Preview
1 2Stacy M. Tucker (SBN 218942)
stucker@kantorlaw.net
2 Jaclyn D. Conover (SBN 266749)
jconover@kantorlaw.net
3 KANTOR & KANTOR, LLP
19839 Nordhoff Street
4 Northridge, CA 91324
Telephone: (818) 886-2525
5 Facsimile: (818) 350-6272
6 Attorneys for Plaintiff Gary Koop
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF SONOMA
10
Case No.: SCV-266944
11 GARY KOOP, [Assigned for All Purposes to the
12 Plaintiff, Honorable Oscar Pardo]
13 v.
Northridge, California 91324
REDACTED DECLARATION OF
KANTOR & KANTOR LLP
19839 Nordhoff Street
14 FIRE INSURANCE EXCHANGE, dba STACY TUCKER IN SUPPORT OF
(818) 886 2525
FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP; BRIAN PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
15 HUNSAKER, SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY
16 Defendants.
ADJUDICATION OF CAUSES OF
17 ACTION FOR BREACH OF
CONTRACT, REFORMATION, FRAUD,
18 MISREPRESENTATION, NEGLIGENCE
AND BREACH OF THE IMPLIED
19 COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND
FAIR DEALING AGAINST FIRE
20
INSURANCE EXCHANGE
21
Date:
22 Time:
Dept: 19
23
24 [Filed concurrently with Plaintiff’s Motion for
Summary Judgment, Separate Statement of
25 Material Facts; Declaration of Gary Koop,
Declaration of Kenneth Bunger, RJN,
26 Evidence in Support of Motion and Proposed
Order]
27
28 Action Filed: August 24, 2020
Trial Date: June 30, 2023
1
REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER
1
2 I, Stacy Tucker, declare as follows:
3 1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all courts in the State of
4 California and am a partner at the law firm of Kantor & Kantor LLP, attorneys for Plaintiff, Gary
5 Koop. I make this Declaration on behalf of Plaintiff Gary Koop in relation to his Motion for
6 Summary Adjudication in this action. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein and, if
7 called upon to testify, could and would competently testify thereto.
8 2. Defendant Brian Hunsaker (Hunsaker) is a captive insurance agent of Farmers
9 Insurance Group, meaning that he works solely for Farmers and does not offer other products related
10 to home or auto outside the Farmers family of products. A true and copy of Hunsaker’s verified
11 special interrogatory No. 36, confirming that he is an agent for Farmers, is attached as Exhibit 1.
12 3. Farmers provided Plaintiff multiple estimates of the cost to rebuild his home. Each
13 of them included all accurate information about the specific details of the home. A true and correct
Northridge, California 91324
KANTOR & KANTOR LLP
19839 Nordhoff Street
14 copy of the 2012 estimate provided to Plaintiff is attached as Exhibit 2.
(818) 886 2525
15 4. A true and correct copy of the 2015 estimate provided to Plaintiff as produced by
16 Farmers in this litigation is attached as Exhibit 3.
17 5. A true and correct copy of the 2019 estimate provided to Plaintiff as produced by
18 Hunsaker in this litigation is attached as Exhibit 4.
19 6. A true and correct copy of the 2015 estimate created for 2650 Amber Lane in 2015
20 but not provided to Plaintiff, as produced by Hunsaker in this litigation, is attached as Exhibit 5.
21 7. On November 13, 2017, a month after the Tubbs fire, Farmers provided Plaintiff with
22 a detailed valuation, by room, of what it estimated it would cost Plaintiff to rebuild his home based
23 on the information in 360Value. It included all details that Farmers had in its database about the
24 home. In additional to the items listed on the replacement estimates, the more detailed valuation
25 included “premium grade” appliances, “deluxe grade” and “premium grade” cabinetry with leaded
26 glass, “high grade” lighting and security system, “high” and “premium” grade bathroom fixtures,
27 “premium” and “high” grade chandeliers, redwood paneling, “molded” chair rail” “w/intricate
28 detail,” “premium” marble countertops and edging, two masonry fireplaces with marble hearths,
2
REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER
1 oak hardwood floors, marble or granite floor tiles, a wood stove, and a spa. A true and correct copy
2 of the 2017 detailed reconstruction estimate, as produced by Farmers in this litigation, is attached
3 as Exhibit 6.
4 8. Until 2011, Farmers used Residential Component Technology as a software for
5 determining replacement value of most homes. In 2007 it began using 360Value to value high-end
6 residential homes. A true and correct copy of the document announcing this, produced by Farmers
7 under protective order in the litigation, is attached as Exhibit 7.
8 9. In 2011, Farmers announced that it was moving to 360Value for all of its homes. A
9 true and correct copy of that announcement as produced by Farmers under protective order in this
10 litigation is attached as Exhibit 8.
11 10. On December 19, 2011, Farmers announced that 360Value would now automatically
12 select the Dwelling Quality Grade, based on information it obtained from its sister program,
13 Xactimate, used for claims adjusting. Farmers’ policies and procedures stated that the agent should
Northridge, California 91324
KANTOR & KANTOR LLP
19839 Nordhoff Street
14 not accept the assumptive information input, but should check each item with the insured. It noted
(818) 886 2525
15 that if an estimate seemed too low, it was likely due to the wrong quality grade being selected, and
16 that the more expensive a home, the more detail should be input to correctly insure it. A true and
17 correct copy of that announcement as produced by Farmers under protective order in this litigation
18 is attached as Exhibit 9.
19 11. On April 1, 2013, Farmers announced that the conversion for all policies to 360Value
20 would occur as of June 16, 2013. The notice explained that Dwelling Quality Grade would be
21 determined based on the Kitchen Quality Grade in RCT. A true and correct copy of the April 1,
22 2013 announcement is attached as Exhibit 10.
23 12. 360Value software pre-populates most data field choices for homes based on key
24 pieces of information provided by the insured and the agent, including the square footage, the age
25 of the home, the address, the style of the home, and the “quality grade” of the home. True and
26 correct copies of the documents explaining this, produced by Farmers under protective order in this
27 litigation, are attached as Exhibit 11.
28
3
REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER
1 13. Farmers’ policies and procedures emphasize the importance of regular Farmers
2 Friendly Reviews to go over dwelling features and discuss the home quality grade. A true and correct
3 copy of the document explaining this, produced by Farmers under protective order in this litigation,
4 is attached as Exhibit 12.
5 14. Farmers’ policies and procedures explain to agents how to select a “style” of home
6 and the impact it has on coverage amounts. A true and correct copy of the document explaining this,
7 produced by Farmers under protective order in this litigation, is attached as Exhibit 13.
8 15. Farmers provides agents with written documentation of how to determine the quality
9 grade of a home. Farmers’ has written documentation on how to determine the “quality grade” of a
10 home. If a home was custom-built, it should be considered “premium.” Farmers noted, “The
11 Dwelling Quality Grade is one of the most critical components of a Reconstruction Cost Estimate
12 and it can have a significant impact on the estimate amount.” Farmers has a detailed chart of how
13 to determine the quality grade. At the top of the chart there was an explanation of how to rate a
Northridge, California 91324
KANTOR & KANTOR LLP
19839 Nordhoff Street
14 property as “Above Grade,” “Custom” or “Premium” if it has finishes that could be considered
(818) 886 2525
15 either “Above-Grade” or “Premium.” The chart states that fixtures such as built-in bookcases, wet
16 bars, or cabinetry other than the kitchen and bathrooms were considered premium. Chair rail, crown
17 molding, and baseboards throughout the house were premium. Countertops and vanities with marble
18 should be considered premium. Premium flooring would be a mixture of high-end carpet, tile, stone
19 and hardwood. A true and correct copy of the document explaining this, produced by Farmers under
20 protective order in this litigation, is attached as Exhibit 14.
21 16. Farmers informed its agents in March 2017 that “The key to obtaining accurate
22 dwelling feature information is interviewing the prospect during the quote process and verifying all
23 of the dwelling features. Inspecting the property before you bind coverage helps you to confirm
24 eligibility, as well as dwelling feature accuracy.” A true and correct copy of that March 2017
25 announcement as produced by Farmers under protective order in this litigation, is attached as
26 Exhibit 15.
27 17. While Hunsaker kept a log of his interactions with Plaintiff from the issuance of the
28 policy, there are no discussions of the coverage amounts, coverage options, other than when Plaintiff
4
REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER
1 contacted Hunsaker’s office on or about September 1, 2015 to confirm that he had sufficient
2 insurance coverage in the event of a wildfire. A true and correct copy of Hunsaker’s notes of his
3 interactions with Plaintiff and his family as produced by Hunsaker in this litigation are attached as
4 Exhibit 16.
5 18. On June 17, 2019, Plaintiff sent a letter to Farmers asking it to review the value of
6 his home and comparable homes before the fire, as he had just learned that he was significantly
7 underinsured. A true and correct copy of that letter is attached as Exhibit 17.
8 19. Per Farmers’ internal policies and procedures, when an insured asks to have his
9 policy limits reformed due to underinsurance, the claims adjuster speaks with the insured and the
10 agent to determine if a reformation should be pursued. If the facts support reformation, it is
11 submitted to underwriting for review. A true and correct copy of the documents explaining that
12 procedure, as produced by Farmers under protective order in this litigation, are attached as Exhibit
13 18.
Northridge, California 91324
KANTOR & KANTOR LLP
19839 Nordhoff Street
14 20. A true and correct copy of the internal notes documenting Farmers investigation into
(818) 886 2525
15 Plaintiff’s allegations of underinsurance due to agent error and request for reformation as produced
16 by Farmers as part of this litigation are attached as Exhibit 19.
17 21. Farmers has confirmed in verified interrogatory responses that it takes no steps at all
18 to verify that the sources and methods used by 360Value are kept current. A true and correct copy
19 of Farmers’ verified interrogatory responses in this regard are attached hereto as Exhibit 20.
20 22. Hunsaker has confirmed in interrogatory responses that he does not make any
21 changes or edits to the 360Value estimate provided after he inputs the data from the insured, and he
22 does not believe it is job to create the estimate, only to input the insured’s information. A true and
23 correct copy of Hunsaker’s verified interrogatory responses in this regard are attached hereto as
24 Exhibit 21.
25 23. On January 4, 2022, I went to the Farmers website at www.farmers.com and
26 requested two homeowner quotations for 2650Amber Lane, based on the information for the 1976
27 home that burned. In the first quote I stated that the house was “above average” grade. That estimate
28 said the home could be rebuilt now, in 2022, for $703,000. The second estimate included the same
5
REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER
1 information but stated that the house was “premium” grade. The second estimate stated that the
2 home could be rebuilt for $1,069,000, or 65.7% more. True and correct copies of the estimates as
3 printed from the www.farmers.com website on January 11, 2022 are attached as Exhibit 22.
4 24. In its original inspection of the home after the fire in October 2017, the claim adjuster
5 confirmed that the house was “custom built.” A true and correct copy of that document is attached
6 as Exhibit 23.
7 25. True and correct copies of relevant portions of the deposition testimony of Brian
8 Hunsaker are attached hereto as Exhibit 24.
9 26. True and correct copies of relevant portions of the deposition testimony of Justin
10 Price are attached hereto as Exhibit 25.
11 27. True and correct copies of relevant portions of the deposition testimony of Brianne
12 Hall are attached hereto as Exhibit 26.
13 28. True and correct copies of relevant portions of the deposition testimony of Liz Evans
Northridge, California 91324
KANTOR & KANTOR LLP
19839 Nordhoff Street
14 are attached hereto as Exhibit 27.
(818) 886 2525
15 29. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 0037-0038 produced by Fire
16 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 28.
17 30. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 00954-0955 produced by Fire
18 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 29.
19 31. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 02284-02285 produced by Fire
20 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 30.
21 32. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 00509-516, and 02297-02298
22 produced by Fire Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 31.
23 33. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 00269-00276 produced by Fire
24 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 32.
25 34. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 02207-02208 produced by Fire
26 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 33.
27 35. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 00954-00956 produced by Fire
28 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 34.
6
REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER
1 36. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 0032-0033 produced by Fire
2 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 35.
3 37. A true and correct copy of page FIRE 0388 produced by Fire Insurance Exchange is
4 attached hereto as Exhibit 36.
5 38. True and correct copies of pages FIRE 0409-0412 produced by Fire Insurance
6 Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 37.
7 39. True and correct copies of pages FIRE 0973-0974 produced by Fire Insurance
8 Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 38.
9 40. True and correct copies of pages FIRE 0323-0324 produced by Fire Insurance
10 Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 39.
11 41. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 0044 to 0049 produced by Fire
12 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 40.
13 42. True and correct copies of additional relevant portions of the deposition testimony
Northridge, California 91324
KANTOR & KANTOR LLP
19839 Nordhoff Street
14 of Brian Hunsaker are attached hereto as Exhibit 41.
(818) 886 2525
15 43. True and correct copies of page FIRE 1027 produced by Fire Insurance Exchange is
16 attached hereto as Exhibit 42.
17 44. True and correct copies of additional relevant portions of the deposition transcript of
18 Jared Schmitz are attached hereto as Exhibit 43.
19 45. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-POLICY 0256-0347 produced by Fire
20 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 44.
21 46. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-POLICY 0348-0351 produced by Fire
22 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 45.
23 47. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-POLICY 0352-0357 produced by Fire
24 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 46.
25 48. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-POLICY 0358-0382 produced by Fire
26 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 47.
27 49. True and correct copies of FIRE-POLICY 0383-0384 produced by Fire Insurance
28 Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 48.
7
REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER
1 50. True and correct copies of documents produced by Plaintiff as KOOP 0338-0365;
2 0366-0393 and 0394-0418 are attached hereto as Exhibit 49.
3 51. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-POLICY 00001-0120 produced by Fire
4 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 50.
5 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this
6 Declaration was executed on March 2, 2023, at Woodinville, Washington.
7
8 _______________________________
Stacy M. Tucker
9
10
11
12
13
Northridge, California 91324
KANTOR & KANTOR LLP
19839 Nordhoff Street
14
(818) 886 2525
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
8
REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER
EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT 1
1 ALBERT M. T. FINCH, III, ESQ. State Bar# 196478
REGINALDO J. G. VILLARREAL, JR., ESQ. State Bar# 321475
2
ERICKSEN ARBUTHNOT
3 210 North Fourth Street, Suite 350
San Jose, CA 95112
4 afinch@ericksenarbuthnot.com
rvillarreal@ericksenarbuthnot.com
5
Telephone: (408) 286-0880
6 Facsimile: (408) 286-0337
7 Attorneys for Defendant BRIAN HUNSAKER
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SONOMA
10
11
GARY KOOP
CASE NO. SCV-266944
12
Plaintiffs,
13
vs. DEFENDANT BRIAN HUNSAKER'S
14 RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SPECIAL
FIRE INSURANCE EXCHANGE dba
INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE
15 FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP; BRIAN
HUNSAKER
16
17 Defendants.
18
Amended Complaint filed: January 6, 2021
19
20 PROPOUNDING PARTY: Plaintiff GARY KOOP
21 RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant BRIAN HUNSAKER
22
SET NUMBER: ONE (1)
23
24
COMES NOW, the Defendant BRIAN HUNSAKER through its counsel, responds to
25
26 Plaintiff's Special Interrogatories, Set One, as follows:
27 BRIAN HUNSAKER and his attorneys have not completed their discovery or preparation for
28
trial, nor have they completed their analysis or review of the investigation and other trial preparation
-1-
DEFENDANT BRIAN HUNSAKER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S
SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE
1 State with particularity what, if any data, YOU entered into the Supplemental Value Section when
2 calculating YOUR replacement value of the PROPERTY, including but not limited to all options
3
selected and YOUR basis for each selection.
4
RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES NO. 35:
5
6 Objection. Overbroad, burdensome, vague and ambiguous as to the term "Supplemental
7 Value Section". Responding Party does not recall. Without waiving the foregoing objections,
8 Responding Party responds as follows:
9
Responding Party cannot recall this information.
10
INTERROGATORY NO. 36:
11
12 State with particularity the legal and business relationship between YOU and any Farmers brand
13 legal entity.
14 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES NO. 36:
15
Objection. Overbroad, vague and ambiguous, calls for a legal conclusion. Without waiving
16
the foregoing objections, Responding Party responds as follows:
17
18 Insurance Agent as defined by the agreement provided in the documents produced.
19 INTERROGATORY NO. 37:
20 State with pai1icularity all complaints made related to insurance policies YOU wrote or sold to the
21
California Department of Insurance from January 2010 to present by YOUR customers with
22
homeowner policies issued by YOU who found themselves underinsured with that policy when
23
making a claim.
24
25 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES NO. 37:
26 Objection. Overbroad, vague and ambiguous as to the term "homeowner policies", lacks
27
foundation, assumes facts, not likely calculated to lead to admissible evidence and calls for a legal
28
-21-
DEFENDANT BRIAN HUNSAK.ER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S
SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE
1 Dated: May ---1.l_, 2021 ERICKSEN ARBUTHNOT
2
3
4
. FINCH, III
5 J. G. VILLARREAL, JR.
6
Attorneys for Defendant
7 BRIAN HUNSAKER
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-23 -
DEFENDANT BRIAN HUNSAKER' S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S
SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE
Koop v. Hunsaker
Sonoma County Superior Court Case No. SCV-266944
VERIFICATION
I, BRIAN HUNSAKER, a Defendant in the above-referenced matter, and am authorized
to make this verification on my behalf. Thave read the foregoing:
• BRIAN HUNSAKER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S FORM
INTERROGATORIES-GENERAL SET ONE;
• BRIAN HUNSAKER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SPECIAL
INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE;
• BRIAN HUNSAKER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE;
• BRIAN HUN SAKER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS FOR
ADMISSION, SET ONE
and know the contents thereof. The matters set forth in the responses are true of my OWTI
knowledge, or I am informed and believe that said matters are true, and on that ground allege
that they are true.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on May z_,o , 2021 at (city/town) /AJ/;;;gY){ , California.
c~Q
BRIANtt
EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT 2
360Value Replacement Cost Valuation A1I2-FM72.1 Page 1 of 3
Reconstruction Cost Estimate for:
926772987
Prepared by: Farmers Conversions (figconvca)
Valuation ID: A1I2-FM72.1 .
Cost per Finished Sq. Ft.: $155.04 FARMERS
This is an estimate of reconstruction costs. We do not INSURANCE
guarantee that this estimate reflects your home's actual
reconstruction cost in the event of a loss.
Owner Information
Name: 926772987 Date Entered: 08/03/2012
Street: 2650 AMBER LN Date Calculated: 08/03/2012
City, State ZIP: SANTA ROSA, CA 95409 Created By: Farmers Conversions (figconvca)
Country: USA User: Brian Hunsaker (960525fig)
Policy #: 926772987
General Information
Most Prevalent Number of Stories: 2 Stories Sq. Feet: 2967
Use: Single Family Detached Year Built: 1976
Style: Unknown Quality Grade: Above Average
Cost per Finished Sq. Ft.: $155.04 Site Access: Average - No Unusual Constraints
Foundation
Foundation Shape: 4-5 Corners - Square/Rectangle Foundation Type: 100% Crawlspace
Foundation Material: 100% Concrete Property Slope: None (0 - 15 degrees)
Exterior
Roof Shape: Gable Number of Dormers: 0
Roof Construction: 100% Wood Framed Roof Cover: 100% Composition - 3 Tab Shingle
Exterior Wall Construction: 100% Wood Framing Exterior Wall Finish: 100% Siding - Cedar (Clapboard)
Interior
Average Wall Height: 8.0 Interior Wall Material: 100% Drywall
Floor Coverings: 50% Carpet, 35% Hardwood - Plank, Interior Wall Finish: 100% Paint
15% Tile - Ceramic
Ceiling Finish: 100% Paint
Rooms
Kitchens: 1 Large - (15'x11') Bathrooms: 3 Full Bath
Bedrooms: 1 Medium - (10'x10'), 2 Large - (14'x12'), Living Areas: 2 Large - (20'x14')
1 Extra Large - (16'x14') Entry/Foyer: 1 Medium - (10'x10')
Dining Rooms: 1 Large - (20'x14') Hallways: 2 Large - (15'x6')
Laundry Rooms: 1 Medium - (10'x8') Utility Rooms: 1 Large - (12'x10')
Nooks: 1 Medium - (10'x10')
Room Details
Kitchen (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large
Appliances: 1 Garbage Disposal, 1 Dishwasher, 1 Range Counters: 100% Solid Surface
Hood - Built-in Hardwood, 1 Space Saver Microwave, Room Features: Chair Rail
1 Cook Top, 1 Built-in Oven
Cabinets: Peninsula Bar, 10 Glass Cabinet Doors
Bath (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium
Type: Full Bath Vanity Tops: 100% Solid Surface
Fixtures: 1 Cult. Marble Tub/Shower Surr.
FIRE-UW 0534
360Value Replacement Cost Valuation A1I2-FM72.1 Page 2 of 3
Bath (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium
Type: Full Bath Vanity Tops: 100% Solid Surface
Fixtures: 1 Cult. Marble Tub/Shower Surr.
Bath (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large
Type: Full Bath Vanity Tops: 100% Solid Surface
Fixtures: 1 Cult. Marble Tub/Shower Surr.
Bedroom (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium
Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding
Bedroom (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large
Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding
Bedroom (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large
Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding
Bedroom (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: X-Large
Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding
Living Area (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large
Room Features: Cathedral/Vaulted Ceiling, Cornice or
Crown Molding, Chair Rail
Living Area (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large
Room Features: Cathedral/Vaulted Ceiling, Cornice or
Crown Molding, Chair Rail
Dining Room (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large
Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding, Chair Rail
Entry/Foyer (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium
Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding, Chair Rail
Laundry Room (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium
Hallway (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large
Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding
Hallway (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large
Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding
Nook (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium
Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding, Chair Rail
Utility Room (Above Grade Room):
Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large
Attached Structures
Garage #1:
# Cars: 2 Car (397 - 576 sq. ft.) Style: Attached / Built-In
Living Area above Garage: 0%
Porch #1:
Square Footage: 250 Material: Concrete Porch
Covered: 100% Enclosed: 25%
Deck #1:
Square Footage: 150 Material: Treated Deck
Covered: 0% Enclosed: 0%
Shape: L-Shape Height: 3
Levels: 2 Benches Length(ft): 15
FIRE-UW 0535
360Value Replacement Cost Valuation A1I2-FM72.1 Page 3 of 3
Key Quality Details
Kitchen Counters: Solid Surface Jetted Tubs: 0
Walk-in Closets: 0 Decorative Beams: 0
Rooms with Crown Molding: 11 Ornate Staircases: 0
Rooms with Chair Rail: 6 Rooms with Cathedral/Vaulted Ceilings: 2
Rooms with Trayed/Coved Ceilings: 0 Built-in Bookcase/Entertain. Center: 1
Masonry Fireplace: 2
Systems
Heating: 2 Forced Air Heating System Air Conditioning: 1 Central Air Conditioning
Fireplace #1:
Type: Masonry Fireplace Fireplace Details: 1 Tile Hearth, 1 Mantel
Fireplace #2:
Type: Masonry Fireplace Fireplace Details: 1 Tile Hearth, 1 Mantel
Home Features
Exterior Doors: 2 Sliding Patio Door Exterior Trim and Details: 3 Decorative Fiberglass Columns
Electrical Features: 1 Electrical Service Size - 200 amp Lighting: 1 Ornate Chandelier, 1 Chandelier with Real
Staircases and Conveyances: 1 Staircase - Metal - Spiral Crystal, 3 Ceiling Fan, 1 Track Lighting
Other Interior Features: 1 Wet Bar Interior Doors and Millwork: 1 Built-in Bookcase/Entertain.
Center, 1 Built-in Desk/Vanity, 1 French Doors
Estimated Cost Breakdown
Labor, Materials and Supplies: $323,614.54 Demolition and Debris Removal: $14,209.74
Architect Fees and Permits: $15,939.34 Other Fees and Taxes: $13,893.31
Overhead and Profit: $91,914.24
Estimated Reconstruction Cost
Calculated Value: $460,000.00
We do not guarantee that the reconstruction cost estimate will reflect your home's actual reconstruction costs in the event of
a loss. We hope our estimate helps you so you can determine the amount of coverage you need. However, even if all of the
factors available in the estimating system are or are not utilized in reaching the estimate or if all information is or is not
accurately input, the result will still be an estimate which you need to evaluate for adequacy. The most important
consideration is that you feel you have enough protection to rebuild your home if it were completely destroyed. If you feel
this estimate is not enough, then you should choose an amount of insurance which does match your estimate. If you have
questions about construction costs in your area, please consult a contractor or an appraiser.
(Reconstruction cost includes all applicable permits, fees, overhead, profit, sales tax, and debris removal)
Attention Farmers Agent: To apply this estimate to the policy you must
select 360Value Refresh in Express or Update in Policy Center.
12.7.14 PL:CASOXV_JUL12
FIRE-UW 0536
EXHIBIT 3
EXHIBIT 3
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Staff of Brian Hunsaker"
Date: September 1, 2015 at 12:04:29 ?M PDT
To: "rnc1dmoto250"
Subject: Homeowners review
Gary,
Attached ls the reconstruct"ion cost estimate on your home. Please review it, make any corrections and
return it to me
via email or if you'd like we can go through it over the phone.
I confirmed the limits of coverage on jewelry for you. It's $1,000 per item up to $5,000. Anything above
that value,
you can add a floater with an appraisal. If the cost starts to add up, we could find insurance for those items
through
another carrier, which may be more cost effective for you since 1.2 million in contents could increase your
premium by
$1,500 annually.
Talk to you soon,
Liz Evans
Office of Brian Hunsaker
Farmers Insurance
8741 Old Redwood Hw·y
Windsor, CA 95492-9233
License Number: 0687046
707-838-9777 (Office)
707-838-0908 (Fax)
~!a ff bh un~aker:'.;_1.- farmersagency. cl.lrn
h(tp: ·'1>.' i.o.·w.farmersagern.comibh unsaker
Close
HUNS000029
Sent: 9/4/2015 11:40
From: Gary Koop
Subject: Fwd: Homeowne rs review
Hi Liz!
Sent from r,,y 1Pnone
Begin forwarded messuge:
Fwm: MeUssa Long , melissalong 2010@hotm ail.com>
Ode: Septemb2r 4, 201 'i 2t 10:10.40 AM PDT
To: "'Gary KrnJp···
Cc: ''Melissa Long"' ,,rnelissalong@pobox.com>
Subject: Homeown ers review
Home Owners Policy for House Insurance (structure and outbuildin gs about the same).
New Contents Insurance (Based on last policy I had $1.SM for ALL contents -and Gaoy
had $440K). Safety box at bank shou!d lower
costs.
Artwork: Larger paintings (TOTAL: $75K}
Shuai Mei: $SOK
3o Yun. $11K
V:etnames e: $2K
Other smaller pieces: total of $1SK
Antique fu rnishi;,gs: (TOTAL: $38Ki I have certificates of antiquity for most of these:
Medicine chests: $2K
B126: Laquer table: $3K
A.rt Deco Chairs: $2K
Dining Table and chairs: $SK
Peachwoo d Armoire: $SK (circa 1840-80)
Red Walnut wood cabinet 1s th century (Qing Dynasty): $8K
Side table; Elm Wood drca 1840-70 Shanxi: $2K
Half moon table: $3K
f\ltsc tables and lamps: $SK
Silver vodka service· $1SK
Piano: $3,200
Jewelry:
I have receipts for $42K
Family .iewe!ry and other purchases that are without receipts are estimated at another $25K
Car Insurance (I have my car with progressive).
From: Gary Koop [mailto:madmoto250@att,net]
Sent: Tuesday, Septembe r~, 2015 1:24 PM
To: Melissa Long
Subject: Fwd: Homeowre rs review
HUNS000030
360Value Replacem ent Cost Valuation A1I2-FM 72.3
Page 1 of 2
Recons truction Cost Estimat e for:
926772987
Prepared by: Farmers Conversions (figconvca)
Valuation ID; A 1!2-FM72.3
Cost per F:n,sned Sq. Ft $169.19
IV \.
FAR MER S
This is an estimate of reconstruction costs, We do not
guaranteo that this estJrnate reflects your home's actual
INSUR ANCE
reconstruction cost in the event of a loss.
Owner Informati on
Name: 9.26772987 Date Entered: 08/03/2012
Street 2650 AMBER LN Date Calculated: 09/01/2015
City, State ZlP; SANTA ROSA, CA 95409 Created By:· Farmers Conversions (figconvca)
Countr>f USA Owner: Elizabeth Evans {960525fig)
Policy#: 926772987
General Informati on
Most Prevalent Number of Stories: 2 Stories Sq. Feet: 2967
Use: Single Family Detached Year Built 1976
Quality Grade: Above Average Cost per Finished Sq. Ft.: $169.19
Foundati on
Foundation Shape: 4-5 Comers - Square/R ectangle Foundation Type: 100% Crawlspa ce
Property Siope: None (0 -15 degrees)
~~te_r.!.2.~..... ··-- .. --····
Roof Shape: Gable -- - ---------- - - ~ - --------- =-cc.~c c-c-~
Roof cover: 100% Composi tion - 3 Tab Shingle
Exterior Wall Construction: 100% Wood Framing Exterior Wall Finish: 100% Siding - Cedar (Clapboa rd)
lnterio r~---c c-cc-c c~,.,.- ~,----- ------- -c-c- --c,c-
Average Wall He'1ght 8.0 c"7~- cc~=c -=c--c c------ ---
Interior Wal! Material: 100% Drywall
Floor Coverings: 50% Carpet, 35% Hardwoo d - Plank, Interior Wall Finish: 100% Paint
15% Tile - Ceramic
Ceiling Finish: 100% Paint
Rooms
Kitche1s: 1 Large -(15'x11' ) Bathrooms: 3 Full Bath
RQ 884.48
231. 6" x 6" square wood post (3 BF per LF)
91.00LF 9.16 44.19 175.56 1,053.31 0/150 yrs Avg. 0% (0.00) 1,053.31
232. Deck planking - redwood (per SF)
990.00SF 8.17 438.89 1,705.44 10,232.63 41/25 yrs Avg. 75% [Ml (4,145 .62) 6,087.01
233 . 4" x 4" square wood post (1 .33 BF per LF)
Preview
1 2Stacy M. Tucker (SBN 218942) stucker@kantorlaw.net 2 Jaclyn D. Conover (SBN 266749) jconover@kantorlaw.net 3 KANTOR & KANTOR, LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street 4 Northridge, CA 91324 Telephone: (818) 886-2525 5 Facsimile: (818) 350-6272 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff Gary Koop 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF SONOMA 10 Case No.: SCV-266944 11 GARY KOOP, [Assigned for All Purposes to the 12 Plaintiff, Honorable Oscar Pardo] 13 v. Northridge, California 91324 REDACTED DECLARATION OF KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street 14 FIRE INSURANCE EXCHANGE, dba STACY TUCKER IN SUPPORT OF (818) 886 2525 FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP; BRIAN PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR 15 HUNSAKER, SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY 16 Defendants. ADJUDICATION OF CAUSES OF 17 ACTION FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT, REFORMATION, FRAUD, 18 MISREPRESENTATION, NEGLIGENCE AND BREACH OF THE IMPLIED 19 COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING AGAINST FIRE 20 INSURANCE EXCHANGE 21 Date: 22 Time: Dept: 19 23 24 [Filed concurrently with Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Separate Statement of 25 Material Facts; Declaration of Gary Koop, Declaration of Kenneth Bunger, RJN, 26 Evidence in Support of Motion and Proposed Order] 27 28 Action Filed: August 24, 2020 Trial Date: June 30, 2023 1 REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER 1 2 I, Stacy Tucker, declare as follows: 3 1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all courts in the State of 4 California and am a partner at the law firm of Kantor & Kantor LLP, attorneys for Plaintiff, Gary 5 Koop. I make this Declaration on behalf of Plaintiff Gary Koop in relation to his Motion for 6 Summary Adjudication in this action. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein and, if 7 called upon to testify, could and would competently testify thereto. 8 2. Defendant Brian Hunsaker (Hunsaker) is a captive insurance agent of Farmers 9 Insurance Group, meaning that he works solely for Farmers and does not offer other products related 10 to home or auto outside the Farmers family of products. A true and copy of Hunsaker’s verified 11 special interrogatory No. 36, confirming that he is an agent for Farmers, is attached as Exhibit 1. 12 3. Farmers provided Plaintiff multiple estimates of the cost to rebuild his home. Each 13 of them included all accurate information about the specific details of the home. A true and correct Northridge, California 91324 KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street 14 copy of the 2012 estimate provided to Plaintiff is attached as Exhibit 2. (818) 886 2525 15 4. A true and correct copy of the 2015 estimate provided to Plaintiff as produced by 16 Farmers in this litigation is attached as Exhibit 3. 17 5. A true and correct copy of the 2019 estimate provided to Plaintiff as produced by 18 Hunsaker in this litigation is attached as Exhibit 4. 19 6. A true and correct copy of the 2015 estimate created for 2650 Amber Lane in 2015 20 but not provided to Plaintiff, as produced by Hunsaker in this litigation, is attached as Exhibit 5. 21 7. On November 13, 2017, a month after the Tubbs fire, Farmers provided Plaintiff with 22 a detailed valuation, by room, of what it estimated it would cost Plaintiff to rebuild his home based 23 on the information in 360Value. It included all details that Farmers had in its database about the 24 home. In additional to the items listed on the replacement estimates, the more detailed valuation 25 included “premium grade” appliances, “deluxe grade” and “premium grade” cabinetry with leaded 26 glass, “high grade” lighting and security system, “high” and “premium” grade bathroom fixtures, 27 “premium” and “high” grade chandeliers, redwood paneling, “molded” chair rail” “w/intricate 28 detail,” “premium” marble countertops and edging, two masonry fireplaces with marble hearths, 2 REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER 1 oak hardwood floors, marble or granite floor tiles, a wood stove, and a spa. A true and correct copy 2 of the 2017 detailed reconstruction estimate, as produced by Farmers in this litigation, is attached 3 as Exhibit 6. 4 8. Until 2011, Farmers used Residential Component Technology as a software for 5 determining replacement value of most homes. In 2007 it began using 360Value to value high-end 6 residential homes. A true and correct copy of the document announcing this, produced by Farmers 7 under protective order in the litigation, is attached as Exhibit 7. 8 9. In 2011, Farmers announced that it was moving to 360Value for all of its homes. A 9 true and correct copy of that announcement as produced by Farmers under protective order in this 10 litigation is attached as Exhibit 8. 11 10. On December 19, 2011, Farmers announced that 360Value would now automatically 12 select the Dwelling Quality Grade, based on information it obtained from its sister program, 13 Xactimate, used for claims adjusting. Farmers’ policies and procedures stated that the agent should Northridge, California 91324 KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street 14 not accept the assumptive information input, but should check each item with the insured. It noted (818) 886 2525 15 that if an estimate seemed too low, it was likely due to the wrong quality grade being selected, and 16 that the more expensive a home, the more detail should be input to correctly insure it. A true and 17 correct copy of that announcement as produced by Farmers under protective order in this litigation 18 is attached as Exhibit 9. 19 11. On April 1, 2013, Farmers announced that the conversion for all policies to 360Value 20 would occur as of June 16, 2013. The notice explained that Dwelling Quality Grade would be 21 determined based on the Kitchen Quality Grade in RCT. A true and correct copy of the April 1, 22 2013 announcement is attached as Exhibit 10. 23 12. 360Value software pre-populates most data field choices for homes based on key 24 pieces of information provided by the insured and the agent, including the square footage, the age 25 of the home, the address, the style of the home, and the “quality grade” of the home. True and 26 correct copies of the documents explaining this, produced by Farmers under protective order in this 27 litigation, are attached as Exhibit 11. 28 3 REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER 1 13. Farmers’ policies and procedures emphasize the importance of regular Farmers 2 Friendly Reviews to go over dwelling features and discuss the home quality grade. A true and correct 3 copy of the document explaining this, produced by Farmers under protective order in this litigation, 4 is attached as Exhibit 12. 5 14. Farmers’ policies and procedures explain to agents how to select a “style” of home 6 and the impact it has on coverage amounts. A true and correct copy of the document explaining this, 7 produced by Farmers under protective order in this litigation, is attached as Exhibit 13. 8 15. Farmers provides agents with written documentation of how to determine the quality 9 grade of a home. Farmers’ has written documentation on how to determine the “quality grade” of a 10 home. If a home was custom-built, it should be considered “premium.” Farmers noted, “The 11 Dwelling Quality Grade is one of the most critical components of a Reconstruction Cost Estimate 12 and it can have a significant impact on the estimate amount.” Farmers has a detailed chart of how 13 to determine the quality grade. At the top of the chart there was an explanation of how to rate a Northridge, California 91324 KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street 14 property as “Above Grade,” “Custom” or “Premium” if it has finishes that could be considered (818) 886 2525 15 either “Above-Grade” or “Premium.” The chart states that fixtures such as built-in bookcases, wet 16 bars, or cabinetry other than the kitchen and bathrooms were considered premium. Chair rail, crown 17 molding, and baseboards throughout the house were premium. Countertops and vanities with marble 18 should be considered premium. Premium flooring would be a mixture of high-end carpet, tile, stone 19 and hardwood. A true and correct copy of the document explaining this, produced by Farmers under 20 protective order in this litigation, is attached as Exhibit 14. 21 16. Farmers informed its agents in March 2017 that “The key to obtaining accurate 22 dwelling feature information is interviewing the prospect during the quote process and verifying all 23 of the dwelling features. Inspecting the property before you bind coverage helps you to confirm 24 eligibility, as well as dwelling feature accuracy.” A true and correct copy of that March 2017 25 announcement as produced by Farmers under protective order in this litigation, is attached as 26 Exhibit 15. 27 17. While Hunsaker kept a log of his interactions with Plaintiff from the issuance of the 28 policy, there are no discussions of the coverage amounts, coverage options, other than when Plaintiff 4 REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER 1 contacted Hunsaker’s office on or about September 1, 2015 to confirm that he had sufficient 2 insurance coverage in the event of a wildfire. A true and correct copy of Hunsaker’s notes of his 3 interactions with Plaintiff and his family as produced by Hunsaker in this litigation are attached as 4 Exhibit 16. 5 18. On June 17, 2019, Plaintiff sent a letter to Farmers asking it to review the value of 6 his home and comparable homes before the fire, as he had just learned that he was significantly 7 underinsured. A true and correct copy of that letter is attached as Exhibit 17. 8 19. Per Farmers’ internal policies and procedures, when an insured asks to have his 9 policy limits reformed due to underinsurance, the claims adjuster speaks with the insured and the 10 agent to determine if a reformation should be pursued. If the facts support reformation, it is 11 submitted to underwriting for review. A true and correct copy of the documents explaining that 12 procedure, as produced by Farmers under protective order in this litigation, are attached as Exhibit 13 18. Northridge, California 91324 KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street 14 20. A true and correct copy of the internal notes documenting Farmers investigation into (818) 886 2525 15 Plaintiff’s allegations of underinsurance due to agent error and request for reformation as produced 16 by Farmers as part of this litigation are attached as Exhibit 19. 17 21. Farmers has confirmed in verified interrogatory responses that it takes no steps at all 18 to verify that the sources and methods used by 360Value are kept current. A true and correct copy 19 of Farmers’ verified interrogatory responses in this regard are attached hereto as Exhibit 20. 20 22. Hunsaker has confirmed in interrogatory responses that he does not make any 21 changes or edits to the 360Value estimate provided after he inputs the data from the insured, and he 22 does not believe it is job to create the estimate, only to input the insured’s information. A true and 23 correct copy of Hunsaker’s verified interrogatory responses in this regard are attached hereto as 24 Exhibit 21. 25 23. On January 4, 2022, I went to the Farmers website at www.farmers.com and 26 requested two homeowner quotations for 2650Amber Lane, based on the information for the 1976 27 home that burned. In the first quote I stated that the house was “above average” grade. That estimate 28 said the home could be rebuilt now, in 2022, for $703,000. The second estimate included the same 5 REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER 1 information but stated that the house was “premium” grade. The second estimate stated that the 2 home could be rebuilt for $1,069,000, or 65.7% more. True and correct copies of the estimates as 3 printed from the www.farmers.com website on January 11, 2022 are attached as Exhibit 22. 4 24. In its original inspection of the home after the fire in October 2017, the claim adjuster 5 confirmed that the house was “custom built.” A true and correct copy of that document is attached 6 as Exhibit 23. 7 25. True and correct copies of relevant portions of the deposition testimony of Brian 8 Hunsaker are attached hereto as Exhibit 24. 9 26. True and correct copies of relevant portions of the deposition testimony of Justin 10 Price are attached hereto as Exhibit 25. 11 27. True and correct copies of relevant portions of the deposition testimony of Brianne 12 Hall are attached hereto as Exhibit 26. 13 28. True and correct copies of relevant portions of the deposition testimony of Liz Evans Northridge, California 91324 KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street 14 are attached hereto as Exhibit 27. (818) 886 2525 15 29. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 0037-0038 produced by Fire 16 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 28. 17 30. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 00954-0955 produced by Fire 18 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 29. 19 31. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 02284-02285 produced by Fire 20 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 30. 21 32. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 00509-516, and 02297-02298 22 produced by Fire Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 31. 23 33. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 00269-00276 produced by Fire 24 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 32. 25 34. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 02207-02208 produced by Fire 26 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 33. 27 35. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 00954-00956 produced by Fire 28 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 34. 6 REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER 1 36. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 0032-0033 produced by Fire 2 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 35. 3 37. A true and correct copy of page FIRE 0388 produced by Fire Insurance Exchange is 4 attached hereto as Exhibit 36. 5 38. True and correct copies of pages FIRE 0409-0412 produced by Fire Insurance 6 Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 37. 7 39. True and correct copies of pages FIRE 0973-0974 produced by Fire Insurance 8 Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 38. 9 40. True and correct copies of pages FIRE 0323-0324 produced by Fire Insurance 10 Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 39. 11 41. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-CLAIMS 0044 to 0049 produced by Fire 12 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 40. 13 42. True and correct copies of additional relevant portions of the deposition testimony Northridge, California 91324 KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street 14 of Brian Hunsaker are attached hereto as Exhibit 41. (818) 886 2525 15 43. True and correct copies of page FIRE 1027 produced by Fire Insurance Exchange is 16 attached hereto as Exhibit 42. 17 44. True and correct copies of additional relevant portions of the deposition transcript of 18 Jared Schmitz are attached hereto as Exhibit 43. 19 45. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-POLICY 0256-0347 produced by Fire 20 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 44. 21 46. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-POLICY 0348-0351 produced by Fire 22 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 45. 23 47. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-POLICY 0352-0357 produced by Fire 24 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 46. 25 48. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-POLICY 0358-0382 produced by Fire 26 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 47. 27 49. True and correct copies of FIRE-POLICY 0383-0384 produced by Fire Insurance 28 Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 48. 7 REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER 1 50. True and correct copies of documents produced by Plaintiff as KOOP 0338-0365; 2 0366-0393 and 0394-0418 are attached hereto as Exhibit 49. 3 51. True and correct copies of pages FIRE-POLICY 00001-0120 produced by Fire 4 Insurance Exchange are attached hereto as Exhibit 50. 5 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this 6 Declaration was executed on March 2, 2023, at Woodinville, Washington. 7 8 _______________________________ Stacy M. Tucker 9 10 11 12 13 Northridge, California 91324 KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street 14 (818) 886 2525 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 8 REDACTED DECLARATION OF STACY TUCKER EXHIBIT 1 EXHIBIT 1 1 ALBERT M. T. FINCH, III, ESQ. State Bar# 196478 REGINALDO J. G. VILLARREAL, JR., ESQ. State Bar# 321475 2 ERICKSEN ARBUTHNOT 3 210 North Fourth Street, Suite 350 San Jose, CA 95112 4 afinch@ericksenarbuthnot.com rvillarreal@ericksenarbuthnot.com 5 Telephone: (408) 286-0880 6 Facsimile: (408) 286-0337 7 Attorneys for Defendant BRIAN HUNSAKER 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SONOMA 10 11 GARY KOOP CASE NO. SCV-266944 12 Plaintiffs, 13 vs. DEFENDANT BRIAN HUNSAKER'S 14 RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SPECIAL FIRE INSURANCE EXCHANGE dba INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 15 FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP; BRIAN HUNSAKER 16 17 Defendants. 18 Amended Complaint filed: January 6, 2021 19 20 PROPOUNDING PARTY: Plaintiff GARY KOOP 21 RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant BRIAN HUNSAKER 22 SET NUMBER: ONE (1) 23 24 COMES NOW, the Defendant BRIAN HUNSAKER through its counsel, responds to 25 26 Plaintiff's Special Interrogatories, Set One, as follows: 27 BRIAN HUNSAKER and his attorneys have not completed their discovery or preparation for 28 trial, nor have they completed their analysis or review of the investigation and other trial preparation -1- DEFENDANT BRIAN HUNSAKER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 1 State with particularity what, if any data, YOU entered into the Supplemental Value Section when 2 calculating YOUR replacement value of the PROPERTY, including but not limited to all options 3 selected and YOUR basis for each selection. 4 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES NO. 35: 5 6 Objection. Overbroad, burdensome, vague and ambiguous as to the term "Supplemental 7 Value Section". Responding Party does not recall. Without waiving the foregoing objections, 8 Responding Party responds as follows: 9 Responding Party cannot recall this information. 10 INTERROGATORY NO. 36: 11 12 State with particularity the legal and business relationship between YOU and any Farmers brand 13 legal entity. 14 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES NO. 36: 15 Objection. Overbroad, vague and ambiguous, calls for a legal conclusion. Without waiving 16 the foregoing objections, Responding Party responds as follows: 17 18 Insurance Agent as defined by the agreement provided in the documents produced. 19 INTERROGATORY NO. 37: 20 State with pai1icularity all complaints made related to insurance policies YOU wrote or sold to the 21 California Department of Insurance from January 2010 to present by YOUR customers with 22 homeowner policies issued by YOU who found themselves underinsured with that policy when 23 making a claim. 24 25 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES NO. 37: 26 Objection. Overbroad, vague and ambiguous as to the term "homeowner policies", lacks 27 foundation, assumes facts, not likely calculated to lead to admissible evidence and calls for a legal 28 -21- DEFENDANT BRIAN HUNSAK.ER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 1 Dated: May ---1.l_, 2021 ERICKSEN ARBUTHNOT 2 3 4 . FINCH, III 5 J. G. VILLARREAL, JR. 6 Attorneys for Defendant 7 BRIAN HUNSAKER 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -23 - DEFENDANT BRIAN HUNSAKER' S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE Koop v. Hunsaker Sonoma County Superior Court Case No. SCV-266944 VERIFICATION I, BRIAN HUNSAKER, a Defendant in the above-referenced matter, and am authorized to make this verification on my behalf. Thave read the foregoing: • BRIAN HUNSAKER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S FORM INTERROGATORIES-GENERAL SET ONE; • BRIAN HUNSAKER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE; • BRIAN HUNSAKER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE; • BRIAN HUN SAKER'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION, SET ONE and know the contents thereof. The matters set forth in the responses are true of my OWTI knowledge, or I am informed and believe that said matters are true, and on that ground allege that they are true. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May z_,o , 2021 at (city/town) /AJ/;;;gY){ , California. c~Q BRIANtt EXHIBIT 2 EXHIBIT 2 360Value Replacement Cost Valuation A1I2-FM72.1 Page 1 of 3 Reconstruction Cost Estimate for: 926772987 Prepared by: Farmers Conversions (figconvca) Valuation ID: A1I2-FM72.1 . Cost per Finished Sq. Ft.: $155.04 FARMERS This is an estimate of reconstruction costs. We do not INSURANCE guarantee that this estimate reflects your home's actual reconstruction cost in the event of a loss. Owner Information Name: 926772987 Date Entered: 08/03/2012 Street: 2650 AMBER LN Date Calculated: 08/03/2012 City, State ZIP: SANTA ROSA, CA 95409 Created By: Farmers Conversions (figconvca) Country: USA User: Brian Hunsaker (960525fig) Policy #: 926772987 General Information Most Prevalent Number of Stories: 2 Stories Sq. Feet: 2967 Use: Single Family Detached Year Built: 1976 Style: Unknown Quality Grade: Above Average Cost per Finished Sq. Ft.: $155.04 Site Access: Average - No Unusual Constraints Foundation Foundation Shape: 4-5 Corners - Square/Rectangle Foundation Type: 100% Crawlspace Foundation Material: 100% Concrete Property Slope: None (0 - 15 degrees) Exterior Roof Shape: Gable Number of Dormers: 0 Roof Construction: 100% Wood Framed Roof Cover: 100% Composition - 3 Tab Shingle Exterior Wall Construction: 100% Wood Framing Exterior Wall Finish: 100% Siding - Cedar (Clapboard) Interior Average Wall Height: 8.0 Interior Wall Material: 100% Drywall Floor Coverings: 50% Carpet, 35% Hardwood - Plank, Interior Wall Finish: 100% Paint 15% Tile - Ceramic Ceiling Finish: 100% Paint Rooms Kitchens: 1 Large - (15'x11') Bathrooms: 3 Full Bath Bedrooms: 1 Medium - (10'x10'), 2 Large - (14'x12'), Living Areas: 2 Large - (20'x14') 1 Extra Large - (16'x14') Entry/Foyer: 1 Medium - (10'x10') Dining Rooms: 1 Large - (20'x14') Hallways: 2 Large - (15'x6') Laundry Rooms: 1 Medium - (10'x8') Utility Rooms: 1 Large - (12'x10') Nooks: 1 Medium - (10'x10') Room Details Kitchen (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large Appliances: 1 Garbage Disposal, 1 Dishwasher, 1 Range Counters: 100% Solid Surface Hood - Built-in Hardwood, 1 Space Saver Microwave, Room Features: Chair Rail 1 Cook Top, 1 Built-in Oven Cabinets: Peninsula Bar, 10 Glass Cabinet Doors Bath (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium Type: Full Bath Vanity Tops: 100% Solid Surface Fixtures: 1 Cult. Marble Tub/Shower Surr. FIRE-UW 0534 360Value Replacement Cost Valuation A1I2-FM72.1 Page 2 of 3 Bath (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium Type: Full Bath Vanity Tops: 100% Solid Surface Fixtures: 1 Cult. Marble Tub/Shower Surr. Bath (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large Type: Full Bath Vanity Tops: 100% Solid Surface Fixtures: 1 Cult. Marble Tub/Shower Surr. Bedroom (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding Bedroom (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding Bedroom (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding Bedroom (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: X-Large Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding Living Area (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large Room Features: Cathedral/Vaulted Ceiling, Cornice or Crown Molding, Chair Rail Living Area (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large Room Features: Cathedral/Vaulted Ceiling, Cornice or Crown Molding, Chair Rail Dining Room (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding, Chair Rail Entry/Foyer (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding, Chair Rail Laundry Room (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium Hallway (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding Hallway (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding Nook (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Medium Room Features: Cornice or Crown Molding, Chair Rail Utility Room (Above Grade Room): Quality Adjustment: None Size: Large Attached Structures Garage #1: # Cars: 2 Car (397 - 576 sq. ft.) Style: Attached / Built-In Living Area above Garage: 0% Porch #1: Square Footage: 250 Material: Concrete Porch Covered: 100% Enclosed: 25% Deck #1: Square Footage: 150 Material: Treated Deck Covered: 0% Enclosed: 0% Shape: L-Shape Height: 3 Levels: 2 Benches Length(ft): 15 FIRE-UW 0535 360Value Replacement Cost Valuation A1I2-FM72.1 Page 3 of 3 Key Quality Details Kitchen Counters: Solid Surface Jetted Tubs: 0 Walk-in Closets: 0 Decorative Beams: 0 Rooms with Crown Molding: 11 Ornate Staircases: 0 Rooms with Chair Rail: 6 Rooms with Cathedral/Vaulted Ceilings: 2 Rooms with Trayed/Coved Ceilings: 0 Built-in Bookcase/Entertain. Center: 1 Masonry Fireplace: 2 Systems Heating: 2 Forced Air Heating System Air Conditioning: 1 Central Air Conditioning Fireplace #1: Type: Masonry Fireplace Fireplace Details: 1 Tile Hearth, 1 Mantel Fireplace #2: Type: Masonry Fireplace Fireplace Details: 1 Tile Hearth, 1 Mantel Home Features Exterior Doors: 2 Sliding Patio Door Exterior Trim and Details: 3 Decorative Fiberglass Columns Electrical Features: 1 Electrical Service Size - 200 amp Lighting: 1 Ornate Chandelier, 1 Chandelier with Real Staircases and Conveyances: 1 Staircase - Metal - Spiral Crystal, 3 Ceiling Fan, 1 Track Lighting Other Interior Features: 1 Wet Bar Interior Doors and Millwork: 1 Built-in Bookcase/Entertain. Center, 1 Built-in Desk/Vanity, 1 French Doors Estimated Cost Breakdown Labor, Materials and Supplies: $323,614.54 Demolition and Debris Removal: $14,209.74 Architect Fees and Permits: $15,939.34 Other Fees and Taxes: $13,893.31 Overhead and Profit: $91,914.24 Estimated Reconstruction Cost Calculated Value: $460,000.00 We do not guarantee that the reconstruction cost estimate will reflect your home's actual reconstruction costs in the event of a loss. We hope our estimate helps you so you can determine the amount of coverage you need. However, even if all of the factors available in the estimating system are or are not utilized in reaching the estimate or if all information is or is not accurately input, the result will still be an estimate which you need to evaluate for adequacy. The most important consideration is that you feel you have enough protection to rebuild your home if it were completely destroyed. If you feel this estimate is not enough, then you should choose an amount of insurance which does match your estimate. If you have questions about construction costs in your area, please consult a contractor or an appraiser. (Reconstruction cost includes all applicable permits, fees, overhead, profit, sales tax, and debris removal) Attention Farmers Agent: To apply this estimate to the policy you must select 360Value Refresh in Express or Update in Policy Center. 12.7.14 PL:CASOXV_JUL12 FIRE-UW 0536 EXHIBIT 3 EXHIBIT 3 Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Staff of Brian Hunsaker" Date: September 1, 2015 at 12:04:29 ?M PDT To: "rnc1dmoto250" Subject: Homeowners review Gary, Attached ls the reconstruct"ion cost estimate on your home. Please review it, make any corrections and return it to me via email or if you'd like we can go through it over the phone. I confirmed the limits of coverage on jewelry for you. It's $1,000 per item up to $5,000. Anything above that value, you can add a floater with an appraisal. If the cost starts to add up, we could find insurance for those items through another carrier, which may be more cost effective for you since 1.2 million in contents could increase your premium by $1,500 annually. Talk to you soon, Liz Evans Office of Brian Hunsaker Farmers Insurance 8741 Old Redwood Hw·y Windsor, CA 95492-9233 License Number: 0687046 707-838-9777 (Office) 707-838-0908 (Fax) ~!a ff bh un~aker:'.;_1.- farmersagency. cl.lrn h(tp: ·'1>.' i.o.·w.farmersagern.comibh unsaker Close HUNS000029 Sent: 9/4/2015 11:40 From: Gary Koop Subject: Fwd: Homeowne rs review Hi Liz! Sent from r,,y 1Pnone Begin forwarded messuge: Fwm: MeUssa Long , melissalong 2010@hotm ail.com> Ode: Septemb2r 4, 201 'i 2t 10:10.40 AM PDT To: "'Gary KrnJp··· Cc: ''Melissa Long"' ,,rnelissalong@pobox.com> Subject: Homeown ers review Home Owners Policy for House Insurance (structure and outbuildin gs about the same). New Contents Insurance (Based on last policy I had $1.SM for ALL contents -and Gaoy had $440K). Safety box at bank shou!d lower costs. Artwork: Larger paintings (TOTAL: $75K} Shuai Mei: $SOK 3o Yun. $11K V:etnames e: $2K Other smaller pieces: total of $1SK Antique fu rnishi;,gs: (TOTAL: $38Ki I have certificates of antiquity for most of these: Medicine chests: $2K B126: Laquer table: $3K A.rt Deco Chairs: $2K Dining Table and chairs: $SK Peachwoo d Armoire: $SK (circa 1840-80) Red Walnut wood cabinet 1s th century (Qing Dynasty): $8K Side table; Elm Wood drca 1840-70 Shanxi: $2K Half moon table: $3K f\ltsc tables and lamps: $SK Silver vodka service· $1SK Piano: $3,200 Jewelry: I have receipts for $42K Family .iewe!ry and other purchases that are without receipts are estimated at another $25K Car Insurance (I have my car with progressive). From: Gary Koop [mailto:madmoto250@att,net] Sent: Tuesday, Septembe r~, 2015 1:24 PM To: Melissa Long Subject: Fwd: Homeowre rs review HUNS000030 360Value Replacem ent Cost Valuation A1I2-FM 72.3 Page 1 of 2 Recons truction Cost Estimat e for: 926772987 Prepared by: Farmers Conversions (figconvca) Valuation ID; A 1!2-FM72.3 Cost per F:n,sned Sq. Ft $169.19 IV \. FAR MER S This is an estimate of reconstruction costs, We do not guaranteo that this estJrnate reflects your home's actual INSUR ANCE reconstruction cost in the event of a loss. Owner Informati on Name: 9.26772987 Date Entered: 08/03/2012 Street 2650 AMBER LN Date Calculated: 09/01/2015 City, State ZlP; SANTA ROSA, CA 95409 Created By:· Farmers Conversions (figconvca) Countr>f USA Owner: Elizabeth Evans {960525fig) Policy#: 926772987 General Informati on Most Prevalent Number of Stories: 2 Stories Sq. Feet: 2967 Use: Single Family Detached Year Built 1976 Quality Grade: Above Average Cost per Finished Sq. Ft.: $169.19 Foundati on Foundation Shape: 4-5 Comers - Square/R ectangle Foundation Type: 100% Crawlspa ce Property Siope: None (0 -15 degrees) ~~te_r.!.2.~..... ··-- .. --···· Roof Shape: Gable -- - ---------- - - ~ - --------- =-cc.~c c-c-~ Roof cover: 100% Composi tion - 3 Tab Shingle Exterior Wall Construction: 100% Wood Framing Exterior Wall Finish: 100% Siding - Cedar (Clapboa rd) lnterio r~---c c-cc-c c~,.,.- ~,----- ------- -c-c- --c,c- Average Wall He'1ght 8.0 c"7~- cc~=c -=c--c c------ --- Interior Wal! Material: 100% Drywall Floor Coverings: 50% Carpet, 35% Hardwoo d - Plank, Interior Wall Finish: 100% Paint 15% Tile - Ceramic Ceiling Finish: 100% Paint Rooms Kitche1s: 1 Large -(15'x11' ) Bathrooms: 3 Full Bath RQ 884.48 231. 6" x 6" square wood post (3 BF per LF) 91.00LF 9.16 44.19 175.56 1,053.31 0/150 yrs Avg. 0% (0.00) 1,053.31 232. Deck planking - redwood (per SF) 990.00SF 8.17 438.89 1,705.44 10,232.63 41/25 yrs Avg. 75% [Ml (4,145 .62) 6,087.01 233 . 4" x 4" square wood post (1 .33 BF per LF)