Wouldn't this be covered by the home insurance?

In reply to a post by jelv:

Wouldn't this be covered by the home insurance?

Maybe it would,but would claiming be worth the hassle, they may say quiet rightly that it's the property of bt therefore we won't cover it,

If bt choose to supply customers via overhead cables then they should also accept that lightning can and does cause damage to their line plant upto & including the nte, there should be no charge to the customer for such damage end off, if it was me i would have told them to go.... and see them in court and then gone as public as possible about this daylight robbery by bt complain to bbc watchdog about it, it to me also sounds that the engineer put the original faceplate back on the nte and charge for a new one

It will be interesting to see what will happen regarding damage to the new external nte they tend to now fit on new builds, are they gonna charge for water ingress ect too?,

Edited by tommy45 (Wed 26-Oct-11 15:34:51)

See this

http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/consumerProduc...

Providing the service (6)

In reply to a post by systemx:

See this

http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/consumerProduc...

Providing the service (6)

You agree to look after any of our equipment. If you do not do so and the equipment is damaged other than through fair wear and tear, you will, have to pay for it to be repaired or replaced.

So how are customers supposed to protect bt cables from lighting or other acts of god or war ect? the socket was taken out by the lighting,not customers responsibly if it was then i'm sure most would be getting buried under the ground by now, and the choice of overhead or in a duct would have to be given
not only that but what about surge damage to our equipment surely that's bt's responsibility isn't it ,excess voltage ect
And according to the t&c's the main master socket is part of bt equipment not the customers

Edited by tommy45 (Wed 26-Oct-11 16:11:12)

Of course you cannot protect directly from lightening damage, but you are responsible for equipment which may be owned by BT on your property, so an insurance would be the answer.

I'm sure the same principle applies to electricity meters, in that you are responsible for any damage other than fair wear and tear, I'll try and find a link

This whole thing sounds a bit like Severn Trent Water who will repair a mains leak on one�s property up to the house stop tap for free once every two years. However if more repairs are needed during that period then they will charge or alternatively one can get a plumber to do the repair and possibly make an insurance claim.

Regarding the nt5: my insurance company does cover accidental damage to electrical equipment but as it's BT's property they may not cover any damage to it but I would imagine they would cover any damage to a filtered faceplate - but it wouldn't be worthwhile making a claim just for that alone...

Perhaps BT should have a similar policy of repairing line and equipment, from the exchange side of the master socket, within one's property and agree to a free repair once every 2 years rather like the Severn Trent's house stop tap policy.

The T&c for electricity companys are many and varied, but n-Power mention damage to meters in theirs

http://www.npower.com/Home/Electricity-and-gas/Terms...

Its under Costs to do with the meter.

Edited by deleted (Wed 26-Oct-11 17:26:25)

In reply to a post by systemx:

The T&c for electricity companys are many and varied, but n-Power mention damage to meters in theirs

http://www.npower.com/Home/Electricity-and-gas/Terms...

Its under Costs to do with the meter.

their terminology to damage is i think referring to willful damage, to the meter by by passing it or other to avoid paying for the electricity, i have never heard of anyone having to pay for a new meter in the event it failed due to power surges ect,

IT says "Replacing a damaged meter or meter seals if the damage is your fault"

I agree that this more than likely refers to tampering, but it does not say that.

The point is you can be charged for the replacement of equipment owned by the supply undertaking.

When I was first married, we rented a TV set and its outside aerial, and damage to the aerial, alone with any damage the aerial may cause was covered by our insurance, so insurance then covered items which we did not own, but were our responsiblity.

I'll have to have a look and see if this principle still applies.