# [2011] HRA and The Cove: Not Letting This Go



## komosatp (Feb 15, 2011)

Sisyphus here...fighting the fight that I have no expectation of ever winning.  

Anyway, since we have a new board at HRA I thought I'd raise the issue that I raised in this post once again.  I have more ammo on my side now that Atlantis publicly advertises that The Cove is the summa-cum-laude of Atlantis towers.

Here's the text of my letter:


> Dear Directors:
> 
> I continue to be concerned about Harborside Owners & Guests being prohibited from accessing amenities in Phase III of Atlantis, Paradise Island.   As you may know, Atlantis is restricting access to two pools on “PHASE III AMENITIES” land (as defined in Exhibit C of the “First Amendment to Use and Access Deed”, dated August 29, 2006).  It is also claiming that the Cove Beach “is reserved” for guests of The Cove.
> 
> ...



I'm not a lawyer...but I could play one on TV.  I'll keep you all updated on what happens.


----------



## timeos2 (Feb 15, 2011)

If there are separate Associations for each phase then there is NO requirement that they share amenities.  If phase III gets to USE phase 1 & 2 assets then they should also agree to let phase 1&2 owners/guests use theirs BUT they cannot be forced to do so. It is up to the three Associations to reach agreement but none can be forced to share.


----------



## komosatp (Feb 15, 2011)

timeos2 said:


> If there are separate Associations for each phase then there is NO requirement that they share amenities.  If phase III gets to USE phase 1 & 2 assets then they should also agree to let phase 1&2 owners/guests use theirs BUT they cannot be forced to do so. It is up to the three Associations to reach agreement but none can be forced to share.


Phase III refers to an land area/set of amenities at Atlantis, not at Harborside.

Phase I and II at Harborside have the same access agreement with Atlantis.

This is not a dispute amongst timeshare owners.  Harborside (both phases) have an agreement with Atlantis that allows Harborside guests to use Atlantis' amenities.  That's how we have the legal right to use Atlantis' property


----------



## timeos2 (Feb 15, 2011)

komosatp said:


> Phase III refers to an land area/set of amenities at Atlantis, not at Harborside.
> 
> Phase I and II at Harborside have the same access agreement with Atlantis.
> 
> This is not a dispute amongst timeshare owners.  Harborside (both phases) have an agreement with Atlantis that allows Harborside guests to use Atlantis' amenities.  That's how we have the legal right to use Atlantis' property



That's great  but it doesn't mean any Phase 3 also gets those rights or has to share what THEY build/control with Phase 1 & 2.  They can have a totally different agreement and it would be legal as the are a separate entity.


----------



## jerseygirl (Feb 15, 2011)

Job well done komsapp!  Although I don't really care about access to Cove pools. I share your concerns about the bigger issue. Thank you!


----------



## sail27bill (Feb 15, 2011)

komosatp--Interesting and well thought out post.  As a Harborside owner, I also do not really care about the use of the Cove pools...the beach and further expansion is another matter entirely.  That said, if the entities are indeed separate, with different governing agreements and exclusivity rights, I do not see how this could be challenged as the only guarantees for Phase I and II owners are what is explicitedly stated in the governing documents as it explicitly relates to them. 

The question I have is whether Phase III a complete and separate entity or is it part of Atlantis itself?

Thanks for your efforts.

Anita


----------



## komosatp (Feb 15, 2011)

Ok...so we don't get confused:

There is no such thing as Phase III at Harborside (the SVO timeshare resort).  If one exists, it remains inside the vault that is SVO future planning.

*Phase 3 at Atlantis* is the Cove and Reef (including new pools built at these towers), and Aquaventure (the water park).


sail27bill said:


> komosatp--Interesting and well thought out post.  As a Harborside owner, I also do not really care about the use of the Cove pools...the beach and further expansion is another matter entirely.  That said, if the entities are indeed separate, with different governing agreements and exclusivity rights, I do not see how this could be challenged as the only guarantees for Phase I and II owners are what is explicitedly stated in the governing documents as it explicitly relates to them.
> 
> The question I have is whether Phase III a complete and separate entity or is it part of Atlantis itself?
> 
> ...


Whether or not Phase 3 at Atlantis is some sort of separate legal entity is moot - I don't think it is separate legally, but I'm not privy to the internal legal structure of Kerzner Ltd.  It is still owned by one entity (Kerzner), and the access granted to Harborside owners is *based on a MAP*, not on what some particular legal entity owns.

The Map is why Atlantis simply said last time that The Cove was not the premier tower.  That is really the only way they can draw lines on property without renegotiating the access deed.  

If Atlantis had said that the new amenities were part of a separate legal entity, and we have no rights of access, then they would have to also retract the amended access deed (and all of the guaranteed access fees it produces) because they did not have the right to sell access to that land in the first place.  This would certainly result in significant litigation, as Harborside owners that purchased with this set of governing documents would likely be entitled to a significant refund of their initial purchase.

Back to *The Map*: basing Harborside owners' access to Atlantis on a map instead of an enumerated-list-of-attractions-owned-by-a-legal-entity is a very important detail.  It means that Atlantis has the freedom to split up the resort without having to renegotiate the access deed with Harborside.  But it also assures Harborside owners that a change in ownership won't impact what we owners can access.


----------



## sail27bill (Feb 15, 2011)

komosatp--So if I understand this correctly, the Cove falls outside of "The Map" as the map is drawn today, and as a result, Harborside owners are not entitled to these amenities?

Thus, the real concern is that as Atlantis expands, the potential to redraw the map exists whereas future amenities can be excluded without having to constantly amend the underlining agreement?

Just want to make sure I completely understand the concern. 

Thanks,
Anita


----------



## komosatp (Feb 15, 2011)

sail27bill said:


> komosatp--So if I understand this correctly, the Cove falls outside of "The Map" as the map is drawn today, and as a result, Harborside owners are not entitled to these amenities?


No, the Cove is most certainly within the map area.  As are the two new pools and the Cove beach.  Atlantis did not dispute this.

The dispute is whether we should have access now (actually, since day one) to these amenities.  Atlantis's prior reasoning for denying us access was that The Cove did not replace the Royal Towers as "_the Atlantis Resorts’ premier luxury Hotel Rooms_".  Because if they concede that the Cove has replaced the Royal Towers as the most luxurious accommodations, then the grandfather clause kicks in: "_or any such other Hotel Rooms as may be intended to replace the Royal Towers Rooms as the Atlantis Resorts’ premier luxury Hotel Rooms_".



sail27bill said:


> Thus, the real concern is that as Atlantis expands, the potential to redraw the map exists whereas future amenities can be excluded without having to constantly amend the underlining agreement?


I'm sure that any truly new developments will involve new/amended access deeds - and fees.

And yes, a real concern is that if Atlantis can unilaterally decide what rooms are the premiere rooms, then they could restrict Harborside access anywhere they wanted.


----------



## sail27bill (Feb 15, 2011)

Thanks for the clarification.  And by the way, I agree with you.  Isn't owning a timeshare great?:hysterical: 

Anita


----------



## siesta (Feb 15, 2011)

> Sisyphus here...fighting the fight that I have no expectation of ever winning.


 thanks for fighting the good fight, someone has to.


----------



## Ken555 (Feb 16, 2011)

Great thread. I look forward to seeing if the Board act in any way. I know when I visit Harborside, I don't like hearing I can't go to the pool bar (though some of you have found ways around) by Cove and the beach guards trying to discourage our visiting, etc. Good luck!


----------



## jarta (Feb 16, 2011)

My wife and I split a Hogburger at the Cove pool restaurant today.  Staying at Harborside this week.

Renovations at my 3-br in Phase II forced me into Phase I.  I was rewarded with a corner 2-br and a corner deluxe 1-br in Phase I.  Picked up about 400 sq. ft. of space.

The Phase II renovations (new carpeting, new furniture but same kitchen appliances) will be finished by the end of April.  Upon arrival, I was told his week nobody is in Buildings 4 and 6.    ...   eom


----------



## ekinggill (Feb 18, 2011)

Keep fighting.  I've never been there, quite possibly never will, but it's the principle of the thing that drives me nuts.  

If the resort chooses to build amenities on land that owners have contractual access to, they shouldn't be able to unilaterally change your access rights.  If they are allowed to do it there, they can start doing it at other resorts.


----------



## jarta (Feb 18, 2011)

ekinggill,   ...   There is a difference between access to amenities and access to a parcel of real estate.  Harborside owners are guaranteed access to a certain level of amenity at Atlantis.

I am no fan of being barred from the Cove (I have found how to get in past security anyway) but guests at Atlantis and the Cove cannot make use of the amenities at Harborside.  There are all sorts of side deals in existence.

Just as Harborside was developed by a joint venture other than Atlantis, I understand that the Cove (and Reef) were developed by a joint venture other than Atlantis.

BTW, Kerzner is threatening to sue the Bahamas for breach of contract on a similar ground.  He claims that nobody was ever supposed to get as good a deal as he got to invest his money in Atlantis and Baha Mar is getting a deal that is just as good as his deal was.  What goes around comes around?

I'm at Harborside now and Atlantis is much more occupied than it has been during the 3 other times I've stayed at Harborside in the last 2 1/2 years.  I see it as a sign the economy's improving.  Hope you get here sometime.  It's a terrific place to visit.   ...   eom


----------



## tomandrobin (Feb 18, 2011)

jarta said:


> I am no fan of being barred from the Cove (I have found how to get in past security anyway) but guests at Atlantis and the Cove cannot make use of the amenities at Harborside.



We have used the Cove's amenities with no problem. When there is a will, there is a way. 



jarta said:


> I'm at Harborside now and Atlantis is much more occupied than it has been during the 3 other times I've stayed at Harborside in the last 2 1/2 years.  I see it as a sign the economy's improving.  Hope you get here sometime.  It's a terrific place to visit.   ...   eom



Little known fact, Robin is a travel agent, and this year money being spent on vacations is up. People either need a break and are willing to pay for it, or economy is actually heading in the right direction.


----------



## esk444 (Feb 25, 2011)

tomandrobin said:


> Little known fact, Robin is a travel agent, and this year money being spent on vacations is up. People either need a break and are willing to pay for it, or economy is actually heading in the right direction.



Plus, Atlantis is doing some pretty aggressive marketing and advertising at least on the east coast.  I see an Atlantis TV commercial at least once every time I put on the TV offering discounted rooms, kids eat free promotions, and free companion airfare.  I've never seen this amount of advertising for Atlantis before.  Hopefully it is working, as I know the Kerzner Int'l group is hurting financially.


----------



## komosatp (Jun 14, 2011)

So I finally got a response to my letter.   They actually sent the response a while ago, but to my prior address.

The gist of the response is that Atlantis/Kerzner is maintaining that the Cove has not replaced the Royal Towers as premiere because the Royal still has the most expensive room on property (Bridge Suite) and the greatest number of premium rooms and suites (Club Level).  And the HRA board accepts that position.

The logical question that follows is: since our access is defined by this set of premiere rooms, shouldn't Harborside owners have access to the same amenities guests in these rooms have, since we owners are supposed to have access _"upon the same terms and conditions [as] Atlantis Guests"_?  Which should mean access to the Club lounge, with free food and drink?

I'll figure out how to write this better in my next response.  Any suggestions as to how to proceed are appreciated.


> June 14, 2011
> 
> Dear [Komosatp],
> 
> ...


----------



## komosatp (Oct 7, 2013)

Thought I’d provide an update on this zombie issue.  Maybe comatose in a persistent vegetative state, without any hope of recovery without a miracle from God*, issue.  Because the issue is not dead, but it certainly is not making progress.

_*That miracle from God would be a Harborside BOD looking out for owners more than Starwood or Atlantis.  I’d think most would agree that a miraculous act of God would be required for that to happen._

Anyway, I’ve now had three US-based class action lawyers review this matter, and one Bahamian lawyer.  All agree that the case has merit and I am almost certainly in the right.  The problem is how to litigate.  The U.S. lawyers all wanted to sue Starwood, but ‘resigned’ when they got to the part in our purchase contract that had the ‘choice of law’.  This section requires any dispute to be litigated in Orange County FL.  According to the 3 U.S. based lawyers this is bad and none of them wanted to move forward because of this. 

There was also agreement among the three that our (HRA owners’) dispute is not really with Starwood but Atlantis, as Atlantis is the one violating the access deed….and receives our access fee.  Someone would eventually have to sue Atlantis in the Bahamas to compel them to give us 100% access.

And this is where the major obstacle is hit.  When I finally spoke to the Bahamian lawyer this summer, he informed me that the Bahamas does not allow cases on contingency, which means I would have to pay for this litigation myself up-front without any certainty of the outcome ($$$ tens of thousands).  Or I could get a group of owners together to pay.  I like being right, but I like not-being-bankrupt more.

So in order for our access right to be enforced, as a practical matter, the Harborside BOD has to decide that the violation has become great enough for it to justify spending association resources on a Bahamian lawyer.  Reading between the lines of what this lawyer said, the HRA BOD has not even made a phone call about this matter to an independent lawyer.  He implied he would know because there are only a few firms in Nassau that are not conflict-of-interested-ed out of suing Atlantis (like if you trip and fall at Atlantis, you only have  a few lawyers to call to represent you, because the rest represent Atlantis on some matter) and his would be involved in this type of dispute.

There are still some avenues to go down: HRA BOD are US citizens, with a fiduciary obligation in the US to act in the best interest of HRA owners, and there is  a new owner at Atlantis since I started the discussions of this matter (Brookfield).  But I haven’t set aside the time to figure out how to proceed. 

So that where this issue stands now.


----------



## tomandrobin (Oct 7, 2013)

thanks for the update


----------



## siesta (Oct 7, 2013)

Komo, some friendly advice:

Although your letter to the BOD was well written, organized, and had all the right ingredients, there is a big difference between a squeeky wheel letter written by a layperson, and a well crafted demand letter drafted by an attorney. Without getting into drafting specifics, the demand letter is taken much more seriously for obvious reasons.  Just the letter head alone and signature by an attorney is enough for a legal department to take it much more seriously.  It eliminates the question of whether the layperson will actually follow through and find an attorney to pursue action, and when/if they do, typically the attorney will draft a demand letter anyways, so they are willing to wait on an issue like this and not take you too seriously.

When I draft demand letters, often I attach a copy of the complaint I intend to file if they dont comply or get the ball rolling by a certain date. This takes things one step further, in case they weren't too convinced by my letter, they can read the complaint and say "oh wow, their case will have merit, maybe we better address/resolve this asap." If they were on the fence merely by the letter, the attached complaint might help tip the scale.

What I suggest you do, is have an attorney draft a demand letter to Starwood, as well as a bahamian attorney draft a demand letter to Atlantis. You have pretty much done all the legwork and research, the attorneys will merely have to re-draft your letter, the cost should be nominal. Although you may or may not intend to follow through with legal action, they will be in the position to have to call your bluff. However, no respectable attorney will attach a complaint and say I will be filing this if X doesnt happen, if that is not true. So likely just the demand letter will have to suffice.


----------



## komosatp (Oct 7, 2013)

siesta said:


> Komo, some friendly advice:
> 
> Although your letter to the BOD was well written, organized, and had all the right ingredients, there is a big difference between a squeeky wheel letter written by a layperson, and a well crafted demand letter drafted by an attorney. Without getting into drafting specifics, the demand letter is taken much more seriously for obvious reasons.  Just the letter head alone and signature by an attorney is enough for a legal department to take it much more seriously.  It eliminates the question of whether the layperson will actually follow through and find an attorney to pursue action, and when/if they do, typically the attorney will draft a demand letter anyways, so they are willing to wait on an issue like this and not take you too seriously.
> 
> ...


I hear you....maybe I should start a kickstarter.com project on this to get the funding.  :hysterical: 

I'm not concerned I wasn't taken seriously by Starwood.  When I started this back in 2008, I had correspondence with lawyers at SVO who assumed I was a lawyer (I am not a lawyer).  The first long letter I received back then clearly showed they had discussions with Atlantis (then Kerzner) about this.  It's become clear to me that the HRA BOD will have to be compelled, in some way, to change their position.  They still have dreams of a HRA Phase 3.  And with Brookfield now in the mix too, SVO has even less incentive to rock the boat.

ETA: the first lawyer I worked with in 2008 warned me that there was some clause in our purchase agreement that made me vulnerable to litigation costs incurred buy the HRA associations over disputes.  I don't want to put myself at risk without an indemnification from a reputable law firm.


----------



## DavidnRobin (Oct 7, 2013)

Interesting... I do not own at HRA or even been to HRA or Atlantis.  I tried to read what I could to understand the issue (HRA HOA agreement was access to Atlantis amentities and pays a fee; Atlantis modified the 'The Cove' and claims that it is not covered in the access agreement - correct?)

Is HRA HOA paying Atlantis for access to amenities? Much like WPROV (Kauai) is paying to use St Regis and Princeville amenities?

I can imagine that Atlantis can easy change and control the playing field here (given what you wrote, and that it is in the Bahamas and a very Rich/Influential person is essentially calling the shots), and the battle would be challenging and expensive for the HOA (which is all the HRA Owners paying).

Perhaps a resolution here would be that the HOA stop paying for access, or pay more for Cove access.  I have a feeling you and others consider the current fee acceptable because of the benefit of Atlantis amenity access - therefore... is paying more worth access to The Cove?  Or, say screw it and we do not need The Cove and keep status quo, or stop paying for Atlantis access altogether? Or, fight the righteous fight with HOA (your) money?  I really do not see the motivation for Atlantis to go back on their position given that they are in control, and have $$$ and backing.

Since jarta owns there he may be a good person to input on best path forward (but make sure he doesn't use Science... )


----------



## komosatp (Oct 7, 2013)

DavidnRobin said:


> I tried to read what I could to understand the issue (HRA HOA agreement was access to Atlantis amentities and pays a fee; Atlantis modified the 'The Cove' and claims that it is not covered in the access agreement - correct?)


The modification to the access agreement was when The Cove was being built, I assume after a negotiation between the HRA associations and Atlantis. The original access deed, added an amendment to provide access to the new amenities, Aquaventure and the Cove & Reef areas of the resort.  The amendment significantly increased the fee paid by owners to access old Atlantis *and* the new amenities.


DavidnRobin said:


> Is HRA HOA paying Atlantis for access to amenities? Much like WPROV (Kauai) is paying to use St Regis and Princeville amenities?


Yes, HRA owners pay an access fee as part of their annul maintenance dues.


DavidnRobin said:


> I can imagine that Atlantis can easy change and control the playing field here (given what you wrote, and that it is in the Bahamas and a very Rich/Influential person is essentially calling the shots), and the battle would be challenging and expensive for the HOA (which is all the HRA Owners paying).


Atlantis can't unilaterally change HRA access.  The Bahamas is a stable country with a independent judiciary and enforceable contracts.

They can play games and try to work within the language of the access deed, which is what I think is happening here.  Out of convenience, they are declaring that the Royal Towers is still the best tower in Atlantis, despite advertising the Cove as 'the ultimate'.

At some point, the HRA BODs can't, in good faith, simply go along with anything Atlantis says, or they'd risk losing their personal indemnification, and we could sue those individuals in The U.S.

Let me add that I don’t think Atlantis set out to screw HRA owners….I just don’t think they thought about us at all.  I’d be shocked if, when deciding how they were going to position the Cove and Reef, that they mentioned HRA once.  It was probably a bit surprising to Kerzner, et al, when someone pointed out the grandfather clause in the HRA access deed.  They then set about finding a way to wiggle out of it.





DavidnRobin said:


> Perhaps a resolution here would be that the HOA stop paying for access, or pay more for Cove access.  I have a feeling you and others consider the current fee acceptable because of the benefit of Atlantis amenity access - therefore... is paying more worth access to The Cove?  Or, say screw it and we do not need The Cove and keep status quo, or stop paying for Atlantis access altogether? Or, fight the righteous fight with HOA (your) money?  I really do not see the motivation for Atlantis to go back on their position given that they are in control, and have $$$ and backing.
> 
> Since jarta owns there he may be a good person to input on best path forward (but make sure is doesn't use Science... )


The dispute really boils down to whether the Cove has: "replace[d] the Royal Towers Rooms as the Atlantis Resorts’ premier luxury Hotel Rooms".  My position is that Atlantis should be allowing access to the Cove/Reef amenities, but they have contrived a technicality to deny HRA owners their appropriate access.  That technicality is that Royal is still the premier.  The HRA BODs have, by default, agreed with this position and is why they HRA associations continue to pay the fee and have not initiated a legal dispute with Atlantis.

We shouldn't have to pay more for something we are entitled to in the first place.  I, and many others, bought HRA before the Cove opened but after Aquaventure opened, so I had no way of knowing that I would be denied access to an area that was clearly marked on a map as being part of the new amenities.  Furthermore, the grandfather clause in the access agreements should have provided me with future assurance that I would always have access to the 'premier' parts of Atlantis.


----------



## komosatp (Oct 7, 2013)

DavidnRobin said:


> I tried to read what I could


WHAT!!!?!?!?!?!  You haven't read every single word, of the several thousand, that I have posted on this issue!!!!!???  I am insulted to my core..






P.S. I am not allowed to bring this issue up in my wife's presence anymore.  Just as I like being not-bankrupt more than being right, I like my wife-and-children more than being right.


----------



## DavidnRobin (Oct 7, 2013)

Not sure how to multiquote w/o extensive editing. but... I think I have it right - the HOA is claiming the contact/agreement provides access (and pays for it), and Atlantis is denying that for The Cove saying that it is outside of the agreement.

Seems like Atlantis has all the power here because they are actively denying access (right or wrong) of The Cove to HRA users, and only recourse is apparently for the HRA HOA to sue Atlantis unless they agree to allow access for what the HOA is claiming as their right according to the contractual agreement.

I really do not understand the arguments around what they advertise or not - seems what is written in the contract and how it is interpreted will be the deciding factor, BUT the problem is that the only resolve (unless Atlantis decides to play nice - which I doubt since they have no motivation, and tons of money and lawyers) is for the HOA to sue them - which as you know is problematic.  The rest of the stuff (e.g. advertising) is likely tangental to the conflict.

It looks to me as an outsider that this is going to be a hard battle to win without $$$ support for the HOA - and that is hard to get unless forced - it doesn't appear to be a win/win situation.  The HOA may have decide if access to The Cove is worth the battle ($$$) which apparently they do not.  Good luck.  I suspect even if fought successfully it will take quite some time to resolve - even if the HOA can find attorneys willing to take up the matter.


----------



## siesta (Oct 7, 2013)

komosatp said:


> It's become clear to me that the HRA BOD will have to be compelled, in some way, to change their position.


 A demand letter may be the compelling factor, one that mentions their fiduciary duty, and subsequent breach of that duty if they dont pursue the proper changes, whether its access to the cove amenities or a reduction in the access fee.


----------



## DavidnRobin (Oct 7, 2013)

In re-reading Post #18 (from 2011) - apparently the HRA BOD doesn't agree with the position that HRA has rightful access to The Cove either - so now the battle has increased on 2 fronts.  Given that the HRA BOD is essentially controlled by Starwood (assumed as it is this way for all other boards of SVO resorts) - and therefore pretty much can decide on actions and processed with impunity for the most part from the HOA as long as they stay within their interpretation of the CCRs and associated agreements - you are now in serious windmill tilting area.  IMO.


----------



## komosatp (Oct 8, 2013)

DavidnRobin said:


> Not sure how to multiquote w/o extensive editing. but... I think I have it right - the HOA is claiming the contact/agreement provides access (and pays for it)





DavidnRobin said:


> In re-reading Post #18 (from 2011) - apparently the HRA BOD doesn't agree with the position that HRA has rightful access to The Cove either - so now the battle has increased on 2 fronts.


I (for the benefit of all owners) am claiming we should have access.  The HRA BOD ‘investigated’ the matter, concluded that my claim 'may have some merit', but that the expense of attempting a change would be too much with too uncertain an outcome.


DavidnRobin said:


> I really do not understand the arguments around what they advertise or not





DavidnRobin said:


> Atlantis is denying that for The Cove saying that it is outside of the agreement.


Not precisely.  This dispute boils down to the grandfather clause in the access deed: "or any such other Hotel Rooms as may be intended to replace the Royal Towers Rooms as the Atlantis Resorts’ premier luxury Hotel Rooms." Atlantis is maintaining, for this purpose, that the Cove has NOT replaced “the Royal Towers Rooms as the Atlantis Resorts’ premier luxury Hotel Rooms”.  But in every bit of advertising out there, promotes the Cove as exclusive and the ultimate in luxury.  How can they have it both ways?


DavidnRobin said:


> Given that the HRA BOD is essentially controlled by Starwood (assumed as it is this way for all other boards of SVO resorts) - and therefore pretty much can decide on actions and processed with impunity for the most part from the HOA as long as they stay within their interpretation of the CCRs and associated agreements


This is why I’ve been trying to find a lawyer on my own.  To go around the HRA BOD.





DavidnRobin said:


> you are now in serious windmill tilting area.  IMO.


I know.  That’s why these posts/my activities on this issue is infrequent….I look into it when I am in the mood or have downtime at the office.





DavidnRobin said:


> their right according to the contractual agreement.
> ….
> seems what is written in the contract and how it is interpreted will be the deciding factor, BUT the problem is that the only resolve (unless Atlantis decides to play nice - which I doubt since they have no motivation, and tons of money and lawyers) is for the HOA to sue them - which as you know is problematic.  The rest of the stuff (e.g. advertising) is likely tangental to the conflict.


Regarding the contract:





> It is clear from the original “Use and Access Deed” (dated January 27, 2000) that the possibility of a higher level tower being developed by Atlantis was considered and integrated into the access deed agreement:
> Section 1.1.4 of the “Use and Access Deed” specifically defines what Atlantis Guest means in the context of the agreement and assures Harborside owners that their access will always be a premier level of access were Atlantis to build a more luxurious tower than the Royal Towers:
> 1.1.4: Atlantis Guests shall mean any guests, invitees or licensees of the Atlantis Owners, occupying Hotel rooms at the Royal Towers at Atlantis (“Royal Tower Rooms”), or any such other Hotel Rooms *as may be intended to replace the Royal Towers Rooms as the Atlantis Resorts’ premier luxury Hotel Rooms.* [Emphasis added]​Furthermore, the original “Use and Access Deed” and the “First Amendment to Use and Access Deed” (dated August 29, 2006) define what access Harborside Owners and Guests have to Atlantis’ facilities. These specific agreements insure that Harborside Owners and Guests have all the same access and use rights as Atlantis hotel guests in the ‘premier’ tower of the resort. In the original “Use and Access Deed”, section 2.1 enumerates the rights Harborside guest will have:
> 2.1: …when a Permitted User is in occupancy of a Unit or any portion thereof, such Permitted User shall have the right, liberty and privilege to access and use the Atlantis Amenities in common with, and upon the same terms and conditions, and subject to the same regulations, as shall from time to time be generally applicable to Atlantis Guests. ​It is clear from these definitions that Harborside guests were always intended to have access rights equal to the highest group of accommodations at Atlantis. Atlantis did not reserve the right to re-classify Harborside guests to anything other than ‘premier’ status. And ‘premier’ now means guests at The Cove, not the Royal Towers.



Well, here’s expansion one and Atlantis is already trying to cut lowly timeshare owners out of their uber-luxury amenities…

As I said in the first post:


> If Atlantis continues to unilaterally classify Harborside owners & guests, then the Harborside associations can no longer consider Harborside’s access ‘premier’, because the level of access would be subject to Atlantis’ prerogative. One would have to view the future of the relationship between Harborside and Atlantis as uncertain, and this significantly lessens the value of our asset at Harborside. In addition, owners who choose to rent their units cannot in good-faith advertise Harborside units as having complete access to Atlantis.
> 
> Furthermore, the spirit of the original agreement (and the amended agreement) between Harborside and Atlantis was intended to secure permanent premier access by Harborside to Atlantis’ grounds and amenities. Atlantis should be erring on the side of giving too much access to Harborside owners and guests, not restricting us from certain amenities. If they do not view the relationship this way, then that fact intrinsically indicates how important it is for the various Harborside associations to not allow Atlantis to act unilaterally on these matters.


----------



## komosatp (Oct 8, 2013)

Here's the original response from the HRA BOD in 2007:


----------



## DavidnRobin (Oct 8, 2013)

Got it...
HRA owners (and visitors) are getting screwed
HOA BOD have decided not worth persuing
You do not have money/time to fight this - even if you find lawyers to take up cause
Likely no HOA support because SVO controls BOD decision-making and information flow

Time to sharpen up that lance...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilting_at_windmills

*****
Just then they came in sight of thirty or forty windmills that rise from that plain. And no sooner did Don Quixote see them that he said to his squire, "Fortune is guiding our affairs better than we ourselves could have wished. Do you see over yonder, friend Sancho, thirty or forty hulking giants? I intend to do battle with them and slay them. With their spoils we shall begin to be rich for this is a righteous war and the removal of so foul a brood from off the face of the earth is a service God will bless." 

"What giants?" asked Sancho Panza.

"Those you see over there," replied his master, "with their long arms. Some of them have arms well nigh two leagues in length."

"Take care, sir," cried Sancho. "Those over there are not giants but windmills. Those things that seem to be their arms are sails which, when they are whirled around by the wind, turn the millstone."

—Part 1, Chapter VIII. _Of the valourous Don Quixote's success in the dreadful and never before imagined Adventure of the Windmills, with other events worthy of happy record._


----------



## komosatp (Oct 8, 2013)

DavidnRobin said:


> Got it...
> HRA owners (and visitors) are getting screwed
> HOA BOD have decided not worth persuing
> You do not have money/time to fight this - even if you find lawyers to take up cause
> Likely no HOA support because SVO controls BOD decision-making and information flow


Bingo!  You should be my editor....


----------



## Ken555 (Oct 9, 2013)

komosatp said:


> Here's the original response from the HRA BOD in 2007:



Interesting that they think it is further to the Cove pools than the others around Atlantis given the ability to take a shuttle to Cove from Harborside...and I would guess (having only walked it once) that the distance from the shuttle drop off location and the Cove pool is similar to that, or perhaps even less than, the distance to the Atlantis river pool. 

But yeah...windmills.


Sent from my iPad


----------



## HarborsideHappyGirl (Oct 13, 2013)

komosatp:

I completely agree with your concerns. It seems like the HOA Directors are unaware of their fiduciary duties and at least one of the (Atlantis Rep) doesn't understand the concept of Conflict of Interest.

While the Cove specifically isn't that important, the picking and choosing what Harborside owners can and cannot access is absolutely important.

This situation makes this Harborside Happy Girl less happy.


----------



## okwiater (Mar 20, 2014)

Bumping back to the top.

Out of curiosity, how is Atlantis enforcing the policy and excluding Harborside guests from access? Are they looking that closely at the room keys?


----------



## alexadeparis (Mar 20, 2014)

I believe that Cove guests are issued different bracelets than harborside guests.


----------



## SMHarman (Mar 20, 2014)

^ That, different color bands and checkpoint staff on the relevant entrance areas.


----------



## Quimby4 (Jul 12, 2014)

SMHarman said:


> ^ That, different color bands and checkpoint staff on the relevant entrance areas.



I have heard of many Harborside owners using the Cove Pools and Cove Beach with out any problems. Can some Tuggers chime in here?


----------



## komosatp (Jul 14, 2014)

Quimby4 said:


> I have heard of many Harborside owners using the Cove Pools and Cove Beach with out any problems. Can some Tuggers chime in here?


The large pool near the Cove, known as The Baths Pool, is available to everybody.
The Baths:





Cain at The Cove and The Cascades (pool between the Reef and Cove) are generally inaccessible, as you have to pass through security checkpoints to access the area, and they check for Cove/Reef wristbands there.  But there are occasional reports of Harborsiders being able to use these.

Cove Beach is open to all, though there still is this language on Atlantis' website:


> Step barefoot onto the warm sands of The Cove beach. This tranquil stretch of white and turquoise waters is reserved for guest [sic] of The Cove Atlantis.


----------



## komosatp (Dec 23, 2015)

komosatp said:


> access granted to Harborside owners is *based on a MAP*, not on what some particular legal entity owns.
> ...
> Back to *The Map*: basing Harborside owners' access to Atlantis on a map instead of an enumerated-list-of-attractions-owned-by-a-legal-entity is a very important detail.  It means that Atlantis has the freedom to split up the resort without having to renegotiate the access deed with Harborside.  But it also assures Harborside owners that a change in ownership won't impact what we owners can access.





komosatp said:


> No, the Cove is most certainly within the map area.


I've mentioned this map before, but I don't think I've posted it. In light of the goings-on in this thread (Grotto Pool now 'exclusive' for  a fee).


----------



## komosatp (Dec 23, 2015)

komosatp said:


> Cove Beach is open to all, though there still is this language on Atlantis' website:



The old language about Cove Beach is gone.  It now says this:





> _Step barefoot onto the warm sands of Cove Beach. This tranquil stretch of white sand and turquoise waters is the perfect place to unwind at The Cove Atlantis._


----------



## Helios (Dec 23, 2015)

This is a pretty sad way to generate revenue...how much are they charging per chair?  Can multiple people access the pool if they share a chair to leave their towels?


----------



## Lingber (Dec 27, 2015)

This is also one of my favorite spots at Atlantis! I would be very interested to know the fees and any info on how to book. Are they able to be reserved the day before? 

One of my least favorite things about Atlantis is the difficulty in finding chairs if you go over from Harborside past 10:00am. We would gladly pay to reserve some chairs one or two days of our trip to avoid the hassle. 

Hoping someone is able to post details. We go in just over two months and can't wait! :whoopie:


----------



## Helios (Dec 27, 2015)

Lingber said:


> This is also one of my favorite spots at Atlantis! I would be very interested to know the fees and any info on how to book. Are they able to be reserved the day before?
> 
> One of my least favorite things about Atlantis is the difficulty in finding chairs if you go over from Harborside past 10:00am. We would gladly pay to reserve some chairs one or two days of our trip to avoid the hassle.
> 
> Hoping someone is able to post details. We go in just over two months and can't wait! :whoopie:



I guess you are right, paying for the security of having a chair is valuable.  The cabanas located thought the Waterpark are nice, but they are pricey.  I like the ones that can be accessed from the back of the baths pool and river, they feel pretty private and get good service.


----------



## smitty2445 (Dec 27, 2015)

We were there first week of November. No one was checking wristbands in the water park and had no problem finding chairs to sit in even after 10am at Cove beach or pool area. The Cove to us seemed the best beach out of all. I'm sure it wasn't as busy as earlier in the year.
The only private place they were watching was the bar and cabanas that were for owners only of the Cove. You couldn't sit at the beach area directly in front of the cabanas but could walk thru it.


----------



## Lingber (Dec 28, 2015)

moto x said:


> I guess you are right, paying for the security of having a chair is valuable.  The cabanas located thought the Waterpark are nice, but they are pricey.  I like the ones that can be accessed from the back of the baths pool and river, they feel pretty private and get good service.



Yes. To me it is worth it. One of my least favorite things on vacation is fighting the crowds and we always travel to Harborside during spring break or summer when the crowds are the largest. If they didn't bring in hundreds from the cruise ships, it wouldn't be so bad but since it is, I would gladly pay to reserve a chair in a good location for a couple of days. Still hoping for details


----------



## okwiater (Dec 28, 2015)

moto x said:


> I guess you are right, paying for the security of having a chair is valuable.  The cabanas located thought the Waterpark are nice, but they are pricey.  I like the ones that can be accessed from the back of the baths pool and river, they feel pretty private and get good service.



How much do they run?


----------



## Helios (Dec 28, 2015)

okwiater said:


> How much do they run?



Pricey depends on your situation, I guess.  Everything is expensive at Atlantis...IIRC, the base cost per day is about $150.  There are add ons such as the cost of a small fridge, stocking the fridge, wifi, etc.  Some cabanas are larger.  The cost varies depending on the size.  That's my recollection from January 2015. Add VAT to that and tips.  Multiply times the number of days and it can add to more a large number...But you get your preferred seating.


----------



## CPNY (Aug 20, 2019)

komosatp said:


> So I finally got a response to my letter.   They actually sent the response a while ago, but to my prior address.
> 
> The gist of the response is that Atlantis/Kerzner is maintaining that the Cove has not replaced the Royal Towers as premiere because the Royal still has the most expensive room on property (Bridge Suite) and the greatest number of premium rooms and suites (Club Level).  And the HRA board accepts that position.
> 
> ...



Looks like Atlantis concedes as to the cove being the premier luxury hotel lol. Also, why do we have to pay for gym access??


----------



## komosatp (Aug 20, 2019)

CPNY said:


> View attachment 13511
> 
> Looks like Atlantis concedes as to the cove being the premier luxury hotel lol. Also, why do we have to pay for gym access??


Since somebody else revived this thread, there's a detail I haven't yet brought up in the nearly 12 year old issue.

As I posted before, Cove/Reef, etc. were clearly included on the map of phase III amenities for several years....I know it was on my purchase documents. But at some point in 2010, a different map was integrated into the ownership documents. If you're a HRA owner, you can pull up you governing documents on the website.

The new map does not include Cove and Reef land as part of the included amenities. You can see it on page 246. You can also see the old map on page 229.

I feel that this move by the HRA BODs was a bit sleazy, since they obviously agreed to this change AFTER this issue was brought to their attention and they apparently did not seek compensation from Atlantis for shrinking the area. Buy a lawyer friend advised me that they'd probably claim this was within their rights to make amendments for technical errors.

One good thing about the new map was that Cove beach is pretty indisputably part of the core land we should be allowed to access.


----------



## Sea Six (Aug 20, 2019)

Is it me or do the yellow towel Cove people seem especially snobby when they plop their yellow towels in the Aquavanture areas?


----------



## CPNY (Aug 20, 2019)

komosatp said:


> Since somebody else revived this thread, there's a detail I haven't yet brought up in the nearly 12 year old issue.
> 
> As I posted before, Cove/Reef, etc. were clearly included on the map of phase III amenities for several years....I know it was on my purchase documents. But at some point in 2010, a different map was integrated into the ownership documents. If you're a HRA owner, you can pull up you governing documents on the website.
> 
> ...


I haven’t seen the map, but is that why we have to pay for the gym? It’s not part of the map since they moved it when they built the spa? That’s ridiculous considering royal towers guests have it for free. Also, all beaches up to the high water mark are public. Which works for me since I don’t need to sit in those dirty brown chairs anyway.


----------



## komosatp (Jan 19, 2022)

komosatp said:


> Since somebody else revived this thread, there's a detail I haven't yet brought up in the nearly 12 year old issue.
> 
> As I posted before, Cove/Reef, etc. were clearly included on the map of phase III amenities for several years....I know it was on my purchase documents. But at some point in 2010, a different map was integrated into the ownership documents. If you're a HRA owner, you can pull up you governing documents on the website.
> 
> ...


Resurrecting this thread in light of today's news that the Beach Tower is going to be re-done and apparently separately branded.









						Pharrell Williams and David Grutman to open new resort in the Bahamas
					

Designed by The Rockwell Group, the new luxury resort will be part of Atlantis Paradise Island.




					www.cnn.com
				




To my disappointment and surprise, it looks like the land between the Coral and Beach towers was not included in the 'core land' when HRA was initially developed. So it sound like they can take the lazy-lazy river and that pool area and not have to re-negotiate our access fee.


----------



## komosatp (Jan 19, 2022)

CPNY said:


> I haven’t seen the map, but is that why we have to pay for the gym? It’s not part of the map since they moved it when they built the spa? That’s ridiculous considering royal towers guests have it for free. Also, all beaches up to the high water mark are public. Which works for me since I don’t need to sit in those dirty brown chairs anyway.


Better late than never?

Anyway, when HRA opened the gym had a fee for everyone. It was only when Atlantis went down the resort-fee model that it became 'free' but only because it was thrown into the justification for the resort fee.


----------



## emeryjre (Jan 20, 2022)

Somebody better tell Pharrell and David to negotiate a new deal for WiFi.  The current WiFi is less than World Class for the $50.00 resort fee.  At Harborside we pay $25.00 a day for the same network.


----------

