Thesis/97 Loan, Erudio/98 chasing Student loans

[Clear33]

I was sick with panic when Link Financial rung me regarding a 97 Student Loan.

 

I have found the correct Statute Barred template

and sent it Special delivery to PO Box 141 Caerphilly, CF839BX

 

I have tracked it and its status is only delivered and not yet collected.

I am concerned about this.

Should I also fax and email?

Is there a better address to send it to

- how long should I wait?

 

I really appreciate your help on this one to alleviate the worry.

 

many THanks, Clear 33

 

--------------------------------

[cerberusalert]

You don't have to do anything further, the ball's in their court now and to pursue further they have to prove the debt is not SB.

[Clear33]

Thanks for the advice - fingers crossed all ok then.

 

Clear33

[cerberusalert]

If they continue to pursue they are in breach of OFT guidelines and you should make a complaint to your local Trading Standards.

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

 

2.14 In the past we have dealt with a number of statute barred debt cases governed by

the Limitation Act 1980, which applies to England and Wales. Based on that

experience our position with regard to England and Wales remains:

a. we accept legally the debt exists

b. it is the methods by which the debt is collected that can be

unfair as follows:

• it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from

the creditor during the relevant limitation period

• if a creditor has been in regular contact with a debtor before the debt

is statute barred, then we do not consider it unfair to continue to

attempt to recover the debt

• it is unfair to mislead debtors as to their rights and obligations, for

example, falsely stating or implying that the debt is still legally

recoverable and relying on consumers not knowing the relevant legal

provisions, and

• continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they

will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to

harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of

Justice Act 1970.

[Clear33]

Hi!

 

I think we may have been a little hazy on the Statute Barred.

I was hoping to clarify.

 

I have received word from Link.

My angle was that I had a clear period of over 6 years from when the 97' loan became due until 2006 which occurred because of serious long term illness and the SLC.

 

I did make some payments after this 2006 period when a debt collection company got in touch.

Link have written and stated that my last payment was in 2008

- which I might agree with as it sounds right

- but they have not mentioned the period I wrote about up until 2006.

 

I have read some threads who have made payments after their clear 6 years of no contact

and then DO and can claim it statute barred

- equally I have read that the 'clock starts ticking again'......

 

After receiving the Link letter I am wondering if I have made a mistake and it is not statute barred?

I can give you more information if I have been too confusing...I am wondering what to do now?

Thanks for your help...

 

Clear33

Edited March 26, 2011 by Clear33

[baileyboy]

Its my understanding that after a clear period of 6 years, the clock cannot be restarted again even if a payment has been made voluntary or overwise.

[cerberusalert]

I have read some threads who have made payments after their clear 6 years of no contact and then DO and can claim it statute barred - equally I have read that the 'clock starts ticking again'......

Once Statute Barred nothing can unbar it, you could bare your derrière, shouting derangedly at the top of your voice that you owe the money and it would still be Statute Barred.... although they'd probably cart you off to the funny farm.

 

Any payments you made after the debt became SB'd would be deemed as a gift from you.

[Clear33]

THanks very much for replying....It is sounding really hopeful.....

 

I am really shocked that these sorts of antics are being used on people and was in complete ignorance.

..never actually having taken a loan out before..

 

 

..The student Loan was supposedly a 'safe loan' and the spirit it was given and taken out in was that one should only pay it back when earning over £15,000 per annum.

 

 

I have never earned anything due to illness.

It should not even go into default unless one is earning over this amount and then does not pay up I think.

I was herded into a room full of students who were all just told to sign the contract which we all did under a feeling of safety as it meant we could go to University.

 

I now say prayers every night for people being bullied and harrassed in this way. It may just be peoples jobs but why don't people refuse to do and say these scripts to other people.....it is very wrong and needs stopping I think.

 

On the practical side of my current case I am really sorry about still being confused on this ........But I am....

 

The thing is this....

 

I only just sent the Statute barred letter...

..after Link wouldn't accept my offer of £10 per week ( I am on benefits) and scared me half to death!

 

So this means

1) I had the clear period from when the 97 loan became due until 2006....

 

2) I made about 10 or so monthly payments to Capquest until 2008...then back to the SLC....then to blinking Thesis when they sold it off or something like this....

 

3) When Link got in touch I spoke to them for ages - I was in tears by the end of the call and really frightened ..... of going near my front door....and of the letter box ha ha the funny farm is right! Letter box phobia.....

and then thankfully found this forum offering some real help and support.....and I sent off the Statute barred letter.

 

They say they acknowledge that I claim it is statute barred but that they have records to show that the last payment I made was in 2008...and they have sent me the appropriate statements and a financial and expenditure form to fill out..

.. This isn't the 'THis matter is now closed' letter I was hoping for that other people have got

 

THis is why I thought I must have made a mistake...

THe CAB had said that after the clear 6 years once I acknowledge it again then it can't be statute barred

An independent financial source said this too until I said it can - she went off to check and then told me it can....

 

Help Please!

 

C

[Clear33]

I am unsure what to do next.

Link say they have taken my phone number off records for now

- as I requested any correspondence to be in writing

- but they say they are holding the right to take further action if I do not fill out the expenditure form....

 

Is there a legally binding ruling or letter template I should send now?

 

THanks

 

C

 

P.S. I have just started lightening up a little and taken in the full humour of that last post.....ha ha

thanks for that

[cerberusalert]

They say they acknowledge that I claim it is statute barred but that they have records to show that the last payment I made was in 2008...and they have sent me the appropriate statements and a financial and expenditure form to fill out.... This isn't the 'THis matter is now closed' letter I was hoping for that other people have got

It doesn't matter what payments may have been made in 2008 as long as there was a clear period of six years where you made no payment, deferral or written admission of the debt. They are debarred in law to pursue the debt through a court & if they continue to pester for payment after you have declared its Statute Barred status it could be construed as harassment; http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

 

page 9

 

Statute barred debt

 

2.13 This guidance applies to the pursuit of debt regardless of its age. We will be

carrying out further work on this aspect of debt recovery including analysis of

relevant legislation and practice throughout the UK.

2.14 In the past we have dealt with a number of statute barred debt cases governed by

the Limitation Act 1980, which applies to England and Wales. Based on that

experience our position with regard to England and Wales remains:

a. we accept legally the debt exists

b. it is the methods by which the debt is collected that can be

unfair as follows:

• it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from

the creditor during the relevant limitation period

• if a creditor has been in regular contact with a debtor before the debt

is statute barred, then we do not consider it unfair to continue to

attempt to recover the debt

• it is unfair to mislead debtors as to their rights and obligations, for

example, falsely stating or implying that the debt is still legally

recoverable and relying on consumers not knowing the relevant legal

provisions, and

• continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they

will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to

harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of

Justice Act 1970.

[Undercover-Elsa]

From the Limitation Act:

 

a current period of limitation may be repeatedly extended under this section by further acknowledgments or payments, but a right of action, once barred by this Act, shall not be revived by any subsequent acknowledgment or payment.

 

[Clear33]

Ah Thanks for that. I understand where I have been confused....

 

I think I am getting the idea now. It becomes Statute Barred AUTOMATICALLY by definition after a Clear 6 year period of no contact......Even though I did not send them the Statute Barred letter at that point in time

 

So this debt was well and truly Statute Barred by 2006....I then made some

'voluntary donations' (payments)

And when Link Scared me half to death and forced me to look into the issue further I sent the Statute Barred template letter in 2011, to explain why I shall not be making any payments.

 

Have I got this all right and straight now?

 

A) Does anyone know what I should do next?

 

B) Should I re-send something to Link Financial? Since Link have not sent me the 'Final and Last Letter' I was expecting....and are still asking for payment albeit in affordable installments (which I would have done had they been 'human' in first contact with me...I must say that because of their antics I don't feel I should pay them anything)

 

C) Should I also send the Statute Barred template letter to the Student Loans Company? ANd get this is it SAR - full disclosure from the SLC....that people are getting now?

 

 

Thanks Very Very Much

C

 

 

P.S. My phone has been cut off so I am going to the library for my internet - I shall try to check for answers every day though......

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hi there,

Sorry to hear about your phone

 

Yep, by George I think you've got it!

 

I would send a SAR to SLC so you can establish the exact dates.

When Link write again, inform them that it was Statute Barred well before you made those payments, which were made under duress when you were not informed of your rights.

Include the quote from the Limitations Act and tell them that the debt therefore REMAINS Statute Barred and you will therefore not be making any further payments, and any further contact will be viewed as harrasment and result in complaints to the relevant authorities.

[brokebutnotbeatn]

Hi, I read somewhere on this site that student loans were subject to a 12 year not a 6 year rule so i would search the site (not just this sub section) and do some more checking before going in guns blazing? If you can't find anything then apologies!

[brokebutnotbeatn]

Correction: good news! Any student loan taken out BEFORE September 1998 comes under the limitation act. The quote below is taken from the OFT.

 

 

 

Old style or ‘mortgage’ student loans are consumer credit agreements.

Payments cannot automatically be deducted from your wages.

The SLC has to go to court before they can enforce the debt against you.

 

 

This means that the Limitation Act can apply if you have not paid or acknowledged the debt for over six years.

 

If you have made no payments and have not acknowledged the debt (either in writing or by making a payment) in six years, then this is statute barred.

Edited March 30, 2011 by cerberusalert
date correction

[silverfox1961]

Hi, I read somewhere on this site that student loans were subject to a 12 year not a 6 year rule so i would search the site (not just this sub section) and do some more checking before going in guns blazing? If you can't find anything then apologies!

 

Hi,

The rules changed in September 1998. Any student loan taken out before that, the 6 year rule applied.

Any loan taken out before this date was a Consumer Credit Agreement and subject to the Limitations Act 1980 therefore if no payment nor acknowledgement of the loan was made in the preceding 6 years then it's SB

[lop]

The new proposed OFT guidance makes for interesting reading. Most DCA's will argue that if they have sent you a letter and can prove thus that the debt is not statute barred as you have deliberately ignored them - well at least that is the speil they will give.....Just playing devils advocate here. However I think these Student Loans have been brought recently. You could request a S.A.R based on their response

[GSJ66]

Hi, for you and for any other person wishing to send a letter to Link (or one of it's many guises) please use the following address as it is a manned desk and they will have to physically sign for the letter. I hand delivered a letter to them after getting annoyed at waiting for replies.

 

Link Financial Outsourcing ltd

Unit 5,

Trecenydd Business Park,

Caerphilly,

Mid Glamorgan,

CF83 2RZ

 

The PO Box will be overflowing and will take them weeks to process, which means weeks of worry for you whilst waiting. Pile the letters high on their actual desks!!

 

Good luck

 

GSJ66

[lop]

Or.....Link Financial,89 Albert Embankment, London, SE1 7TP

[Clear33]

The only thing I shall miss about the phone is the dog howling at it By the time I wondered who it was ringing - it usually stopped anyway Ha ha

 

At last I have a grip on the Statute Barred! Hooray! I shall do all of the above and will begin by reasserting that the Loan is Statute Barred with appropriate quotes...and then take it from there Fingers crossed.... I don't know if I will even bother yet with a SARs as the onus is on them to prove otherwise...and then also if necessary I will send that 1£ off to check they even still have a contract etc....

 

 

But whats this? NEW guidelines......Flippin' 'eck..... just when I think its all sorted!

In fact I was past my coping point in 2008 after getting the loan put back to the SLC and arranging a monthly payment for my 97 and 98 loans and then it was mentioned to me on the telephone by the SLC that my 97 loan was 'going somewhere else' - nothing then ever came in writing about this! I don't even know if I had any contact with Thesis... It is ridiculously confusing....

 

I was too ill then to worry about it and chase it up, my Dad had just died - I guess what happened is it went to Thesis.... and then got passed onto Link....

 

I shall carry on with plan A - (unless anyone can see that that is not right).... for now and send it to the manned address as quoted...

 

Many THanks 8-)

 

C

[lop]

In that case, lets see what the response is. Nothing lost but I am sure they will respond to you with a technicality. Look forward to eharing what happens.

[Clear33]

ALMOST A YEAR LATER!!!

 

HI!

I have been passing letters back and forth.

 

As a summary as to what has happened:

After sending a few letters to me trying different tacks

- Link finally sent a letter stating that with regards to the Act I mentioned

The 97 loan has been cancelled and no further action from me is required.

 

Before this letter I had in the meantime become concerned about the 98 loan and phoned the SLC to check it was still there and that under no circumstances would it be sent to a debt collect

 

I was promised faithfully that they had my correct address and that it would not be sent to a debt collectors.

 

Well, a few weeks later I was bombarded by another Debt collection agency asking for payment in full of the 98 loan!!!

 

I have written several letters to the SLC.

They said they recalled the 97 and 98 loans to them.

Good news.

 

They now won't acknowledge my request of confirmation that the 97 loan is statute barred.

They again did the same as link.

They stated they have a payment in 2008 - which is beyond the 6 years for statute barred

- as both loans were unacknowledged from 1997 - 2006

 

- I sent another letter stating IN THE RELEVANT PERIOD it BECAME STATUTE BARRED and they have sent me a letter now not acknowledging the 97 loan and stating that the 98 loan ACCRUED and therefore is not Statute Barred because payments were made etc/.

 

They have said it ought to be resolved at the customer care team and have not passed it on to a Debt Collection Company.

 

Again, to be clear I had a clear 6 years of no payments or acknowledgments

On the plus side they haven't given me any evidence on the contrary - HmmmmCarol

[Clear33]

NEW Company have written to me.

 

I am only just losing my fear of my mailbox and people walking down my driveway

 

i dont want it back again.

 

So far, i am calm about this...

 

I have received a letter today from:

 

Erudio Student Loans.

 

They say they purchased my SL on Nov. 2013 'as notified to you in your SLC transfer of ownership enclosed'

 

They say i owe them £2400

 

Now, i sent the statute barred template to the SLC for both my loans.

 

The link financial who had one of them finally acknowledged it was statute barred and withdrew.

however the slc never would avknowledge.

 

i was wondering what i should do?

 

send the statute barred template to erudio and slc?

 

many thanks

Clear33

[WarrenBuffet]

Send a firm letter stateing that they are breaking regulations and will be reported for attempting to collect an alleged debt that has already been proven to be statute barred.

 

 

Further, if they do not remove your details from their systems and confirm this in writing to you, you will report them for harassment.

 

Others will tell you to just ignore which may be best advice?

But, do not live in fear as you have nothing to fear.

 

 

They will not come calling at your door, they have no such legal powers. Id just be blunt with them and tell them to Jog On!

 

Be aware that they will eventually sell it on to another mug DCA and it will all begin again, don't fear them look forward to giving them an earful.

[Clear33]

thanks warrenbuffet

 

it doesnt seem wise to ignore it as it will just escalate?

 

the slc would not send me evidence that it was not statute barred but also claimed the 6 year consecutive rule of no contact did not apply if i had been in touch after (which i knew by then this is wrong). They juat confirmed this was their position.

 

i heard nothing again until today.