1998 was sold to Erudio.

 

 

This total debt was £890 million pounds worth, but was sold to Erudio for £160 million.

 

Now £890 million pounds worth was from over 250, 000 loans, so be assured,

this letter was sent to over one hundred thousand people at least.

 

 

I assume the number could be higher than this, as this number works out at an average of 2.5 loans per person

 

 

don't fall for their scheming tactics.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read the comments given in reply to my last post and I am confused and quite upset!

 

Not having any legal knowledge, I like many others relied on the people in the know posting on this website, to advise accordingly.

 

On numerous occasions I was advised not to communicate with Erudio until they honored my CCA request.

 

I was advised not to send in a deferment form and to just sit tight.

 

I was also informed that while the CCA was outstanding my account would be frozen.

 

Now I am told that wasn't the case and not only have i lost the right to defer

and have it cancelled when i reach 60 but i could also be liable to pay the full amount owed?

 

How many other people will find themselves in the same predicament ?

 

My last hope it seems is going down the disability route

I am currently in consultation with my GP and Health Workers to see how I can achieve this.

 

JMG

 

Yes, a lot that was just plain wrong or misguided.

 

Lack of a CCA supplied under a s77 request.

 

* Does not put the account on hold or freeze it

* Is not a 'dispute' under and terms that regulators will recognise as a valid one.

* Does stop your obligations under the agreement from continuing

* Does not stop valid arrears from building up if you refuse to pay

* Does not stop other provisions of the contract such as the need to defer from continuing to apply

* Does not prevent interest or valid charges continuing to accrue

* Does not prevent the creditor exercising their rights under the contract, such as the right default or call in the whole loan under the T&Cs

 

Plus as non compliance with a s77 request only makes the agreement temporarily unenforceable by a court until a copy is supplied, then when once is supplied even that protection goes away.

 

There was never very much doubt whether they could supply a CCA as SLC did keep many of them, and the form and historical content of these agreements is very well known, in fact a matter of public record, so it would be a not very difficult task to reconstitute ones sufficient to comply with a s77 request.

 

Unless something very odd happened, it was more than likely they would turn up at some point.

 

That does not necessarily mean that they will try to use the courts to enforce now. They have not tried yet outside of historical claims that the SLC etc already had obtained before the loans were sold.

 

It it however a gamble

 

It could be that in coming months they will launch court claims against many that have shot themselves somewhat in the foot by doing what you have.

 

It could be they they will just give up those as a bad job and just concentrate on those who look easier victims.

 

I can't say for 100% certainly, and nether can anyone else here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Janmarie

 

Yes, there has been an enormous amount of false info on here.

 

 

You should not be relying on an internet forum for legal advice.

That said, I've learned a lot from here and think I have it pretty figured out.

 

This is how I'm dealing with it;

 

Applied for deferral in September 2014.

They said I wasn't eligible, I said I was.

Continued back and forth with emails - no ground given by either side.

 

 

I requested CCA end of January 2015.

End of February 2015, they sent my notes to some complaints office who once again said I wasn't eligible for deferment,

at which point they said they would send my CCA to me.

 

 

It has now been 4 months since requesting CCA and nothing has come.

I have not heard from them for over six weeks.

I am hoping that they don't have my agreements, which means the case is in lock down forever.

 

 

However, if the agreements do show up, my next step is too complain to the ombudsman, which should drag it out another six months.

If the ombudsman goes against me, I will disagree with the decision and tell them to take me to court and see if they actually do it.

 

 

In the mean time, I have been putting away a bit of cash each month to cover the debt on the off chance that it comes to that (highly unlikely).

 

I am prepared to stretch this out as long as legally possible, but in the end, if the agreements turn up, and they are prepared to take me to court,

I'll probably pay up. However, I'm wondering how much they are willing to invest in one case, when there are plenty of others who aren't prepared to put up a fight.

 

My advice is to drag it out as long as legally possible and hope they've lost your agreements.

Edited by jacobjones
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...