Sunday, March 10, 2013

Fidelity National Title actually implied that I acted in Bad Faith


I wrote at great length toward the beginning of this blog on the Response to the Third Amended Complaint about what Fidelity said in this document.  To sum my interpretation two things stood out in my mind. First, that Fidelity National Title Insurance Company was somehow not really responsible for the errors made by Fidelity National Title Company (therefore the Defendant had no office in Napa, did not employ escrow officers nor title officers and did not prepare the erroneous Grant Deed) and then through their extensive list of Affirmative Responses they implied that I was responsible for my loss - in my opinion then made me trying to get them to honor their insurance policy - the adversary of Fidelity National Title.

·         Treatment of insured represented by attorneys as insurer adversaries.
·         Treatment of insured and claimants as adversaries.


 Here is one example per Fidelity National Title's Response to the Third Amended Complaint written by Edward Kunnes:

"Defendant [FNTIC] is informed and believes and thereupon allege that Plaintiff [me] is guilty of unclean hands with regard to the matter set forth in the TAC."
  • Well I admit I have absolutely no idea what unclean hands is - that is in the legal term - or are they talking about when I am gardening or petting the St. Bernard or cleaning the bathroom?????
  • Unclean hands??  Per Wikipedia, "Unclean hands, sometimes called the clean hands doctrine or the dirty hands doctrine, is an equitable defense in which the defendant argues that the plaintiff is not entitled to obtain an equitable remedy on account of the fact that the plaintiff is acting unethically or has  acted in bad faith with respect to the subject of the complaint—that is, with "unclean hands".
  • I do not think I have been acting unethically.  The claim was opened by a title officer on my behalf.  I did not prepare the Preliminary Title Report nor the Grant Deed.
  • I just do not even know what to say or ask.
So can someone please explain to me how this makes sense?  By having their title officer open a claim on my behalf - how did I act unethically or how did I act in bad faith?????????????

I would really love to ask Edward Kunnes to explain this to me.  Maybe I should write him a letter.  Hmmm.