Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • oh well i wonder what new fake documents they have made up then...for them to try this.... just to check nothing funky like Link have filed an n244 to lift the stay and strike out her defence....she hasnt moved since last court comms has she?   is this an n24? bit unusual for a 13mts stay to just be lifted... has she not received anything from link/kearns in the last fw weeks like a docs bundle? bit like this thread... https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/466576-lc-assetlinkkearns-claim-form-2-mbna-cc/?do=findComment&comment=5256397  
    • if the agreement was taken out jan 23, then she has not reached the 1/3rd mark so the car has not become protected goods under the consumer credit act.  this puts her in a very very vulnerable position regarding ever keeping the car....whereby once they have issued a default notice they can legally send a guy with a flatbed (though they are NOT BAILIFFS and have ZERO legal powers) to collect the car.  if the car is kept on the public highway then they can simply take it away and she will legally owe the whole stated amount on the agreement AND lose the car. if it's on private property i'e like a driveway, ok they shouldn't take it without her agreeing, but if they do, it's not really on but its better than a court case and an inevitable loss with the granting a return of goods order. are these 'health reasons' likely to resolve themselves in the very short term (like a couple of months?) and can she immediately begin working again ? i'e has she got a job or would have to find one?  answer the above and we'll try and help. but she looks to be between rock and a hard place . whatever happens she will still have to pay the loan off...car or no car....unless you can appeal to the finance company's better nature using health reasons to back off for xxx months.
    • no need to use it. it doubles the size of the thread and makes it very diff to find replies on small screens too. just like @username it - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread already inc you ...gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.
    • Hello all,   I ordered a laptop online about 16 months ago. The laptop was faulty and I was supposed to send it back within guarantee but didn't for various reasons. I contacted the company a few months later and they said they will still fix it for me free of charge but I'd have to pay to send it to them and they will pay to send it back to me. The parcel arrived there fine. Company had fixed it and they sent it via dpd. I was working in the office so I asked my neighbours who would be in, as there's been a history of parcel thefts on our street. I had 2 neighbours who offered but when I went to update delivery instructions, their door number wasn't on the drop down despite sharing the same post code.  I then selected a neighbour who I thought would likely be in and also selected other in the safe place selection and put the number of the neighbour who I knew would definitely be in and they left my parcel outside and the parcel was stolen. DPD didn't want to deal with me and said I need to speak to the retailer. The retailer said DPD have special instructions from them not to leave a parcel outside unless specified by a customer. The retailer then said they could see my instructions said leave in a safe space but I have no porch. My front door just opens onto the road and the driver made no attempt to conceal it.  Anyway, I would like to know if I have rights here because the delivery wasn't for an item that I just bought. It was initially delivered but stopped working within the warranty period and they agreed to fix it for free.  Appreciate your help 🙏🏼   Thanks!
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Erudio help please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3684 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

Hi this post is to help my partner.

 

Her student loan has bee sold to Erudio

 

after a bit of reading up I know that they are effectively Arrow Global.

And I now have a couple of questions if anybody can help

 

1 their form seems overly inquisitive and wants more information than the slc ever asked for.

Does filing it in change the original t&c's.

 

2 they ask for direct debit details.

But upon checking her account erudio appear to have already set up a new dd (slc never felt the need to set it up)

so if they already have them why do they ask for a new mandate to be filed in?

 

3 if my partner refuses to fill in their form and sign it does it put her in breach of the original t&c's

 

My advice to her is fill in only the bits that would have been relevant on her old slc form.

Ie gross income name and address and score out and write not relevant on the bits that arnt needed

then send a covering letter averring that these facts are correct and that she will not be filling in their forms as she thinks it will change her t&c's

 

her main worry is that by doing that erudio will say they are not deffering

and either start debiting her account or if she cancels the dd that they will place a marker on her spotlessly clean credit file

 

Her gross income is well below the threshold and defferment should really be a formality

 

Any advice on how she should deal with this would be most appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is that Erudio are AG like you mentioned.

I would remove their DD and set up a SO... You are then in control :)

 

Also you dont have to fill in their Form...

 

But others here are better at this stuff than I am

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What type of SL is this?

 

She MUST cancel the DD immediately and instruct the bank to NEVER set one up without her express permission, bloody chancers!

There is NO requirement to fill in any forms these lot send her, why have they been flogged it?

 

Was it in arrears previously and this is the outcome of the sordid DCA's being flogged them by this corrupt government?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shes worried that if she cancels the DD before she applies for deferment then they will refuse to defer and demand repayment.

 

Its never been defaulted

 

its only ever been in deferement because her gross earnings do not reach the threshold to start paying it back

 

She thinks yhey are the old mortgage style loan. Taken out 96 97 98 and 99

 

Hers is one of the loans sold on by the government recently to erudio.

 

Im sure I read somewhere it was in the region of 250,000 student loans that were sold. To

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can't blackmail her like that.

 

A direct debit allows them to rifle the account and take whatever they want whenever they want, a Standing Order puts the account holder in control.

 

IMO, I would be cancelling the DD as a matter of urgency and applying for deferment.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shes 99% certain that having a current account and filling in a dd mandate with the slc was part of her original t&c's. She worried that cancelling it would breach them thus rendering her liable to immediate repayment

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shes 99% certain that having a current account and filling in a dd mandate with the slc was part of her original t&c's

 

But now the original T&C's have changed, this isn't SLC we're talking about, this is a cheap taccy DCA who will help themselves to whatever is in the account, a very amoral outfit, give them no wriggle room.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 would send them a CCA for EACH account number.

 

these debts have been SOLD

 

they must abide by the org T&C's

 

we are under the belief that they cant mark credit files once sold in this manner.

 

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

Blue... Listen to us above... The T&Cs still do however now that it's hit the collections process most of these are thrown out the window by the DCA)

 

She needs to take control of this and there shouldn't be any repercussions for doing it.

 

DX is right... This is a loan whichever way you look at it.

Please believe us... I don't want to see someone else fall to another DCA

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I mentioned... When it goes to a DCA, most of the terms are thrown out of the window by the DCA and they will try ANYTHING to get you to pay.

 

Please do not cave into them

I'll amend my post sorry for the confusion

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are currently big discussions about Erudio's tricks on Money Saving Expert and Mumsnet forums,

where many people are concerned about the terms and conditions on Erudio's deferment form.

 

I sent mine off before I realised about the CRA issue, although I'm not so much concerned about that at the moment as the possibility

that they might be planning on doing whatever they can to worm out of deferring the loan and demanding repayment.

 

An Erudio direct debit is already set up in my account because they were given my details by the Student Loan Company (who had their own direct debit set up).

 

The Student Loan Company never actually took any money because they always agreed to defer.

 

Many people are worried that, if we cancel our direct debits, Erudio will then claim we are in breach of our terms and conditions and demand full repayment.

However, if we are eligible to defer they should not be even trying to take the money.

 

I would suggest that anyone who is pressurised into repaying when they are below the repayment threshold should report Erudio to the Financial Conduct Authority.

 

The new regulations given to the FCA from yesterday were introduced precisely to stop companies trying to extract money from people who cannot afford it

- if the FCA finds out that Erudio has been trying to make people on low incomes repay student loans when they cannot afford to, hopefully it will clamp down on them.

 

I would post links for you to both the MSE and Mumsnet discussions on this topic

but unfortunately I'm not allowed to post links on this forum as I'm new.

 

Anyone who wants to view those discussions can do so by going to the relevant sites and searching for Erudio

(on MSE you will also have to select 'Forum' from the drop-down list which appears when you click in the search

box). The discussions on both sites should be the first thing that appears in the search results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

those threads are already listed in the above link I posted.

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

My partner has read those threads. Shes still none the wiser as to what course of action she should take as regards responding to erudio use yheir forms and change her t&c's. Or not and risk them saying she has breached her t&c's and must start repaying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look blue, put simply your partner has no contract with eurido as she signed contract/s with slc who then did the dirty and sold her debt to a DCA.

 

You/your partner need to research DCA and what little power they have, their main power is to lie and cheat people out of their money .....plain and simple. They have no authority to demand payment in full etc, etc as there is no signed contract between your partner and them. Sorry to be blunt but the advice given by above posters is 1st class advice ...and you need to advise your partner to grow a pair and take these parasites on . Their forms ask questions they have no legal right to ask, and i would as advised be fuming if they set up a dd on my bank acc without my express position. Tell them that dd are not suitable for you and you demand that if a repayment facility is to be set up you will organise a SO from your side.

 

YOU NEED TO BE FIRM with these bottom feeders

 

They ask in their forms ....

 

Do you rent or own property?

 

Answer: N/A

 

Please give us your bank details?

 

Answer: BOGOF , you have no need for my bank details. If payments need TO BE made then please forward me your bank details and i will organise a SO from my bank.

 

Or!

 

I no longer hold a bank account.

 

Do you get the drift? This is not a respectable organisation they are a thinly veiled extortion racket who paid peanuts for your debt. They are not to be trusted and fight them, they have bugger all legal powers and judges are all to aware of their illegal activities.

 

Laugh at them the next time they make their nonsense demands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing i might do, you sign any correspondence in your own handwriting but as your partner . DCA 's have been known to cut and paste signatures onto documents that dont exist.

 

You could then stand before a judge and say that it was your signature and therefore prove its a false document, there have been court cases regarding this in the past, so try baiting them to see if they bite ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

never ever forget rodeo are a DCA ARROW GLOBAL.

 

they cannot change anything.

 

please don't fall for there tricks

 

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

Iv had some very good advice guys. Thanks. Turns out in erudios noa They say that they know my partner has an active DD and that the original t&c's apply so their form will go back to them with the information supplied that slc would have asked for. They will alo be told that they will not be provided with any additional information then if they refuse deferral becasue of that I can go after them via complaint to to the fca and ill be hauling up their data controler with complaints. I figure I should keep my powder dry at least until I get them to blink first

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not be stating why you are not filling in certain parts

 

just fill in what you are required to do

under the SLC T&C's.

 

as you have said

 

keep your powder dry.

 

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

Instruct your bank to block any DD application from them.

 

Also, send all correspondence 'signed for' as if they start playing silly buggers and say that deferral was not received,

 

not to their liking and play a dirty trick by entering a mark on credit file?

 

Then you can easily have it removed arguing it was a malicious entry.

 

Just play smart with them and box clever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...