Erudio - 'Arrears' Help

[zohar]

Hi,

 

I sent back the deferment form back in April, several weeks in advance of my deferment expiring,

 

however I didn't sign or date it as I was concerned about the legal implications of doing so,

I just filled out the bare minimum of information and sent it off along with a Jobcentre letter confirming I was in receipt of JSA

and a template letter from a website [removed] explaining why I wasn't signing the form.

 

Not too surprisingly I subsequently received a letter from Erudio rejecting my deferral and resending the form to be signed and dates.

 

At this point, I wrote to them asking them to fully explain what - if any - legal differences there were

and any possible implications in terms of signing their deferral form compared to the one used by SLC.

I also sent them a postal order for £1 and a request for my original signed credit agreements.

 

I received an acknowledgement letter off them and told that someone would respond in due course.

 

a few weeks later,

6 weeks after my deferral had officially ended

 

I received a leter from Erudio saying they had not yet received my monthly payment of £112.38

and that now 'account is now in arrears'.

 

It went on to say request that I make arrangements to clear the 'total overdue amount of £407.73 ass soon as possible'.

 

Last week finally got round to sending me my original signed credit agreements

but they did not include any response to my questions about the issues I raised concerning signing their deferral form.

 

I was considering signing the deferral form today, and called ahead to to query the arrears

as I had been told over the phone that my account had been 'frozen' for three months

(3 months from the original deferment date ending) and

 

the woman I spoke to said that amount was £300 (she couldn't say why her amount was lower than the one stated in the letter).

 

I explained that I thought that because the account was in dispute they weren't legally allowed to build up arrears and charges,

but she wasn't that knowledgeable and said that someone will call me back today before 5:30.

 

Can someone here give me any info on this?

 

It seems pretty unfair that that if you have legitimate questions about the way in which a new company is handling your deferment

and they take weeks and weeks to get back to you and endlessly dodge the issues,

they can they not only build up arrears on your account, but add charges too.

[Pluthero]

Do not worry you are not alone!

 

Check out the long threads on MSE (money saving expert) and mumsnet about these very issues.

 

Short answer is that Erudio are a DCA (debt collection agency)

and to get any response from them you are going to have to be very firm in your dealings with them.

 

You are under the threshold to defer so write a 'complaint' to erudio,

there is an address on their website for complaints,

asking why you have not been deferred as they have the evidence to do so which you supplied well before your deferment date was up.

 

DO NOT SIGN/USE their deferral form as it seeks to change the terms of your original agreement with the SLC.

 

NEVER EVER PHONE THEM! Waste of your money and time and they will tell you nothing useful or helpful.

 

Send all mail recorded delivery or they may deny receiving it.

 

You owe them nothing and don't be bullied by them into believing you do.

 

If they do not defer you lodge a complaint with the FOS (financial ombudsman Service)

IN fact even when they do defer you lodge one anyway about their shoddy/unprofessional treatment of you

and hopefully they will not do the same thing in the future to you and others.

 

I could go on but check out the above threads for more support/guidance.

 

Mods, feel free to correct/add to any of the above.

 

Kinda new at this but have spent way to much time researching/dealing with Erudio

to let others suffer at their hands.

 

Hope I covered the main points as tactfully as I could!

[zohar]

Thanks for your response.

 

I wrote to Erudio on June 9 asking them to detail the differences that I would be agreeing to in the credit agreement by signing the form.

 

They wrote back acknowledging my letter but they have yet to answer any of the questions.

 

Do you know how their credit agreement differs to the original one?

 

I have read through Mumsnet and MSE threads on this but I find them confusing and I can't find the info that specifically relates to my concerns.

 

Y'know, as much as I don't want to,

I'm on the verge of just signing the form as I'm weary of all the stress this is causing.

 

I know that's what they want and I really don't want to do it but by the 19th August

I will be 4 months in arrears and at that point they are able to ask for repayment (of the arrears),

if only at a highly reduced rate, based on my current circumstances.

 

Even if it was just a few pounds a week or month, that's not money I have at the moment.

[Pluthero]

I believe it differs in respect of if you sign it Erudio will be able to register your loans with credit reference agencies as 'on payment holiday.'

In effect ruining (potentially) your credit rating.

 

They are saying you owe x amount of money as a debt to cannot afford to repay.

This is incorrect as it is student loan you are legally allowed to defer under the original SLC terms

and should not adversely affect your ability to get credit:

and there is some debate whether it is even legal for Erudio to do this if you are a genuine deferrer.

 

There may be a miss selling argument to pursue as taking out a student loan was supposed to be safe

and not discourage people from going to UNi for fear they would be burdened with a loan they would not be able to repay.

 

Hence you were allowed to defer yearly and after 25 years the loan would be written off.

 

However its speculation at this point because I do not know if Erudio have put anyone on 'payment holiday' as they only just took over this shambles.

 

But many people believe and are fearful that Erudio could ruin your credit rating: ie no mortgage or moblie phone contracts etc.

 

I am in same boat as you BTW.

 

I sent 3 months wage slips and covering letter well before my deferment date was up.

 

Erudio ignored it all,

I complained about their tardiness in not deferring me as I had sent the legal amount of evidence to do so.

 

The eight weeks for them to respond to my complaint is up and I am writing to the FOS for help.

 

I also got an Erudio arrears letter which I also complained about to them as I saw it as HARASSMENT.

 

My third complaint letter is also going this weekend about their continued failure to defer me and non response to my first two complaints.

 

I sent recorded letters and emailed Erudio the same info hoping for a faster response by email but they have not replied by email either.

 

This does not put them in a very good light with regulators. I have tried to solve my issues with them, they have ignored me.

 

I ain't letting it lie till all avenues of complaint have been exhaused.

 

Its all up in the air at the moment. Keep your spirits up. Read up about DCA tactics!

[dx100uk]

I seriously suggest you read the threads already here on CAG.

 

dx

[zohar]

I've read the threads here but still haven't found the info I needed about what exactly are the differences in respect of signing the deferrment form.

 

From what I can see, I don't think anyone has got a full answer on that from Erudio, be that here Mumsnet and MSE.

 

If Erudio say there are no differences then that will either be fine, or it turns out that isn't the case,

then in court, they can be shown to be liars. Or they may well state what the differences are,

and I could then make a decision as to whether it's worth fighting.

 

Well, that was the theory anyway,

 

but like I say, I'm now getting too drained to continue what seems to be a futile battle

and may well just sign the damn form.

 

I just wish that I - or someone else- had been able to extract a final answer from Erudio earlier on in the year

so we could have made our decisions accordingly.

[zohar]

And just to add, in everything I've read across the various forums, I haven't seen a single person be accepted for deferral without signing the form.

[dx100uk]

sign and send back a copy of the old SLC deferment form

 

its in a thread here already.

[zohar]

Are you aware of anyone who has done that and had a successful deferment?

[Pluthero]

I think someone has on mse. You are falling into erudios trap! Ask your self! Am I under the threshold. Did I send enough evidence? Yes and yes. So you have done nothing wrong! Fight them all the way!

[zohar]

I think someone has on mse. You are falling into erudios trap! Ask your self! Am I under the threshold. Did I send enough evidence? Yes and yes. So you have done nothing wrong! Fight them all the way!

 

You 'think' someone has...?

Hmmm..

..considering all the people who have been battling Erudio on the grounds of their controversial forms,

one would have hoped there would be more than one person that might have been granted a deferment

using an alternative method.

 

 

If it comes down to it and I don't send it back soon and then the ombudsman finds against me,

that leaves me with arrears that I will legally be obliged to pay regardless of being under the threshold.

I may be able to get a grace period whilst I'm not working but they will become enforceable when I get a job.

 

As I said above,

no one seems to have found out definitively what the legal implications are of signing their form are,

as opposed to the old SLC form, so no one can say for certain that it would be deleterious to do so.

 

 

Of course, I don't trust Erudio, and they've behaved abysmally in handling our complaints,

but acting on suspicion and speculation rather than solid facts,

is not a wise move when they could be found to have the law on their side.

[dx100uk]

law what law they are a dca.

 

dx

[zohar]

law what law they are a dca.

 

dx

 

Yes, I know they are a DCA. What point are you trying to make?

[renegadeimp]

They have zero rights to do pretty much anything. Thats why they are desperately trying to get you to sign so they can change your terms and conditions to give them full control. If you sign and give in, you are in for a LOT more problems.

[zohar]

They have zero rights to do pretty much anything. Thats why they are desperately trying to get you to sign so they can change your terms and conditions to give them full control. If you sign and give in, you are in for a LOT more problems.

 

In what specific ways does my signature allow them to change the terms and conditions of the original credit agreement?

 

 

Have you been able to get a deferment from them without signing their form?

Edited July 31, 2014 by zohar

[dx100uk]

I thought you'd been reading around?

 

look at the text above where you have to sign on their inflated and intrusive referral form.

 

its all there.

 

dx

[zohar]

I have the form in front of me right now. There's nothing above the signature line that suggests that one is agreeing to changes in the original credit agreement.

[dx100uk]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?421805-ERUDIO.-What-documents-have-the-sent.

[zohar]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?421805-ERUDIO.-What-documents-have-the-sent.

 

Yes, I've read that too.

 

Am I right in thinking that people here are suggesting that people send in their proof of income without signing the form, and then allow arrears to build up on their accounts when it's not accepted?

[Pluthero]

Listen don't believe a word erudio tell you!

 

You are not in arrears.

 

They are trying it on.

 

If the FOS side with erudio then next step is court for breach of contract.

 

I can't really afford to go to court but as I am hoping to get a mortgage next year

I really have no choice as I will need my credit rating intact!

[dx100uk]

they cant mark your credit file.

 

don't think there is any 'proof' anywhere they have done this to anyone.

 

dx

[dx100uk]

Yes, I've read that too.

 

Am I right in thinking that people here are suggesting that people send in their proof of income without signing the form, and then allow arrears to build up on their accounts when it's not accepted?

 

no you send back a filled in copy of the original SLC deferment form.

and sign it.

 

let them waffle on about arrears etc etc .

 

you start paying, when you shouldn't need to

and they've got you.

 

dx

[zohar]

Listen don't believe a word erudio tell you!

 

You are not in arrears.

 

They are trying it on.

 

If the FOS side with erudio then next step is court for breach of contract.

 

I can't really afford to go to court but as I am hoping to get a mortgage next year

I really have no choice as I will need my credit rating intact!

 

Well, SLC always used to put accounts in arrears too, so this isn't any different.

 

I'm inclined to think that if Erudio are acting illegally , then whether we have signed the forms or not, is neither here nor there. If they are acting outside the law this will apply to everyone regardless of which forms they did - or didn't - sign.

[renegadeimp]

Theres a HUGE difference between acting illegally and acting unlawfully. Follow the advice given and you'll be fine. Erudio are simply a DCA. Nothing more. They know they have little chance at collecting most of the accounts, which is why they are trying to force people into signing a new contract which allows the DCA to do pretty much whatever they like.

[zohar]

Theres a HUGE difference between acting illegally and acting unlawfully. Follow the advice given and you'll be fine. Erudio are simply a DCA. Nothing more. They know they have little chance at collecting most of the accounts, which is why they are trying to force people into signing a new contract which allows the DCA to do pretty much whatever they like.

 

OK, I hear what you are saying but I'd be grateful if you could paste here the part of the form which you're referring to. At the moment I can only see declarations pertaining to 'mistatements', 'omissions', confirmation of income and granting Erudio the right to request further information/verification 'from whom the income is derived'. Unless I'm missing something, none of this suggests that a signature will thus allow Erudio to do 'pretty much whatever they like'.