• The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 30 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other Owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 30 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 30th anniversary: Happy 30th Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    Free memberships for every 50 subscribers!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $21,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $21 Million dollars
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    60,000+ subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

[ 2012 ] Fairmont / Sunchaser / Northwynd official thread with lawsuit info!

Petus@18

newbie
Joined
Dec 28, 2017
Messages
164
Reaction score
300
Points
63
We received the following letter today from the Provincial Court of Alberta.

January 8th, 2018


Re: Correspondence Address to Honourable Judge Young.

I take this opportunity to respond to your letter to Judge Young.

Judge Young has issued a written decision on this matter (2017 ABPC 249), and we understand an appeal of the decision has been filed. Accordingly, Judge's Young's authority is now exhausted with respect to everything except the issues of interests and costs, which are subject of a forthcoming decision. She has no power to revisit anything in the aforementioned written decision and has received submissions from counsel on the other matter, which is under consideration.

When a litigant is represented, any communications to and from Judge Young can only occur through counsel, with copies to all parties. If you are unhappy with your current legal representation, you may wish to seek alternative legal advice as to the appropriate steps to take. You may also wish to contact the Law Society of British Columbia and/or the Law Society of Alberta, as they are the organizations that govern the behavior of lawyers. If you have complaints or concerns they will be able to assist you.

Sincerely yours,

Kim Palichuk
Executive Legal Counsel


Please note that the letter mentions that an appeal of Judge Young's decision was filed. Was the appeal done by Geldert or any of his hired group of dopes?. Does anyone has a copy or seen it? I understand Judge Young cannot submit her recommendations regarding interest and costs until this appeal is heard. My feeling is that Geldert/Northmont are using their scare tactics once again to make us pay their crazy settlement right away. Waiting for an appeal takes time, and they are making sure we don't have more time to think what to do next. Would this be right?
 

Scammed!

newbie
Joined
Dec 20, 2017
Messages
104
Reaction score
195
Points
43
I don't know how the law works. But with this public out cry and emails of truth out there, doesn't the Judge have to, or someone in office have to inform the Judge to appoint us all a public lawyer to represent us or someone to represent us? This would be regarding the issues she has not exhausted, like the interest rates and costs? It is no secret that all the officials have been notified that we do not have our lawyer representing us at this time. We have paid money to a lawyer and are out in the cold, and with everything that is happening to all of us this is so serious and the first to happen in Canadian History. We are under totally different circumstances here, as we are the first Canadian timeshare "OWNERS" (wrong) that are fighting for our rights and our lives. I challenge our ROCK to step up and break the rules. This coming from a citizen that broke all the rules banging on everyone's door including the Judge's....which we all know now is not the proper steps. But guess what... it sure as heck got everyone's attention...... Great job everyone getting the word out! Don't leave one stone uncovered, for under one of them is our Rock...
 

CleoB

newbie
Joined
May 31, 2013
Messages
196
Reaction score
190
Points
103
I have just received a warning!!

This potentially affects anyone who:
  • are not paid to date on their Geldert retainers
  • selected option 2
  • parted ways with Geldert
  • did not submit the SIF at all
Michael has initiated Withdrawal of Services on individual statement of claims as early as the beginning of December and is not properly notifying clients he has done so.

The individual reached out to the Edmonton Court House in order to start to put their own legal affairs in order and learned of this action.

Also missed in the filing was there was no Dispute Notice of Interest and Costs submitted which left the individual very financially vulnerable.

The paperwork filed was also done incorrectly so the address on record was not given correctly to be entered so anything being served to the individual would be going to the wrong place.

Document everything for your complaint to the Law Society. This is a clear violation of the Professional Code of Conduct.

This is very significant and had the individual not checked they may have never known about the filing and address error. As a result of not receiving this notice and it being filed improperly by Michael or his representatives from Strathcona Law Group they would not have received important documents related to their on-going legal matters with Northmont. In this case documents could have been filed such as a Judgement against them to allow Northmont to seek restitution without dispute and they would have never known.

If you have parted ways with Michael or he has parted ways with you, he should be notifying you as to the steps related to the Withdrawal of Service but you may want to check yourself with your local Court House where the Statement of Claim was filed to ensure your proper address is on file and to verify what has been filed.
Where did you get his warning from?
 

Punter

TUG Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2014
Messages
59
Reaction score
49
Points
78
Someone posted that KW said at trial if we were canceling we didn’t have to pay the special assessment? If he said that under oath then why are we???!!and please correct me if i misunderstood something

Because, our legal representation negotiated an “excellent settlement” that failed to recognize our rights on interest, costs, and NM’s neglect on contributing their proportionate share.

Oh, and they didn’t run it by us prior to settling.
 

CleoB

newbie
Joined
May 31, 2013
Messages
196
Reaction score
190
Points
103
You can phone the court where your Statement of Claim was filed. Just say the word Northmont and then your Statement of Claim number.
Where do I find my Statement of Claim number?
 

Hey lady

newbie
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
30
Reaction score
14
Points
68
Someone posted that KW said at trial if we were canceling we didn’t have to pay the special assessment? If he said that under oath then why are we???!!and please correct me if i misunderstood something
I believe MG said it was only for 2013.
 

Scammed!

newbie
Joined
Dec 20, 2017
Messages
104
Reaction score
195
Points
43
It could be way worse....we could be living in a third world country where there is misrepresentation, contracts changed without your knowledge, framed stating your someone your not, not being informed of what's really going on by your lawyer, told not to pay a fee you always paid faithfully! That's only to name a few nightmares! I can't imagine what that would be like........


Responding to Punter's post
 
Last edited:

Hey lady

newbie
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
30
Reaction score
14
Points
68
Where do I find my Statement of Claim number?
To find your Statement of Claim number check the document you were served from Sauvageau in 2014. It is the document stating the judgement against you in small claims court. If Sauvageau was unable to serve you, your notice of claim may be with Geldert.
Without your Notice of Claim you do not know which court house to go to.
 

CleoB

newbie
Joined
May 31, 2013
Messages
196
Reaction score
190
Points
103
MG would never present this to NM, even when he claimed he negotiated a deal, so I told him to quit playing games!
When I get my judgement I will file a dispute note claiming what they owe me because of 2009-10 Fraud Scheme. In the meantime I will go in detail today and send them a DEMAND BILL for this amount..
How are you going to prove fraud?
 

Broke Mama

newbie
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
22
Reaction score
6
Points
3
Location
washington
Resorts Owned
Sunchaser
To find your Statement of Claim number check the document you were served from Sauvageau in 2014. It is the document stating the judgement against you in small claims court. If Sauvageau was unable to serve you, your notice of claim may be with Geldert.
Without your Notice of Claim you do not know which court house to go to.
Is this for the owners in the US too?
 
Joined
Dec 19, 2017
Messages
107
Reaction score
315
Points
73
Resorts Owned
Fairmount
I hope everyone is okay after receiving their recent update and wish you all the best while you digest it.

I myself have not brought myself to read the entire thing yet but I am understanding enough to know this is not what my directions were to Michael Geldert and wanted to share with you what I am going to do this morning.

If you decide to follow suit with what I am going to do in sharing my opinion I do not recommend you outright fire Michael, threaten, or try to ask him what his motives are if you want to share your own opinion.

You may even want to ask that he respond to you in writing if he feels the need to respond.

Be courteous, professional, and as indicated email him as directed – here is a few emails that might work to ensure he receives your concerns.
sunchaser@geldertlaw.com
patricia@geldertlaw.com
accounting@geldertlaw.com
info@geldertlaw.com
michael@geldertlaw.com
intrawest@geldertlaw.com


Mr. Geldert

I have started my reviewed of your most recent update sent January 11th but I am still working my way thru it.

Thank-you for ‎finally providing the details of your negotiated settlement that was signed by yourself December 14th and now that I have finally received full details of the negotiated settlement there are particular areas of the settlement agreement I do not agree with. These related to the settlement you alone have had in your possession for almost a month and failed to share until now related directly to the settlement cost, the limited time to prepare to pay these costs, and some of the conditions stipulated. I had to rely on your past updates that only provided vague details and only after receiving this most recent update began to understand the full magnitude of your settlement negotiation.

The SIF form I submitted for November 10th was only provided based on the fact you were only directed to enter into discussions with Northmont reaffirmed by your comments below that implied you understood your direction to take on behalf in the November 6th update.

“Neither side of this dispute wants a repeat of the last settlement discussions that failed to resolve the dispute between you and Northmont. Northmont made it a precondition of our settlement discussions that we have the ability to sign a binding agreement for you. What we want to clarify is that having the ability to sign a prospective settlement agreement does not limit the exercise of our mandate to negotiate reasonable terms for you, or to confirm those terms before arriving at a final agreement. Should the settlement discussions develop into an agreement that we believe can be recommended to you, we will provide a copy to the group for final input prior to finalizing those terms.”

As we also had a personal phone call related to the modified SIF I found on Facebook that you refused to accept you clearly indicated the understanding of the limited scope of the directions you had from me and verbally reaffirmed acknowledged you would not finalize the negotiations without my approval. You also indicated you could be trusted not to use this SIF document as a PIN to my bank account and this was just part of the process to get Northmont to the table.

This negotiated settlement is very one sided to the sole benefit of Northmont and not what you were instructed to do on my behalf – your interpretation may differ but at the end of the day you are only offering an opinion that is paid for by the client who should ultimately decide the proper course of action.

As you are more than likely aware a great many members of the litigation group are not in agreement with your decision and the terms you have negotiated. As a result they are exercising their rites to ensure their interests are heard and will be fairly looked after.

Part of these exercises have been directed towards Judge Young who has replied to members of the litigation group there are judicial protocols she must follow. This included a comment to the effect counsel must initiate contact with her and all parties involved so all parties can be involved to ensure no one party can stand in front of her without the other allowing all sides to speak to the matter mutually at hand.

Now that we have heard from Judge Young as to what the process is to be heard, Michael you need to initiate contact with Judge Young as our existing council. This more than likely will cause you to check your ego at the door but you need to re-open the negotiations with Northmont to discuss options moving forward to serve the interests of everyone involved.

Michael you should have understood if you followed the direction of the court an arbitrator or a ruling from Judge Young would aid in the negations with Northmont as I believe Judge Young believed you were out of your league in entering negotiations with Northmont. She provided you the guidance to assist in reaching something closer to an amical negotiation on behalf of your clients in her decisions’ conclusions and now you must act on this guidance.

You have caused severe distress especially given the timing of the year, lack of transparency, and slow timing of information provided which forced most people to take some form of action to see your decision was not endorsed by the courts as it is not in our own personal best interest, best interests of other member of the litigation group, or the timeshare industry as a whole.

You had a lot of people relying on you who are still forced to rely on you that you have failed so there is limited time for you to right this wrong so seize the opportunity and fix your mistake.

Northmont will not be in favor of returning to the table as they already have the golden egg(s - actually you have done well in giving them pretty much all of them) so this will be very difficult for you to do but you created the current situation alone and it is up to you to initiate corrective action based on your clients instructions not your opinion.

‎Regards,
I was just asked in a private message if this was a letter in jest or if this was actually something worth doing - sorry if I have caused some confusion.

It is actually something worth doing sooner rather than later in your own way.

Late this afternoon I contacted Judge Young's office to inquire about my own letter being received and learned that there is a meeting scheduled sometime next week with herself, Northmont, and Michael to discuss court costs. I am certain the topic of conversation will not be just procedural as according to her assistant Judge Young is not to happy with all the faxes she has received so the message is getting thru to her office something is very wrong.

Right now Michael could be confident in the fact that he has your signed SIF form which can say is your consent and potentially will say it was never disputed by you especially now that all his clients have received all the information related to the settlement agreement.

If he hears no one challenging the SIF they have signed he can twist this to mean acceptance of the negotiated settlement agreement in front of the Judge.

The negotiated settlement document is a very restrictive document that has been very well crafted - from my initial interpretation my opinion is it will severely limit peoples legal rites and remedies in more ways that just a gag order in the future.

Please take the time and email Michael to state your consent was coerced, your real instructions and that they were not followed, and that you have not provided your consented to the negotiated settlement agreement. I am not a lawyer but I think I have put everything in the initial post's letter to cover the bases but definitely open the floor for improvements.

This correspondence can also be used as an opportunity to state to the Judge your instructions were not followed and you have not consented to the negotiated settlement agreement so the message does not get ignored.
 

torqued

newbie
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
102
Reaction score
105
Points
53
Location
Virginia
Resorts Owned
Sunchaser
The settlement amount should not exceed 50% of our original lease amount. Period. We should not pay a dime until a forensic audit is performed. This should be ordered by judge young. NM can pay for the audit performed by a neutral third party.
 

Inquiringmind

newbie
Joined
Dec 31, 2017
Messages
15
Reaction score
13
Points
3
Resorts Owned
Riverside
I was just asked in a private message if this was a letter in jest or if this was actually something worth doing - sorry if I have caused some confusion.

It is actually something worth doing sooner rather than later in your own way.

Late this afternoon I contacted Judge Young's office to inquire about my own letter being received and learned that there is a meeting scheduled sometime next week with herself, Northmont, and Michael to discuss court costs. I am certain the topic of conversation will not be just procedural as according to her assistant Judge Young is not to happy with all the faxes she has received so the message is getting thru to her office something is very wrong.

Right now Michael could be confident in the fact that he has your signed SIF form which can say is your consent and potentially will say it was never disputed by you especially now that all his clients have received all the information related to the settlement agreement.

If he hears no one challenging the SIF they have signed he can twist this to mean acceptance of the negotiated settlement agreement in front of the Judge.

The negotiated settlement document is a very restrictive document that has been very well crafted - from my initial interpretation my opinion is it will severely limit peoples legal rites and remedies in more ways that just a gag order in the future.

Please take the time and email Michael to state your consent was coerced, your real instructions and that they were not followed, and that you have not provided your consented to the negotiated settlement agreement. I am not a lawyer but I think I have put everything in the initial post's letter to cover the bases but definitely open the floor for improvements.

This correspondence can also be used as an opportunity to state to the Judge your instructions were not followed and you have not consented to the negotiated settlement agreement so the message does not get ignored.
I was just asked in a private message if this was a letter in jest or if this was actually something worth doing - sorry if I have caused some confusion.

It is actually something worth doing sooner rather than later in your own way.

Late this afternoon I contacted Judge Young's office to inquire about my own letter being received and learned that there is a meeting scheduled sometime next week with herself, Northmont, and Michael to discuss court costs. I am certain the topic of conversation will not be just procedural as according to her assistant Judge Young is not to happy with all the faxes she has received so the message is getting thru to her office something is very wrong.

Right now Michael could be confident in the fact that he has your signed SIF form which can say is your consent and potentially will say it was never disputed by you especially now that all his clients have received all the information related to the settlement agreement.

If he hears no one challenging the SIF they have signed he can twist this to mean acceptance of the negotiated settlement agreement in front of the Judge.

The negotiated settlement document is a very restrictive document that has been very well crafted - from my initial interpretation my opinion is it will severely limit peoples legal rites and remedies in more ways that just a gag order in the future.

Please take the time and email Michael to state your consent was coerced, your real instructions and that they were not followed, and that you have not provided your consented to the negotiated settlement agreement. I am not a lawyer but I think I have put everything in the initial post's letter to cover the bases but definitely open the floor for improvements.

This correspondence can also be used as an opportunity to state to the Judge your instructions were not followed and you have not consented to the negotiated settlement agreement so the message does not get ignored.
I was just asked in a private message if this was a letter in jest or if this was actually something worth doing - sorry if I have caused some confusion.

It is actually something worth doing sooner rather than later in your own way.

Late this afternoon I contacted Judge Young's office to inquire about my own letter being received and learned that there is a meeting scheduled sometime next week with herself, Northmont, and Michael to discuss court costs. I am certain the topic of conversation will not be just procedural as according to her assistant Judge Young is not to happy with all the faxes she has received so the message is getting thru to her office something is very wrong.

Right now Michael could be confident in the fact that he has your signed SIF form which can say is your consent and potentially will say it was never disputed by you especially now that all his clients have received all the information related to the settlement agreement.

If he hears no one challenging the SIF they have signed he can twist this to mean acceptance of the negotiated settlement agreement in front of the Judge.

The negotiated settlement document is a very restrictive document that has been very well crafted - from my initial interpretation my opinion is it will severely limit peoples legal rites and remedies in more ways that just a gag order in the future.

Please take the time and email Michael to state your consent was coerced, your real instructions and that they were not followed, and that you have not provided your consented to the negotiated settlement agreement. I am not a lawyer but I think I have put everything in the initial post's letter to cover the bases but definitely open the floor for improvements.

This correspondence can also be used as an opportunity to state to the Judge your instructions were not followed and you have not consented to the negotiated settlement agreement so the message does not get ignored.
 

Inquiringmind

newbie
Joined
Dec 31, 2017
Messages
15
Reaction score
13
Points
3
Resorts Owned
Riverside
Great letter. We will write MG something along the same lines. Everybody should. Can we cc Judge Young. Does the fact that Jeke was overturned in the later cord have any consequence here.
 

Hey lady

newbie
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
30
Reaction score
14
Points
68
My lawyer asked me why I signed option 1 on the SIF, as it is binding. The reason is that Geldert said in private emails to myself and others that we
Is this for the owners in the US too?
I was personally served so I have my notice of claim, therefore I know the court house and the file number. Some people were not personally served, even in Canada, and I understand that Geldert may have accepted service on your behalf.
 

aden2

Guest
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
193
Reaction score
292
Points
224
Location
Edmonton
Booklet "Commencing a Claim in Provincial Court Civil page 12 dispute note filing "any claim you may have against the plaintiff if you feel that
the plaintiff owes you money....... The judge will look at both claims at the same time and decide who owes money to whom."
 

greyskies

newbie
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Messages
21
Reaction score
9
Points
3
My lawyer asked me why I signed option 1 on the SIF, as it is binding. The reason is that Geldert said in private emails to myself and others that we

I was personally served so I have my notice of claim, therefore I know the court house and the file number. Some people were not personally served, even in Canada, and I understand that Geldert may have accepted service on your behalf.
So if we opted for option 1,there is no recourse?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
 

Spark1

newbie
Joined
May 8, 2013
Messages
382
Reaction score
394
Points
123
Location
Ponoka alberta canada
Great letter. We will write MG something along the same lines. Everybody should. Can we cc Judge Young. Does the fact that Jeke was overturned in the later cord have any consequence here.
Why would anyone pay this extortion? We never finished the first case. What Northmont did is they highjacked the owners that have LEASE CONTRACTS which sows we are not responsible for Special Assessments! We also would never sign a Cancellation Agreement like theirs neither. This is what an agent said at Service Alberta said——-“you are not cancelled”. This is the e-mail I received from Michael Geldert on November 6/2017 and MLT AIKINS on page 2, item 3. This is David Wotherspoon’s interpretation of the Trustees rights and obligations. David is a very good Lawyer.
- Item no.3, Northmont’s Unilateral Amendments to the VIAs are Unauthorized. Northmont has unilaterally imposed two seperate amendments of the VIAs: First of all they are amending not VIAs, Northmont is amending my Vacation Villa Lease.
1/. An April 18/2016 Amendment to all VIAs entered into prior to January 1/2003 are to
have the pre-2003 VIAs mirror the JEK VIA (The “2016 Amendment”) and
2/. An April 10/2017 Amendment to all VIAs to insert a “Modification to Lands and Resort
Development” provision allowing Northmont to unilaterally modify the “Lands and Resort
Development” as it sees fit (The “2017 Amendment”), collectively, the “Unilateral
Amendments”. This does not prove that Vacation Villa Leases a re r esponsible to pay
“Special Assessments”. This is why we hired Michael Geldert. I had no idea this even
happened and I first found out on November 06/2017. My contract when I put it close.
to a mirror - mirrors itself. I have no idea what JEKs contract looks like and how it
reads, an I am sure it mirrors itself. Then there’s Michael Geldert, yes he wanted out
of this case but I do not like the idea that he became Northmont’s “Bill Collector”.
What we have to do is look at the situation where it was when we hired Michael
Geldert over 4 years ago. We can not include the illegal move that Northmont made
with our Lease Contracts. That does not prove that at the time we hired Michael
Geldert that our LEASE CONTRACTS stated that we had to pay “Special Assessments”.
What Northmont is doing is manipulating the case and is changing the reason why we hired Michael Geldert, that was to protect our Lease Contract. That being said we have a “right-to-use” timeshare, which refers to a Lease-Like Agreement. In this type of timeshare your lease expires after a specified time and you have no Property Ownership therefore no rights in the Property. Without all Northmont’s distractions this is still what our case was all about. We should have never been pressured into paying this amount of money in this case, which is very easy to understand. Why did Northmont want this case to take so long, the answer is the huge bills they are sending out. We have to impress on SERVICE ALBERTA and the JUSTICE MINISTER that this is foul-play by Northmont and they still have not proven that Timeshare Owners of Vacation Villa Leases are required to pay “Special Assessments”. I feel that because of how they brought in the unilateral contracts before they could even prove our Lease Contracts included “Special Assessments”. This is Unauthorized!

Bill 31, which was passed December 13/2017 states “A Better Deal For Consumers and Businesses. This amends the “Fair Trading ACT”. This bill prohibited Businesses from making
“Unilateral Ammendments” to Contracts, unless the Consumer is provided advance notice and is given the right to cancel the Contract. Service Alberta is going to say NO, You can’t use this because we just passed the bill onDecember 13/2017. This does not matter. We are talking about JUSTICE here for thousands of Timeshare Leases that did not get Justice. Do not blame the Consumers of Timeshares, it is the RESPONSIBILTY OF “GOVERNMENTS”, to protect Consumers from “”SCAM,FRAUD, SENIORS ABUSE & WHITE COLLAR CRIME””. The door was left wide open for this new owner of Fairmont Resort Properties Ltd. to extort Consumers that bought a product that is legal to sell in Canada. Because of this, Northmont stands to make $200 Million after they extort all that money and sell off the buildings. Timeshare Owners are not criminals - we are consumers, and there was nothing wrong until Northmont came on the scene.
 

Spark1

newbie
Joined
May 8, 2013
Messages
382
Reaction score
394
Points
123
Location
Ponoka alberta canada
My lawyer asked me why I signed option 1 on the SIF, as it is binding. The reason is that Geldert said in private emails to myself and others that we

I was personally served so I have my notice of claim, therefore I know the court house and the file number. Some people were not personally served, even in Canada, and I understand that Geldert may have accepted service on your behalf.
Every one should wait for a subpoena and go to the court house and fill out the paper at the court house and represent yourself. You have a right to do this and this will load the courts up for years.
 

Hey lady

newbie
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
30
Reaction score
14
Points
68
Someone posted that KW said at trial if we were canceling we didn’t have to pay the special assessment? If he said that under oath then why are we???!!and please correct me if i misunderstood something
Geldert said it only applied in 2013, not today.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2017
Messages
42
Reaction score
70
Points
28
Resorts Owned
Northwynd/Northmont/Sunchaser
I agree with you Spark 1 and I know you have devoted literally years to this and I sympathize so much. What has surprised me greatly is that no agency, no authority has stepped up to support us in this. As far as I can tell, only one young woman with her talk show. I have written many letters - nothing. We are hung out to dry. Wrong and right had no place in our legal system. Double speak, vague language, manipulation in court is what counted. I would have thought Canada was better than this. I was wrong.
 

Spark1

newbie
Joined
May 8, 2013
Messages
382
Reaction score
394
Points
123
Location
Ponoka alberta canada
Great letter. We will write MG something along the same lines. Everybody should. Can we cc Judge Young. Does the fact that Jeke was overturned in the later cord have any consequence here.
Absolutely it does. If this is true this means they can not try to mirror the 2003 and contracts prior to. That means the Vacation Villa Leases are not mirrored to JKEs Contract which was ridiculous. Is this for sure? How can we find this out. Is it true they are also adding on to the Timeshare owners that cancelled and also charging the Special Assessment. Can you copy this and put on Tug or Facebook. I will be working for weeks with the anti fraud division with the RCMP and it would be nice to also report this Thank you. We all have to get after the government they are the ones that created this by not having regulations in place what these New owners have to follow. We are not criminals because we bought a timeshare. They are part of the Canadian Consumer Handbook and we are consumers and do not be afraid of government and demand that you are looked after. They created this by leaving the door opened for these criminals to scam innocent Canadians and Americans for millions. The other product that the government should never allowed was the Legacy for Life. These type of timeshares are illegal in every country except for Canada. How could they sell this saying the buildings were in great shape and 3 years later start the Freedom to Choose. Buy the end of the day we will have sent out many documents and letters to the top government MPS and we start at 4:30 am. So get mad and do not let up with these governments.
 

Tanny13

newbie
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Messages
59
Reaction score
100
Points
43
Resorts Owned
FAIRMONT, Marriott
For those still willing to fight, have a look at the last few years of financial statements from Northmont. There are huge amounts for legal fees. So legal fees are not only included in our maintenance fees, we are also paying our manager 15% of those legal fees, as a management fee. If any costs are to be paid out now, the amount should be deducted from what was included in the maintenance fees.
 

mmchili

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
39
Reaction score
2
Points
8
Re: Post #2940 (re: par.87), the full decision of Justice Young is posted on www.sunchaservillas.ca (Young, re Northmont Resort Properties Ltd. v. Reid – October 11, 2017 – PDF) together with one subsequent decision and six prior decisions.
 

torqued

newbie
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
102
Reaction score
105
Points
53
Location
Virginia
Resorts Owned
Sunchaser
For those still willing to fight, have a look at the last few years of financial statements from Northmont. There are huge amounts for legal fees. So legal fees are not only included in our maintenance fees, we are also paying our manager 15% of those legal fees, as a management fee. If any costs are to be paid out now, the amount should be deducted from what was included in the maintenance fees.
Do you think the 26.8% is a way of charging us legal fees and then we are getting charged again as you stated in your post?
 
Top