I'm due letter #3 any day now. Who knows what'll be inside the next envelope?! ;-) I will open it with all the excitement of a child opening a window on an Advent calendar. Far from scaring me with their bully-boy threats, their letters actually tickle me up!

I concur with the above! The original poster will doubtless see my regular updates about these guys, as I'm at about the same stage of their letter campaign- the chances are they bought your 'debt' for tuppence like mine. So far I haven't received a balance 'owed' by good old Jason, so I don't feel remotely inclined to give these clowns the time of day either! There is a great thread on here from 1997, by a guy calling himself InTheKnow- from what I can make out, a rebellious ex-employee of theirs. If you can find it, it's well worth a read to put your mind at rest!

I do recall, after making a certain offer to these guys a few years back, receiving a letter from them in the post which employed the most extraordinary language. Essentially, they wrote back and said that they had (grudgingly) agreed to 'give me the right' to pay them £xx per month. 'Give me the right'?!?! They're a BUSINESS, not the judiciary!!! What they *should* have written was: 'We accept your offer, Mr X.' EXTRAORDINARY!!! Lol!

Hi. My understanding is such that *no* creditor can insist on how much is paid or at what rate: this can only ever be stipulated by a judge in a County Court. I have had dealings with Wescot in the past and they never sent anyone round to my door. Even if they did, you are under no obligation to answer as they are NOT bailiffs. If you are currently paying them by Direct Debit, I would consider switching this to a Standing Order, just in case they pull a fast one. It sounds very much like hot air, for my two pence worth. You have, it seems, made good-faith efforts to pay them so far, so they need to realize that I want does not necessarily get! I would be inclined to just continue paying as you are, and not worry too much.

Nailpost, I do believe you must be psychic- or well informed! Julie Edwards' alter ego Jason Evans has written to me from the 'recovery department'. Couldn't quite bring himself to explain what it *is* that he is attempting to recover, mind; odd given his job description lol. Although the various credit and debit card logos at the bottom would suggest that it's not milk bottle tops. The letter is blatantly a photocopy, too. Not a very professional way of attempting to negotiate a civil matter, is it? :-/ Have filed it away all the same... Next threat should be bankruptcy, if I'm not mistaken!! Brigadier, you were correct also!

Have read a lot about these guys on this forum, as I received a pretty much identical letter myself the other day (see my thread). From what I can make out, this company does NOT send bailiffs round, does NOT take people to court and does NOT bankrupt people- they just use bully-boy tactics to try and scare people into thinking that they CAN do these things- or at least scare them enough to make them a payment. Apparently they specialize in statute barred debts (ie unenforceable ones). One tip I picked up in my searches was this: UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SPEAK TO THEM OVER THE PHONE. They are apparently very intimidating and aggressive, so it's not worth putting yourself through the stress. Personally, I've decided to ignore them entirely, in the firm belief that I am more likely to turn up on *their* doorstep than they are on mine- at least if their history is anything to go by!

Figured as much lol! Their approach struck me as very cack-handed from the word go. 'We are trying to contact xxxx. If you are not the person concerned, please ring us in order that we can correct our records etc." (If I am not 'the person concerned', then why would I break the law by opening xxxx's mail? Lol!) I'm relatively reassured by the voluminous intel supplied on this site that they are mostly hot air- bottom feeders who specialize pretty much exclusively in very old statute barred debts. If it's genuine, it can only be from way, way back when I was a student in the early 2000's, as my credit history for many years has been pretty quiscent. My strategy is actually just to ignore them throughout- as a previous poster on this site put it, 'I have a very good shredder'! The poor buggers couldn't even get my full address right, so I'll let sleeping crooks lie, I reckon! Will keep the site posted for amusing developments ;-)

Echoed. I have had personal dealings with these guys. I suggested a seriously tiny monthly repayment scheme via standing order with them about 5 years back, and in spite of their arrogance- they agreed to grant me 'the right' (!!!) to do this, even though they have no more 'right' to extend 'rights' to anyone than you or I do- they were no hassle from then on. They strike me as 'settlers' if you see what I mean. Now, in *your* case, it sounds very much a 'statute barred' kind of deal, ie not enforceable. A good route to go down would be to consider sending them a request to see the original consumer credit agreement. There are letter templates on the site, and hopefully someone more in the know than me can clarify things better. That said- compared to many DCAs out there, Wescot never struck me as bona fide nutjobs, and were mostly hassle free in my case. Can't imagine they'll be hammering anyone's doors down, so above all don't worry! Hope this helps in some way.

Nice! I'm also reminded of the American philosopher John Dewey's aphorism that "politics is the shadow cast on society by big business" (ie modifications in the shadow- say, by holding an election- won't change the source of *true* power; reforms then become essentially meaningless). ;-)

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear... Aren't these guys naughty? ;-) Firstly, can I introduce myself as a new member on this wonderfully informative site. Secondly, my apologies in advance if the formatting of this post is a little 'exotic'- I am using a phone which is anything but smart lol! Just received a letter from this Ruthbridge gang: no details provided about what they want; just a request from Julie Edwards [sic] in relation to "a personal matter". Struck me as VERY suspicious from the outset, and so I Googled them a day or two ago and, thankfully, ended up here. Having perused the forums in great detail, I'm guessing I will have no real problems with them as long as I don't engage in telephone communication with them, right? Anyone else still having trouble with these guys? Their tactics seem VERY shocking from what I have read so far!!!