It is standard practice for insurers and insurance defense counsel to deny that a demand letter met the requirements for a 93A demand letter. 93A suits are dismissed from time to time because the demand letter failed to provide enough information for the insurer to assess liability or damages.
In Robotham v. LaFortaine, 2010 WL 3327826 (Mass. Super.), the Superior Court dismissed a suit against an insurer because a pre-suit letter did not mention at least one of the following six factors:
1) express reference to 93A;
2) express reference to the consumer protection act;
3) assertion that the rights of the claimants as consumers have been violated;
4) assertion that the insurer acted in an unfair or deceptive manner;
5) assertion that the insured anticipated a settlement offer within 30 days; or
6) assertion that the claimant will pursue multiple damages should the claim be denied.