February 07, 2001

By AHRC News Services
Copyright 2004 AHRC News Services

Dana Parsons in his column - February 7, 2001 in the Los Angeles Times, was too kind on the homeowner association, Judge Mason Fenton, and the association attorney, Rosa Kwong of CHUBB Insurance Company

The story of Mr. and Mrs. Ross is but another incredible example of how homeowner association boards have become the modern day tyrant – stealing and oppressing as only tyrants know how to do. The Ross's, along with all the other owners in their association, own the common area and its facilities. Yet the board, several of whose members have children in the Irvine swim team, brazenly steal the pool from the owners. That is theft, pure and simple.

Judge Fenton is retired – and should remain retired. He drove up the the cost for litigants by taking fifeen minute smoke break every hour during the one the one week trial.

A mind that can twist a straight forward theft into some laudable act – and impose massive legal fees on the Ross's in the process – needs to have his marbles or morals checked – or both. Citizens' hearts sink when they see such judicial injustice.

The Ross's should consider filing a complaint with the state bar against Rosa Kwong. Her suggestion that the Ross's are pedophiles not only shows that Ms. Kwong has no faith in the validity of her case, but that she will stoop to the lowest of depravities to win her case.

The Ross's should consider filing a defamatory action against Rosa Kwong, and her employer, Chubb Insurance. In fact, all across the country, homeowners who live in associations have been rising up in protest against Chubb Insurance and the attorneys which it hires.

One major aspect which Mr. Parsons did not cover is that Chubb Insurance has a nationwide monopoly on the insurance sold to homeowner association boards, and that it has secured this monopoly by promising to defend boards – no matter what they do.

Mr. and Mrs. Ross are to be commended for their incredible courage. Their battle benefits each and every homeowner who lives in associations. Hopefully, the appellate court justices will have a similar courage and clear sightedness to put the association's incredible appeal where it belongs – at the bottom of the swimming pool. They are continually plagued by one homeowner association case after another, where lower court justices do not do justice.

On a longer range basis, homeowners now have an opportunity to reshape the law. The California Law Revision Commission at its February 2 meeting in Sacramento has decided to do a comprehensive review of common interest development law. They have also decided on a fast track basis to investigate the possibility of designing a non-judicial dispute resolution mechanism, so that homeowners are not faced, as the Ross's were, with crushing legal fees to defend their rights.

As the homeowner association industry – lawyers, management companies etc. – are already flooding the Commission with their views, designed to keep association dollars flowing into their pockets, homeowners need to raise their voices loud and clear – or they may become the next Ross's.

Statements to the Commission should be addressed to:
California Law Revision Commission
Attn: Nathaniel Sterling, Executive Secretary
4000 Middlefield Road, Suite D-1
Palo Alto, CA 94303-4739
Email: sterling@clrc.ca.gov
Voice: 650-494-1335
Fax: 650-494-1827