| Index |
| Previous |
| Next |
| TRco Final Notice to MMA 27 Feb 2006, English Version |
| Copyright © 2009-2013, Marc CAMPUS |
02/27/06 Certified FINAL NOTICE BEFORE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
TO Notary Mr. DUCHAN
TO Mr SEYS - MMA I.A.R.D. President,
TO the Conseil Superieur du Notariat,
TO ACAM (Commission de Controle des Assurances)
SUB: Professional Indemnity.
This notice arises due to your ( Mr. Duchan ) professional negligence consequent to your failure to take adequate
professional care during the attestation of the testament of Mme Maquard. Our group of companies have been
deprived of the opportunity to inherit the property worth to dozens of Millions US dollars due to this act. We, Texas
Riding Co., along with our principal company TEXAS RIDING LINE Co. have repeatedly asked you at different times to
act immediately to do the necessary in order to put us back to the same position if we were not deprived of the
heritage property rights.
You negligently attested the Will, in which one of the witnesses was not a French citizen as the law requested but was
a Moroccan with a temporary resident permit in France. As soon as it came to our knowledge that the validity of the
Will was in question, Mr. Jean François Schweingruber, one of the witnesses, signed an affidavit (copy A) complaining
that you failed to verify the nationality of the witnesses and also failed to read out the contents of the Will as per
Article 980 of the French Civil code.
Apart from this to get the Will registered, you also carelessly advised us not to disclose the page with the name of the
witnesses but only the page where the company was appointed as the beneficiary and mislead us that though the Will
would not be valid in France it would still be valid in USA. We believed this. Later it was found that this was also not
true. This is a clear failure on your part to give proper advice to your clients.
You have also accepted this mistake. We then filed a complaint before the Chambre des Notaires – Aude - on 27
September 2004 regarding your professional negligence (copy1). In November 8, 2004 letter, they in turn informed us
that the issue has been transmitted to MMA, an insurance company where you were a policy holder.
December 13th, 2004, as no letter from your insurer MMA was received by Mrs. Marie Campus, she requested over
the phone that your insurer MMA faxed the letter related to the Professional Indemnity Liability file it claimed that it had
mailed.
In their reply-letter then faxed, dated November 26th, 2004 to Texas Riding Co., (copy 2) MMA instead of replying
with respect to your professional indemnity liability, they have questioned the Director, Mrs. Marie Campus of Texas
Riding Co. that she did not have the authority to complain and that she did not have the authority to sign as the
Director of the legatee company. They also asked for the proof of her authority.
Your insurer MMA is quite aware of the fact that anyone may file a complaint to the Chamber of Notaries.
And also your insurer MMA in the opening of the indemnity file is not reluctant to make a false accusation against Mrs.
Marie Campus, Director of Texas Riding Co. who filed the complaint and signed for Texas Riding Co. At no point of
time Mrs. Marie Campus signed as the Director of TEXAS RIDING LINE Co. but was all the time for Texas Riding Co.,
which is a subsidiary company of the legatee Co. TEXAS RIDING LINE Co. that she signed.
Apart from this, your insurer MMA has shifted the responsibility on us to prove your negligence. Contrary to the
insurer says, the witness is not bound to verify his aptitude to be a witness in a Will himself. It is indeed the
responsibility of the notary, who drafts the Authentic Will to verify the witness’ ability, if he does not, he commits a fault
for which he is liable. The notary must take care to enlighten the witnesses on Law’s requirement and to verify, in the
document, the interpellations he made, concerning this subject, for their attention. Thus, you did commit a fault you
are liable for.
Your insurer is quite aware of the fact that you have accepted the negligent act. In your case it is the insured
(yourself) that has to prove that a negligent act has not been committed and after this the burden of proof is shifted to
the insurer (MMA).
Assuming that we have not to prove your professional negligence, we have anyway submitted all our relevant
documents to demonstrate how your negligent act has caused loss both financially and mentally to all our
corporations. This has been expressed in all our correspondences. Now your insurer MMA has to take all steps to
provide proof contrary to your negligence, if they have any. Neither they have commenced the investigation about
your act nor taken any bonafide move to settle our legitimate claims. Whenever we put our claims to you, you point
your hands towards MMA and they in turn keep delaying the affair asking us for some proof or other. This has
become a vicious circle, without an end to our loss and suffering.
In addition, the letter dated 26th November from your insurer MMA was received only on 12th January 2005 with
identical contents but signed by a different person than the one your insurer MMA has faxed December 13th, 2004. It
is interesting to note that the letter of your insurer MMA was only received January 12th, 2005 following to an under
postage fees to the USA. (copy 3)
In spite of all the inaccurate details, misleading requests and false accusation wrote by your insurer MMA in the
opening of the indemnity file, immediately a clear explanation was sent by fax dated December 14th, 2004, (copy 4)
giving all the details regarding the issue and also narrating the proper authority under which Mrs. Marie Campus
signed. She had been properly authorised by our principal corporation, TEXAS RIDING LINE Co. through a resolution
dated 9th May 2004 to follow up with all and necessary actions to get its recovery. (copy 5).
After this, we received a fax from your insurer MMA dated December 23rd, 2004 (copy 6) stating that appropriate
action will be taken after examining our papers and will revert back to us. It is not only the duty but also the liability of
an Insurance company to indemnify within a reasonable time for the professional negligence. As a responsible insurer
they have failed to acknowledge and act promptly upon our claims. They have been delaying the payment of claims
by not attempting in good faith to effectuate a prompt, fair, and equitable settlement of claims in which your liability is
reasonably clear. This has in turn caused excessive economic damages and loss not only to our company but also to
our groups of corporations associated with us.
There has also not been any proper follow up to our last certified mail dated January 14th, 2005 (copy 7). Neither
there has been any proper action nor a reply from you or your insurance company regarding the payment of the
amount, even after lapse of several months. Our claim began for the indemnity but was diverted to a different issue by
your insurance company only to drag the issue and delay the payment. The time lapse in settling the issue has
caused severe damages to our group of companies. The authority of our Director, Mrs. Marie Campus has been
unnecessarily questioned and has put our group of companies into great dishonour. The development of our group of
companies has been greatly hindered by these acts. Apart from this, as a legal representative of the legatee
company, Texas Riding Co has lost the percentage of amount which we would have received if TEXAS RIDING LINE
Co. would have inherited the property rights.
The unfair request to prove your negligent act and the unjustified delay by MMA only exposes the lack of
reasonableness in dealing with the public interest. We now write once again reiterating our claim for the loss suffered
by our company due to your negligent act and also the way in which the issue has been unfairly dealt by MMA.
We, hereby, call upon you to pay an advance, being the loss suffered by our company due to your negligent act, who
is insured with MMA company and also the unfair practice adopted by your insurance company MMA in dealing with
this issue. It is clear that you will have to pay because of, on one hand, the liability of a notary. On the other hand, by
this mail, you became yourselves liable, according to the article 1383 of the French Civil Code, because of the delay
of payment and the lack of good faith.
Unless we receive a prompt reply and settlement of claims for your said actions within 10 days of the receipt of this
letter, we shall consider that your insurance company, MMA to be liable not only in breach of contract but also of torts
and we shall thereupon expect a full refund, reserving such further rights as we have under the appropriate law and
for any other damages sustained and we shall have no other alternative except to take appropriate legal action
through our lawyers for recovery of the amount along with interests and costs of litigation and other charges before
the appropriate forum.
Noted : According to the principles of Private International law, the parties have a right to choose the law to obtain
justice and also the forum which offers better relief. Considering the history of the cases dealt in France and USA it is
clear that the common law principles applied in USA will be the best forum in torts case.
You will find the annexed documents Copy 1 to 7, also available on our Website www.CS1RANCH.us
Copy 1 Complaint, September 27th, 2004
Copy 2 MMA opening letter, November 26th, 2004
Copy 3 Envelope of MMA opening letter, November 26th, 2004
Copy 4 Our Reply fax, December 14th, 2004
Copy 5 TEXAS RIDING LINE Co. resolution dated May 9th, 2004
Copy 6 MMA fax dated December 23rd, 2004
Copy 7 Our last certified mail dated 14th Jan, 2005
- Texas Riding Co. Director -
TO Notary Mr. DUCHAN
TO Mr SEYS - MMA I.A.R.D. President,
TO the Conseil Superieur du Notariat,
TO ACAM (Commission de Controle des Assurances)
SUB: Professional Indemnity.
This notice arises due to your ( Mr. Duchan ) professional negligence consequent to your failure to take adequate
professional care during the attestation of the testament of Mme Maquard. Our group of companies have been
deprived of the opportunity to inherit the property worth to dozens of Millions US dollars due to this act. We, Texas
Riding Co., along with our principal company TEXAS RIDING LINE Co. have repeatedly asked you at different times to
act immediately to do the necessary in order to put us back to the same position if we were not deprived of the
heritage property rights.
You negligently attested the Will, in which one of the witnesses was not a French citizen as the law requested but was
a Moroccan with a temporary resident permit in France. As soon as it came to our knowledge that the validity of the
Will was in question, Mr. Jean François Schweingruber, one of the witnesses, signed an affidavit (copy A) complaining
that you failed to verify the nationality of the witnesses and also failed to read out the contents of the Will as per
Article 980 of the French Civil code.
Apart from this to get the Will registered, you also carelessly advised us not to disclose the page with the name of the
witnesses but only the page where the company was appointed as the beneficiary and mislead us that though the Will
would not be valid in France it would still be valid in USA. We believed this. Later it was found that this was also not
true. This is a clear failure on your part to give proper advice to your clients.
You have also accepted this mistake. We then filed a complaint before the Chambre des Notaires – Aude - on 27
September 2004 regarding your professional negligence (copy1). In November 8, 2004 letter, they in turn informed us
that the issue has been transmitted to MMA, an insurance company where you were a policy holder.
December 13th, 2004, as no letter from your insurer MMA was received by Mrs. Marie Campus, she requested over
the phone that your insurer MMA faxed the letter related to the Professional Indemnity Liability file it claimed that it had
mailed.
In their reply-letter then faxed, dated November 26th, 2004 to Texas Riding Co., (copy 2) MMA instead of replying
with respect to your professional indemnity liability, they have questioned the Director, Mrs. Marie Campus of Texas
Riding Co. that she did not have the authority to complain and that she did not have the authority to sign as the
Director of the legatee company. They also asked for the proof of her authority.
Your insurer MMA is quite aware of the fact that anyone may file a complaint to the Chamber of Notaries.
And also your insurer MMA in the opening of the indemnity file is not reluctant to make a false accusation against Mrs.
Marie Campus, Director of Texas Riding Co. who filed the complaint and signed for Texas Riding Co. At no point of
time Mrs. Marie Campus signed as the Director of TEXAS RIDING LINE Co. but was all the time for Texas Riding Co.,
which is a subsidiary company of the legatee Co. TEXAS RIDING LINE Co. that she signed.
Apart from this, your insurer MMA has shifted the responsibility on us to prove your negligence. Contrary to the
insurer says, the witness is not bound to verify his aptitude to be a witness in a Will himself. It is indeed the
responsibility of the notary, who drafts the Authentic Will to verify the witness’ ability, if he does not, he commits a fault
for which he is liable. The notary must take care to enlighten the witnesses on Law’s requirement and to verify, in the
document, the interpellations he made, concerning this subject, for their attention. Thus, you did commit a fault you
are liable for.
Your insurer is quite aware of the fact that you have accepted the negligent act. In your case it is the insured
(yourself) that has to prove that a negligent act has not been committed and after this the burden of proof is shifted to
the insurer (MMA).
Assuming that we have not to prove your professional negligence, we have anyway submitted all our relevant
documents to demonstrate how your negligent act has caused loss both financially and mentally to all our
corporations. This has been expressed in all our correspondences. Now your insurer MMA has to take all steps to
provide proof contrary to your negligence, if they have any. Neither they have commenced the investigation about
your act nor taken any bonafide move to settle our legitimate claims. Whenever we put our claims to you, you point
your hands towards MMA and they in turn keep delaying the affair asking us for some proof or other. This has
become a vicious circle, without an end to our loss and suffering.
In addition, the letter dated 26th November from your insurer MMA was received only on 12th January 2005 with
identical contents but signed by a different person than the one your insurer MMA has faxed December 13th, 2004. It
is interesting to note that the letter of your insurer MMA was only received January 12th, 2005 following to an under
postage fees to the USA. (copy 3)
In spite of all the inaccurate details, misleading requests and false accusation wrote by your insurer MMA in the
opening of the indemnity file, immediately a clear explanation was sent by fax dated December 14th, 2004, (copy 4)
giving all the details regarding the issue and also narrating the proper authority under which Mrs. Marie Campus
signed. She had been properly authorised by our principal corporation, TEXAS RIDING LINE Co. through a resolution
dated 9th May 2004 to follow up with all and necessary actions to get its recovery. (copy 5).
After this, we received a fax from your insurer MMA dated December 23rd, 2004 (copy 6) stating that appropriate
action will be taken after examining our papers and will revert back to us. It is not only the duty but also the liability of
an Insurance company to indemnify within a reasonable time for the professional negligence. As a responsible insurer
they have failed to acknowledge and act promptly upon our claims. They have been delaying the payment of claims
by not attempting in good faith to effectuate a prompt, fair, and equitable settlement of claims in which your liability is
reasonably clear. This has in turn caused excessive economic damages and loss not only to our company but also to
our groups of corporations associated with us.
There has also not been any proper follow up to our last certified mail dated January 14th, 2005 (copy 7). Neither
there has been any proper action nor a reply from you or your insurance company regarding the payment of the
amount, even after lapse of several months. Our claim began for the indemnity but was diverted to a different issue by
your insurance company only to drag the issue and delay the payment. The time lapse in settling the issue has
caused severe damages to our group of companies. The authority of our Director, Mrs. Marie Campus has been
unnecessarily questioned and has put our group of companies into great dishonour. The development of our group of
companies has been greatly hindered by these acts. Apart from this, as a legal representative of the legatee
company, Texas Riding Co has lost the percentage of amount which we would have received if TEXAS RIDING LINE
Co. would have inherited the property rights.
The unfair request to prove your negligent act and the unjustified delay by MMA only exposes the lack of
reasonableness in dealing with the public interest. We now write once again reiterating our claim for the loss suffered
by our company due to your negligent act and also the way in which the issue has been unfairly dealt by MMA.
We, hereby, call upon you to pay an advance, being the loss suffered by our company due to your negligent act, who
is insured with MMA company and also the unfair practice adopted by your insurance company MMA in dealing with
this issue. It is clear that you will have to pay because of, on one hand, the liability of a notary. On the other hand, by
this mail, you became yourselves liable, according to the article 1383 of the French Civil Code, because of the delay
of payment and the lack of good faith.
Unless we receive a prompt reply and settlement of claims for your said actions within 10 days of the receipt of this
letter, we shall consider that your insurance company, MMA to be liable not only in breach of contract but also of torts
and we shall thereupon expect a full refund, reserving such further rights as we have under the appropriate law and
for any other damages sustained and we shall have no other alternative except to take appropriate legal action
through our lawyers for recovery of the amount along with interests and costs of litigation and other charges before
the appropriate forum.
Noted : According to the principles of Private International law, the parties have a right to choose the law to obtain
justice and also the forum which offers better relief. Considering the history of the cases dealt in France and USA it is
clear that the common law principles applied in USA will be the best forum in torts case.
You will find the annexed documents Copy 1 to 7, also available on our Website www.CS1RANCH.us
Copy 1 Complaint, September 27th, 2004
Copy 2 MMA opening letter, November 26th, 2004
Copy 3 Envelope of MMA opening letter, November 26th, 2004
Copy 4 Our Reply fax, December 14th, 2004
Copy 5 TEXAS RIDING LINE Co. resolution dated May 9th, 2004
Copy 6 MMA fax dated December 23rd, 2004
Copy 7 Our last certified mail dated 14th Jan, 2005
- Texas Riding Co. Director -
