1999 SLC SCOTTISH 1a small claims Decree, now rebadged by shoes/eruido - think i'm stuffed? No, I WON

[saintalan]

Not that i am complaining but they always give me 14 days to respond but take 7 weeks themselves.

[saintalan]

I have decided to request a SAR

 

Does that put the whole process on hold until they reply ?

 

Should I make that clear when I request the Sar ?

 

Should I sign the Sar ?

 

My offer of £1500 that was rejected was not signed.

 

Will making a further offer of say £1600 at the same junction as requesting a Sar

cloud the issue (They did not declare what would be a satisfactory offer)

 

Again I will not be providing a statement of income/expenditure

[dx100uk]

sar to SLC mind...

 

 

you need to tell shoes you dispute the bal and are awaiting the SLC SAR reply

 

 

the sar goes to SLC, no need to say anything more than the template does

 

 

yes you MUST sign it

 

 

no link here, the sar goes to slc, the offer to shoes

[saintalan]

Thank You

on the SAR should I ask SLC for info from themselves and "all of their agents" (Naming Erudio) ?

I assume SLC are no longer kept in the loop after selling on to Erudio who use Shoosmiths to hound me.

[dx100uk]

they'll be nowt to gain from doing that

 

 

simply send SLC the sar

 

 

dx

[saintalan]

So I followed your advice DX.

 

I got an instant reply back from Shoos who I had informed that I had written to SLC with a SAR.

 

Shoos instantly have put the account on hold.

 

 

They have stated that my SAR should have gone to Erudio though and they will check in with Erudio to see if I have made a request.

 

I forgot to name Erudio (In person although I used "your agents") on the SAR

 

Question.

 

 

Do SLC pass my SAR to Erudio or what ?

 

Have I caused a problem or will Erudio check with SLC ?

[dx100uk]

stuff shoes nowt to do with them

they are just here to frustrate you.

 

 

I hope you are not talking to these muppets on the phone are you?

seems like it? STOP if you are!

 

 

theres no point in ever sending an sar to a DCA.

 

 

dx

[saintalan]

I had to write to shoos again within the 14 days of their last letter refusing my settlement offer,

or they would "possibly" enforce the "valid by the looks of things" decree that was passed from SLC to Erudio.

 

All I did when I wrote was telling them the account should now be put on hold pending a SAR request to SLC that may put the account in "dispute".

 

They wrote back agreeing to put the account on hold but stated my SAR should have gone to Erudio.

 

I only communicate with the "muppets" when I have too and only in writing.

 

Clearly I am looking if possible to avoid paying however you guys within this thread have stated their case is solid.

 

I have made a near 50% full settlement offer that was declined.

 

I am not due to write to them for any further reason as things stand.

 

I refuse to give them any income/earnings details.

 

I suppose I am only really stalling the inevitable.

[saintalan]

Good new the SLC acknowledged my SAR. They promise to send on or before 1st april by "Special Delivery" so I can see how £10 is decent value.

[saintalan]

Hello all again.

 

 

I have received my sar documents from SLC

a particular period I will concentrate on makes interesting reading.

Whether legally it can help me or not is why I will put all the little points out to you.

 

Firstly I can tell for a fact there is missing communication. Whether significant for you guys.

 

For the purpose of staying anonymous lets say I lived at 26a Letsby Avenue from 1997-200

 

1st point of interest comes around a "tracing company" finding me in October 98.

The address they give the SLC company is 26 Letsby Avenue. 99% correct.

 

SLC write to me at 27 Letsby Avenue (Less correct as would be accross the road) in that same month. I do receive it.

 

This is the 1st correspondence they have sent me within the sar since the initial loan stuff back in 1994.

It ties up with the date they perceived the course to have finished in 1998.

All the Sar confirms this and it appears the repayment system is set up at this time.

They do know that I withdrew in 2005 and only actually made 2 payments to me.

 

this letter does not quite add up.

It is an instruction from collections.

It advises a default notice had previously been sent to me which had expired.

The SAR does not include such correspondence.

 

It then goes on to say "Court proceeding will be instituted without further notice" should I not get in touch within 7 days with a reasonable proposal.

This in effect allows them to seek a decree if I ignored them without telling me.

This is where their information then appears to disappear !

 

I must have replied for the following reason.

The next piece of info in the SAR is a letter from me 2 months later "noting my dissapointment" at their response to my payment request.

I then state I did not agree to "discharge the debt at xx per month as quoted in your letter of xxJan/ARR04. (No sign of their letter in sar)

I then up my offer per month and send a cheque for my proposed 1st month.

This payment appears on their screendump statement as my 1st payment.

 

This proves I wrote to them and they replied.

They have not supplied either pieces of correspondence !!!

They do not respond to my 2nd proposal (Nothing in pack).

 

 

I clearly looking at their screendump statements do not make any further payment.

Said screedump continues to show an expected amount of xx per month.

 

Next correspondence in the SAR is approx 10 months later to advise they are in receipt of an extract decree (Again they write to slightly the wrong address).

So they have clearly gone for the decree without informing me.

 

Hopefully this is readible.

 

Is the missing correspondence significant ?

 

Are the incorrect addresses significant ?

 

Should I have been notified of intention to seek decree ?

 

Anything they did that looks wrong ?

 

Cheers

[saintalan]

Anybody ?

[dx100uk]

sadly all of that is trumped by the decree.

 

unless you can prove either both:

 

the balance at the time of the decree was wrong or

 

the decree was attained outside of 5yrs since your last deferral or payment

so the 'debt' was already statute barred

[saintalan]

Just an update over a year on.

I wonder if one of these muppets did put the "action" on hold and forgotten to follow up.

Maybe I am just too awkward for them to bother with.

I have not done anything since March last year and likewise have received no more correspondence.

[dx100uk]

Good show

[*RainbowTears*]

Good show

 

+1

 

Hopefully it stays that way for you!

[saintalan]

Hello everyone.

Message on my answerphone today asking me to contact xxx at Shoosmth.

Out of the blue after nearly 2 years.

Need to go and dig out the file from the loft again.

Just one question if you experts are still out there.

 

In post 11 I note the Decree is subject to a 20 year prescriptive period.

Assuming August 2019 is the 20th anniversary what would this mean if I got to that point.

[dx100uk]

dead extinguished

do NOT ring them!!

[dx100uk]

can you confirm my comment in post 41

[saintalan]

Your post 41 says good show !!!

I have had no contact either way letters or anything for 3 years now.

 

Do you mean dead extinguished if I dodge them till the 20 year anniversary

[dx100uk]

yes!!

 

it was where I was p'haps wondering what year this was taken out an what year you finished or last had contact with SLC.

 

at one point it LOOKED like the decree might have been attained outside of five years

but that's not likely

[saintalan]

Okay thanks again. I will keep my head down and try and get to 20th August 2019

 

 

The original SECOND EXTRACT DECREE FOR PAYMENT

Sheriff Court ***** Court Ref *****

Date of Decree 20 August 1999 In Absence

Pursuers Student Loans Company Ltd

[dx100uk]

its the in absence that pricked my ears

what years were you at uni/college

[saintalan]

90% sure it was for 1 year at Uni from Sep 94 to Jun 95

 

 

I just assumed the in absence meant the decree was granted without me defending.

[dx100uk]

which fits as they would have needed to get the decree within 5yrs

wonder why you never got served with papers in 1999

the rules then were that it had to be done only by person to person by sheriff officers

[saintalan]

Editing the timelines from my earlier post where I go through my SAR pack at the point where I try to negotiate a monthly payment plan.

That confirms I was unaware of the decree but had been threatened with one. See below.

 

 

It then goes on to say "Court proceeding will be instituted without further notice" should I not get in touch within 7 days with a reasonable proposal.

This in effect allows them to seek a decree if I ignored them without telling me.

This is where their information then appears to disappear !

 

I must have replied for the following reason.

The next piece of info in the SAR is a letter from me 2 months later "noting my dissapointment" at their response to my payment offer.

I then state I did not agree to "discharge the debt at xx per month as quoted in your letter of xxJan/ARR04. (No sign of their letter in sar)

I then up my offer per month and send a cheque for my proposed 1st month.

This payment appears on their screendump statement as my 1st payment.

 

This proves I wrote to them and they replied.

They have not supplied either pieces of correspondence !!!

They do not respond to my 2nd proposal (Nothing in pack).

 

Their statements show I do not make any further payment.

Said statements continues to show an expected amount of xx per month.

 

Next correspondence in the SAR is approx 10 months later to advise they are in receipt of an extract decree (Again they write to slightly the wrong address).

So they have clearly gone for the decree without informing me and at the wrong address.