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

[mmchili]

ERW; as a lease holder, at the end of the lease we own nothing. As a co-owner, we own a portion of the resort, of whatever value there is.

Here are some links to the Canmore property.
http://cheatauworld.ca/timeline.htm
http://www.rmoutlook.com/article/20110804/RMO0801/308049987/-1/rmo0801/fraud- charges-laid-in-time-share-scam
http://cheatauworld.ca/chateauworld.htm
http://www.servicealberta.gov.ab.ca/pdf/undertakings/FTA-Royal_Crown_Resorts-Apr_19 _07.pdf
http://my.opera.com/CHEATauWorld/blog/index.dml/tag/Kim Schram

 

[aden2]

So here's what I'm wondering, some owners have already retained lawyers that will represent them at court, but won't whatever decision the judge makes impact all owners the same?

[COLOR="royalblue"]In the Canmore case the timeshare holders who came forward were the ones being considered damages, even though the Judge stated that he was confident that there were many more timeshare holders.[/COLOR]

 

[ERW]

aden2 - would filing the Form 67 qualify as coming forward? And in this case so far, there are no real damages to award, so far it is more of a cease and desist request (or rather an objection) in relation to allowing Northwynd to go forward with their request. Or am I off base?

 

[aden2]

aden2 - would filing the Form 67 qualify as coming forward? And in this case so far, there are no real damages to award, so far it is more of a cease and desist request (or rather an objection) in relation to allowing Northwynd to go forward with their request. Or am I off base?

1., have you written to Northwynd (you could email thems)stating that you are withholding for there numerious violations of the contract, when you get their reply go to Service Alberta and print a complaint form. Make sure you check off "timeshare". Make a formal complaint and attached your letters and Norwthyn's respond. There is an address and fax # on the form.

2. do fill out the affavidit and form 67. You can get it notorize at a court house free of charge. You can also fax it to the Civil Divison Vancouver.

3. comments from Canmore court action I’m disappointed because these charges are specific to the issues of 59 members and we know there are a lot more victims than that,” she said.

Goodwin also expressed concern because Muran pleaded guilty to Fair Trading Act charges in the past and “got a plea deal, a slap on the wrist and a wag of the finger.

“I want to see serious penalties for this naughty corporate behaviour,” she said.

Under a previous name, Royal Club Resorts (RCR), the company and Muran were charged in 2004 with 125 charges in relation to failing to provide timely refunds to customers who cancelled their contracts.

 

[Judythreetimes]

I am sending you an email..this thread jumps arounf so much, I am unsure what is and isn't happening. We are extremely pissed at this company...

 

[Judythreetimes]

Maybe...no one got anything in the mail about what was going on at this resort? I know we sure as hell didn't. We have had nothing but problems with this Timeshare from the beginning. They are rude and obnoxious. All of them.

 

[marbel62]

With regards to surrender, which I plan to do, I took this mess to my lawyer along with the contract I signed in 2000. She pointed out that Provision 13 (Default of the Lessee in any payment required under this Lease) allows me to surender the property through non-payment for 16 months at which time it will be considered that I have offered it for sale back to the lessor for.....(multiple calculations)...a small amount. But it does NOT allow them to charge me for surrender of the lease!

She wrote a letter for me stating the above.

Our lease also states the above, but it goes on to say that " If the Lessor accepts the deemed offer as aforesaid, the Lessor shall be entitled to the Lessee's leasehold interest..." , the critical word being " accepts ".
I doubt that Northwynd will accept the taking back( without cost to owners) of defaulted timeshares, since they have already said in today's market they are unsaleable, in a list of their explanations ( excuses ) why they are in such financial dire straights.They need money and don't want to be stuck with more inventory they can't sell, hence this money making scheme they have come up with, at the owners' expense.
I too do not want to pay out any more money to help this company fix the problems they inherited from FRPL. Surely when a company buys another, they ought to do due diligence to find out the financial state of affairs (and the state of the property bought) of the company they are buying. Seems to me we owners are the ones footing the bill to protect the investments of the Northwynd group.
The best scenario for all owners would be that Northwynd et al goes bankrupt. The only way I see this happening is if no owner pays them any money. However, I know most owners are afraid to do this, because of Northwynd's threat of legal action, collection agency etc. So, this company will make its millions of dollars in this scheme and laugh all the way to the bank at us owners. I sure hope there will be a class action suit eventually and that we owners will be able to recoup some, if not all, of our losses.

 

[ERW]

I am filling out the Form 67 but haven't contemplated the Service Alberta option, but I'm thinking the more brought up about this whole mess, the better.

I still think that once a judge sees all of the opposition to what Northwynd is trying to pull, he/she would be hard pressed to allow it to happen.

I still have some things that are not quite clear in my mind:

1) Is the resort still considered to be in receivership and if so, is there a trustee in place that is considered to be arms length from Northwynd?

2) Is there any sort of consensus as to what should be stated in the Form 67? I don't beleive a judge would consider financial hardship on the part of the timeshare owner to be a legitimate reason. From what I understand, the process that Northwynd is pursueing is the area to be objected to. I am thinking Northwynd's demands to choose to stay or go by May 31st before the decision has been actually considered by the courts would be one reason. Breaking various clause in the contract regarding mtce fees, not setting up an owners association, late financial statements and insufficient consultation regarding the renovations would be some of the reasons. Are there any others that would be considered relevent? I would add that concerns regarding the solvency of Northwynd and what would happen to owners' "investment" if Northwynd decided to go belly up in 6 months would be another issue (if the judge were to find Northwynd's request reasonable, I would want to see the funds placed under the control of an independant trustee appointed by the courts so owner's mtce payments would not "disappear".)

Any other important issues I am missing?

I think consistency of the message being sent to the BC courts is important. I probably should have posted these comments/questions a month ago so some common ground could be reached amoung all of us.

And I wonder if the folks at Northwynd/Northmont monitor this string of comments?

 

[browger]

Form 67

Sorry, but we just found out about this site and have been trying to digest all the info. We are wondering how to find this 'form 67'

We have been reading the original lease, and have been reading section
12 about default of lease and any payment required under the lease.
(Page 3) 'Fairmont Vacation at Riverside'. It is all quite interesting, it looks like they need to pay us, not the other way around. 50% of 1/40 of the purchase price for an annual lease (if surrendering or defaulting after 16 months).

We are running out of time, this is why I don't have the time to try and search out where to find the form. I called the Lawyer Kellie Hamilton, and she wants $400.00, and I know for a fact that hundreds have been in touch with her, so again, feeling a little wary about this. Is this another money grab, or should we be doing it!

 

[stan Smith]

I am filling out the Form 67 but haven't contemplated the Service Alberta option, but I'm thinking the more brought up about this whole mess, the better.

I still think that once a judge sees all of the opposition to what Northwynd is trying to pull, he/she would be hard pressed to allow it to happen.

I still have some things that are not quite clear in my mind:

1) Is the resort still considered to be in receivership and if so, is there a trustee in place that is considered to be arms length from Northwynd?

2) Is there any sort of consensus as to what should be stated in the Form 67? I don't beleive a judge would consider financial hardship on the part of the timeshare owner to be a legitimate reason. From what I understand, the process that Northwynd is pursueing is the area to be objected to. I am thinking Northwynd's demands to choose to stay or go by May 31st before the decision has been actually considered by the courts would be one reason. Breaking various clause in the contract regarding mtce fees, not setting up an owners association, late financial statements and insufficient consultation regarding the renovations would be some of the reasons. Are there any others that would be considered relevent? I would add that concerns regarding the solvency of Northwynd and what would happen to owners' "investment" if Northwynd decided to go belly up in 6 months would be another issue (if the judge were to find Northwynd's request reasonable, I would want to see the funds placed under the control of an independant trustee appointed by the courts so owner's mtce payments would not "disappear".)

Any other important issues I am missing?

I think consistency of the message being sent to the BC courts is important. I probably should have posted these comments/questions a month ago so some common ground could be reached amoung all of us.

And I wonder if the folks at Northwynd/Northmont monitor this string of comments?

You bet Northwynd is monitoring these messages!! I feel this IS a "money grab" and the only way to fight a bully is to stand up against them and show them it will cost more to try and intimidate folks than to tell them the truth. The only way to stop bullying is to stand up against it! I have signed up with a lawyer.

 

[aden2]

You may be familiar with court proceedings and trials, but proceedings commenced by petition are different in several ways. First, the person starting the action is called the petitioner, and the person defending the action is called the petition respondent. And, if a proceeding is started with a petition, there is no trial with witnesses. Instead, the matter is heard by a judge, and the evidence is presented by affidavits only

Before the hearing, the petitioner cannot ask for documents from the petition respondent or ask him or her questions. All evidence is presented in the form of affidavits


Suggested Lawyers:
sunchaser@coxtaylor.ca Attention Lindsay LeBlanc - they are out of Victoria; retainer is $300.

Law firm in Calgary
We are a law firm located in Calgary, Alberta, and we have been asked to investigate the assessment against the owners of timeshare properties at Sunchasers Vacation Villas.If you are interested in doing so, please contact our offices for further details."

Robert C. Forsyth
System Administrator
DOCKEN KLYM
403-269-3612
robert@docken.com

Also The Alberta Fair Trading Act re: timeshares , it applies to Northwynd.

Hope this info is helpful!

 

[Spark1]

My lawyer in Saskatchewan says the same. He is not familiar with the law in BC but if this was in Saskatchewan he maintains they have the right to do what they are attempting. I also contacted Northwynd as I have a week booked in late June that I have paid Maintenance on. Northwynd says that if I comply with one of the options offered including the option to buy my way out I am entitled to come and enjoy my booked week. (Actually the lady I spoke to at Northwynd was very cordial and patient with me). I think the court case in June is to give them legal grounds to downsize the resort based on the leases they will have moving forward but it may include other options they are seeking. I will be making a decision over the next week on what I will do. Good luck to everyone on their decisions.

Northwynd is a Alberta based company from Calgary Alberta. If they are doing things according to consumar laws they can be charged buy Service Alberta PH. 18774274088. Get a complaint form and mail it in buy fax.

 

[ERW]

Interesting information Aden - my understanding is that under the existing terms of the various leases/purchase agreements, Northwynd would not be able to do what they are proposing. The only way they can proceed is by petitioning the courts to clarify if the contracts will allow Northwynd to proceed. Barring that, see if the judge that hears the petition feels that the circumstances are such that Northwynd is justified in doing what they are doing. Saying yes to this would open the door to Northwynd to proceed.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

My take on this? If the resort buildings are legitimately in such bad shape and need to renovations to meet building codes, I understand. However, I do not agree with how they have gone about this. No real consultation with the owners that will be footing the bulk of the bill, a "do or die" ultimatum ( before a decision is handed down) to either accept their terms or buy your lease out, and finally, no assurances that the monies collected would be held in trust to be released in stages as the work is completed. It appears to me the money would just disappear into a pit and if Northwynd goes under, our money disappears as well. Or for that matter that in 2 or three years time, they won't be back looking for another 3, 4 or $5,000.00

 

[Spark1]

I wonder if this fair trade act applies in BC? Also, it says any transaction, so hopefully that would include leases? Does anyone know? If this was a purchase gone bad we could let them repossess the item or give it back but a lease seems to be different? Does anyone in this situation have a deeded timeshare? Mine is called a "vacation experience lease". Some experience, huh?

Yes it does, reason Northwynd is a Calgay based Company.

 

[mmchili]

The audited financial statements for 2012 were recently posted on Sunchaser’s web-site, visit http://sunchaservillas.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/December-31-2012-Financial-Statements.pdf

I received no email from Northmont/Northwynd advising that the financials were being posted on the web-site nor that they are available.

aden2; which clause of which contract requires the 15% replacement reserve? I have a copy of three different contracts and neither make reference to the 15% replacement reserve.

gilker; the 15% management fee goes to Northmont/Northwynd as pure profit. We get no specific service (accounting, administration, etc) for the 15% fee other than the name of Resort Villa Management (RVM).

The lessees and co-owners pay for everything, all the costs incurred by RVM and a significant amount billed back to RVM by NW, which is stated in the 2012 Financial Statements under ‘Off-site wages and benefits’ at $979,854, an increase from 2011 at $721,400.

 

[gilker]

The audited financial statements for 2012 were recently posted on Sunchaser’s web-site, visit http://sunchaservillas.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/December-31-2012-Financial-Statements.pdf

I received no email from Northmont/Northwynd advising that the financials were being posted on the web-site nor that they are available.

aden2; which clause of which contract requires the 15% replacement reserve? I have a copy of three different contracts and neither make reference to the 15% replacement reserve.

gilker; the 15% management fee goes to Northmont/Northwynd as pure profit. We get no specific service (accounting, administration, etc) for the 15% fee other than the name of Resort Villa Management (RVM).

The lessees and co-owners pay for everything, all the costs incurred by RVM and a significant amount billed back to RVM by NW, which is stated in the 2012 Financial Statements under ‘Off-site wages and benefits’ at $979,854, an increase from 2011 at $721,400.

so for that 15% management fee, the larger the 'reno' bill, the larger their profit?? could that be why the reno's have escalated so high?

 

[Spark1]

Maybe...no one got anything in the mail about what was going on at this resort? I know we sure as hell didn't. We have had nothing but problems with this Timeshare from the beginning. They are rude and obnoxious. All of them.

We have friends that converted to RCI points and they to have not received this outrageous renovation package. They say that because they have points they are not responsible for the payment and somebody else pays it I do not know much about this point system and can not see why they are exempted from paying these fees. I hope this is not true because it will take out a group of owners that will not be fighting these high fees. It will also give a false reading about how the majority of the owners feel about these renovation costs.

 

[aden2]

Vacation Experience Lease - REPLACEMENT RESERVE 15%
#10. (h)"as compensation for its services the Manger shall be entitled to annual fee equal to fifteen per cent (15%) of the aggregate of the Replacement Reserves".

 

[mmchili]

Spark1 - We have converted to RCI points and RECEIVED an invoice for our proportionate share of the Renovation Project Fee for our annual week. Perhaps your friend has an biennual-even week which will be invoiced next year, 2014.

aden2 - The last paragraph of clause 10 of our 1996 Vacation Villa Lease states: "As compensation for its services the Manager shall be entitled to an annual fee (the "Management Fee") equal to fifteen per cent (15%) of the aggregate of the Replacement Reserves and the Operating Costs assessed in each calendar year with respect to the Project." I interpret this to mean the management fee is 15% and that it applies to the operating costs and replacement reserves.

Regarding default of lessee, our agreement states “If the lessor accepts the deemed offer ---“. The key word is “If”. The lessor (Northmont/Northwynd) is not required or obligated to accept the “deemed offer”, only "if" it accepts. “If” is discretionary, not mandatory word.

The resort is not under receivership; Fairmont Resort Properties (FRPL) is defunct. The receivership under CCAA was finalized in July, 2010 when the resort was transferred to Northmont.

Yes, I believe Northmont/Northwynd and Resort Villa Management monitor TUGBBS.

I believe it is very important for each owner, lessee and co-owner, to respond to the petition filed by the trustee, Matkin, whether as an owner, an owner with a lawyer or as a group with a lawyer. The Judge, Petitioner Matkin and Respondent Northmont should be made aware of the owner’s concerns.

Form 67 and instructions can be found at: http://www.supremecourtbc.ca/sites/default/files/web/Defending-a-Proceeding-Started-by-Petition.pdf

 

[Spark1]

Maybe...no one got anything in the mail about what was going on at this resort? I know we sure as hell didn't. We have had nothing but problems with this Timeshare from the beginning. They are rude and obnoxious. All of them.

I feel none of us know what is going on at this resort. Did everyone read up about the limited subsidy agreement between Northmont and RVM. Google Limited Subsidy. Read about the cost overruns on this 7000 building. Everybody knows renovations are more expensive than new construction. They talk about polyB plumbing, hell lots of buildings have this pipe, They talk about the electrical behind the walls, if the electrical was not done properly the place would of burnt down buy now. All of this was inspected buy Provincial inspectors. With renovations nobody will know what the price will be. We live in Mexico in the winter months and people joke about how slow the mexicans work,i have watched how construction workers work at this resort,the Mexicans have them beat. The costs overruns will be high, this price between 28 and now 50 million means nothing. It would of been cheaper to push the buildings down and start over. Northwynd will take advantage of the timeshare owners. This is Canada after 20 years everything is old, in Europe they live in their homes over 400 years. Once the timeshare Owners finish paying for this Major Renovations,watch what will happen to the maintenance fees, they will double. This is why i am walking away from this resort.

 

[mmchili]

Spark1 - The maintenance fees are bound to increase after NW does a capital reserve fund study to build up the reserves for the next round of renovations, alterations, etc.

 

[nofair]

We would like to contact the Victoria group you have just joined. Could please pass on the contact information? Thanks.


You can contact Cox Taylor website: www.coxtaylor.ca
Their office is in Victoria

 

[Misery1]

Northwynd has not earned anyone's trust

The CCAA Monitor recommended to the Court to accept the Offer (Northwynd) within the CCAA proceedings, because the following benefits would be achieved:
a) Northwynd LP will continue operating the majority of the existing business of the Fairmont Group as a going-concern;
b) retention of employees' jobs will continue for many of its staff;
c) the management and administration of the Fairmont Group and the remaining Fairmont Resort Non-CCAA Debtor entities will continue without significant interruption;
d) timeshare usage will be essentially unchanged for the more than 15,000 timeshare owners who have purchased timeshare interest from the Fairmont Group; and
e) Northwynd LP will take the responsibility (as contemplated in the Offer) for the repair of Building 7000.

If Northwynd agreed to take responsibility (which included the trust where $400 of inventory time share and reversionary program weeks sold were required to be deposited to) why has the deficit of the repairs been passed on solely to the timeshare owners? By creating the Limited Subsidy Agreement between Northmont and RVM (even though they own both of these companies) they have been able to distance themselves from any obligation they agreed to under CCAA? In addition, by them stopping selling timeshares etc. in 2011 they bankrupted the trust that was created as part of the CCAA to fund the repairs). The positives noted in all of those monitoring reports was the consistent flow of cash coming from all of our timeshare maintenance fees! The actions Northwynd is trying to get the courts to agree to (altering all of our agreements, changing weeks, removing buildings) is a substantial change in our interests. Northwynd has sold off a substantial amount of interests it acquired (Makaha Resort & Golf Club, Costa Maya Reef (they transferred those poor timeshare owners to Lake Okanagan and then sold the property) and Rancho Banderas.

You only need to look at how Northwynd has treated timeshare owners at these resorts to see our future. We will lose our resort in the end, one way or another, the question is how much more money are you will to invest into this sinking ship. I too have joined one of the lawyer represented groups.

 

[nofair]

Twofus,
We would like to contact the Victoria group you have just joined. Could please pass on the contact information? Thanks.

Website: www.coxtaylor.ca
The victoria office
So far the group is growing quick. Request to join and you will receive an email with all details and the deadline is set for 27 May to respond..maybe they will extend it.

 

[Spark1]

The CCAA Monitor recommended to the Court to accept the Offer (Northwynd) within the CCAA proceedings, because the following benefits would be achieved:
a) Northwynd LP will continue operating the majority of the existing business of the Fairmont Group as a going-concern;
b) retention of employees' jobs will continue for many of its staff;
c) the management and administration of the Fairmont Group and the remaining Fairmont Resort Non-CCAA Debtor entities will continue without significant interruption;
d) timeshare usage will be essentially unchanged for the more than 15,000 timeshare owners who have purchased timeshare interest from the Fairmont Group; and
e) Northwynd LP will take the responsibility (as contemplated in the Offer) for the repair of Building 7000.

If Northwynd agreed to take responsibility (which included the trust where $400 of inventory time share and reversionary program weeks sold were required to be deposited to) why has the deficit of the repairs been passed on solely to the timeshare owners? By creating the Limited Subsidy Agreement between Northmont and RVM (even though they own both of these companies) they have been able to distance themselves from any obligation they agreed to under CCAA? In addition, by them stopping selling timeshares etc. in 2011 they bankrupted the trust that was created as part of the CCAA to fund the repairs). The positives noted in all of those monitoring reports was the consistent flow of cash coming from all of our timeshare maintenance fees! The actions Northwynd is trying to get the courts to agree to (altering all of our agreements, changing weeks, removing buildings) is a substantial change in our interests. Northwynd has sold off a substantial amount of interests it acquired (Makaha Resort & Golf Club, Costa Maya Reef (they transferred those poor timeshare owners to Lake Okanagan and then sold the property) and Rancho Banderas.

You only need to look at how Northwynd has treated timeshare owners at these resorts to see our future. We will lose our resort in the end, one way or another, the question is how much more money are you will to invest into this sinking ship. I too have joined one of the lawyer represented groups.

Everyone should check out (THE SUNCHASER VACATION VILLAS AT RIVERSIDE,HILLSIDE AND RIVERVIEW) Management's Discussion and Analysis. You will see on page2 that Fairmont was in default of its obligations to mortgage bondholders who had invested funds in FRPL. Finance Ltd. On March4 2010 Northwynd Properties Real Estate Investment Trust (Northwynd) was formed, the holders of mortgage bonds issued by FRPL,exchanged their bonds for units of the trust Concurrently. It is hard for me to believe that Northwynd did not know what was happening was audited statements and the condition of this resort. Were Northwynd the bond holders of FRPL, Finance Ltd.