Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So they have not actually issued a Court claim yet ? If they did that, then it would enable you time to seek advice, defend, go through mediation and then come to an affordable repayment arrangement. They are just trying to frighten you into finding ways to come up with money to pay them.   In regard to Solicitors/legal fees, you would need to check the leasehold agreement, which should include details of the ground rent/maintenance arrangement with a management company. The leasehold agreement you sign may make you liable for reasonable legal fees incurred by the management company.    If you can afford to pay the ground rent element, then that might be a sensible thing to do and pay this to the management company directly.   Do you have financial breakdown information showing how much is ground rent, what the maintenance fees cover, how much is management companies fees etc? You are entitled to this information, so should ask the management company for it.   Have you contacted your local Council Authority about help available ? Depending on your financial situation, there may be help available.  Government  have provided Councils with extra money to help those who have suffered financially because of Covid. There are discretionary Housing funds that you can apply for.          
    • Hi everyone, I am new to this forum. I am HOPING you can give me some advice that can help me. I am 68 years old and I currently own a leasehold property for which I have to pay (extortionate) monthly fees for Ground rent and Maintenance to a management company. During 2020, I managed to pay only for 6 months and then ended up in financial difficulty due to Covid. I was barely able to make ends meet. I stopped paying the maintenance fees around June 2020. My plan was to pay them a lump sum at the end of the year, when things go back to normal and my financial situation improved. Government advised things would go back to normal but unfortunately this didn't happen and I ended up in a lot of debt. I even had to sell my car to pay back money I had borrowed from family members. I live alone and this whole pandemic situation has really affected me mentally. To make matters worse, because I wasn't able to pay the lump sum as I originally had planned, the management company consulted a solicitor (Realty Law) to help them recover this outstanding debt. The initial debt was £596.00 + £36.15 for interest (no idea where this interest came from). The solicitors have now added on legal fees of £721.50 increasing the total debt to £1353.65. I contacted them via email and offered to pay £50 a month for the time being until I can improve my financial situation, at which point I would pay them more. Their response was the following: 'Our client has advised that they cannot honour a payment plan for that duration and therefore we have been instructed to continue our recovery process and request judgment if payment has not been made by 2pm on 29th October 2021. As such, we request that you please make full payment of £1353.65 as per the attached arrears schedule by 2pm on 29th October 2021. If payment or correspondence has not been received by then, then we shall be continuing with further recovery action and issuing a county court judgement (CCJ) which will incur additional fees. You are entitled to seek your own legal advice.'   The whole idea of court proceedings and CCJs and ADDITIONAL FEES has really elevated my anxiety levels to the point I am struggling to get to sleep at night. I borrowed money from family members and used some money that I had saved to pay off the initial £596.00, but its not possible for me to come up with the £700+ for the solicitor fees by 29th October. How is it even acceptable to charge someone £700+ in legal fees for a few letters?    Can someone please give me some advise on what on earth to do or who on earth I can speak to. I am desperate here.  Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance  
    • Please also take photos of the sign at the entrance as well as any signs inside the car park especially any that are different. Please take them from a distance where we can read them and if there is a payment machine, the sign on the machine or very close to it that explains their T&Cs for the machine.
    • Thanks for getting the signage posted up so quickly. The sign on entry should explain their T&Cs. As they don't it means that  what they have given you is  an offer to treat, not a contract. For there to be a contract they would have had to put their offer at the entrance.  You cannot put a notice saying that their T&Cs are inside the car park and expect motorists to be subject to those T&Cs when they are unaware what the terms are.. They have to be able to read them and understand them before they can accept them. My feeling is that the sign that includes the charge of £100 is too small to be acceptable On top of that the sign at the entrance is for Parking Control Solutions while the signs inside are from HX Management-a completely different animal. To strengthen your case for not paying them is the fact that their PCN is not compliant.  Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 there are certain wordings in  the NTK  that by Law must comply with the Act. They don't  have to quote that part of the Act in their PCN but the relevant wording has to be included. PoFA Schedule 4 paragraph 9 [2]   the notice must  [f]   warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given— (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid;   Your  NTK does not include  [if all the applicable conditions  under the Schedule have been met ]thus rendering the NTK non compliant.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

SLC Threshold, Yearly or Monthly?


jacobjones
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2040 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

I have not earned enough to pay back my student loan for the last ten years.

 

I now find I am slightly above the threshold, if indeed it is a monthly threshold.

 

Over the course of the last year I have earned less than the yearly threshold.

 

Over the course of the last three months I have earned less than the threshold (divided by 4).

 

However, the fact remains that my monthly salary is currently above the threshold and has been for the last two months.

 

How is the threshold calculated?

 

Is it on the previous years earnings divide by 12?

 

On this months earnings?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I have a question about thresholds. There seems to be a monthly threshold and also a yearly one.

 

My deferral should have started a in mid-November.

 

I changed jobs mid-year and spent two months with no income.

 

If you look at my salary for the year before the deferral date, I earned less than the yearly threshold.

 

If you look at the three months before the deferral date, then I also, on average, was well under the monthly threshold.

 

However, my current employment pays over the monthly threshold.

 

Two pay cheques from the job fell in the year period before the deferment date (September and October).

 

Should I start paying it.

 

To my mind, if I haven't met the yearly threshold in the year before the deferment date, then I should be able to defer.

 

Is that correct.

 

The purpose of a threshold is something to be met over a period, no?

 

I will probably be in this job for a few years, and I know that next year I won't be able to defer, and I'm ok with that.

 

However, I don't think that in my current position I should be being it now.

 

I am going to email them one more time and ask them this.

If I don't get an adequate response I will ask for a copy of the original contract (CCA?),

 

That will either clarify the situation or, if they wish, bring it to a halt.

 

Thoughts?

 

Is the threshold amount based on the year before deferment or the year of deferment.

 

I've always understood it the be total slary for the year before deferment (meaning a threshold to be reached).

 

My total wages for the year before the deferment date were less than threshold,

but during the period of deferment I am asking about my salary will be higher than threshold.

 

I just want to confirm that the threshold needs to be reached before the deferment date,

as opposed to a future projection of what will be earned during the deferment period.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I just want to bump this up.

 

 

The posts above were written over a period of six weeks, but only posted in the last few days (thank you dx100uk),

so might look like ramblings. This is where I'm at as of today.

 

I am questioning the way Erudio judge how people reach the threshold.

 

 

The student loan company only states a yearly amount (currently £26,727) and refers to it as a threshold,

the dictionary definition of which is, "the point at which a stimulus is of sufficient intensity to begin to produce an effect."

 

 

to my mind that means I can defer until I reach the threshold amount in the year before deferment.

 

 

I ask this because I recently started a job which, if based on a monthly threshold, would appear to be over threshold.

 

 

However, this new job followed two months with zero income.

 

 

In the year before deferment I earned less than the yearly threshold.

 

 

In the three months before deferment I, on average, earned less than the monthly threshold (because in one of those months I earned zero).

 

I asked Erudio to lay out their criteria for deferment.

 

 

They cut and paste this from another document,

"we use copies of your wage slips confirming your gross income for the last three consecutive calendar months

to calculate your average monthly figure for the previous 12 month period."

On this basis I am well under threshold,

 

 

however, when I questioned Erudio as to why I am not being deferred

they said they were only using the two payslips I provided and not including the third month, when I earned zero.

 

 

As a consequence, this pushes me over the monthly and yearly threshold.

But, this also means they have ignored their own criteria,

by excluding one of the three months before deferment.

Erudio have ignored their own criteria in order to bump up my salary average.

.

I have now requested that they send me a copy of the original contract and they have said they will do that.

I referred to the 1974 CCA when I asked them to do this, but I did not send a template letter or £1.

I have told them that I will adhere to the agreement that I signed.

 

If I remain in my new job I will almost certainly not be able to apply for deferment next year, but I will not pay before I have to.

 

Thanks for listening!!

Edited by jacobjones
Link to post
Share on other sites

The precise method is not set down in law anywhere. Its just.

 

From the 1998 regulations which replaced all previous ones, and replaced the agreement terms in the older type written agreements.

 

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.

 

“deferment level” means 85% of the lender’s estimate of average monthly earnings of all full-time employees in Great Britain for the January when the level will apply based on figures published by the Office for National Statistics, or if that Office ceases to publish relevant figures, any other published figures;

 

“relevant month” means the month before the month in which the borrower asks for deferment;

 

So all the law says is that you have to "show" Erudio that:

 

a) Your income for the month before the month you apply for deferment was below the threshold

 

and

 

b) You income for the 3 months following that month will not or is likely not to be above the threshold.

 

Its (b) that causes the problems, as its subjective opinion based on evidence you supply, where the type and duration of the required evidence itself is not specified in law anywhere.

 

SLC for wageslips at least, routinely used the last 3 months worth in most cases.

 

However, they had discretion on that such as in your case where they might have cause to think that the 2 months were more representative evidence of what your income over the next 3 months might be.

 

Nothing is set down in law saying the HAVE to use 3 months worth.

 

Leaves a big hole for Erudio to exploit. Which they have done with their new forms and demands.

 

Only 2 ways you could force Erudio to apply fairer conditions is:

 

- Go to FOS and hope they agree that Erudio are being unreasonable, and then get a final adjudication that would be enforceable in court.

 

- Go to court off your own back and ask a judge to decide what is reasonable.

 

Government should have put stricter and more certain conditions in place in law before they sold the loans to protect ex students from the predatory practices of Erudio/Arrow, but they were too keen to get their pound of flesh, and probably didnt care less anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Maybe the first obvious question to ask is what evidence did you supply about your earnings, did you provide anything to show that you were not working? If not I guess I can understand why they have taken 2 months as that is all that was supplied. Were you claiming benefits? Just a thought

 

Just looking at what windysock wrote it would seem that you will need to start paying as the month prior to deferment you were earning above the limit and indeed the evidence suggests that over the next 3 months you will continue to earn above the limit

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

I live overseas and am not entitled to benefits of any kind.

 

 

I supplied payslips for the two months before deferral.

The month before that I didn't supply anything, as I didn't earn anything, so I have no proof.

 

 

I did send one page of my contract which had the start date on it and a year end summary from my job, which tallies with the payslips.

I also sent info about my previous contract that showed there was a two month gap in the middle.

 

I find it unbelievable that they can tell me (in writing) how they calculate deferment in one breath,

then ignore that criteria when it doesn't work for them.

By not including that third month (where I earned zero) they are pushing me over the limit.

They are picking and choosing criteria that forces me over the limit.

 

Also, I am a contract worker, albeit on one year contracts.

According to Erudio's document, "Getting Your Deferment Application Form Right", when I fill out my deferment application I should,

"ensure that you insert a monthly figure.

For example, if your current annual earnings before deductions (and including any bonuses and other taxable benefits) is £12,000 a year,

your gross monthly income is £1,000."

If I do this for the year before deferment, then, again I am under the threshold.

However, they are choosing to only select the two months before deferment.

The purpose of the above criteria is to smooth out the salaries or self-employed and short term contract workers,

to get an average salary, however, they are doing the reverse, by choosing the optimum months to force me over the limit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SO, I have asked for a copy of the original contract. Is it correct that they can't take any action until that arrives? Are they actually sending these out when requested? I was under the impression that in some cases they have been unable to do this. Any know?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I continued to point out that I was under threshold for the year before the deferment and also under threshold, on average, for the three months before deferment. Apparently my application has now been sent to a complaints department and will be answered within eight weeks (deferment was up last September).

 

Still waiting for original agreements to arrive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jacob, sorry to have not answered sooner.

 

If you have sent a CCA then you are

disputing any contract with them until they PROPERLY respond to your CCA request. In effect you are asking them to "Prove It".

 

Do not take anything they say seriously, they are not a respectable institution and they have bugger all powers. They will regardless, continue demanding your money and that you do this and you must do that. They are parasities and devious liars ...... Nothing more!.

 

The best advice that i can give you is:

 

1.) Type DCA's legal powers into google and grab a good glass of wine, & read.

 

2.) Take Control!

You like most are falling for their scare/intimidation tactic.

 

2a.) Write back stating, 'I will not be responding to any of your threatening letters until, such times as you properly respond to my legal request for copies of the original signed agreements as outlined in my CCA request. You haave chosen to ignore this legal obligation and as a result, the alleged debt remains in dispute and is therefore unenforceable.'

 

Contd...

 

3.) 'I have no legal obligation to complete your frankly intrusive DAF and will only complete the original deferment form as provided by the SLC. You are aware that legally, this is the only deferment form i need supply and your Eurido DAF, will be thrown in the bin where it belongs.'

 

4.) Fight them on every point, and if they state that something is black you argue its white.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy to fight them. I have pretty much done numbers 2, 2a and 4. I'm a little concerned about it, but not scared / intimidated. I am happy to stand my ground.

 

I did not send them a CCA letter with a pound. I emailed them and said please advise me on where I should send the CCA and they replied they that they would send the agreements to me. No more mention of CCA or pound fee. Still awaiting delivery.

Edited by jacobjones
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I had another letter from Erudio saying that they are refusing deferment and this was their final decision,

although they appreciate they did a crap job, they also sent a cheque for £50 for my trouble!

They also sent some information about making a complaint to the ombudsman.

 

 

I have sent Erudio one final email letting them know that I will be taking this option up,

as not only have they not answered my questions,

they have also not sent copies of my original documents, even though they promised to do so in two emails in January

(they did not ask me to send a CCA letter or £1, they just flat out said they would send them to me, which of course, they have not).

 

So, really, I'm trying to drag this out.

 

 

The ombudsman says I need to email them within six months.

 

 

Should I email them now, or should I wait until the original documents turn up,

then email the complaint?

Link to post
Share on other sites

pers I'd send an official CCA request

£1 blank PO don't sign anything.

 

 

the perhaps think about involving the FOS if they supply a compliant CCA return.

 

 

but in all honesty, you'll never get the FOS to side with you on this one.

 

 

its a sold gov't debt,

you need to be aware who their governors are ...

 

 

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

What's the average amount it takes for them to supply copies of original documents? It is weeks, months or years? Do they actually have copies of all of them?

 

 

Just wondering.

Link to post
Share on other sites

theres no hard and fast answer

 

 

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

  • 2 weeks later...

It's now been three months since I requested my original docs.

 

 

It's all gone kinda quiet.

 

 

I'm not going to write to the Ombudsman until I get them.

 

 

I shouldn't have to make a complaint until I have been furnished with all the info I need.

 

 

Plus they can't do anything while I drag it out.

 

 

Plenty of time............................

Link to post
Share on other sites

good

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

  • 2 weeks later...

"So all the law says is that you have to "show" Erudio that:

 

a) Your income for the month before the month you apply for deferment was below the threshold

 

and

 

b) You income for the 3 months following that month will not or is likely not to be above the threshold."

 

See, I have a real problem with this.

A threshold is something to be met, before another reaction (denial of deferment) can happen.

 

 

Part B is actually referring to a future-projection, not a threshold.

Once I receive my original docs (if I ever do receive them), I will make a complaint to the ombudsman based on this.

Also, the SLC does not refer to the threshold in monthly terms, it refers to a yearly threshold.

It's quite easy to pick holes in their wording, as it is extremely badly written.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question about the following paragraph, would a breach in obligation need to be proved in court?

 

 

A Mortgage Style Loan borrower’s liability shall be cancelled:

 

When the borrower dies;

If/when the borrower is not in breach of any obligation in relation to any loan and, if they were under 40 years of age when they last entered the loan agreement, when they reach the age of 50 or when the loan has been outstanding for not less than 25 years (whichever is the sooner); or If the borrower was over 40 years of age when they entered the loan agreement, when they reach the age of 60.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How long did it take from the time you wrote to the ombudsman to the time of the decision?

 

I sent the first complaint to them late september last year and they sent me their final decision late april this year so seven months of email ping pong,

 

 

you have to tell them that email is your preferred method of communication and i'm glad i did as if this was through the post it could easily have taken twice that length of time.

 

I wouldn't have taken out the loan at all if it had been offered by these lowlifes,

I thought taking it from the government was a better bet,

 

 

my initial gripe with the whole system was that the government had sold off my student loan at a fraction of it's face value to these unscrupulous sharks

before I even graduated (they didn't offer it for sale to me at that low price) so I decided not to pay it or communicate with them.

 

 

North of the border the SNP promised in their manifesto back in 2007 to write off student debt in Scotland which helped get them elected for the first time, needless to say they were lying and didn't deliver on this promise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

success,

I argued my case and demanded a final decision by the ombudsman rather than the previous person and they had upheld my complaint,

 

 

they are instructing honours student loans to write off my student loan.

 

 

My case will appear on the FOS website they say so you can read it.

 

 

I think this may be the first one of these cases to go to the ombudsman unless anyone knows of another

 

 

and this will set a precedence for others drop me a mail if you need advice arguing your case.

 

Great result. Well done. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hi. Could someone give me the link to the CCA forms I need to get original copies of my agreements and statements from Erudio. I want to make sure I'm sending the right forms. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...