I agree about the horse and the cat, but I'm puzzled as to how you are collecting fees for students who have not yet applied.
In that case, the system isn't going to kick in properly until three years from now, when the first cohort graduates...so what happens if there is a change of government in the meantime? Could there be some kind of readjustment?
The usual statement is that the system won't be self-funding for about fifteen years: many/most students will make zero or very small repayments for their early years of work, and it will not be until a substantial number of students from the 2012 cohort are in their prime earning years, say around 2025 onwards, that the repayments will come remotely close to funding the new loans, never mind paying down the money advanced in the intervening years. And because a large number of the loans will start to be written off from 2037 or 2040 onwards (I can't remember if the 25 year write-off is from first payment or from graduation; it doesn't really matter) the scheme will always run in substantial deficit. Of course, reasonable accountants and actuaries will realise that loans that are substantially "behind" repayment at year 10 will be unlikely to be repaid by year 25 (if you're a lower quintile earner at 30, you're not likely to become an upper quintile earner by 40) , so will mark them as impaired anyway, but the write-offs won't start to crystalise until the late 2030s.
The point about this scheme is that it moves undergraduate funding out of the current account and the PSBR, and it's in essence a slightly less mad version of PFI. With university take-up at 50%, today's young people are going to pay for their education one way or another, whether it's as tax being used to service the public borrowing that funded their education, or whether it's "direct" as in the current scheme. Personally I'd be in favour of funding higher education entirely from general taxation, but it's the over forties that vote, and they show no appetite for voting for tax rises. Similarly retrospective graduate taxes; there are all sorts of reasons why that wouldn't work, but let's ignore those and instead just look at the political reality that student funding exercises people under thirty who don't vote, while tax rises exercise those over thirty who do. It's politically impossible.