In Gantman v. United Pacific Ins. Co. (1991) 232 Cal. App. 3d 1560, the court rejected the complaint of the owners of individual units in a planned development project who had sued the insurer that had issued a policy of insurance to the homeowner's association. Unlike our case, however, the plaintiff owners in Gantman had attempted to recover on the association's policy in which they were not named as insureds. They sought to recover damages for defects in the roof of the project's building. The court held that they had no standing to bring the action; only the homeowners association could sue on the policy. The duty to repair and maintain the roof was the association's responsibility and whatever benefits available under the insurance policy also belonged to the association, not the individual homeowners. ( Id. at pp. 1566-1568.) The plaintiff homeowners did not attempt to sue the insurer on the claim that an independent duty owed directly to them had been breached.