Wolfe’s
Borough Coffee Inc. – dba - The Black Bear Micro Roastery
16 Burleigh
Road, POB 31, Center Tuftonboro, NH 03816
Phone:
603-569-6007 FAX: 603-569-6009
On the WEB at www.BlackBearCoffee.com E-mail: bbmr@worldpath.net
Wednesday, June 26, 2002
Debra Bertone
Litigation Specialist
Zurich American Insurance Company
POB ZZ
Jamaica,
NY 11430-00ZZ
Re: Claim #: 564-0066470-001 CF
Policy #:
PAS 30929054
Date of Loss: 7/3/01
Re: Zurich June 20, 2002 Certified Letter
regarding
Starbucks motion for leave
to serve an Amended Complaint No. Ol-CV-5981
Dear Debra,
I
would like to respond to the above referenced letter.
The word
“damages” refers to monetary loss in this instance. Our policy clearly states that Zurich is “ … obligated to pay
sums that the insured becomes legally obligated to pay as damages …”. Nowhere in the applicable section of our
policy is the interpretation of the word “damages” parsed into separate
categories. Starbucks is specifically
asking the court to award substantial sums of money, which would clearly
represent an overwhelming monetary loss to us.
The policy is written in English, and we are clearly insured against
such monetary loss.
You have
once again made reference, in print, to “insurance industry intent”, and
“relevant case law”. However, it is now
more than three months since these discussions began, and you still have failed
to produce even a single shred of documentation to back up you position. While you state that you are not acting in
concert with Starbucks in “restraint of trade”, I have to reiterate that the
appearance of “restraint of trade” seems a possibility, considering the
foregoing.
A
reasonable individual might well deem your actions as intimidation, intended to
force us to “walk away”, and suffer considerable losses in the process, or face
the very real prospect of our business failing before we even have our “day in
court”.
Insurance
premiums are considered an essential business expense to protect against
unforeseen, and catastrophic loss.
Since you have no evidence that we have done anything wrong, and since
Starbucks is seeking substantial monetary damages, you are contractually
committed to protecting us from the aggressive actions of Starbucks. I strongly request that you cease
restricting our defense council from pursuing an adequate defense.
If you can
clearly document you position, why don’t you do so? Continuing to act in the manner that you are, without any visible
justification to do so, would seem to indicate deliberate intent on your part
to save money for Zurich, and assist Starbucks in achieving its goal, while
putting the existence of our business in extreme peril.
Sincerely,
![]()
|