Saturday, October 27, 2012

Fourth and Fifth and Sixth Claims Counsel

In August 2009 I received a letter from my fourth claims counsel from Fidelity National Title Insurance Company responding to my Request for Assistance to the State of California Department of Insurance.  After a long conversation the new claims counsel agreed that the appraiser should have done a diminution-in-value rather than a cost-to-cure valuation and a new appraisal was ordered.

In mid-November 2009 the fourth claims counsel sent me an almost identical copy of what I felt to be the original misleading and erroneous appraisal.  The appraiser from Boise, Idaho re-evaluated the lost easement, without citing one property in the area with an entrance through a commercial property, and declared that the diminution-in-value was zero dollars ($0) for the loss of an almost mile long easement through private residential property.

In response to a Reconsideration Request, the fifth claims counsel wrote that the matter was concluded and closed but a few days later Fidelity National Title Insurance Company's Manager West Region wrote, "If you would like to provide us with an appraisal from a certified appraiser we would be more than willing to review it."