Stayed Erudio SLC Loan Court Claim - missed deferment as i moved - ombudsman found in favor claim stayed can i sue/counterclaim Erudio

[honeybee13]

Thread reopened, please post your update here.

HB

[MoralMinority]

Hi CAG - An update:

After the disappointment of my investigators final decision, I decided to escalate my case to the ombudsman. 

I wrote to the investigator, including a final statement, to be added to my case file, unabridged or edited, citing the previous Ombudsman(s) decisions in cases I believed to be almost identical to mine.  I also did my best to rebut the investigators final argument that Erudio did not know that I had moved. 

  As luck/justice would have it, Erudio had provided me with an audio recording of the last time I had been in touch with them (as part of my initial complaint with themselves and before any involvement of the FoS). 

The recording was from 2020, when I rang to find out if my deferment had been successful (it seems, according to other complainants cases, I was not the only one to not be notified during this time period).  Erudio cited this recording as proof that I had failed to update my address. 

However, it also proved that I had notified them that my address HAD changed, since I was heard on the call telling them as much.   I included this in my final statement to the Ombudsman.

After a few weeks I was contacted by the investigator, as the Ombudsman assigned to my case requested some more information.  They asked I provide proof of eligibility of deferment for the years 2021, 22 and 23 along with a copy of the recording Erudio had given me.

Suffice to say, after careful consideration the Ombudsman disagreed with the investigator, ruled in my favour and upheld my complaint.

I will cite the Ombudsman’s findings/case no. once it has been published. 

Erudio have been instructed to restore the accounts to the point as if nothing had gone wrong and there had been no breakdown of communication.  They must remove any negative impact to my credit file,  reinstate my accounts/write them off depending on the date(s) and remove any negative consequences as a result of this breakdown in communication. 

Despite not updating my address formerly with Erudio, I today received a letter, ironically, to my correct address, stating incorrect balances of the accounts along with what appears to be them cheekily adding the court fees/admin costs to my balance.   They cite minimum fixed loan terms (60 days), make no reference to the remedial instructions issued by the Ombudsman and as a result, I emailed them the following:

<<Email begins>>

As you are aware, my complaint with the Financial Ombudsman Service was upheld.  I recently received a letter from yourselves, to my current home address, dated the 8th of September that provides no useful information in relation to the remedial action your company was instructed to carry out as part the FoS ruling.  I disagree with the content of this letter, including but not limited to, the balances provided and the loan terms stated. I refer you to the original contractual agreements.

I require the following information to be provided to me, as per the instructions/ruling of the Financial Ombudsman:

What is the deferment status of the account for years 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024?

How and when will you notify me of my debt(s) being written off.

According to your most recent correspondence dated (September 8th 2023) that I received today (September 25th 2023) it appears you have added court costs and administration charges to the outstanding balance.  Why?

Please notify and provide confirmation from your representatives Drysdenfairfax that the court case has also been actioned as per the Ombudsman's ruling and instructions.

Please provide confirmation that any negative impact to my credit file (i.e. Default notices) from your company or any representatives has been retracted and corrected,

I notice, as part of your most recent correspondence (Sept 8th), you state that:

"We wanted to make you aware that as of 31st May 2023, Erudio Student Loans Limited appointed Capquest Debt Recovery Limited as the new administrator of your credit agreement(s).  The previous administrator, Arrow Global Limited, withdrew its regulatory permissions from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and as a result, a new, FCA regulated administrator was appointed."

I continue to reserve the right to pursue further regulatory action against Erudio Student Loans Ltd and Arrow Group Limited and look forward to Capquest/Erudio's timely response to the Financial Ombudsman's instructions.

<<Email Ends>>


Given that my court case is currently stayed and only got as far as submitting my N9B defence, without brokering any form of ‘mediation’ which may have, at that point, brought both parties together to agree on a FOS decision, can I apply to have my case struck out?

I imagine they might quite like to leave it stayed and hope I forget about it.  However, since my FoS complaint has been upheld, pursuing this case lends even more weight to this entire matter being vexatious. 

I never submitted a counter claims part of my N9B defence, however, this entire matter has taken up a considerable amount of my time, I have incurred large phone bills calling Support Through Court and other organisations and whilst the Ombudsman has not issued any compensation in their decision, this doesn’t factor in costs addressing the court case. 

Would the next step for Erudio’s legal representatives be to issue a discontinuance? Or can I get it struck out citing the FOS ruling and then claim reasonable costs without objection.

I also intend to raise a case with the FCA against Arrow Global and Erudio for this entire situation, especially given the new, recently enacted Consumer Duty regulatory framework.  It seems unsurprising that Arrow Global withdrew its regulatory permissions from the FCA.

Finally, I’d like to thank BeingFleeced as well as the moderators/advisors of CAG who helped give me the motivation and advice to continue fighting this, without you I would have lost.  

I’ll continue updating this thread as time goes on till this reaches its final conclusion in the hope that anyone else out there suffering the same tactics from Erudio can take heart and if needed, reach out to me via messages and I’ll try and help.
 

[dx100uk]

1 hour ago, MoralMinority said:

I never submitted a counter claims part of my N9B defence, however, this entire matter has taken up a considerable amount of my time, I have incurred large phone bills calling Support Through Court and other organisations and whilst the Ombudsman has not issued any compensation in their decision, this doesn’t factor in costs addressing the court case. 

1st very well done.

ive pinged @Andyorch regarding the above bit ,as im not really sure but id really like to nail them for every penny they've cost you inc damage to your credit file too.

 

dx

 

[dx100uk]

ps id expect erudio will instruct drydens to issue a N279 Notice of discontinuance now.

[AndyOrch]

The claim is stayed therefore its purely speculative at this stage unless the claimant made application to lift the stay and proceed to allocation.

The ombudsman decision in your favor has little relevance on the claim at this stage unless the above was to transpire.

With regards to costs ....costs are restricted in the small claim court and are only decided on the conclusion of the claim which is determined by which way the court determined.

It is possible for you the defendant to make an application to lift the stay and request permission to submit a part20 counterclaim on proved losses and proceed to allocation with the part 20 alone but this would be very risky and something I wouldn't advise.

You really would be well advised to let matters stay at this stage and see if the claimant wishes to either proceed or withdraws the claim which is unlikely on a stayed claim...your best hope is that it remains stayed and disappears into the aether.

 

Andy