The power V SLC Help needed

[Thepower]

The story up to now: I’m currently paying student loans a payment of £10 per month

But they’ve come on to me for £120 a month (my “proper” payment Plus back payment)

This is for the pre 1998 loans covered under the CCA ( they have confirmed this)

They passed my account onto Smith Lawson Company (“SLC “a part of student loan company) so to buy some time I sent them a CCA request (recorded), the 12 days plus 2 came and went

BUT they have now replied inside they 40 days with an “agreement”. Problem (for them) is it’s a photocopy TOTAL unreadable as it’s so faint/ parts missing.

The Question:

Do I say nothing and use it a defence when 40 days have passed? Or

Write and say you sent me a blank-ish page you have the remaining of the 40 days left to respond with a true copy? ( there is about two weeks remaining form the original 40 days)

Also they didn’t send it recorded so no proof I got it?

Or do I phone them? Or when they phone me do I tell them. I’m sure the phone harassment will start again tomorrow.

 

 

Thanks the power:confused:

[livity]

The story up to now: I’m currently paying student loans a payment of £10 per month

But they’ve come on to me for £120 a month (my “proper” payment Plus back payment)

 

This is for the pre 1998 loans covered under the CCA ( they have confirmed this)

 

They passed my account onto Smith Lawson Company (“SLC “a part of student loan company) so to buy some time I sent them a CCA request (recorded), the 12 days plus 2 came and went

 

BUT they have now replied inside they 40 days with an “agreement”. Problem (for them) is it’s a photocopy TOTAL unreadable as it’s so faint/ parts missing.

 

The Question:

 

Do I say nothing and use it a defence when 40 days have passed? Or

 

Write and say you sent me a blank-ish page you have the remaining of the 40 days left to respond with a true copy? ( there is about two weeks remaining form the original 40 days)

 

Also they didn’t send it recorded so no proof I got it?

 

Or do I phone them? Or when they phone me do I tell them. I’m sure the phone harassment will start again tomorrow.

 

 

Thanks the power:confused:

 

I reckon that you should write to them advising that (a) as they did not respond within 12 days, and (b) as they have not provided a true and accurate copy of the original they are in default. My rationale is that (a) they didn't respond within 12 days, and this needs to be noted, and (b) unless you advise them they're in default, how will they know? They'll keep on hounding you if they think they can.

 

Incidentally, if you're having difficulty paying more than £10 there are options open to you - check posts on this and other forums, if I can I'll dig out a few links.

 

Most important thing to remember is: the SLC are **** and deserve to be treated exactly as they treat you. Stick to deadlines you set! Always write to them (never phone, never fax)! Always send letters recorded/registered (I forget which, you want the one where they sign for it - it's always entertaining listening to their lies, and more so when you turn round and point out that, despite their claims to the contrary, they *did* receive your letter - and the Royal Mail can prove it).

 

Best of luck!

[livity]

Oops, forgot - just because they didn't send it recorded is no defense. Apparently just writing to you is evidence enough. It doesn't work both ways (allegedly), so always send your letters recorded.

[CAGisforME]

Send a letter to them pointing out that having not sent you a LEGIBLE agreement they have not fulfilled their obligations under the CCA and therefore are now in DEFAULT.

 

The further 40 days started ticking the day the 12 was up, and should they not send you a LEGIBLE agreement withing that deadline they will have commited an Offence.

 

There is some debate on this site as to whether we should remind them of their obligations, as they should know them, however I am of the mind that you still require information from them and therefore have a moral obligation to persue it (it will help you later on if they decide to get nasty!) and reminding them that you know the law will not hinder you!!

 

Send your letter Recorded Delivery.

 

Include a line similar to this one:

 

" However, whilst I acknowledge receipt of a supposed Credit Agreement I have to say that it is illegible and therefore I would like to formally request a TRUE copy of this document as the copy you have supplied me with does not constitute a sufficient response.

As you are a Debt Collection Agency, I would also ask that you supply a signed true copy Agreement and of the executed deed of assignment for the above referenced agreement. This is an obligation, whether you are the original creditor or not, under section 189 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

In summary, I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THIS DEBT AND THEREFORE REQUIRE YOU TO SUBSTANTIATE YOUR CLAIMS BY PROVIDING THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTATION BEFORE I CORRESPOND FURTHER :

 

1. True copy of original credit agreement – this needs to be legible

As you are aware, a credit agreement that is not properly documented and signed by the customer is totally unenforceable under the CCA and therefore is a complete defence to any court claim that is issued.

 

Please take note at this stage, that any legal action you may contemplate will be both vigorously defended and contested and that I consider this matter to be “in dispute” and whilst it remains so, no payment will be forthcoming. I hope to hear from you within the statutory time limit, which commenced on the date you received my original letter.

 

Yours faithfully "

 

 

 

Hope that this helps!

[Thepower]

Thnaks for all your help: My response

My address

15 May 2007

YOUR Reference: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for response to my request, however whilst I acknowledge receipt of your letter, the documents enclosed do not constitute a credit agreement and therefore not a sufficient response. For the following reasons:

1) Page one, 75 % of the words are illegible

2) In the 25 % of legible writing in page one, the total amount is considerable different form the amount you alleged I have defaulted on and is less then the amount I have all ready repaid.

3) Page two is totally Illegible

You must supply a signed true copy of The Credit agreement(s) on request . This is an obligation, whether you are the original creditor or not, under section 189 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Please note: You are now in default as 12 + 2 days have passed since my request.

I require a response within the statutory time limit, which commenced on the date you received my original letter.

 

Yours faithfully

The Power

 

[Thepower]

Guess what

 

After years of telephone harassment I’ve herd NOTHING for months not one call, not one letter.

 

I keep paying SLC £10 a month ( As I want to, in the end pay this money back but at an affordable rate)

 

SLC have committed a CRIMINAL act by not sending me my CAA this seems to shut them up!

 

Any harassment off SLC, CAA Them !!!!!

 

Note: SLC do have the originals in a dark data centre for all post 93 agreements. but it takes them six months to retrieve the agreements by which time they have committed a criminal offence so want to keep the matter “amicable” they can only send shoddy scans which isn’t acceptable inside 6 months.

 

ALL pre 1993 agreements have been destroyed and the debt is unenforceable, someone’s due for the sack over that one hahhahahha

 

Thanks to my SLC insider for that bit of info…

[emmaf01]

Glad to hear everything is going ok with this.

 

Its always great when the phonecalls stop.

 

I'm in the process of taking them to court at the mo, and reported them to the ICO. Thats shut them up!!

[Thepower]

More great news, just talked to a nice bloke at trading standards, When SLC defaulted on the CCA request, they committed 4 separate offences! Yes 4 because if you remember you signed a new agreement every year you took a new student loan so 93,94,95,96

SLC bundle all the accounts into one so you only have one account number to use as your reference. This simplifies administration and shows their complete contempt for the 1974 CCA

When you CAA them always ask for ALL you agreements and use the (S) plural see my letter above.

The fine is 2.5K per offence (level two)

SLC YOU DO THE MATHS £2500 x 4 =?

BTW

The default notice as also incorrect? because of the account number reference to my 93 agreement but had the total amount 93,94,95,96

Out if interest:

Has the SLC ever taken any one to court? Or do you know any one with a ccj for a SLC debt?????????

.

[Audreygreeneyes]

Yes they have and did nothing about it until 2 weeks befor ethe end of the 6 year period. when they re applied ot the court...... I do nto have any paper work for the loans as they were takne out 94,95,96 but would love to find a way of reclaiming something back

[emmaf01]

We are not disputing paying back the loans- but by their dealings, the Student Loans Company are increasing the debts by astronomical amounts.

 

I will happily follow the regulations and pay back what I owed plus interest accrued.

 

But I will not pay unlawful charges and interest/arrears which bear no relation to lawful behaviour.

 

I am ill and disabled, therefore I am waiting until I am working, as per the SLC regulations, to continue paying back my loans. But still the SLC are increasing my debt with charges- why is it right to fight back when its a bank but not when its a different financial institution, mpul?

[Thepower]

Just phoned SLC and collections refused to speak to me as my account is in dispute and did'nt want to break collection rules !!!

 

 

 

WHAT A RESULT

 

what's wrong SLC the CAA(T) got your tong

 

 

not a word in months

[emmaf01]

My accounts are all in dispute, and collection AND Smith Lawson have all phoned me today!

 

It would be nice if they ALL knew these rules.

[Thepower]

Are you making any payments?

[emmaf01]

I'd ask "do I look stupid?" but thats just because they've put me in the worst mood possible. SORRY!!!!!!

 

I am not making them any payments, until the court claim is over. ANd then, my 3 year deferment should be up and running, so they cannot chase me for any arrears. So then I will see what I WANT to pay them.... perhaps.

 

PS I do look stupid at the moment.

[Thepower]

Sounds like a good plan, when or if you start paying them back as little as possible see this great thread

 

Student loans: should you pay them off?...

 

ps

 

what did slc say when you said your account was in dispute?

[emmaf01]

They keep trying to argue that I can still make a payment, until I correct them, of course.

 

I just feel like making a tape to play them each time I speak to them, its getting so repetitive.