Emma vs Student Loans Company

[noomill060]

fingers crossed.

[emmaf01]

Talked to a nice person at the SLC (a miracle in itself).

 

My accounts have manager's notes all over them saying don't phone until "the matters are resolved).

 

judgment in two days.

[noomill060]

Dont forget that judgement is at the Court's discretion, as this will probably be classed as unliquidated, the Court may decide that this needs to go before a judge. If they fail to enter a defence though, they will not have any right to put their case before him/her.

 

But you will. This is good.

[emmaf01]

I am a happy bunny.

[noomill060]

Dont count your chickens just yet, they may still enter a defence.

[emmaf01]

I would still be happy!

 

There's nothing I enjoy more than a tussle with the SLC. Makes you feel alive.

[emmaf01]

Surprise- TWO identical letters from Hamish Macleod, one recorded and one first class. Perhaps I put the ***** up them.

 

They will remove the charges from my account and send me a cheque for the interest.

 

I'm pondering the wording/conditions they have attached. More info later.

[emmaf01]

And WHY can't these solicitors get account numbers right? Is there some sort of problem which means they HAVE to get the account numbers wrong on their grovelling letters?

[noomill060]

 

Jayzyz- every flippin' time. Just shows SLC's numptietude.

 

Sorted.

 

Just email the muppet responsible to point out their error. You could point out that you are aware that this "administrative errorr" appears to be standard behaviour. Was it Stephanie Lynn or Laura Packitinoviwitch?

 

They wont settle until the hearing date is almost upon them, so dont expect a fast resolution, but hey- it means they cant hassle you again.

[emmaf01]

Stephanie Lynn- I've sent her a nice letter saying thanks, here are the correct loan numbers and I'll stop my court action after I've got the cheque.

 

Got their defense from the court- sorry, INCOMPLETE defense. They sent the defense form, stating the defense was on an attached sheet, but didn't include any sheet! The court are aware of their further incompetence.

 

At least they have managed to set up my three year deferment, finally!

[noomill060]

Ah bless- our wee Stephanie! Silly mare.

 

Here's her email address if you need it-

 

[email protected]

 

Funny how they've managed to set your deferment up, just when you have their nads in a vice!

[noomill060]

Remind her about good old noomil060 v SLC - claim number: 07/36092

 

[emmaf01]

Now I've rerceived another letter from Stephanie Lyn, enclosing a copy of the previous letter, telling me to get in touch with SLC to accept their offer.

 

I've already sent a letter to Ms Lynn- she can tell them I have accepted. I'm not ringing anyone else.

[noomill060]

Send the bitch an email putting her in the picture.

 

Youre not wasting any more time or money on her client.

 

You are calling the shots here- if SLC want to avoid a close encounter with a judge they can damn well do what YOU tell them to.

 

See how even now, they think they can call the shots?

[un1boy]

Emma,

 

Personally Im quite happy for them to do nothing up to 8 April. I hope they arent now looking for my paperwork too:wink:

 

Lets get this right,......and I have asked un1boy to clarify his statement last night because there is no basis for what he said about all student loans not being covered by the CCA. We know that to be untrue. With both our cases they are in default great! our position is stronger. But not the strongest it can be. If they are in default they can still produce the document after say 12 wds + 1 calander month (-1 day) then they would no longer be in default and payments would have to start again. What I want is form them not to pass me the details and break the law, then my position goes from strong (whilst in default) to practically untouchable!!!!!

in my eyes the very least getting your debt wiped out and with a good clam on all payments made so far.

 

Gooders

 

I have just noticed this - I clarified the statement to you after you made your request. It is certain agreements after a certain date that aren't covered, I think you misinterpreted what I was saying and I don't think you re-posted my explanation.

 

I don't apreciate having comments made like, "there is no basis for what I said" and then not following it up with my explanation. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind being corrected and I am always the first to admit when I am wrong.

 

Just don't make comments like that about people and then not follow it up with their response.

 

 

I am really glad to see that you guys are finally getting somewhere with the SLC - it's about time!!

[emmaf01]

Its ok, un1boy, everyone knows what you meant. The early agreements are subject to the CCA, but then the agreements changed so they are no longer CCA applicable.

 

Sometimes people get a bit heated, probably because so much time, money and stress is involved. But we all respect each others opinions, as we would get nowhere without everyones help and input.

[un1boy]

Its ok, un1boy, everyone knows what you meant. The early agreements are subject to the CCA, but then the agreements changed so they are no longer CCA applicable.

 

Sometimes people get a bit heated, probably because so much time, money and stress is involved. But we all respect each others opinions, as we would get nowhere without everyones help and input.

 

Thanks for your post. It's all good, don't worry.

 

I am really pleased that you have got this settlement now!!

[emmaf01]

I am waiting until its in my hand before I'm happy. We all know how incompetent the SLC can be!

 

But thanks.

[noomill060]

Absolutely, emma.

 

Dont do anything to let them off the hook until the cheque is cashed and you have everything else you want in writing.

 

I would be inclined to ignore any more bull****e from that bitch in Glasgow, her "clients" know where they stand well enough.

[emmaf01]

I've sent her an email to confirm she has the letter- it was sent recorded delivery anyway, so I know she has.

 

I'd be surprised if I get any response....

[emmaf01]

I ended up phoning SLC, to find out what is going on- they actually managed to be MORE useless and stupid than usual. Asking me questions, telling me I had a deferment "IS THAT THE CREDIT YOU ARE EXPECTING?"

 

No mate- thats a deferment, not a credit.

 

Anyway, so I rang Stephanie Lynn, who seems to be well aware of the SLC level of competance, just unable to say so as they're a client.

 

So my credit/payment are held up because the SLC are saying that the wrong account number is correct, not the real account number, which I have corrected by post/is on the loan agreement and every piece of correspondence they've ever sent me.

 

Just when you think their incompetence can't get any worse, they show you a new low.....

[noomill060]

when is the hearing date set for, emma?

[emmaf01]

I've only just got the AQ through, to return early next week, so no date as yet, noomill060.

[emmaf01]

Well, after much toing and froing, I finally got my cheque through last week- SO A BIG WIN FOR ME!!!!!!!!!

 

Good luck everyone- I'll be back on the forum properly in the next couple of weeks. I've been fixing the house and garden up, so I'm rushed off my feet, but it will be over soon.

[tiglet]

Well doen Emma - hubby and I are still waiting for an enforceable CCA from them.

 

They keep passing onto debt collectors who soon disappear when we tell them what is going on.

 

Oh, how we laugh!