Erudio and old Student Loan not deferred since 2014

[Hickory Dickory]

Hi, I have an old student loan pre-98 that was sold to a company I've never heard of called Erudios.

 

When they first started sending me letters about it in 2018 I sent a few letters back denying the debt and telling them to "go find another sucker". 

 

The letters kept coming, so I sent a SAR to Student Loans Company and a month later a wedge of paper arrived showing the last time I contacted SLC or asked to defer was May 2014. 

 

By my understanding of things due to no contact, no payment, no deferment with SLC since May 2014, these three old student loans "SHOULD" have become statute barred in May of this year?

 

However, my concern is, did my responding to Erudios letter  reset the SB clock?

I have spoken at length to Money Advice Service and the call handler said I should probably call them up and enter into some sort of £1 a month plan as my writing to them has definitely acknowledged the debt? I'd be very depressed if this was true?

 

I've never earned over the threshold, always deferred on time with SLC.

Stopped in 14 when they told me the debt would have been sold and to wait to hear from new company.

(Didn't record call, so can't prove SLC said that, but for what it's worth they did. First time I heard was 4 years later in 18!!)

 

does my writing to Erudios to say "I'm not paying" reset the SB clock, as at my time of writing in 2018 the debt WASN'T SB'd, but now in Nov 2020 it is.

 

Cheers for any heads up with this people... 

[dx100uk]

i have moved your post to the SLC forum

and retitled it

100's of threads to read here about the same issue

 

are you sure the last time you deferred was 2014? not 2013?

and you think that runs for 12mths?

 

when did you actually last send back a deferment form?

[Hickory Dickory]

Thanks for reply. Last time my deferment was accepted was May 2013. That ran for a year. May 2014 comes round and I phone up SLC asking for deferment forms, they say no, it's been sold, wait to hear from debt buyer.

 

Heard from debt buyer first time 2018.

 

Sent a SAR to SLC, comes back, sure enough it shows my phone call to them in May 2014, no details of what was discussed, but no deferent forms sent.

 

Any advice please?

[Peterbard]

The situation is, that your correspondence, if it is to reset the SB start date would have to state an intention to pay.

 

If the debt had already gone past the six years, it cannot be re started.

[Hickory Dickory]

Thanks for reply.

 

My response to Erudios certainly didn't state an intention to repay!!

Ha! It stated an intention which if I were to write here would probably see me moderated! 

 

My concern is that I contacted them in 2018 when the debt wasn't statute barred and simply said,

"who are you, I'm not repaying my student loans to a random stranger who contacts me, show me a CCA".

 

The debt is now safely SB'd BUT did my writing in response to them saying "get knotted" restart the clock?

 

The reason for my question, is I have a few friends from Uni in the same boat as me, and we've started to notice actual letters of claim and pre-action protocols being sent for the first time. Maybe Erudio are getting desperate and starting to follow through on their baseless threats.

 

I'd feel more comfortable to know exactly where I stand. Facts rather than opinions, etc.

 

- did my writing to them to say "I'm not paying", reset the SB clock.

 

Yes or no, please.

 

 

[dx100uk]

Sorry but its not as simple as that.

 

But there has never been a case whereby a signed letter by a debtor has counted alone.

 

If people are getting letters of claim

They MUST reply regardless to it being SB'd or not.

 

A debt being sb'd is NOT a guarantee that a speculative robo court claim cannot be raised and succeed.

 

As i said you need to READ the threads in this slc forum and get upto speed.

 

you also need to answer my question..

 

dx

 

 

[Hickory Dickory]

Sorry, what was your question?

[dx100uk]

43 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

when did you actually last send back a deferment form?

 

 

[Hickory Dickory]

Deferent form last sent back May 2013

(edited to say, sent back to SLC May 2013)

 

Never heard of Erudios till their first letter 2018 telling me I owed them money.

Edited November 2, 2020 by Hickory Dickory

[dx100uk]

thank you

as i suspected

 

the same as 90% of the threads here of the same issue

 

but you MUST TELL THEM it is statute barred

 

use our SB letter from the debt collection section of our library 

same for all your mates that their dates are the same too.

 

don't ever sit on a drydens letter of claim

else they WILL get a backdoor CCJ at the last address informed to SLC.

 

 

[Hickory Dickory]

I think you've misunderstood my question DX - I KNOW it's statute barred because the last time I communicated with SLC or asked to defer was well over 6 years ago. 

 

My question was, did I reset the clock by writing in response to Erudio's letter demanding payment in 2018? I didn't offer payment to Erudio in my letter to them, but did the very fact I responded with the SLC loan reference numbers reset the clock? 

 

Yes or no please.

 

I've read around the threads here, nothing directly answers my question.

[dx100uk]

and that has already been answered by PB above......

 

once a debt is statute barred, NOTHING not even a judge can unbar a debt .

 

HOWEVER if you do not inform any debt owner or the previous original creditor of your CORRECT and CURRENT address if you move 

they are quite entitled under the law to raise a court claim using the last address YOU informed them of in writing .

that means the 1st you'll know about it is when you try and get credit and are rejected., or look at your credit file..or have court or High Court Bailiffs at your door.

 

as with all fleecing DCA's (Erudio are Arrows DCA in sheeps clothing and Drydens are part of the same Arrows Group) the very fact they have sent the Letter of claim is to see if you respond, if you don't, they raise a court claim using your old address KNOWING they'll get a guaranteed backdoor CCJ. the fact that it is statute barred is IMMATERIAL.

 

if you got read some court claim threads you'll see lots here regarding backdoor CCJ's because the OP ignored everything...DON'T

you must reply by sending the SB letter as advised if you get a PAPLOC.

[Hickory Dickory]

Ok, makes sense. Thanks for the response. 

 

I was simply concerned that although it is NOW statute barred, they might issue a claim saying my contacting them two years ago when it WASN'T statute barred reset the clock.

 

However, you've put my mind at rest, I think.

 

So thanks for all responses. You have my permission to close this thread now. 

[dx100uk]

59 minutes ago, Hickory Dickory said:

I KNOW it's statute barred because the last time I communicated with SLC or asked to defer was well over 6 years ago. 

 

7 minutes ago, Hickory Dickory said:

I was simply concerned that although it is NOW statute barred, they might issue a claim saying my contacting them two years ago when it WASN'T statute barred reset the clock.

 

you see you don't even know what you said 1 hours before...

you don't appear to be either reading what people say or remembering what you posted...

 

you say one thing

then you say something totally diff.

 

the fact you wrote within the supposed 6yrs period is still somewhat immaterial

there are no examples of 'a letter' alone ever succeeding in an slc loan not SB'd claim by erudio.

 

it's all just pointless distractions from the main 2 points...

 

you must always write to your debt owners if you moved

you must always reply to a letter of claim.

[Peterbard]

On 02/11/2020 at 19:31, dx100uk said:

thank you

as i suspected

 

the same as 90% of the threads here of the same issue

 

but you MUST TELL THEM it is statute barred

 

use our SB letter from the debt collection section of our library 

same for all your mates that their dates are the same too.

 

don't ever sit on a drydens letter of claim

else they WILL get a backdoor CCJ at the last address informed to SLC.

 

 

 

Yes absolutely its called reversing the burden of proof, I believe.

As DX says, if you dont respond properly, there is nothing to stop them taking proceedings, the court will not interfere.