Student Loans and statute barred debt help

[drokkeh]

Am i mising some thing

 

student loan in 1995 and 1997

 

link stating payment made 2006 towards debt, even if thats the case the account will be statute barred

 

student loans are only statute barred if taken out before july 1998, after that theire is no time limit

 

just tell link to sod off with the statute barred template and check your credit files as sugested

 

Yes but the last time i acknowledged the debt was in 2004 when i deferred the student loan. I have a copy of this deferment, so to my understanding it resets again to 6 years from the last time you acknowledged it.

[postggj]

the point i am making is

 

ONCE STATUTE BARRED, ALLWAYS STATUTE BARRED

 

no acknowledgement from 2007 to 2004

 

THATS SEVEN YEARS

 

does not matter if you made payment or defered in 2004

[kurvaface]

Once barred, always barred.

 

If you have sent the sb letter, to slc too, it is now down to them to prove why it is not barred.

 

I understand it Is very worrying dealing with this people, but if you follow the guidance, and you are sure you have not paid or acknowledged the account in ANY 6 year period, I am sure things will be fine.

[drokkeh]

the point i am making is

 

ONCE STATUTE BARRED, ALLWAYS STATUTE BARRED

 

no acknowledgement from 2007 to 2004

 

THATS SEVEN YEARS

 

does not matter if you made payment or defered in 2004

 

Yes I see your point, but I did have contact with slc between 1997 and 2004. Several phone calls and yearly deferments and in fact they took me to court in early 2002 regarding the debt (which i attended).

 

What i am saying is that the only period I KNOW I did not have contact with them was from 2004 (when i last deferred the loan) to present. So this is the only period that it has been 6 years since I have not made payment, contacted them or acknowledged the debt.

 

This is why the alleged payment in April 2006 of £10 is so concerning. As i said in my original post, i know for 100% sure i did not have a bank account between 2001 and November 2006 so i could not have made the payment in my name. My wages from work during this time went into my girlfriends natwest account (i was not a joint account holder).

[kurvaface]

What happened in2002 when you went to court. Was a ccj given?

[sequenci]

 

This is why the alleged payment in April 2006 of £10 is so concerning. As i said in my original post, i know for 100% sure i did not have a bank account between 2001 and November 2006 so i could not have made the payment in my name. My wages from work during this time went into my girlfriends natwest account (i was not a joint account holder).

 

All you need to do is send the stat barred letter via recorded delivery. They need to prove that a payment was indeed made. It sounds to me like they are trying to pull the phantom payment trick.

 

Thy need to show that it was actually you that made the payment, AND HOW.

[jasperpad]

Just re-read the info from Lin and made a payment of £17.72 10th December 2004 but have had no contact with the student loans company since then.

 

Link rang me jan/feb 2010 to say that I owed the money but I said that as I am now 60 i do not owe the moeny.

 

Next thing is I get a letter asking for the money dated October 2010 "Notice of collection services" again I did not accept that I owed the money.

 

I have read the statements as said but (There's always a but) they have supplied me with a very strange statement which I could have produced with a very strange set of "payments" stating that there was a set of payments between 30Th September 2009 to 31 Sept 2010 ranging from 25p to 28p for interest that was credited to me bringing the amount down by a total of £3.29 over a year. How can they say that I have earned interest on a debt?

 

is this a ploy to try and get me to acknowledge the so called debt which I do not accept in any way.

 

I have sent a letter stating that this debt is statute barred a few days ago.

 

Do I have a right to be worried about this so called debt?

 

jasperpad

[kurvaface]

One of the interesting features of the pre 98 student loans is the way the interest applied is linked to one of the official cost of living indexes. You end up with the student loans company occasionally actually paying money into your loan which fits with payments of pence going into your account. This is not an acknowledgement of your account though and will not change the status re Limitations Act.

 

What you need to clear up though, and soon, is was there a six year window of no acknowledgement or payment from you to this account. Deferring the loan acknowledges it, and what was the court situation in '02? If you believe it to be barred, then there is nothing more for you to do.

Edited January 19, 2011 by kurvaface

[jasperpad]

Thanks this makes things easier.

 

I have not made any payments in any way. I was never taken to court even though I was threatened with it and the first I heard was in late January/February 2010 stating that I owed the money but I stated that I did NOT owe anything as I was then over 60.

 

From what has been said here I am not responsible for this so called debt now, and as said earlier I have sent a statute barred letter so I am now waiting with quite a bit of excitement for their letter screaming that it is not statute barred, to which I want someone to stop me from laughing too much!

 

jasperpad

 

One of the interesting features of the pre 98 student loans is the way the interest applied is linked to one of the official cost of living indexes. You end up with the student loans company occasionally actually paying money into your loan which fits with payments of pence going into your account. This is not an acknowledgement of your account though and will not change the status re Limitations Act.

 

What you need to clear up though, and soon, is was there a six year window of no acknowledgement or payment from you to this account. Deferring the loan acknowledges it, and what was the court situation in '02? If you believe it to be barred, then there is nothing more for you to do.

[kurvaface]

Sorry about post #30... I got crossed posts with another thread with SLC. ooops. I seem to be getting a lot of mail from cag at the moment.

 

I really think you are in the clear on this one and it's up to them to validate / prove those payments in 04 are yours - even so, thats more than six years ago. For peace of mind, the dsar would be a good idea and I don't think your phone call from link in jan 10 would count as acknowledgement. It has to be in writing or as a payment. Again, for peace of mind, do the DSAR and get everything, including the phone transcripts at link.

 

I apologise for my cock ups and hope I haven't confused things.

Edited January 20, 2011 by kurvaface

[Ben400061]

Hi There,

 

I am in a very similar situation to the OP and others in the thread having taken my last student loan in '96, then having longer than 6 years without contact, payment or deferral. After this six year period I did begin to make payments to a CCA which have since ceased. I have now been contacted by solicitors working on behalf of Honours Trustee Ltd (who hold the loan) asking for payment.

 

I believe that this debt is statute barred but I am wondering how to amend the standard letter, in particular this part;

 

"The last payment of this alleged debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act,"

 

Since I have made a payment within the last 6 years how should I, the OP and others reword this?

 

Cheers.

[postggj]

HELLO BEN AND WELCOME

 

THIS LINK EXPLAINS ALL

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?291091-Another-Student-Loans-Query&p=3266017&highlight=#post3266017

[kurvaface]

You don't have to put in dates. Why make their work easy for them. Just say the account is statute barred because there is a period of more than six years where no payment or acknowledgement was made to the account.

[jasperpad]

there is a template letter you can use on CAG so have a look at it and make any amendments you feel necessary.

 

From what you have said this debt is statute barred so the letter tells them this.

 

You may have them try and coerce you into making some form of payment, but do not pay anything. In the letter you can also state that you have no intention of making any form of payment in any form. sometimes they are deceitful and try to make it look like you have made a payment during this 6 year period, if they do ask them for the proof of who made the payment how it was paid.

 

if you are new to this site .... welcome

 

jasperpad

 

 

 

Hi There,

 

I am in a very similar situation to the OP and others in the thread having taken my last student loan in '96, then having longer than 6 years without contact, payment or deferral. After this six year period I did begin to make payments to a CCA which have since ceased. I have now been contacted by solicitors working on behalf of Honours Trustee Ltd (who hold the loan) asking for payment.

 

I believe that this debt is statute barred but I am wondering how to amend the standard letter, in particular this part;

 

"The last payment of this alleged debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act,"

 

Since I have made a payment within the last 6 years how should I, the OP and others reword this?

 

Cheers.

[Ben400061]

Hi again everybody,

 

First thank you all for the warm welcome and advice so far, and apologies for not responding sooner.

 

Here is an update on my case;

 

I sent a statute barred letter to the solicitors acting on behalf of Honours Student Loans stating that I had not acknowledged the debt between 1996 and 2006 and that the debt is therefore statute barred. I have today received a reply from HSL themselves. In it they claim that as my course was due to end in 1999 the debt did not fall due for collection until April 2000, and that as I had made contact in February 2006 the debt is not statute barred and wont be until 2014.

 

Now here is the rub; whilst my course was slated to end in 1999 I actually quit uni in 1996 (the year of my final loan), and it is my belief that in this situation the debt is liable for collection the next year, ie April 1997 in my case, and that the debt is therefore still statute barred.

 

Can anyone affirm that I am correct in my thinking that student loan debt becomes liable for payment immediately if you leave your course early (as opposed to at the expected course end date)?

 

Thanks.

[kurvaface]

No worries for you.

 

It doesn't matter when your course ended. If there is a six year period where there was no payment or acknowledgement then it is barred. Tell them to sling it, report them to Trading Standards on 08454 040506 and copy the student loans company in on the "Sling it" too.

 

LOL. is that the best they can do?

[sequenci]

Now here is the rub; whilst my course was slated to end in 1999 I actually quit uni in 1996 (the year of my final loan), and it is my belief that in this situation the debt is liable for collection the next year, ie April 1997 in my case, and that the debt is therefore still statute barred.

 

Can anyone affirm that I am correct in my thinking that student loan debt becomes liable for payment immediately if you leave your course early (as opposed to at the expected course end date)?

 

Thanks.

 

I think you may be right.

[Ben400061]

Just a quick update;

 

After careful search I have found the relevant section in the term & conditions;

 

8.—(1) Subject to regulations 9 to 12 a borrower shall commence repayment of his loan on such day in the month of April next following the date on which he ceased to attend the course as the loans administrator may determine in his case (referred to below in this regulation as “the determined date”).

 

Just what I was looking for!

[sequenci]

Superb news Print that out for sure!

[stevo7790]

I don't think it matters if you make contact aslong as you don't acknowledge the debt, I think its a bluff by the other party to make you pay up.

[jasperpad]

Hi

 

I am in a similar situation but my course started in 1993 and I quit at the end of 1993 but the course was due to end at the end of 1995. I am waiting to hear from Link (or should that be stink?). as I see it:

 

1. you have not had any contact or acknowledged the debt for more than a 6 year period

2. You quit the course before the course finished

3. your loan finished being paid to you before the end of the due date of the course

4. you may have or may not have been paying the loan back before the end of the course

5. the solicitors are fishing

6. the loan is statue barred!

 

Hi again everybody,

 

First thank you all for the warm welcome and advice so far, and apologies for not responding sooner.

 

Here is an update on my case;

 

I sent a statute barred letter to the solicitors acting on behalf of Honours Student Loans stating that I had not acknowledged the debt between 1996 and 2006 and that the debt is therefore statute barred. I have today received a reply from HSL themselves. In it they claim that as my course was due to end in 1999 the debt did not fall due for collection until April 2000, and that as I had made contact in February 2006 the debt is not statute barred and wont be until 2014.

 

Now here is the rub; whilst my course was slated to end in 1999 I actually quit uni in 1996 (the year of my final loan), and it is my belief that in this situation the debt is liable for collection the next year, ie April 1997 in my case, and that the debt is therefore still statute barred.

 

Can anyone affirm that I am correct in my thinking that student loan debt becomes liable for payment immediately if you leave your course early (as opposed to at the expected course end date)?

 

Thanks.

[Ben400061]

Hi and thanks for the responses.

 

What the loan company is trying to say in my case is that, since the course ended in 1999 the debt did not fall due until April 2000, they say;

 

"...the Act therefore provides for a limitation period starting on the date of the first breach of the relevant contract that the non-breaching party is entitled to bring a claim for." and then "It follows that the limitation period cannot start to run unless and until such a breach occurs, or in other words (in relation to your student loan) until you failed to make a payment which was otherwise due."

 

They are saying that since the loan was not due for repayment until April 2000 (ie the year following the scheduled course end) that the relevant period with respect to the Limitation Act is from April 2000 - April 2006 (and not the date on which the contract was signed or loan received etc) , and since I acknowledged and made payments from Feb 2006 then the debt is not statute barred.

 

I am not sure whether they are correct on this point; that the relevant period begins only once a breach has occurred. However this is a moot point in my case since I withdrew from my course in 1996 and therefore the debt became liable for payment in April 1997, which clearly means there has been a six year period of no acknowledgment on my part.

 

If anyone can offer any further advice on these points I'd be very much obliged.

 

In the meantime I have drawn up a letter pointing out that I left the course in '96 and the debt must have then fell due in '97 and is therefore statute barred.

[sequenci]

In the meantime I have drawn up a letter pointing out that I left the course in '96 and the debt must have then fell due in '97 and is therefore statute barred.

 

That's what I would have done. Have you any proof that you left the course at that point (just to prove to them if they challenge it)?

[Ben400061]

Hi Sequenci,

 

I can obtain proof I think if necessary. Also presumably a SAR request to the SLC will show when they made their first demand for payment.

 

Cheers.

[sequenci]

Hi Sequenci,

 

I can obtain proof I think if necessary. Also presumably a SAR request to the SLC will show when they made their first demand for payment.

 

Cheers.

 

For sure, great idea.