Erudio / Shoosmiths Claimform - Misleading the court?

[gm256]

Hi Guys, I appreciate this is yet another Erudio post, but having rewad them all and taken action it seems there is something different going on here with mine with various underhand and dodgy practices.

 

To summarise my situation:

-Took out a total of four slc loans 96/97/98 as normal, which were sold to Erudio

- I had always deferred due to low income and Erudio let me defer for a year before their new contract appeared

- I refused to sign, they pushed

- I eventually sent back a signed agreement with the dodgy terms crossed out, which they refused

- I complained officially, which they rejected

- Eventually (in 2014) I gave in to their pressure and they let me defer after signing

- We moved and notified everyone

- Didn't hear anything from Erudio for four years untill this January when the claimform arrived with a letter from Shoosmiths.

 

- I followed good protocols and filed a defense along with SSR & CCA

- They eventually complied and it seems the case is stayed right now.

 

It is the examination of the aSAR content that has shown me some dodginess. Obviously there are the are the common things posted on here about a lot such as the 'Master Reference Number' on the claim form, but here's what else I found:

 

- Erudio did a credit search on me, which I found on my credit file, a year before any of this court stuff began. My guess is that they found my correwct address then since I've always remained on the electoral register etc. BUT this search does not appear on the Erudio activity print-out. It looks to me to have been removed before they sent out the SAR to me. nb, the claim form relied on my not responding to their letters, which obvs were sent to the old address.

 

- Next was from the Shoosmiths SAR bit. Erudio had asked me for ID such as a marriage certificate in order to do the SAR. I agreed since my name changed when I got married. I sent it to them.

 

The SAR shows that Erudio told Shoosmiths - "hey, we have her marriage certificate, you could use it to save the £100 you normally charge us for a name change'

Then Shoosmiths wrote to the court on my behalf claiming that I'd made an article 16 GDPR request for rectification. They included my marriage certificate. They also followed up their request to the court with a second letter.  Lhe most recent letter I have from the court is addressed to my married name.

 

So, my main queation is can they do that? I never made a request for rectification. Also, if it is as dodgy as I think what can I do to make some noise about it?

 

Thanks guys, these posts have really helped me so far!

Edited August 20, 2019 by gm256

[dx100uk]

The claim is stayed 

i wouldn't kick pram wheels until/unless you need to.

[gm256]

Thanks dx100uk, makes sense and I've seen this advice across the other posts too.

I'm still keen to better understand how these issues would play into it if they did decide to lift the stay

(and I appreciate that so far no case has been seen through so this is hypothetical).

Any thoughts?

 

[dx100uk]

bottom line is you've never earned above the legal threshold?

so cant see anything ever happening

 

these claims were solely issues because 'something' was ignored.

and they thought they'd get a default rubberstamped judgement because it would be ignored too.

[gm256]

Again, thankyou. That's very reassuring to read. Much appreciated

Can they put a new claim through with the actual account numbers if they decide to?

[dx100uk]

Why what does that change?

[gm256]

good point. I suppose I was thinking that the approach with the combined numbers was a 'hope for the best' approach and gives them a second chance if it goes wrong.

 

The point you made about never earning enough anyway stands whatever they decide to throw at me I guess.

[dx100uk]

well they've not pushed any of the claims here once the defendant has AOS/CCA/CPR , most are now stayed or close too.

and not pushed any of the PAP LOC once a reply has been made.

 

it seems that once a reply is received from a previous 'ignorer' things die.

 

they are picking off the easy meat and gaining default judgements, what good that will do them is anyones guess ….doesn't get them money and it will be interesting to see someone set aside one of these too, but a case of that is to come here yet....my suspicions are they'd grant it and go quiet.

 

same as the PAP LOC's, some may wrongly panic and pay, just the same as some will wrongly panic and pay a default judgement..

it gets them some income for their investment and as theres sev 10'000's SLC loan people on their books, they will find mugs out there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[iabb]

DX looks like I’m the first set aside! 

 

Read my thread here......

 

 

[gm256]

On 20/08/2019 at 17:05, dx100uk said:

bottom line is you've never earned above the legal threshold?

so cant see anything ever happening

 

these claims were solely issues because 'something' was ignored.

and they thought they'd get a default rubberstamped judgement because it would be ignored too.

DX I'm considering bankruptcy due to other debts - do you know if this Erudio situation can be included in that given it's current state of limbo? Is there something I need to do first to conclude this or does it still count as student debt, therefore not BR relevant?

 

TIA 

[dx100uk]

pers I would never recommend goingBK for consumer credit debt.

 

start a new thread in the debt self help forum

and list your debts that are troubling you.

 

dx

 

[AndyOrch]

Student loans are excluded and cant be included in Bankruptcy.

 

Andy 

 

[gm256]

Hi Folks, I have an update on this... a letter from Drydens Fairfax. It reads...

 

We refer to the above matter and further to the defense which you have filed in response to the claim issued against you.

 

We note that in your defense, you state that:

 

1) You did not receive a copy of the notice of assignment

 

2) You did not receive a copy of the default notice

 

3) You requested a copy of the agreement

 

Having now had the opportunity of discussing the defence with our client, we enclose the following documentation addressing the issues you raised in the defense and in support of our client's claim against you:

 

- copies of agreements

- default notice

- notice of assignment

 

Given that the attached documentation deals with the issues raised in the defense in full, we are clearly in position to progress our client's claim against you and would therefore invite you to now settle this matter without the need for further legal action.

 

Please make payment of the sum due within the next 14 days or alternatively contact these offices to discuss possible repayment options.

 

In the event that we do not hear from you within 14 days, we will have no alternative but to apply to the court to loft the stay on the proceedings in order to progress the legal action commenced against you. It is also likely that any such application will include an application for a summary judgement, given the evidence which has now been provided to you in support of our clients claim.

 

If the above action becomes necessary, further costs will be incurred which ultimately, may be payable by you. If you fail to respond to this letter and therefore necessitate such further action, we will produce this and our previous corespondance to the court in support of any additional claim for costs.

 

Signed off

 

enclosed are copies of signed agreements, erudio notice of default (one letter), Erudio notice of assignment copy listing asll accounts.

 

So... above I noted all the ways this whole things isn't ok. I'd appreciate any suggestions of where to go next with this. Thanks in advance,  

Edited February 28, 2020 by gm256

[dx100uk]

std drydens letter

we might, have no alternative, the bog door is closed at present so we don't know what our leader is going to do.

 

ignore them until or unless the COURT writes to you that the fleecers have issued an N244 to lift the stay.

 

the other over -riding issue here is..you have never earned above the threshold.

 

 

 

 

[gm256]

Thanks for the reassurance @dx100uk

 

Should they ever take it to court is it the case that the judge would overlook whatever processes they've been enforcing on me and that ultimately I still haven't ever earned over the threshold?

 

Much appreciated - 

 

Has anyone ever made a reasonable documentary about this situation? It's such a mess for so many people and very stressful.