Student Loans maybe privatized
- Thread starter gosub
- Start date
King Biscuit Time
Well-Known Member
Scrap the fucking lot of it, fees included, in favour of a 1p in the pound graduate solidarity tax for every graduate earning above a certain threshold. Stick in a 2p rate too for £100k pa or thereabouts.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
Come off it. That's far too fair for anyone to get their heads around.
maomao
普費斯
It's a percentage over a certain amount so that can't happen. I believe mine is 9% over 18k p.a. so if I earned 18,100 in a year I would pay 9 pounds.
I'm just on the last little bit now so I have 300ish left to pay but the payroll dept where I worked seem to have fucked something up so my P60 shows I've paid less than I actually have this year and phoning the student loans co is no fucking good because they reckon they don't know how much I've paid meanwhile I'm still getting 150 a month deducted till I get it sorted out. If I don't sort it out they will continue to take the same amount till next year and the SLC will make a couple of grands profit and not bother telling me.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I repeat:
Ready for a bit of cyprus troika style robbery old students?
Raise interest rates on old student loans, secret report proposes
Ready for a bit of cyprus troika style robbery old students?
Raise interest rates on old student loans, secret report proposes
Fez909
toilet expert
With 'normal' debt, I think once the debt has been sold, they can't change the terms.
bi0boy
Power User
Pre-98 loans are all-or-nothing repayments, so once you reach the threshold salary you have to start repaying it over 5 years as if it was a standard commercial loan (obviously with better interest).
maomao
普費斯
Oh, ok, I started uni in 98 so didn't know that.
What's being suggested is they change the terms, the govt, the current other party on the agreement. SO they can make them more attractive to buyers. I don't intend to look up the agreement at the moment. But if there is such a clause allowing them to retrospectively alter the terms, how legally water tight is that. (GCSE law, unfair contracts, blah.)
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Huge fuss about retroactively altering terms of investment bankers contracts - govt backed off.
Fez909
toilet expert
I know what's being suggested..I posted the link!
What I meant was that the contract usually cannot be altered once the debt has been sold on. So if the government set a rate, the private company will be stuck with that. The private company can't change the rate after (unless it's linked to inflation etc).
Fez909
toilet expert
Got a link for that butchers? Or do you mean the pension for Fred Goodwin etc?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I mean a proposed retroactive tax on bonus' rather than the pensions stuff but need to check i've got it right.
Dogsauce
I’ve got Skol but I’m not a Scholar
How much economic productivity is wasted by people having to spend time filling out applications and deferments, how much by companies having to deal with payroll issues? Paying for education out of general taxation would be more efficient, surely?
Nobody's interested in productivity/efficiency though, are they? It's just about banks making money producing absolutely nothing of worth, as usual.
Nobody's interested in productivity/efficiency though, are they? It's just about banks making money producing absolutely nothing of worth, as usual.
Sorry forgot to copy link. But that happened in the US. Tax on retrospective bonus's. Was dropped (skim reading.)
There's this too regarding the UK. But that's a bit different as obviously they weren't contracts signed with the government.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...s-would-be-illegal-whatever-john-mcfall-says/
Fez909
toilet expert
Even if you haven't, the pension stuff is surely the same thing? When he was sacked from RBS there were calls to remove his £5m pension or whatever. I can't remember the details but some MPs came out and said they can't go and change his contract retrospectively.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
That argument was very forcefully put by MPs (worried about popular anger at their own conditions at the time) you're right.
Fez909
toilet expert
And this does have similarities with the student loan company as RBS is part-publicly owned, right? As opposed to xenon's link, where s/he probably rightly says they couldn't change a contract between two private parties.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Ta. Yes, the state attempting to do the tax would be on the one found contract-breaking no matter who the bankers were employed by. I think they backed off.
Only because it wasn't their contract to change. Third parties interfearing in legal contracts, not really viable.
The old student loan agreements are effectively contracts with the government though. They're looking at altering them, seemingly under the proviso they stuck a clause in saying, effectively we can still change anything we want later.
The old student loan agreements are effectively contracts with the government though. They're looking at altering them, seemingly under the proviso they stuck a clause in saying, effectively we can still change anything we want later.
You're missing the point a bit. The govt want to change the contract, *before* selling them on. To make them more attractive to buyers.
Fez909
toilet expert
I know this. And nothing I've said contradicts that.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
If the state imposes an illegal tax it's the one forcing contract breaking through (a normal state of affairs tbh) and the one who would have to retreat in both cases. More direct in the student case i think though.
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
I don't earn enough to pay my student loan back, hope they're not going to start chasing me.
this is worth remembering for old loan takers:
"Old style or “mortgage” student loans are consumer credit agreements. Payments cannot be automatically deducted from your wages. The SLC has to go to court before they can enforce the debt against you. This means that the Limitations Act can apply if you have not paid or acknowledged the debt for over 6 years. Student loan agreements are simple contracts and this gives the Student Loans Company (SLC) 6 years from the date you last paid or acknowledged the debt to go to court to enforce the agreement. (Asking for the loan to be deferred could count as acknowledging the debt and start time running again).
However, this does not mean that the loan no longer exists, it does, and they can hassle you for repayment. Most often they pass it on to the DCA to collect, all the 6 year rule means is that they cannot take court action against you
From September 1998 new style or “income contingent” student loans include rules to say that repayments are automatically deducted directly from your wages or through your tax return if you are self employed. This means that the SLC are still allowed to take money from your wages for a loan over 6 years old as they do not have to go to court to do so."
"Old style or “mortgage” student loans are consumer credit agreements. Payments cannot be automatically deducted from your wages. The SLC has to go to court before they can enforce the debt against you. This means that the Limitations Act can apply if you have not paid or acknowledged the debt for over 6 years. Student loan agreements are simple contracts and this gives the Student Loans Company (SLC) 6 years from the date you last paid or acknowledged the debt to go to court to enforce the agreement. (Asking for the loan to be deferred could count as acknowledging the debt and start time running again).
However, this does not mean that the loan no longer exists, it does, and they can hassle you for repayment. Most often they pass it on to the DCA to collect, all the 6 year rule means is that they cannot take court action against you
From September 1998 new style or “income contingent” student loans include rules to say that repayments are automatically deducted directly from your wages or through your tax return if you are self employed. This means that the SLC are still allowed to take money from your wages for a loan over 6 years old as they do not have to go to court to do so."
Fez909
toilet expert
Sorry, I see why there's a mix up here and yes, it's my fault. I mistakenly thought your post (#66) was worrying about the clause being carried over after the sale, and so the private company could whack up prices even further.
Apologies
You keep mentioning the terms can't be altered after the loans have been sold on. So what. I'm not saying they can be.
Imagine X prospective buyer of the loan book suggests to the govt what level they feel the rates might be raised to, to make them worth buying. Government obliges and you and I can't hire a lawyer to challenge the retrospective change in terms.
Similar threads
