Saturday, October 27, 2012

From Chicago, Illinois to Omaha, Nebraska offices of Fidelity National Title Insurance Company

Apparently the Chicago office closed.  At the end of January I reached the original claims counsel in Walnut Creek, California who told me I was assigned to my third claims counsel in Omaha, Nebraska.  When I reached the new claims counsel, he said that he was inundated with work from the closing of the Chicago office but he asked for the names of local appraisers which I provided to him.

At the beginning of March 2009, Fidelity National Title Insurance Company hired an appraiser not located in   Napa County in California but in Boise, Idaho.  The appraiser determined that perfecting a prescriptive easement to the property with an entrance miles from the original easement to Cavedale Road in Sonoma County was the factor for determining a "cost to cure" the original lost easement to Mount Veeder Road in Napa County.

I disagreed in a lengthy response to this substitution and also cited what I believed to be many inconsistencies and errors in the appraisal and comparable properties and provided substantial data, information on comparable properties and other information for consideration.

Towards the end of June 2009 the appraiser responded with a letter containing again what I thought was more false and misleading statements about the property and a statement about the tonnage of red varietal grapes in 2006.

I again disagreed in writing with the appraisers statements.

In July 2009, Fidelity National Title Insurance Company sent a check for the purchase of the prescriptive easement amounting to $3000 for the purchase and $10,500 for the legal fees associated with its purchase.  Six years earlier the owner of that property had declined to sell the easement for 20 times that amount.  I disagreed with this payment but was told by claims counsel, "You may cash this check without impacting your future claims."

The claims counsel also wrote, "Even though the rights to Parcels 2 - 5 are as set forth in Schedule A of the Policy are excepted from insurance against loss or coverage under Schedule B, the Company in good faith has treated this matter as if it is a covered loss."  But per Part One of Schedule B, number 3 "[e]asements which are not shown by the public records" are excepted from coverage.  Prior to purchasing the property I met with the title officer in Napa, California and was provided copies of the public records.