Am I entitled to get a maintenance loan?
According to GOV.UK, you can only apply for Student Finance if: Since you don't fulfill the criterion 2 and 3, you are technically not eligible for Student Finance. Since you have received information from Student Finance England that you can apply for the maintenance loan, you should either write to them or call them again, to confirm the information given to you. I think you're eligible for the tuition fee loan but not the maintenance loan. I think that SFE were suggesting that you'd be eligible under point 4 here 4: People with the right of permanent residence in the UK If you satisfy all the conditions under this category, you will be   eligible for full Student Support. To be eligible: (a) you have the right of permanent residence in the UK; and (b) you are ordinarily resident in England on the first day of the   first academic year of your course; and (c) you were ordinarily resident in the UK and Islands for three years   before the first day of the first academic year of the course; and (d) if your three-year residence in the UK and Islands was at any time   mainly for the purpose of receiving full-time education, you must have   been ordinarily resident in the UK or elsewhere in the EEA and/or   Switzerland immediately prior to the three-year period of ordinary   residence in the UK and Islands. It does not matter if you were in the   EEA and/or Switzerland mainly in order to receive full-time education   during this earlier period. Point (b) would be the reason for asking you to prove you were in England on 1 September, but since you were under three years old when you left the UK, you wouldn't satisfy point (c). You should be eligible for the tuition fee loan under point 2 2: EU nationals, and family If you satisfy all the conditions under this category only, you are   eligible only for a loan to pay your tuition fees. To be eligible: (a) on the first day of the first academic year of the course, you   must be:     a UK national; or a non-UK EU national who is in the UK as a   self-sufficient person or as a student; the relevant family member of   such a person above; and (b) you must have been ordinarily resident in the EEA and/or   Switzerland for three years before the first day of the first academic   year of the course; and (c) the main purpose for your residence in the EEA and/or Switzerland   must not have been to receive full-time education during any part of   the three year period.
IMO student loans are junk debt that should be dealt with as soon as possible.  Buying a house comes with risks and expenses (repairs, maintenance, etc) and dealing with a student loan at the same time just makes it tougher. Personally, I would try to pay off at least a few of the loans first. "As noted in richardb's comment buried in the comments/debate on the other answer (and all credit for this answer should be due to him): a significant issue with the scheme as originally envisaged in the question (up to £11K pa) is that there is actually a cap on the maintenance part for over 60s: On page 28 of this ""Student finance - how you're assessed and paid"" document it says: If you're 60 or over on the first day of the first academic year of   your course you can apply for a Maintenance Loan of up to £3,566,   depending on your household income. Your loan will be reduced by £1   for every £5.46 of household income over £25,000, up to £43,675. If   your household income is more than this you won't get any Maintenance   Loan. I'd consider that to make this route considerably less attractive... and maybe that's the intention of the rule!  (Although I might not think that was so true if I was actually on the UK's state pension of £6K a year and desperate.  However, I was originally thinking more in terms of comparing the accumulated ""free money"" over the three years with the UK's average - and woefully inadequate - pension pot of £50K, rather than with pensioner income). I'll leave those who found the idea of exploiting government incentives so outrageous to ponder the at least as troubling ethics of discriminating against people based on their age, especially when that government apparently likes the idea of older people retraining. (Just to complicate things: I note that one of the possible criteria for applying for a ""special support grant"" - an alternative to a maintenance loan - is being over 60.  That's a grant not a loan and doesn't have to be repaid, but abusing that would seem even to me to be on a par with faking disability to get benefits or similar)." Seems like a bad deal to me. But before I get to that, a couple of points on your expenses: Onward. You value a property by calculating its CAP rate. This is what you're calculating, except it does NOT include interest like you did -- that's a loan to you, and has no bearing on whether the unit itself is a good investment. It also includes estimations of variable expenses like maintenance and lack of income from vacancies. People argue vociferously on exactly how much to calculate for those. Maintenance will vary by age of the building and how damaging your tenets are. Vacancies vary based on how desirable the location is, how well you've done the maintenance, and how low the rent is. Doing the math based on your numbers, with just the fixed expenses: 8400 rent - 2400 management fee - 100 insurance = 5900/year income. 5900/150000 = 0.0393 = 3.9% CAP rate. And that's not even counting the variable expenses yet! So, what's a good CAP rate? Generally, 10% CAP rate is a good deal, and higher is a great deal. Below that you have to start to get cautious. Some places are worth a lower rate, for instance when the property is new and in a good location. You can do 8% on these. Below 6% CAP rate is usually a really bad investment.  So, unless you're confident you can at least double the rent right off the bat, this is a terrible deal. Another way to think about it You're looking to buy with your finances in just about the best position possible -- a huge down payment and really low interest. Plus you haven't accounted for maintenance, taxes (if any), and vacancies. And still you'd make only a measly 1.2% profit? Would you buy a bond that only pays out 1.2%? No? What about a bond that only pays 1.2%, but also from time to time can force YOU to pay into IT a much larger amount every month? Will citizens advice be able to help me, or am I only going to get told to seek legal advice anyway? They are just advisory. i.e. help/guide people. They are not responsible for any outcome. What can I do as I'm not the person who's made payment or been paid, but I also don't want to cause the estate agent lots of work from my mistake, but legally no bank will talk to me anyway. You are right. You estate agent would have to follow-up with banks [which you have already done]. Will I have to seek legal action or the estate agent? Once you follow-up with the Banks and the Ombudsman, you should proceed to legal. Legally if it is a mistake on your part, the beneficiary is NOT entitled to the money and has to refund it. However establishing this takes a while and hence most of the times beneficiary does not pay back the money that is not rightfully his. It is completely in the realm of each lender what they request. Some lenders always want to see proof of income, and others have decided to look only at other things. Their decision has nothing to do with you, your situation, your income, or your credit history. You are of course free to go to another lender that does not want proof of income. I agree with the deposit part. But if you are buying a new car, the loan term should meet the warranty term. Assuming you know you won't exceed the mileage limits, it's a car with only maintainence costs and the repayment cost at that point. "Your post has some assumptions that are not, or may not be true. For one the assumption is that you have to wait 7 years after you settle your debts to buy a home.  That is not the case.  For some people (me included) settling an charged off debt was part of my mortgage application process.  It was a small debt that a doctor's office claimed I owed, but I didn't.  The mortgage company told me, settling the debt was ""the cost of doing business"".  Settling your debts can be looked as favorable. Option 1, in my opinion is akin to stealing.  You borrowed the money and you are seeking to game the system by not paying your debts.  Would you want someone to do that to you?  IIRC the debt can be sold to another company, and the time period is refreshed and can stay on your credit report for beyond the 7 years.  I could be wrong, but I feel like there is a way for potential lenders to see unresolved accounts well beyond specified time periods.  After all, the lenders are the credit reporting agencies customers and they seek to provide the most accurate view of a potential lender.  With 20K of unresolved CC debt they should point that out to their customers. Option 2:  Do you have 20K?  I'd still seek to settle, you do not have to wait 7 years.   Your home may not appreciate in 2 years.  In my own case my home has appricated very little in the 11 years that I have owned it.  Many people have learned the hard way that homes do not necessarily increase in value.   It is very possible that you may have a net loss in equity in two years.  Repairs or improvements can evaporate the small amount of equity that is achieved over two years with a 30 year mortgage.   I would hope that you pause a bit at the fact that you defaulted on 20K in debt.  That is a lot of money.  Although it is a lot, it is a small amount in comparison to the cost and maintenance of a home.  Are you prepared to handle such a responsibility?  What has changed in your personality since the 20K default?  The tone of your posts suggests you are headed for the same sort of calamity. This is far more than a numbers game it is behavioral." I don't think that they ask you for your citizenship status when you apply in a dealership. At least I don't remember being asked. I know of at least 3 people from my closest circle of friends who are in various immigration statuses (including one on F1) and got an auto loan from a dealership without a problem and with good rates. They have to ask for your immigration status on online applications because of the post-9/11 law changes. Edit to allow Dilip to retract his unjustified downvote: Chase and Wells Fargo have a reliable track of extending auto loans to non-permanent residents.