Order affirmed, with costs.
The excuse offered by defendants to explain their approximately 4 1/2-month delay in answering was not sufficient. It appears defendants forwarded the summons and complaint to their insurance carrier in Chicago and that New York counsel retained by the insurance company sought to act diligently once it received a copy of the papers and authorization to legally represent defendants. In the lengthy interim period, however, the record reveals only unexplained and, hence, unjustified inaction by the insurance carrier. Mollen, P.J., Gibbons, Brown, Niehoff and Eiber, JJ., concur.