Saturday, March 9, 2013

Did Fidelity National Title Act in Good Faith? #8


·         Treatment of insured represented by attorneys as insurer adversaries.
·         Treatment of insured and claimants as adversaries.
·         Using extreme undue persecution, wrongful and victimizing tactics and actions, meant to crush, threaten, thwart, intimidate, oppress, in order to scare away and get the claimant not to make or pursue a claim.

I have written a tome of letters to Fidelity National Title and since I was transferred to the Omaha office - I have felt that somehow I was an adversary - not the insured. I believe this brief - here again responds to this:


In this Brief Jeff Hansen and Todd Moody have apparently already had a conversation where they have decided even before it is done that the second appraisal will be lower and that I am going to complain.  This does not sound to me like they are treating me like anything other than an adversary.


The Response to the Third Complaint by Edward Kunnes in my opinion in their affirmative defenses in essence basically said that the fact that their was a claim for Parcels Two through Five being included in my prelim and Grant Deed when they should not have been was my fault.

And finally even at the Settlement Conference Richard McNeely spent the entire first portion of the conference lecturing and I felt threatening me (I even put this down in my notes and showed it to him "Scare tactics") that even if I won I could still end up owing Fidelity National Title Insurance money.



·         Biased investigation of that which is supposed to be neutral and unbiased.

Please see the Brief above. I do not believe I need to say anything other than what Jeff Hansen wrote.