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

[komosatp]

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.

These two pools (Cascades and Cain) and the Cove Beach are located on land denoted with cross hatching in Exhibit C of the “First Amendment to Use and Access Deed”. It is clear that Atlantis is violating the terms of Use and Access Deed by restricting Harborside owner access, and that it is in the best interest of Harborside to vigorously assert our access rights to the entirety of Atlantis’ grounds.

In 2007-08, I alerted the board to my concerns about this issue. At the time, the board chose not to further escalate the matter for several stated reasons, though only one was legally significant: Atlantis’ position that rooms in The Cove had not replaced the “Royal Towers Rooms as the Atlantis Resorts’ premier luxury Hotel Rooms”.

New Developments

Since my letters in 2007-08, Atlantis has publicly changed the way it classifies The Cove amongst its hotel towers. Given the way it now classifies The Cove, it can no longer, in good faith, deny access to Harborside guests: Atlantis is now explicitly advertising The Cove as the unequivocally superior category of accommodations at the resort:

• On Atlantis’ website: Stylish and dynamic, The Cove offers the ultimate escape within the world of Atlantis
• In a pamphlet available at atlantismeetings.com: Most luxurious amenities and services
• In a TravelZoo August 2010 Promotion: $199 ... Royal Towers -- 4-star, in the heart of the action near the casino; $249 ... The Reef -- 4-star beachside studios with a kitchen; $349 ... The Cove -- 5-star all-suite resort with an adults-only area;

By virtue of the agreements between Harborside and Atlantis, Atlantis should be classifying Harborside owners and guests as if they are in the same category as Cove guests, and granting them access to the same amenities. While it is within Atlantis’ prerogative to re-classify hotel guests in any manner it sees fit, it is compelled by the agreements it made with Harborside to treat Harborside guests as if they were guests of “the Atlantis Resorts’ premier luxury Hotel Rooms”. Today, the premier luxury hotel rooms are indisputably at The Cove.

While access to two pool areas might seem to be a minor issue, the failure of the association to vigorously defend its access right might allow Atlantis to draw new lines in areas that are much larger (such as the Cove Beach).

Access Agreement and ‘Premier Luxury Hotel Rooms’

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.

Implications

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.

Remedy

Fortunately, there is a simple remedy to this situation. Atlantis can grant access to these areas in the same manner as they grant them to Cove guests. Alternatively (and far more complicated), Atlantis and Harborside can re-negotiate the access agreement, refund a material proportion of the access fees paid since the opening of Phase III, and compensate owners for the diminished value of the access agreement.

If Atlantis no longer wants to classify Harborside guests as ‘premier’, I expect the associations’ boards of directors to act in the best interest of its owners, and seek appropriate compensation from Atlantis. Should Atlantis maintain the nonsensical position that the Royal Towers are still the ‘premiere’ accommodations at the resort, then I urge the board to resolve this dispute through litigation.

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

 

[timeos2]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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).

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

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]

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]

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".

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]

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

Anita

 

[siesta]

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

thanks for fighting the good fight, someone has to.

 

[Ken555]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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],

Thank you for contacting the Board of Directors with your concern regarding access to the pools located at the Cove Hotel, This letter is being sent on behalf of the Board of Directors of Harborside Resort Condominium II Association Limited and Harborside Resort II Vacation Ownership Association Limited.

During the most recent Board of Directors' meetings, all of the boards which are responsible for the management of the resort discussed the issues associated with the use of The Cove pools by our owners. The Boards of Directors in the past have done extensive research on this issue and have responded to your concerns. In the Boards' view, the underlying facts have not materially changed; therefore the position of the Boards has not changed. The Boards acknowledge the consistent position of Kerzner International Hotels Limited and its affiliates ("Kerzner") that it is not Kerzner's intention for The Cove hotel rooms to replace the Royal Towers as the premier luxury hotel rooms in the Atlantis Resort complex. Rate information provided by Kerzner supports this position, demonstrating that the Royal Towers houses the most expensive suite at the Atlantis Resort, specifically the Bridge Suite, as well as the largest number of premium rooms and suites. Based on the above information, the Boards must respectfully decline to support your position.

We understand your concern as it relates to future development of the Atlantis property, additions to the Atlantis amenities, access to the beautiful beaches, and the areas covered by the Use and Access Deed. Please know that we too take very seriously the rights and privileges granted under the Use and Access Deed. As the available amenities have expanded over the past few years at Atlantis, our access to the amenities has expanded as well. This growth has been consistent with the Use and Access Deed and accomplished without the necessity to renegotiate or amend the Use and Access Deed or incur any additional burden as an Association.

We appreciate your continued concern and hope that you can continue to enjoy all of the experiences that Harborside at Atlantis has to offer.
Sincerely,

Dale Curtin
President
Harborside Resort Condominium II Association Limited Harborside Resort I/ Vacation Ownership Association Limited

 

[komosatp]

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]

thanks for the update

 

[siesta]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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.

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.

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.

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]

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.