Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company allegedly has sunk to new depths in coming up with pretexts to deny insureds valid claims.

Comes a story from Okaloosa County where Commonwealth’s agent, Southern Escrow and Title Company, of Miramar Beach, did not inform an insured as to a discrepancy that existed with the legal description on the insured’s Residential Sale and Purchase Contract. It turned out that the property being purchased by the insured, was not as it was purported by the sellers.

The insured believing, pursuant to Florida law, that a title insurer has a duty to disclose anything, which may subject the insured to financial loss, filed a claim under his policy, citing the Florida Supreme Court decision in First American Title Insurance Co. v. First Title Service Co., 457 So.2d 467, 472 (Fla.1984), which defined the general nature of the duty involved with title insurance: “The issuance of the title commitment places a duty on a title insurer to skillfully and diligently search for and disclose to the insured any reasonably discoverable information that would affect the insured's decision to close the contract to purchase.” The insured also claimed that Commonwealth failed to procure insurance as the insured had requested, in his sales contract, citing Caplan v. La Chance, 219 So.2d 89 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)(holding that an insurance agent's negligence in failing to procure the proper insurance coverage requested by the insured is a recognized cause of action).

Commonwealth answered the insureds first allegation concerning disclosure by saying that they were not attorneys allowed to practice law in Floirda, and to divulge information discoved during the abstract constituted the unlawful practice of law. Well, goodbye to Florida decisional law. It looks as if Commonwealth has found a new rock to hide under to keep from paying valid claims.

As to the insureds second claim regarding Commonwealth’s alleged failure to procure insurance as requested, a long held and well-establish premise in Florida, Commonwealth asserted the economic loss rule. They pointed to no case law, (little wonder).

The insured brought up the Internet advertising of Commonwealth. Commonwealth allegedly induces potential customers to purchase its title polices for the protection an abstract of title and title examination offers them. They guarantee a security for the insureds investment from a myriad of hazards that only a professional search and analysis of the public records can supply. The catch is that if they do uncover a “hidden” problem during the abstract it remains hidden deep within the title policy legal verbiage. Talk about a Catch 22. Well I bet it keeps their claims payments down. Would you buy a title policy from this company?