HV Chubb Insurance 11.11.01

November 11, 2001

Michael D. Daugherty, Attorney and
Vice President of Specialty Litigation
Chubb Insurance Corporation
Fountain Place, Suite 4600
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 75202-2763

RE: The Certain Demise of Huntington Village Community Association’s Directors

Dear Mr. Daugherty,

It was a joyous pleasure learning of Federated/Chubb’s recent denial to continue insuring HVCA’s BOD. Many Homeowners are elated that Fed/Chubb heeded my advice as it ensures good business sense to choke the directors. I hope you were influential in this decision of no longer persecuting its few participating members by

funding the whims of its directors. May you be rewarded with heaven’s blessings if you partook in this righteous deed to foment justice.

As written to you in my January letter,

RE: Chubb's Bad Faith Policy and 'Duty to Defend' Initiatives

Questions on Chubb's Defense Spending for Huntington Village's Violators

If Chubb acted in good faith not wishing to harm the HV membership, then NO Chubb D & O policy and collection of premiums are warranted for HVCA's directors. Chubb should have long ago terminated any business dealings with the Huntington Village directors. This has not occurred. (Please see lawsuits below.)

Is Chubb's interest in HVCA as a stakeholder solely to keep receiving the premiums despite the consistent violations of governing docs by HVCA's BOD? Why is sustaining this corporate government so important to Chubb?

If there is a $1000 deductible as claimed by HV's directors, it is considered a misappropriation of association funds. Further, it constitutes unjust enrichment used to defend BOD violations against a reforming, participating member using his own money he paid as premiums to Chubb.

It was a sure detriment in that CAI representation welcomed the probable and enormous monetary litigation I mentioned would happen from the sixty-plus honorable supporters still living in that inflicted Gulag. Last summer, I also stated likely litigation would be further initiated by new purchasers—at BOD insurance expense. And it remains outrageous in any community that litigation is due process for response and explanation from its unaccountable directors.

The ‘duty-to-defend’ policy should always absorb all litigation costs so Homeowners may have their ‘purchased rights’ when denied by immune-thinking violators. I am happy to say these statements seemingly grabbed Fed/Chubb by the balls thus initiating long overdue and sensible action with the terminating of the board’s legal defense spending.

The HV-BOD have made themselves open to their violating practices to preserve that worthless entity through a tiny closed-membership which has fueled defamation, discrimination, by-law violations and sham elections.

I am proud to have played a major roll since 1996 in the promising demise now facing Houston’s UnHeavenly Village.

Sincerely,

Steve Thomas Solcich