How does FideltyNational Title Treat People During the Claims Process??

Another two hour conversation yesterday.  I have now had numerous conversations with people who were involved in the claims process with Fidelity National Title.  The specifics of the claims are all slightly different but the similarities are remarkably the same.

1)  Every individual I have talked to has felt frustrated, very angry and that they were not being treated fairly or as valued customers.  Class action, fraud, bad faith and/or other choice words have been used singularly or in combinations.  (And the emphasis here is on choice words!!)
2)  Every individual has in some way - frequently by Fidelity National Title like I was - had it acknowledged that they had a valid claim.  Some like myself actually had the claim opened for them by Fidelity and/or had the claim acknowledged as valid in a letter.
3)  Every individual was attempting to settle or was involved with the Claims Department for years.  I would guess the average time to be four years.
4)  Every individual thought at the beginning of the claims process that the Claims Counsel was there to help them and/or to represent their (the insured's) interest but slowly over time learned that the Claims Counsel appeared to represent the financial interest of Fidelity National Title above the interest in protecting their property rights.  (And here I should clarify - not one person I spoke to felt that they received a fair and equitable settlement - not even close.  Compounding this for most was the tens and hundreds of hours the claimants had to work to procure any kind of a settlement - and this time was universally not acknowledged financially.) (In my particular case by the time court, attorney and appraisal fees were paid - I received nothing for my loss and about 10 cents an hour for the time I spent pursuing the claim opened on my behalf by Fidelity.)
5)  Every individual had multiple Claims Counsels assigned to their claim. So far the fewest I have heard is three (and that person has still not settled their claim) but six seems to be a common number.
6)  Individuals have spent between $50,000 and $300,000 or more to settle their claims with Fidelity National Title.

The other common thread which is the purpose of this blog is "How do we keep this horrible situation from happening to others?"  I do not have the answer to that question.  One difficulty is that I have spoken to/or heard from clients of Fidelity National Title from more than a dozen states.  But I believe that using our First Amendment rights and communicating the facts of what occurred during our claims to inform and educate others is at least a step in the right direction.

Additionally, I have been trying to learn more of how title insurance claims work by talking to others and researching the process on the internet.

Some important questions that arose from my experience include:

Why is your escrow handled by Fidelity National Title Company and your property is insured by Fidelity National Title Insurance Company?

Is this why the files and documents of the escrow and title search done by Fidelity National Title Company for that process not available to Fidelity National Title Insurance Company during the claims process?  (At least they were not available in my case.)

Why are the people who handle the claims attorneys?  And do these attorneys represent you as the claimant or the financial interests of Fidelity National Financial and its subsidiaries?

Are the claims counsels attorneys and really representing the financial success of Fidelity?  And then in the case of a lawsuit their phone logs, notes, emails, etc. are not available due to attorney/client privilege??  (At least they were not provided in my case.)

If they are indeed all separate companies why do all of their email addresses (from escrow officers to claims counsels) end in @fnf.com?

Are the insured actually the clients/customers of the company??

Does the fact that Fidelity has an employee stock program create a conflict of interest in the paying of claims?  In other words if claims are not paid then the value of the stock increases, correct?

Oh, I could go on and on with question after question.  I obviously have a lot more research to do on how title insurance companies handle the claims of the insured.

$300,000 and Still Battling with Fidelity National Title

I have had more people contacting me with more problems with their title reports - and the thing, for example, here that I do not understand.  I thought that it was Fidelity's job to represent their clients in title issues with the other parties in items like undisclosed easements.  I have not had a chance to speak to this individual yet as I was out of town on business so I do not know the entire story.  But he is not the first person to spend multiple thousands of dollars in trying to protect his property rights.  I know that I could have continued on with my fight but I could not afford to do so with the tremendous loss I experienced over the loss of my easement and the loss of marketability of my property.  And as with this individual - I would not have purchased my property with an accurate title report.

 

Hi Ann, I have been reading your Blog.

I to am having serious issue with Fidelity. In 2009 we learned of an Easement that was not included on our Title Report. 4 years later and to a cost of about 300,000 we have lost and now are in Arbitration with Fidelity as they never disclosed this Easement. As such we would not have purchased our home.

 

Anyway I would love to talk with you just to compare notes etc..

Please let me know if that might be ok.

 

Warm regards,

Letter to Roger Jewkes, President, Fidelity National Title Group

 

June 9, 2013

 

Roger Jewkes

President, Western Operations

Fidelity National Title Group

601 Riverside Avenue

Jacksonville FL  32204

 

Dear Mr. Jewkes,

 

I sent this letter to Mr. Foley six months ago and never received a response.  I would ask your assistance please.

 

Thank you.

 

January 11, 2013

 

Mr. William P. Foley II

Fidelity National Title Insurance Company

601 Riverside Avenue

Jacksonville FL  32204

 

Dear Mr. Foley,

 

I am writing to you as the President of Fidelity National Title Insurance Company.  (Mr. William P. Foley, serves as the President and Chairman of Fidelity National Title Insurance Company.)  I was a real estate agent/broker in Sonoma, a Fidelity Gold Client and used Fidelity for my personal real estate transactions.  I owned an 80 acre parcel with sweeping views of the Napa Valley off of Mt. Veeder Road that was above the former Chateau Potelle property purchased by Jess Jackson and Barbara Banke.  An easement from Mt. Veeder Road that was insured by Fidelity was found to be invalid (but it was determined but not told to me a year into the claim that it might be valid).  A claim was opened on my behalf by a Fidelity Title Officer.  An appraiser from Boise Idaho was hired who determined the value of this mile long easement in Napa County had a value of $0.  He did things like compare in value my property above Oakville to America Canyon – I am mentioning this as it would be the equivalent of comparing in value your property in Healdsburg to Ukiah.  His first “cost to cure” was to substitute a prescriptive easement I already had to Cavedale Road in Sonoma County for the lost easement to Mount Veeder Road in Napa County.  The claims counsels in Omaha found neither of these facts odd.

 

After four years, three claims offices and six claims officers I finally filed a lawsuit.  I discovered though that an individual is in no position to fight a corporation such as yours.  I settled the suit to pay the legal fees and compensate my attorney for his time.  Here is my blog entry on the result of the settlement:

 

“I have been thinking a lot about this since I wrote the email to my attorney instructing him to divide the Settlement money between himself and the two trial attorneys from Fidelity National Title.

 

Over the course of my former career as a real estate agent/broker I referred hundreds of clients to Fidelity National Title as the title company that I supported and felt did the best job due to the excellent service I and my clients had received from the escrow officers in the Sonoma California office.

 

As I have said - thank goodness that I am the only one who ever had to actually file (or had filed on my behalf) a claim with Fidelity National Title.  Having experienced working with (LOL) the claims department of Fidelity National Title, I feel guilty having referred so many of my clients to Fidelity knowing that if they have a problem in the future with their real estate investment title, they will need to most likely go through an experience similar to what happened to me.

 

If I accepted the pittance of a settlement that I felt I was forced to agree to - which I did solely for the purpose of paying the legal expenses (amounting to almost $8000 just to barely get the lawsuit started) and to pay my attorney for his time.  I was convinced by the intimidating speech of Fidelity National Title's Senior Trial Attorney (Richard M. McNeely, Jr.) that not only was it going to cost tens of thousands of dollars but even if I "won" I could still legally end up owing Fidelity money.

 

Additionally, the second Fidelity National Title Attorney (Edward Kunnes) in what I felt was not a pleasant way pointed out the following:

 

My attempts at adding a little levity to the conference was not appropriate for a settlement conference.

When he stated that Fidelity National Title Insurance Company did not have an office in Napa (and therefore this statement in our complaint was false) -  which I wrote about as I researched the company I realized that he was correct as there are so many different divisions but even as a real estate broker - I thought that they were all the same and interconnected and not part of what I now understand to be a form of organization and legal protection.

And he stated that indeed per the law I was no longer covered by the insurance because I no longer owned the property.  Of course, I now realize that this must have been part of the intention of moving me all over the country from office to office and claims counsel to claims counsel and the lack of response until I contacted the California Department of Insurance, etc.

At any rate - I feel that it is important that I continue to express the reasons I would never ever use Fidelity National Title Company and Fidelity National Title Insurance Company documented with copies of documents from Fidelity National Title.  If I took the money then I would be sending the message that I thought that I had been treated justly and fairly - which I do not - not even close.”

 

 

Having only two days before the Settlement Conference to pour through thousands of pages of documents provided weeks late by Fidelity I finally put some of the pieces of the puzzle together and formed this list of events for the Conference:

 

Chronological Order of Events

 1998 Hamilton Vose subdivided off this property and sold it to Arnie Kresch.  At that time the Grant Deed from Napa Land Title Co. lists only Parcel One (the property) and Parcel Two (our Parcel Six – the easement thru Chateau Potelle).  Grant Deed

 

2002 -2004 AND HERE IS THE MISTAKE.  When we purchased the property from the Kresch kids after Arnie Kresch’s death Fidelity added in Parcels Two thru Five to both the prelim and the Grant Deed on the purchase and subsequent re-finance.  THE REASON THEY ARE NOT VALID AS THEY WERE NOT THE SELLER’S TO CONVEY.  Grant Deed

 

2002 I met with the title officer in Napa prior to purchasing the property and received the map and recorded documents on all of the easements leading me to believe that there was this second deeded easement from Mt. Veeder.

 

June 2008  When I went to sell the property I (obviously) thought there was a valid easement which is the reason I contacted Doreen Ho which started the entire claim.  Fax to Debbie Shelton

 

October 2008  Craig Donner of Fidelity National Title determines the easements are not valid as they were not the sellers to convey and opens the claim.  “Our insured is now putting the property on the market and wants to advertise that she has an additional access being the insured easement.  I know we need to forward to claims department, but escrow wants to know what she should advise her customer.  I think we should be up front and let her know the facts and that it will be handled by the claims department.”   Email re: telling Zollinger and Confidential Claim Report to General Counsel

 

October 29, 2008 Claim assigned to Dennis Lucey, Walnut Creek.   Email to Craig Donner

 

“Since she ‘s trying to sell the property, and needs the claim resolved first, (and we apparently have a long professional history with her) I’m going to be sure to keep this on, or near, the front burner.”  Conversation was he was going to attempt to get the easements back.

 

November 13, 2008 Claim re-assigned to Adam Pinchuck, Chicago

 

November 18, 2008 Initial Fact and Claims Analysis “However, since these easements were included as insured parcels in Schedule A, we have provided coverage to our insured.”

 

December 30, 2009 Mr. Pinchuck “determined” “coverage is appropriate…..”

 

January 26, 2009 Zollinger reaches Dennis Lucey who tells her she has been re-assigned to Robert Kelly in Omaha.  (Kelly told Zollinger in a phone conversation he was swamped from the closing of the Chicago Office closing and asked for the names of local appraisers.)

 

February 23, 2009 Email from Jim Gibson to Owen Girard, “Thank you for taking the time with me this morning.  As I indicated, I have been, and continue to perform Diminution In Value (DIV) appraisals for Fidelity National-Chicago Title, covering numerous states, including:…….  I work with a small team of appraisers who have experience in DIV projects.  We have offices scattered across the county, providing local market knowledge.”

 

March 5, 2009 Email from Jim Gibson to Robert Kelly, “We will take care of this project.  It’s very similar to a DIV project I did in Aspen/Snowmass CO last fall.  A key issue for this type of project is not to over look the “Cost to Cure” for the noted defect in title.  If the estimated Cost to Cure is less than the difference of the “Before and After Value”, the Cost to Cure is considered to be the appropriate measure of damages.  In terms of this project, we have valued numerous commercial vineyards within the Napa/Sonoma market over the past few years.”  (So as he first did a “cost to cure” it can be assumed that this value was less than the DIV????)

 

May 1, 2009 Jim Gibson completes his appraisal determining that perfecting the prescriptive easement to Cavedale Road in Sonoma County can be substituted for perfecting the easement to Mount Veeder Road in Napa County and valued the “Cost to Cure” at $13,500.

 

Zollinger refutes the appraisal.

 

June 15, 2009 Email Robert Kelly to John Hilvka and Gary Colemere, “I’ll call Ann and advise her that I’m waiting for Mr. Gibson to provide a written response to his review of the information Ann submitted in an attempt to increase the loss amount indicated in his original DIV report.  I really need to discuss options 1 & 2 with you because Ann is asking me if we have acted on either of these options. (Note #1 is regaining Parcels 2 – 5, #2 obtaining another easement (not thru a winery) to Mt. Veeder Road.)

 

June 25, 2009 Jim Gibson responds with more false and misleading information

 

June 26, 2009 Policy Payment Approval Report

 

“After investigating this issue extensively with Gary Colemere out of the Napa County office it appears that Parcels 2 – 5 may run with Parcel 1 after all.”

 

“Legal Arguments:  Once the Company indicates to the Insured that the Property does not include Parcels 2 – 5 and as a result, this is a covered loss, and the insured relies on our statement and does not market the property as having a secondary easement access through parcels 2 – 5, can the company now say 6 months later that there is no loss, the property is as insured.”  (so it was valid the whole time and I was never told??????  And no attempt was made to defend my right to the easement with the neighbors?????)

 

June 30, 2009  Email from Steven Johnson to Robert Kelly, “We should provide our best explanation of the basis for the tendered claim payment, pointing out that it looks like there is a valid easement, that there are exceptions to the easement, and that we have diligently responded to requests in handling the claim.”

 

July 10, 2009 Robert Kelly writes, “Based on your request of 5/27209, our Company in good faith reviewed Parcel……  Based on this information the interest in the land is as described in Schedule A of the Policy.”  Then he excepts the coverage under Schedule B but states that in good faith the Company treated this matter as a covered loss.  Then, “so if the Historical Easements provide another access to the Property it would be the third access easement to the Property.”  (I did not get from his letter that there was a valid easement.)

 

Zollinger files claim with DOI

 

August 18, 2009 letter from Jeff Hansen (replacing Robert Kelly)

 

September 23, 2009 Brief by Jeff Hansen, “On 9/23/09 sent the following email to appraiser Jim Gibson of PGP after discovering bob Kelly had instructed Jim to appraise base on “cost to cure”, i.e. of obtaining alternative easement, as opposed to straight DIV.  “Talked to Todd Moody about this on 09/22/09 and also talked to Todd about fact that it’s come to light that Zollinger recently lost the property in foreclosure (Bank of America now owns).  Todd and I decided that due to DOI complaint, we should go ahead and get DIV appraisal, which will likely be lower than what Bob already paid Zollinger based on “cost to cure” appraisal.  Todd suggested if Zollinger complains about lower appraisal, we can then raise the issue of the foreclosure.”  (Interesting – since Gibson implied that the “cost to cure” was less by Hansen has now decided it would be less?????)(And Hansen, also, obviously did not get that the easements were valid as he, too, is still treating it as a loss?????)

 

November 9, 2009 Hansen writes, “In your letter of September 27, 2009, you made reference to the extensive sales data you had submitted on six other properties.  Rest assured, all of that data you submitted was sent to the appraiser and I told the appraiser to analyze it as part of the new appraisal and to make sure and address it in the appraisal report.”  (Not done.)

 

November 19, 2009 Jeff Hansen sent an almost identical appraisal without any analysis of the submitted data only now DIV is $0.

 

November 21, 2009 Zollinger complains.

 

December 16, 2009 Jeff Hansen writes, “The PGP Valuation Inc. report concludes the diminution in value is zero.”  “Additionally, your coverage under the above –referenced policy of title insurance terminated because, due to foreclosure, you ceased to be the record owner of the property”.

 

July 26, 2010 Jennifer Reeves writes, “If you would like to provide us with an appraisal from a certified appraiser we would be more than willing to review it.”

 

Needless to say it is impossible to readily explain four years of agony, frustration and unhappiness dealing with your claims department on a claim that your own company filed on my behalf.  The bottom line is that if I were you – I would be ashamed that the company that I head calls itself an insurance company.

 

If you would like more information please feel free to read my blog:

www.fidelitynationaltitleinsurancecoclaim.blogspot.com

And Yet Another Claim Against Fidelity National Title

I heard from another individual today -  a phone call this time.

This individual has had a similar experience to mine with fighting Fidelity National Title to get them to honor their claim including multiple claims counsels and filing having to file a long and costly lawsuit.  Fortunately though unlike myself they have the funds to fight for what they feel is right against a huge corporation.  They are basically going to win or go down fighting.

Needless to say I cannot discuss specifics of their case like a couple of others as it might jeopardize their cases.  But I am going to be providing them with some of the more interesting documents that I received from Fidelity National Title that might help their case.  And I have offered to make myself available to assist them in any way possible.

It is important to me that even if I cannot afford to prove in court that Fidelity National Title did not honor my insurance policy - I can at least help others who can afford to fight the fight - hopefully win their cases.