BT threatening to sue

agrinnall

Johno100 wrote: »

As common courtesy, so BT know you haven't just thrown the letter in the bin and given them another chance to correspond directly with the insurers.

Have you never heard the phrase "when you're in a hole, stop digging"?

Johno100

agrinnall wrote: »

Have you never heard the phrase "when you're in a hole, stop digging"?

I don't care!

I prefaced my original comment by saying that is what I would do and I still would. If the OP wants to handle it differently then that's up to them.

Hermione_Granger

Johno100 wrote: »

I don't care!

I prefaced my original comment by saying that is what I would do and I still would. If the OP wants to [STRIKE]handle it differently[/STRIKE]proceed not in accordance with the terms of their insurance policy then that's up to them.

You "don't care" that you are giving incorrect advice to people asking for help and advice?
As Quentin rightly stated, there is normally a term in any motor insurance policy that explicitly tells you not to respond to any correspondence regarding a claim but to simply forward it to your insurer.

This is from my policy:

(iii) send to the Insurer unanswered any letter claim writ or summons immediately after it is received;

Johno100

Hermione_Granger wrote: »

You "don't care" that you are giving incorrect advice to people asking for help and advice?
As Quentin rightly stated, there is normally a term in any motor insurance policy that explicitly tells you not to respond to any correspondence regarding a claim but to simply forward it to your insurer.

This is from my policy:

Well I seemingly don't live in the same Kafkaesque world occupied by some other posters where a simple acknowledgement letter can lead to rejected claims and apparent financial ruin.

Hermione_Granger

Johno100 wrote: »

Well I seemingly don't live in the same Kafkaesque world occupied by some other posters where a simple acknowledgement letter can lead to rejected claims and apparent financial ruin.

Or apparently in the same world occupied by some other posters who have decided to abide by the terms and conditions of legal contracts that they have signed up to.

Aretnap

Paulbrash wrote: »

My wife hit a telephone pole in April, the car was written off and the pole needed replaced, the insurance company settled with us and BT were provided with insurance details- we have received a letter from BT saying if our insurance does not settle within 21 days we would be liable for the £2000 and are threatening legal action.... can they do this? I read recently in a national paper that they could not go after us but need to sue or go after the insurance company? Is this right

Any legal action would be against your wife as she's the one who is ultimately liable. They can't sue her insurance company as nobody is claiming that her insurance company damaged the telephone pole.

Your wife then asks her insurers to indemnify her in accordance with the terms of her policy. So in the unlikely event that BT do actually sue her, it will still be her insurers who end up putting their hands in their pockets.

In practice is unlikely that it will actually get as far as court - most likely her insurers are just being a bit slow dealing with the claim and this is a way of getting them up. Especially as they'll now have your wife healing then for updates as well as BT.

Contact her insurance ASAP and follow their instructions.