Erudio/Dryden claimform - old SLC Loans

[Skamp57]

Hi

 

I got a Northampton Court Claim Form posted June 3rd. 

RE. Erudio / Drydens Fairfax / Student Loans

and have spent the last few days organizing my paper work. 

Tonight I have been working on a long spreadsheet of it's history.

 

Below is my history. 

Should I add it here or paste it to start a new discussion? 

This is the first time I added a comment to this site.

 

 

I had 3 student loans from 1991, 1992, 1993. 

Graduated in 1994. 

Was born Nov 1962.  I

was under 40 when took out loans. 

Was eligible to defer all the time till I was over 50 Nov 2012. 

 

I actually did my last DAF Sept 2013 (whilst already 50) and was granted deferment as usual. 

2013 I kind of wanted to set the ball rolling, not do the DAF and finally contest my long running dispute but filled out the forms instead, 

 because in case I lost the case I had no savings. 

In fact I am now 56 and still without any savings or property. 

Too late now for a mortgage!

 

I have had a long running dispute with SLC from 1998 where there was an 8 month delay in my deferment process and from then on SLC claimed I had Arrears on my account which I always contested.

 

Order of events that year: 1998

 

Originally I should have received the Deferment Application Form (DAF) to defer from making payments that would start in April, but early 1998 I had moved home and was sofa surfing. 

 

Late April 98 I sent a letter to Student Loans Company SLC provide new address (actually a c/o my sister's flat). 

They acknowledged my letter mid May and promised to send out new DAF. 

 

In June I phoned to chase them up as the DAF had not arrived and they told me to wait.

This dragged on till late July when I got a default notice of arrears.

 

I called again in August. 

Some time lapse on my part was visiting my sister to get correspondence and not having a phone.

I kept waiting for the DAF.

 

Early September I sent letter to SLC that I had not received the DAF. 

I received a DAF shortly after and sent it back late Sept. 

I made copies of what I sent.

 

End of October I got a letter that they had not received my DAF. 

By this time I thought they were just not able to cope with their administration load and having dealt with delays from other government agencies did not know what should be considered slow progress.

That given what I was presuming was their earlier 'incompetence' in sending me the DAF, that these delays were the norm.

 

By 1st December I sent duplicate copies of the DAF I sent in September and copies of the accompanying documents I sent in September

My loan was deferred mid December.

 

From then on after backdating my deferral by 3 months, SLC put me in Arrears for the other five months back dating to April. 

I disputed I was responsible for the delay as it seemed unlikely to me documents were lost in post on two occasions.   I suspected they were under strain to manage their work load and were making mistakes.

 

The curious thing; though my memory of these events may now be conflated with the anecdotal way I have discussed my story over the years;

but I recall when I phoned SLC that summer they were odd about checking my address. 

 

I had the nagging doubt that it was not changed when I had asked it to be in April but was only later changed when I called about not receiving the request to new address DAF.   The letters they sent me in May were not automated, so I could imagine they had manually put my new address on them. 

For sending out the DAF at that time they had written to me to say it would be process to send i.e. letter it send via some computer routine.

 

from 1998 whilst writing to SLC I disputed the Arrears (and subsequent letter charges relating to them).

 

every year the deferral process was now set to September and I was granted deferral. 

From then started my saga of arguing in letter and over the phone about who was responsible for the long delay in 1998 and I made a repeated declaration in the  letters I wrote from the end of 1998 onwards I considered they were at fault, not me.

That is that I was not responsible for what amounted to 5 x £40 = £200 of so called outstanding arrears.

 

I have kept all the paperwork.

 

In 2009 I made a SAR request and discovered that there was evidence of an inconsistency as to when they changed my address on the system and when they said they sent out my requested DAF. 

I have it as evidence that when they wrote saying a new DAF was sent to me during May 98 they had not changed my address. 

I have the system screen shots which show it was still record at my old address (where I was not able to collect post or expecting it to go to) until mid June 98. 

I have the letters where they promised to have sent the DAF and exact dates showing there was a problem. 

This was the start of the delay from SLC's side and I was only enlightened in 2009. 

During all the correspondence before then they would never in writing question the subject of any issue in their performance.

 

Up until 2009 I had written to SLC, Smith Lawson & Company and another 7 Debt Recovery Agencies. 

All the time arguing my case. 

The time I was fielding off Debt Recovery Agencies all ended in 2009 just before I received the SARs. 

After that I only ever got the usual automated threats from SLC and Smith Lawson. 

I have never got to reveal my evidence as I have never got around to writing another letter. 

 

From then on I just kept getting the yearly deferral and filed just filed all the letters. 

I never conceded in all the years, to owing the arrears or for that matter the accrued £400 of letter charges.  

So many letters all warning the same thing and promising the same. 

So many Final Letters I could paper the toilet with them.

 

In 2014 when the loans were sold to Erudio I never ever responded to them. 

I just filed all their correspondence. 

The lot into a box still in the envelopes. 

Their new forms and weird revisions of balances, looked like so much confusion it just left me cold.

 

So now I was amongst those who got the Court Claim Form and have a week or so to get my response back.

 

The last few days I have been organizing the chronology onto a spreadsheet and putting to one side some Legal Arguments that might amount to being able to defend not paying Erudio.  Should I attach them to give a better idea just how ridiculous (in my view) the years between 1998 to 2014 were?

 

Thanks

[AndyOrch]

Hi and Welcome to CAG

 

I have created your own thread...please continue to post here.

 

Please read the following link and then copy and paste the Q,s and responses back here for further advice on how to proceed.

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/357877-you-have-received-a-claim-what-you-need-to-do-updated-jan-2019/

 

Andy

 

[Skamp57]

Thanks Andy.

 

I will return to this tomorrow and follow the link.

[dx100uk]

sounds like everyone else 

yours is statute barred too.

 

 

[Skamp57]

Q&A LINK.  My Answers

 

 

Name of the Claimant

 

Erudio Student Loans Limited

C/O Wilmington Trust S P

Service (London) Limited

Third Floor

1 King's Arms Yard London

EC2R 7AF

 

Address for sending documents...

 

Drydens Limited

4th Floor, Fairfax House

Merrion Street, Leeds,

LS2 8BX

 

Date of issue 03 Jun 2019

 

Date of issue 03/06/19 + 19 days ( 5 day for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = 21/06/2019 + 14 days to submit defence = 05/07/2019 (33 days in total)

 

 

Particulars of Claim

 

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?

 

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

1. The Claimant claims £3,984 for monies due from the Defendant.

2. This debt was pursuant to a regulated agreement(s) between the Defendant and The Student Loans Company Limited.  Each agreement had an individual account number as follows:

3.  The Defendant failed to make payments as per the terms resulting in the agreement(s) being terminated.  Notice of such is served by a Default or Termination Notice subject to the terms of the agreement(s).

4.  The debt was assigned to the Claimant on 22/11/2013, with a notice provided to the Defendant.  A new master reference number xxxxxxx was also applied upon assignment.

5.  The Claimant has complied with the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims.

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

My notes  on above:

For  2. Where it says " Each agreement had an individual account number as follows:  " It is missing the numbers.   I have not left out the numbers; the numbers are not on the claim form?

Note sure I quite understand date and second part of 4. 

"The debt was assigned to the Claimant on 22/11/2013, with a notice provided to the Defendant "

The Student Loans Company wrote a final letter to me 31st March 2014, which included,

"the Mortgage Style account(s) you had with Student Loans Company (SLC) were transferred to Erudio Student Loans Ltd on 10th March 2014". 

The only clue to the November date was perhaps where they also wrote,

 "The Government announced in November 2013 that it has sold the remaining publicly own Mortgage Style loans."

Do not understand what the "...with a notice provided to the Defendant.", part means as I have no record of receiving a notice in November 2013.

 

 

What is the total value of the claim?

 

Total Amount

£3,984

 

 

 

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) ?

 

TO DO:  I have to check the Erudio documents.  At present I have only just started to order them where up until last week most were still in their envelopes, with just the envelope opened to check the who the sender was.

 

Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?

 

Not in the sense that I am still at the same address I was when Erudio took over the alleged debt from SLC.  My contention though is by Nov 2012 the debt should have been cancelled and was being held on SLC records because of disputed arrears from 1998.  Thus my contention is that by 2004/5 disputed Arrears were Statute Barred and so rest of debt was not in dispute and as I had turned 50 it should have been cancelled.

 

Did you inform the claimant of your change of address?

 

NA

Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account?

 

NO

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ?

 

3 Agreements: 1991, 1992, 1993 for Mortgage Style loans.

 

 

Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ?

 

Not sure.  It might have been done at the University?

 

Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/ Equifax /Etc...) ?

 

I have never checked. 

 

For me TO DO: How should I check?

 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim.

 

The claim is not issued by the original creditor but by Erudio who were assigned the account in 2014.

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment?

 

SLC sent letter 31/03/2014 which said loans were transferred to Euridio on 10/03/2014.

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?

 

I used to get Notice of Sum in Arrears letters.  I have to look through 18 years of document to check for something in particular.  If by Default Notice it has a particular format i.e. title; I have checked some years and can't find one.

 

Note:  Up until the time Erudio took over from SLC apart from disputed 'Arrears',  I had maintained a deferral on the rest of the loan balance. Perhaps because of that they may never sent a Default Notice?  I hope that makes sense.

 

For me TO DO:  Look for particular headed letters from SLC

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ?

 

 

There have been a Notice of Sums in Arrears and then Notice of Default 27/05/2016.  Not yet finding later ones for 2017 and 2018?

 

For me TO DO:  Ring bind in date order and annotate through Euridio bundle to check on this.

 

Why did you cease payments?

 

I have never paid any monies to either SLC or Euridio. 

 

What was the date of your last payment?

NA

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved?

 

Yes.  In 1998 there was a delay to the deferral process of 8 months, which SLC claimed could only be backdated 3 months.  That claimed Arrear for 5 months was immediately due i.e. approx £200 (5 x 40).  From 1998 they had my continual denial that I was liable for the Arrears, my counter claim was they had caused the delay.

 

This I presumed became Statute Barred a around 2004/5.  I did not understand the terminology back then and SLC never stopped sending out Arrears notices.

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan?

 

Never.  To the contrary I informed then in 1998 I would contest the matter legally and repeatedly demanded they take it to court.

 

There is though the point that in 1998 when the deferral was becoming delayed that in my letters I said I could not start paying the monthly sums 'due' because I was under the threshold and not earning enough.  I was making my declaration of eligibility to defer from my first letter whilst waiting for their Deferral Application Forms. It was also a case of "can't pay, won't pay" but I was not expressing I had financial problems.

 

 

[Skamp57]

Tonight I have 'enrolled' onto Money Claim Online and have navigated to the Claim. I have not done anything. 

I just wanted to check I could get onto the site and check the Claim as recorded there. 

 

Whilst I can see the Particulars on the paper Claim Form posted to me, I am not sure how to navigate to where they are stored on Money Claim Online. 

I will not click on anything until I am sure I know what to expect and which choice to make.

 

My intention is to make Defence against their claim. 

My loans should have been cancelled November 2012 when I reach 50 years. 

SLC did not do so because they were claiming I owed arrears. 

 

I had contest those arrears since 1998. 

Arrears were Statute Barred and the rest of the balance should have been cancelled in 2012. 

Euridio was transferred a 'debt' that should no longer have existed.

 

How does that sound?

 

I have also a side argument: 

There seems to be something of a cheat in how SLC were still demanding the balance in 2013 (and on wards with Euridio). 

As I was 50,  they had on the one hand their claim of Arrears for £200 plus letter charges of £400 i.e. in total £600, and on the other the rest of the balance approx £3600. 

 

By 2013 why did they not provide options i.e. they never sent me guidance that there were two options for resolution. 

That is based on their system saying I was in Arrears they were not cancelling the debt, but if 'Arrears' were note on the system then my debt should have been automatically cleared based on the contract. If I had paid the £600 the rest would have had to be cancelled. 

 

I have no letters in 2013 reminding me of there being a choice. Continuation of this is I never was this carried over onto Erudio demands, that they never make the suggestion that if I 'catch up on so called Arrears' the rest is cancelled. 

Shouldn't these companies be revealing the contractual options?

 

 

[dx100uk]

sorry so in the true sense, the loans are not statute barred

however you have a well documented dispute with the OC which will do fine as a defence

in a nut shell.,, they wrongly refused  to cancel the loans when you reached 50 as there were arrears, and a default, which thus under their rules, prevented such happening.

 

as this situation was not of your doing, but in essence 'anadmin error' by SLC.. the loans now should not exist.

 

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.
.
 register as an individual
 note the long gateway number given
 then log in
.
 select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box.
.
 then using the details required from the claimform
.
 defend all
 leave jurisdiction unticked.
 click thru to the end
 confirm and exit MCOL.
.
 get a CCA Request running to the claimant 

no need to sign anything
.
you DO NOT await the return of paperwork.
you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count]
 

[Skamp57]

DX

 

Thank you for your considered and prompt response.  I have done the part of registering as an Individual on MCOL and found the claim there.

 

I will proceed with AOS. 

 

The paper version of the claim has 5 points on the particulars, though if they are there I did not know where to find them on the online version.  When I do AOS  'defend all', at this time do I have to reference each separately and word a defence per particular?

 

Thanks

Edited June 12, 2019 by Skamp57

[AndyOrch]

You are only acknowledging service for now...not submitting your defence......you have until the 5th July 

 

Andy

[Skamp57]

Question about Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/ Equifax /Etc...) ?

 

I have used ClearScore which is only showing one debt i.e. a few £K debt on one credit card. 

 

In terms of my character, in the past I cleared larger sums debt  off my credit card, putting it back to zero. 

I have also over the years paid off 3 bank loans. 

 

Regarding present debt on credit card accrued in 2017/18, this year I am presently reducing the debt and have full expectation to continue to.

 

All other debts in my life I pay back.

[dx100uk]

rarely do SLC debts show after all this time

get CPR running please as advised.

 

 

 

 

[Skamp57]

Have sent CPR to Drydens and organised all past correspondence into date order. 

 

I have itemised a spreadsheet. 

I am going to next look into what I might gain from doing a DSAR request, because I wonder just how much of the SLC database Euridio has. 

 

I have always contested their system was at fault when it came to the delay in getting out the Deferment Forms (and losing my first return of it). 

 

The SAR I got from SLC in 2009 has evidence of their failure to change my address when first requested but now I think they may have some other evidence about whether they even sent out a Deferment Form but I need them to provide a glossary of some of the 'read outs' codes.

 

I am by the way a database specialist by trade, so I know what to ask for these days.

[dx100uk]

nt even would bother... never any point in sending an sar to a DCA.

 

if they are going to produce anything to counter your defence it must be done at the disclosure stage {WS}

the case might not even go that far!!