Complaint Review: Colonail Lloyds Insurance Claim Of The South Inc And B. Boss JAMES K. CAMPBELL Atty - Fort Worth, Beaumont, DALLAS Texas

filed suit in district court (DC-06-06286)

To Texas department of insurance Mr. Woodall From Adam R. Miller 2140 Monterrey ave Dallas TX 75228 Re: letter from Dottie Schneider, insurance claims of the south, Inc. dated 5/2/05 Mr. Woodall, Miss Schneider is not telling the truth, she's left out that I gave the information about being sued by the city to her claim rep. Mr. Drain. If you check the court record you'll see that I am and have been in contempt form the start of the suit. Under the terms of my policy I would have to be out of the house for 60 days, court order or not! I was living there at the time of the fire, so their claim for stopping ALE for vacancy is unfounded and illegal. She also claims that I haven't submitted a list of content, which is untrue! I've sent you'll copies of the various content list, and copies of my request for funds to hire a recovery firm which have been denied or ignored. At this point they aren't doing anything new, their still running me in circles by lying. I see that she's willing to answer questions for you, ask her this: 1. Did they agree to the RV and to make it habitable? 2. Has any content list been submitted? 3. In 08/04 and 09/04 were there any requests for funds to hire a recovery firm for content? 4. Was timely notice given when she/they changed their mind on the agreed to RV plan? I believe the answers should be yes (and you have the documents that show any answer other than yes is false) , and that would mean that they are lying to the regulators (TDI), if they will do that to you then it explains why they feel like Texas state doesn't apply to them! I request that you fine them $1,000 per day of delay until such time as they come up with some kind of reasonable settlement offer, the fine can go to charity or something. I don't want to have to sue them and I believe that TDI are the insurance police and should act in a manner that insures that the law is being followed by all parties.

From : Ken Campbell Sent : Tuesday, April 19, 2005 3:05 PM To : Subject : Re: funds requset I am in receipt of your e-mail of 4/13. I regret that you are apparently in financial difficulty. You will remember that you have already been paid the limits of the policy for the structure and all ALE to which the carrier believes you are entitled. What remains to be decided is the payment, if any, for the contents. I have repeatedly requested information from you to move along the contents claim. See my most recent e-mail of March 16. I have had no substantive response from you regarding the information requested. You cannot withhold relevant information and expect the carrier to make a claims-handling decision without it.

my house is in danger of being foreclosed on this month, by the mortgage company. I'm, again requesting funds, in the amount 9k. if for some reason you'll don't release the funds or my house if foreclosed before you do, i will be holding you and your client responsible for all cost to reclaim my house plus damages. thats on top of the remainder of the policy that is owed me. i figured you'll would have done the numbers and seen that the current policy value is right around 50k if the owner rebuilds as i am, and taken the settlement offer to end this at 30k. worst case, you all would be looking at me suing for upwards of 300k (you and your clients). so heres what needs to happen in the next 10 days, you need to release funds, so i can stay out of foreclosure. P.S. reposted at ripoffreport.com

From : Ken Campbell Sent : Friday, July 30, 2004 8:31 PM To : Adam Subject : claim 038256 ------------------------------- As I advised you by telephone this afternoon (July 30) Colonial Lloyds is not willing to pay you any money at this time to hire a structural engineer and it is not willing to advance any money on your contents loss, as its investigation is not yet complete. Colonial Lloyds is willing to advance another $500 in ALE. I should have that check on Tuesday morning. Be advised that we have received an inspection report on the RV that you purchased which indicates that it would be most unwise to spend any money repairing it. It appears to me that you would be better off staying with your girlfriend at $50/week. Of course, the ALE payments are subject to the reservation of rights made by the carrier and you are not entitled to any ALE at all if there has been no covered loss. ================================== From : Ken Campbell Sent : Tuesday, August 17, 2004 4:48 PM To : ASAM Subject : RE: claim 038256 ------------- With regard to your three e-mails of August 16, please be advised: 1. Your policy did not provide replacement cost coverage. 2. The amount of equity you may have had in the structure, if any, is irrelevant to the amount owed under the policy. The structure was insured to a limit of $71,000 and that amount has now been paid. You are not owed any additional sums under the policy for the structure. 3. I do not know what "misconduct" you are referring to but, in any case, the carrier denies that it has committed any "misconduct". 4. With regard to ALE, you seem to be laboring under the opinion that the carrier agreed to pay you an amount sufficient to make the RV you bought liveable. Although the carrier initially attempted to work with you to accomodate your desire purchase and locate an RV on the premises, when the RV you selected was independently inspected it was determined that it would be unwise to spend any money on it. I advised you of that fact in my e-mail of July 30. Let me state again: the carrier has not agreed to repair the RV you purchased. You testified in your sworn statement that you were staying with your girlfriend for $50 per week. That being the case, you have already been paid amounts sufficient to compensate you for ALE through at least the end of September. Of course, all payments, including ALE, are subject to the reservation of rights made by the carrier and you are not entitled to any payments if there has been no covered loss. ---------------------------- From : Ken Campbell Sent : Monday, August 23, 2004 10:36 PM To : Asam Subject : Claim 38256 l. With regard to ALE payments, it has been determined that the judge of the 101st District Court entered an order on June 28, 2004, titled "Modified Temporary Injunction," which mandated that you "shall not occupy the property until further order of the Court." There is no further order of the court. You could not legally reside at the structure in question at the date of the fire. Additionally, Colonial Lloyds is in possession of information indicating that you were not residing at the structure at the date of the fire. Therefore, Colonial Lloyds hereby denies your ALE claim. 2. With regard to your request for payment for day laborers to clear the debris, Colonial Lloyds will not make any payments for such purpose. You have already been paid the limits of the coverage on the structure. 3. The nvestigation regarding your contents claim is still proceeding. You have not yet signed the transcript of your sworn statement before a notary public and returned it to me nor have you submitted a final contents inventory. Additionally you have not provided me with an appointment with Ms. Feller so that I can take her statement. 4. With regard to your e-mail of 8/19 requesting "the insurance company's adjusters report," be advised that while the carrier is investigating under a reservation of rights,it is not willing to provide you with copies of any of the fruits of the investigation.

TO INSURANCE CLAIMS OF THE SOUTH INC. THEIR AGENTS ANT) ASSIGNS NOTICE TEXAS INSURANCE CODE UNFAIR CLAIM SETTLEMENT PRACTICES AND TEXAS DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT VIOLATIONS RE: POLICY#: CHA-O1-002185-4 INSURED: ADAM R. MILLER This is a formal complaint in followup to previous written grievances with you about my accidental fire loss of July 5, 2004 at 2140 Monterrey in Dallas, Texas 75228 which destroyed my home and personal property beyond use. Please T A K E N 0 T I C E THAT your company has been engaging in and continues to commit the following unfair claim settlement practices against me: 1. knowingly misrepresenting to me the facts and policy provisions governing the extensions of coverage in my fire and casualty insurance policy; 2. failing to implement reasonable standards relating to my claim under the personal property coverages and failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards for the investigation of claims arising under the personal property coverages in my fire and casualty insurance policy; 3. not attempting in good faith to effect a prompt, fair and equitable settlement of the claims submitted in which liability for extensions of coverage and personal property coverages has become reasonable clear; 4. compelling the institution of suit to recover the amounts due under my fire and casualty policy for additional living expenses and other extensions of coverage by first accepting an agreed settlement for living arrangements, namely to pay for a trailer home and pay to make habitable, then unilaterally without further notice intentionally reneging on the agreement after reliance by me, when you knew or should have known this would leave me homeless with no alternative living arrangements; 5. delaying without any kind of notice my claim for personal property coverages while under the guise of investigating the source of the fire for an extended length of time from July, 2004 through the present date January 31, 2005 and beyond,witholding unreasonably payment of or any offer of or even intention to make payment on the personal property losses; 6. committing continuing bad faith, including but not limited to failure to complete a timely investigation while making comments, threats and intimidation about arson that are unjustified and slanderous and for the sole purpose of harassment and delay and to take advantage of my impecunious position. This letter is a second written request in followup to my request presented after the deposition that I be notified as soon as the disposition of the claim for losses above has been completed and that I be told when and what other items and forms are required from me. So far only receipts for ongoing cost of living expenses remaun. I would like to settle the entire remaining claim for $35,000 today. If this is close to what you are willing to settle on the claims then contact me at your earliest convenience to sign the necessary papers. If not, and the settlement amount is to be less than the $28, 000 personal property losses plus the total other extended coverages (as are being provided to you with ongoing receipts of costs of living), then please provide details relating to how your offer amount is being calculated. I need the information to make any decision about fair settlement. IF YOU FAIL TO RESPOND WITHN 30 DAYS to this Deceptive Trade Practices and unfair settlement claims notice, I will have no alternative but to institute suit against you. Dated this 4th day of March, 2005. Adam R. Miller, Policy Holder

Regarding the content list, because of your clients actions I was unable to complete the content list. Prior to demolition I requested funds to hire a fire recover firm to do inventory, debris removal, and salvage estimate , your client said no regardless of my medical restrictions. All of the proof materials would have been my house, and where lost in the fire and or the demolition, some of the objects that survived the fire are in my garage (10%), but will have to be thrown away when the rebuilding supplies arrive. 35k is the lowest >From: "Ken Campbell" >To: >Subject: Fire Loss of 7/5/04 >Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:13:20 -0600 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Received: from JS-APP01.johnsonsylvan.local ([65.71.203.161]) by mc10-f1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Wed, 9 Mar 2005 14:22:42 -0800 >Received: from js_mail-MTA by JS-APP01.johnsonsylvan.localwith Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:13:58 -0600 >X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jFv1OT+pi6YJ0lsp9+gUHB5tbsQItSVFxY= >X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 6.0.4 >Return-Path: [email protected] >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Mar 2005 22:22:43.0081 (UTC) FILETIME=[83265790:01C524F6] > >I acknowledge receipt of your fax of 3/9 demanding $35,000 in settlement of your claim. I will confer with your carrier and we should have a response within the next ten days, but I cannot respond today. With regard to your contents claim, you faxed me and called me on September 15 with the message that you were not finished with your contents list. > I have not received any supplementation of the contents list since that time. You will remember that early last July the carrier advised you that your policy required that you provide a complete inventory of the contents damaged or destroyed. My letter to you of August 13 reminded >you that the carrier needed "an itemized list of the contents, detailing when the item was purchased, the place it was purchased, and the amount that was paid. In addition, we require proof of purchase documentation, if you have it." Have you now decided that the list you faxed me on September 7 is intended to be complete? If that is the case, please let me know what the dollar amounts are intended to be. Is that the >purchase price or the value to you at the time of the fire? I look forward to hearing from you.

JOHNSON & SYLVAN, P.C. ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS 4440 RENAISSANCE TOWER 1201 ELM STREET DALLAS, TEXAS 75270 (214) 748-4747 FAX (214) 748-3191 UR.: www.johnsonsylvan.com JAMES K. CAMPBELL Direct Dial: (214) 760-2138 E-Mail: [email protected] March 16, 2005 Via E-mail: [email protected] and Regular Mail Emma Jean and Adam Miller 2140 Monterrey Avenue Dallas, Texas 75228 Re: Claim No. 038256 Insured: Emma Jean Miller & Adam Miller DOL: 7/5/2004 Our File No,. 11800-15588 Dear Mr. Miller: I have your e-mail response of March 10th to my e-mail of March 9th. As I wrote you on March 9th, we need an itemized list of the contents, detailing when the item was purchased, the place it was purchased and the amount that was paid. In addition, we require proof of purchase documentation, if you have it. You sent me a list on September 7th. Do you wish to add any items to this list? Are the dollar amounts on the list you have already provided intended to be the purchase price or the value to you at the time of the fire or some other figure? I look forward to hearing from you. Yours very truly, James K. Campbell JKC:slg