Well it should be; over 20 years old she says! Dx, who is the debt owner? Arrow seem to have originally had it, sold it to Capquest, who on the same day appear to have sold it to Intrum. So Intrum is the final owner? It seems odd it all happened on one day, as it goes. Any views on the 'address confirmation' letter?

The other side of the desk today. Apologies if this is not the right forum, as all the firms involved seem to appear in multiple threads. I'm sure @honeybee13 will move me to where I should be if not On 17 Jan, the OH received two letters (in the same envelope). One from Capquest informed her of a change of legal ownership of her account ('Notice of Assignment'). The other from Arrow usefully informed her of this change. Scans attached. Today she received a text message from Resolve Call with a link. The link so far remains unclicked. Right? Scan also attached. The last link she had with A&L would have been in c.2002 when she closed an HSBC account, although says all charges/OD were settled. So this is perplexing. I assume it's well and truly timed out by now. Fair assumption, or not? Letter to Capquest letting them know her address (re: backdoor CCJs). Is there anything else I should/shouldn't do? Thanks in advance, everyone. Capquest 1 & 2, Arrow 1, Resolve Call text..pdf

And in any case, that's a pretty massive assumption by the OP, and tasteless too

Often dismissed out of hand by this stage if they've already decided. No champagne corks yet, though.

Thanks dx, must've missed that. Well, that might give us a few weeks, then, at least. but @TiredDodo (cool username!), please do as HB suggests—time is of the essence!

I wish you'd found us sooner. This all happened four months ago; if you'd come to us then, it could have been resolved by now (although I wouldn't like to say which way). You've received 'a few' letters since; it's usually over the course of those letters that, on our advice, you persuade TfL not to take forward their prosecution. The problem here is that, with the amount of time that's passed, you can't tell them anything radically different to what you've already said. Bearing in mind that you've been placed under PACE caution at least twice by now, and according to your original post, you told them you did it to save money. I'm afraid mens rea is all they need to win a case, and that's it right there. Feel free to post up the info the others have asked for. Two other things, perhaps more importantly considering the stage of the game we're at now: Have you got a court date yet? Have they indicated what figure they're seeking yet? Re. your final questions, I think I'd probably want to keep my 60+ mother out of court, to be honest, but of course, that's between you. Unless the vast majority of journeys were made by her—were they?—it won't make much difference.

I was never in, tbh. Per Bazza's reasoning but also... which will be precisely TfL's thinking

Don't you remember signing that invisible contract for life, 25 years ago...

I was going to say something similar. It would have made things so much easier for everyone if they had. Well, except for the desk sergeant over the road, of course

No such thing as bailiffs in the north anymore. HMRC have certain statutory powers, but obviously, they don't apply here. The legislation is much like the rest of the UK: MB either chases the debt themselves or sells it (or a %age) to a DCA. The DCA has no more rights than the original creditor had. They have to apply for a collection judgment against you through the Enforcement of Judgements Office. Hence @lolerz blunt point that

It's probably a bit late for sending 4 to 5 letters! Although that does depend on the court date. Your brutal honesty is not far from the mark, though, I totally agree. @honeybee13 can probably summarise the court proceedings if we ask nicely. @jk2054 it's a good point about the cash. It's a curious thing, but it's still very vague. There's been a mention of being to broke to afford fares, yet living off capital

Now that's Karma

Just to clarify, that's not quite what they're for; TfL doesn't expect five-year-olds to be travelling around the tube! They're effectively a means of identifying the child and proving that she s/he is eligible for free travel and, therefore, that their accompanying adult doesn't have to pay a child rate ticket. Merely FYI, though showing you know about the ticket you misused might go down well. How they are a great money-saver for families with children in a time of austerity, etc, and that you would greatly regret (be double gutted, you know?) if your actions impacted on that allowance.

True, but they'd have to know what tax bracket he was in to know whether he was paying it off?

It certainly does not. In fact, the OP's present approach, while refreshing, is manna from heaven to any prosecutions team... You need to avoid a) Blaming TfL for issuing tickets to five-year-olds; b) Blaming a 68 x lapse of judgement; c) Blaming your job; d) Blaming getting caught; e) Blaming your immaturity. It will not help, and they may suspect this already. Do: a) Be honest b) That's it. It's still worth writing a letter, perhaps more than one, but honestly, you need to avoid telling them everything you've told us. Respectful, understanding, apologetic - no need to debase yourself - and fundamentally believable. Good luck!