Thanks, I'm new to all this:)

Sorry, don't get this post?

So nice to see these gits are so caring about keeping people's jobs!!!

Who is Mr Prosser within Robinson Way?

Sorry, but I am a bit confused, why do I need this name/address?

Well, I have got the letter from them where they say the last payment wa made in 'September 2003' so it will be interesting if they then find one from October 2003. I would like to inform the OFT and TS but I'm not sure exactly what to say to them. At the moment it all seems a bit confused and I worry about saying the wrong thing.

Yeah, I won't do anything till the end of the month. Guess, I could try and find out who replaced Gareth Thomas, if no one else knows?

Yes, I realise I don't need to prove it but I suspect just ignoring them won't work either as they are stating that they 'do not accept that the above amount is time barred under the Limitation Act'.

Yes, that's the sort of letter. I won't send it yet but can anyone tell me if Gareth Thomas, the person named in that letter, still holds the position it says?

Thanks but I have already sent them both of these, the first resulted in them sending me a copy of the 2001 agreement and a letter saying I paid in September 2003 and the second resulted in the letter I quoted at the beginning of the thread. What I need, if there is one, is a letter asking them to prove the debt isn't statute barred, which is what they are currently claiming.

Yes, but how can I be certain? As I said, all I have from them is a copy of the 2001 original agreement with Capital One and a letter which claims I paid Capital One £5.00 in 'September 2003'. What I don't want them to do is find some loophole and take me to court. Does anyone know if there is a standard letter to send these people asking them to prove that it isn't statute barred?

Capital One.

Thanks everyone. Just wondered if there was a standard letter or anything to write to them to tell them to prove it or get stuffed? I don't want to send the wrong thing and bugger up my chances.

After sending Robinson Way the standard letter denying debt limitation I today received a letter saying the following: "Further to your recent communication we do not accept that the above account is time barred under the Limitation Act. Even if you were to demonstrate that this debt is time barred, the debt still legally exists and may be reported accordingly to the credit reference bureaux, as appropriate. We are prepared, however, to offer you a substantial reduction to settle this account once and for all. Should you be interested in taking up this option please telephone us on the above number" Now I know to ignore the last paragraph as that would just be me admitting the debt but I do not see how it is up to me to prove the debt is time barred? All they have sent me, so far, is the original agreement from 2001 and a letter which says, with no proof, that I last paid them £5.00 in September 2003. I know I would not have paid £5.00 on the debt as that would have been a daft amount to pay, I would have either paid nothing, the full amount or a regular monthly payment of more than £5.00. As I have said elsewhere I am not even convinced I still owe this debt as I paid several off in 2003 when I received a redundancy payment, sadly, after moving home several times, I don't have any records of any of my old debts or their payments, which were always in cash over the bank counter. What I want to know is what do I do now?

I know what you mean but I would have to have the correct legal terminology to do this as I don't want to do anything that they could then say meant I was admitting the debt. If you, or anyone, could come up with a letter that I could send, that won't backfire on me, I'd be tempted to do it.