Re: BT Wayleaves

Hamish wrote:
"Mike" <windywalls@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:2F19f.9156$sA4.1646@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Hamish" <akc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:dk0dj7$qd3$1$8300dec7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Mike" <windywalls@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:Y4H8f.7855$Sx4.6523@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
seems we are liable if we dig up any of their unmarked

cables.

In law or just BTs opinion?
They issue an invoice for the job and have the legal department to chase payment. You may win the case in court but it would be costly.



It does not surprise me. I saw a report in the paper recently where a company had used a false address
and the electricity bill was issued to the false address. However the false address did not exist so the equivalent of the "spell checker"
converted the address into a best guess. The residents at the address, who of course had a different name, contacted the company telling them that it was in error. The company now having a correct name modified the bill for what is now a correct name and address.
They refused to pay and a debt collector was called in. Eventually it was sorted, but the electricity companies attitude to why they
did not follow up the reasons why the people denied liabilty was that "as a false address had been used it was reasonable to assume any other assertions were also false".

I would have reported it as a crime, making unwarranted demands with menaces (AKA blackmail) contrary S21 Theft Act 1968. That would have made someone's eyes water a little.

--
Howard Neil
.