Thanks Andy ... Cheeky, eh?

Ps I suspect this is in regard to a different debt, one that is either statute barred or very close to becoming so, so should probably sit tight until they send something else. The paperwork says Link and not Lowell, but Lowell were sending me the odd letter until quite recently. Maybe they are hoping to confuse me into admitting to a debt (if I talk about the CCJ) on the telephone which they could take as me admitting to another debt. If I said "I'm paying you the money I owe you by standing order", for example.

Sorry, I didn't mean to hijack another thread, thought I was adding to the info about Link and how they operate! Have now received a letter "...on this occasion you declined to give your details. We can understand your reluctance to confirm details but we do need to speak to you and ask that you call us now to discuss your account. Please call us on ... please telephone our office today". Yours sincerely, illegible scribble and no name. Should I ignore? Thanks

Had a call claiming to be from Link today, although the number was withheld. Welsh accent and cocky attitude, demanding my details and telling me that if I didn't give them the details I would be receiving a letter. ("so there", I assumed.) Nothing has changed since last year, they are still paid by standing order and I have no intention of changing that. I wonder if maybe they have picked up one of my old debts from another DCA, but they should all be statute barred by now. I doubt it's worth their while going back to court to get the payments increased. I wonder if they want to offer me a full and final settlement; but would that be allowed, once a CCJ has been settled on me owing them £5k and paying £25 a month? I have no real incentive to go for a full and final and don't trust them at all. PS I will update you once I get the letter.

PS I guess technically I am not "debt-free", but I regard myself as so. I am free of worry about debt. The Link £5k or so, I can pay off if I need to; the statute-barred debts exist but they can't do anything and I'm not going to pay them. My conscience is totally clear - the banks did well out of me in my prosperous times.

Just wanted to say thanks to the people who gave encouragement and advice when I was going through a very tough time a few years back. I nearly got my flat repossessed and was being harassed by several debt companies I was struggling to repay. Some of my debts I paid off at a discount, one company (Link on behalf of MBNA) got a CCJ, which I am paying off at £30 a month. I could pay it off in one go, but don't feel like it as Link really hounded me, when I wasn't very well. Other debts have now become statute barred. My credit history has not really affected me at all and the CCJ should disappear from that within two years. Generally, everything is great and I've learnt to be wary of credit, but also, not to be bullied. Big thanks, and I am making a small donation to the site. Best of luck, and chin up, to all those currently struggling. Your health is the most important thing, so please don't worry too much.

They didn't bother prosecuting in that case, but it did take a letter.

To add ... All the extra staff that have suddenly materialised on the Chingford/Hertford line: there are two on each barrier bank staring avidly at the barriers in order to check no-one misuses a child or Freedom pass. What's the point in automation if you're going to have that level of overmanning? I haven't seen the like outside of a communist country (Russia, where they had women watching the escalators). Do they have quotas of people to catch? Are they on commission? Surely the amount lost in dodging cannot justify their wages. People like me aren't "dodging" anyway, any negative balance will be made up next time the person uses the Oyster, which has a deposit of £3.00 on it. A Penalty Fare of £40, hmm, maybe a reminder to check the balance more carefully, but all the telling-off and deliberate time-wasting seems nothing but vindictive, unnecessary and disproportionate.

Going to join in with a little rant here ... I travel regularly from my station into Liverpool Street, today I didn't notice that I had a low balance when touching in (there's no barrier, just a touch pad), only when I went to touch out and got a "please top up" notice. Asked the man on the barrier if I could go and top up (sometimes they have let me do this .. before they became London Overground), he told me to go and speak to the revenue man. I resigned myself to a penalty fare at this point, some you win, some you lose. (I've tried to set up automatic top up (which would be the obvious answer) but it's not working for me). The man he pointed out was on the phone, with a queue of three people. I went in search of another responsible member of staff - there were about 30 standing around platforms 1-6: 2 on each barrier bank, little crowds by the ends of the platforms. I found the manager and said that I needed to get out as I hadn't had enough money on my Oyster, was there someone else who could deal with that? He made me go through what had happened, while he listened with a look of total smugness, and then said "you have to buy a ticket before your journey". Yes, I know, I said, fine, but I need to get out of here as I have an appointment, is there not another person in this army of people in uniform who can deal with that? Mr Smug felt obliged to puff himself up and tell me that he was the Customer Services Manager, and was trying to help me, and all those staff were barrier staff, bla bla irrelevant bla, to go on about the need to buy a ticket and (eventually) that there was another revenue protection officer I could speak to. The RPO was equally smug and irritating - he asked where I'd come from twice, checked my Oyster, found it had a negative balance - well, yes, because the system had just mugged me of £5.50 or so for tapping in with insufficient funds (there had been a pound or so of credit). "You cannot travel with a negative balance". "Yes, I know that ..." And so on. I was offhand with them, but I wasn't offensive. Mr Customer Services Manager seemed put out that I wasn't impressed by him, not bothered about 40 quid and didn't want to play his power game. I did point out that I am a customer who pays several hundred pounds a year to TFL, and I wasn't getting much of a service. I had my debit card in my hand the whole time, was ready and willing to pay. They felt obliged to run smugly through the options of charging me £40 if I paid now (yes, yes, yes... ) £80 if I didn't pay there and then, and the possibility of prosecution if I didn't pay (regardless that I had been trying to pay for the last ten minutes). Took the guy 10 minutes to fill in the form, deliberately slowly. All in all, I was delayed by 20 minutes. I'm told revenue staff talk about customers failing the "attitude test", and that plays a part in decisions to fine or prosecute; I think they fail the "attitude test" if they treat customers like criminals or naughty children, and deliberately inconvenience them, just because they consider them lippy or insufficiently humble.

Agree, they're not allowed to add interest, didn't stop them trying, though.

Link are the only company to take me to court and get a CCJ, 3 years ago. The court set repayments at £25 pcm. I could afford now to pay the whole remaining £5k back in one go, but don't feel like it maybe they will go out of business sometime, eh. Link have tried to discuss a "review" with me, suggesting I might like to pay less, but I'm guessing paying less would give them grounds to claim I wasn't meeting the court's terms. They also send statements with screaming lines about "ARREARS" but they've stopped adding interest. I don't trust them, I pay them by standing order and that's that.

hi there ... I remember that address now! I haven't done anything yet, will try this week before we run out of time.

He was told from the moment he started making the phone call "is this going to take long? I need to get off in a minute. I have some ID here." but he ignored it. It appears he was being deliberately difficult. I know traffic wardens, ticket inspectors etc. do a necessary job but it's naive to think that some don't wring every bit of a power trip they can from it.

OK, fair enough (well not really, but we can take it on the chin!). Didn't appreciate first-class's narky attitude to another forum member who was simply asking a question, but the "unacceptable behaviour of passengers" seems to indicate an over-identification with authority.

Even if "walking away" is the only way to ensure you get off at your stop and are not carried miles out of your way? That's ridiculous.