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

[Wankel=crook]

My husband and I are on board with your suggestion but we need everyone to bring credentials to keep this meeting private from Wankel et al. Suggestion - bring photo ID plus a copy of your 2018 fee statement that was attached to the Geldert email on 18 January. I will send you a note in conversations to volunteer for screening at the door.

I'm in

 

[tuguser_14]

My husband and I are on board with your suggestion but we need everyone to bring credentials to keep this meeting private from Wankel et al. Suggestion - bring photo ID plus a copy of your 2018 fee statement that was attached to the Geldert email on 18 January. I will send you a note in conversations to volunteer for screening at the door.

 

[#deceived]

Yes, sign me in. Let us know exactly when/where. Thank you. If you can, just follow Danielle Smith tomorrow and phone in to let her know. She will spread the info about the


Can’t make the meeting but applaud your idea(s). We have to all align!

 

[wagga2650]

All I can say Is Wankel you have paper thin skin.If you cant take whats being said on this forum run away.You have screwed so many lives up and now you say we are being complicit, whatever that means.Trying to bully us around again through your lawyer.Why don't you just set up a town hall and face the people you have robbed?

 

[Inquiringmind]

[

In the decision of Judge Young dated October 11, 2017 page 25 conclusion paragraph 89 it states the plaintiff is entitled to costs of this application and if the parties cannot agree on those costs, then they can be spoken to when the parties appear before me with respect to the other issues. The clerk of the court will not be preparing certificates of judgement until the outstanding issues have been resolved.

Are the outstanding issues resolved.? If they are not then why are we being asked to sign off and pay at this point?

 

[MarcieL]

In the decision of Judge Young dated October 11, 2017 page 25 conclusion paragraph 89 it states the plaintiff is entitled to costs of this application and if the parties cannot agree on those costs, then they can be spoken to when the parties appear before me with respect to the other issues. The clerk of the court will not be preparing certificates of judgement until the outstanding issues have been resolved.

Are the outstanding issues resolved.? If they are not then why are we being asked to sign off and pay at this point?

The way I understand it, those that signed off on a settlement are done, negotiations are finished. The settlement has nothing to do with interest rates.

 

[wagga2650]

The way I understand it, those that signed off on a settlement are done, negotiations are finished. The settlement has nothing to do with interest rates.

The problem with saying we signed off is that we signed off before the negotiations started.The only reason most of us signed option 1 was on the agreement we got to see the settlement before agreeing.

 

[Inquiringmind]

The way I understand it, those that signed off on a settlement are done, negotiations are finished. The settlement has nothing to do with interest rates.

With all due respect, can you post a copy of the certificate of judgement on this case P1 4 9 030-4333?

The problem with saying we signed off is that we signed off before the negotiations started.The only reason most of us signed option 1 was on the agreement we got to see the settlement before agreeing.

Show me a copy of the certificate of judgementOn Northmont versus Reid case number P1490304333

 

[Spark1]

Punter use page 96 and you will find what you are looking for.

 

[Scammed!]

The way I understand it, those that signed off on a settlement are done, negotiations are finished. The settlement has nothing to do with interest rates.

If that is the case we need a lawyer. This needs to be brought up today on Danielle Smith as there is a large portion of people in this category and they need to be properly informed of their options.

 

[MarcieL]

Don't shoot the messenger. I am relating what myself and many have been told by lawyers. The settlement was based on our invoice plus 20% this was an exit method they chose. They could've just picked another method out of the air! I totally agree, we as well as many, signed option 1 due to the specification, we would view the agreement after negotiation, did not happen.

 

[MarcieL]

Pose this question to teh lawyer on Danielle's show today. I will not be able to listen to the show, report back please.

 

[FairSun]

In the decision of Judge Young dated October 11, 2017 page 25 conclusion paragraph 89 it states the plaintiff is entitled to costs of this application and if the parties cannot agree on those costs, then they can be spoken to when the parties appear before me with respect to the other issues. The clerk of the court will not be preparing certificates of judgement until the outstanding issues have been resolved.

Are the outstanding issues resolved.? If they are not then why are we being asked to sign off and pay at this point?

I'm no lawyer, but what I understand is that with the settlement agreement, once the conditions of that settlement are completed, NM agrees not to pursue the judgment against that person(s) holding the lease agreement. The lawyers for the two sides would inform the court they have agreed to terms on costs and interest and the case is closed. If you don't agree to settle outside of court, I think NM will seek the costs and interest the same as in the settlement agreement. If the individual successfully disputes those terms and the contract allows 5% annual interest, then NM has stated they will also claim a cancellation fee (potentially $16,000), the 2018 maintenance fee and interest to that date.
I calculated our bill to Dec. 31, 2017 using compound interest of 5% and our total savings would be $16,049.55. Hmmm, plus $16,000 cancellation fee? Plus 2018 fees and fees of a new lawyer, never mind the never-ending grief. Every way we have looked at this, we just don't see a way to lower our out-of-pocket payout now with those court decisions favouring NM's interpretation of our contract.

 

[Scammed!]

I guess my question is was the settlement completed legally if we didn't see it, and we're informed we would?

 

[Tanny13]

I'm no lawyer, but what I understand is that with the settlement agreement, once the conditions of that settlement are completed, NM agrees not to pursue the judgment against that person(s) holding the lease agreement. The lawyers for the two sides would inform the court they have agreed to terms on costs and interest and the case is closed. If you don't agree to settle outside of court, I think NM will seek the costs and interest the same as in the settlement agreement. If the individual successfully disputes those terms and the contract allows 5% annual interest, then NM has stated they will also claim a cancellation fee (potentially $16,000), the 2018 maintenance fee and interest to that date.
I calculated our bill to Dec. 31, 2017 using compound interest of 5% and our total savings would be $16,049.55. Hmmm, plus $16,000 cancellation fee? Plus 2018 fees and fees of a new lawyer, never mind the never-ending grief. Every way we have looked at this, we just don't see a way to lower our out-of-pocket payout now with those court decisions favouring NM's interpretation of our contract.

The hearing for cost and interest is only for those who are NOT in the settlement. I believe most of those are taking their chances and staying on with the resort, and fighting. Perhaps we will end up paying less, perhaps not. The settlement agreement will not change based on Judge Young's decision regarding interest and costs. The amount in your settlement is what you owe, and must be paid by the due date, or Northmont has a judgement against you for an even higher amount (162%). Unfortunately, that's the case if you signed the settlement agreement.

 

[Bewildered]

The hearing for cost and interest is only for those who are NOT in the settlement. I believe most of those are taking their chances and staying on with the resort, and fighting. Perhaps we will end up paying less, perhaps not. The settlement agreement will not change based on Judge Young's decision regarding interest and costs. The amount in your settlement is what you owe, and must be paid by the due date, or Northmont has a judgement against you for an even higher amount (162%). Unfortunately, that's the case if you signed the settlement agreement.

Where are you getting this from?? Like everything MG spouts off, these are just numbers he has been threatened with by NM there is no judgement for the 162%. And I take objection to you assuming that people that checked Option 1 which by the way is all based on 26.8% interest plus the 20% tip MG famously negotiated, feel that is in any way binding if Judge Young decided tomorrow or next week that interest is 5.5%. I would be telling MG to stick it in one call. Your confusing settlements with judgements. The fact is the damn judge never ruled on interest.

 

[Tanny13]

Where are you getting this from?? Like everything MG spouts off, these are just numbers he has been threatened with by NM there is no judgement for the 162%. And I take objection to you assuming that people that checked Option 1 which by the way is all based on 26.8% interest plus the 20% tip MG famously negotiated, feel that is in any way binding if Judge Young decided tomorrow or next week that interest is 5.5%. I would be telling MG to stick it in one call. Your confusing settlements with judgements. The fact is the damn judge never ruled on interest.

Read the settlement agreement - 162% is in there. There is no ruling on interest or costs if you’ve agreed to the settlement. Just the Messenger...

 

[MgolferL]

I have read all these postings over the past days. And am new to the forum. I too have been assesses $42K and as all of you am totally surprised by this outcome. As someone said previously this seemed like such an unbelievable situation that i paid for a timeshare in 1994 (can't quite remember when) then the place goes into bankruptcy (presumably all of my entitlement for the time i paid for is gone) and then i assumed that would b e the end of it...i would just loose my investment. But then it gets bought out of bankruptcy and then they are asking me to pay to release myself...just seemed like an illegal ask. Then this reno fee...I own a timeshare not an interest in this property so how can they ask me to pay for the renovation fees...im thinking cmon that is impossible. All through this time I'm thinking this has just got to go away soon cuz someone will challenge North mount in some lower court to show how crazy this situation is and our legal system and "timeshare law" would protect consumers from this sort of injustice. But to my surprise this actually keeps going. Well OK then the legal battle starts...all of us hire Gilbert and then I'm thinking OK this will soon be over. Then all the years go by and Northmount actually wins this thing in our Canadian court system. Wow they must have good lawyers. OK well then I thought I will be charged the $8000 fee that was assessed to be in 2013 and that would be the end of it. Which is completely unfair but well thats how legal battles go sometimes (I've been involved with many over my business career and you just never know how it can go). But then they actually are able to charge for the fees every year (of a time i was prohibited from using jousting this time) and then charged 27% compounded interested for it all. It just seemed so wrong on so many levels and so illegal on so many levels that this actually can't be happening to us in this country. (i get this if it was Mexico or something)

I live in Calgary and my guess is that there are many of us who live here as well. I would like to suggest that we get together in person next week Tuesday evening to further discuss this and to see if there may be some solutions we can still pursue. I read with interest the appeal that has been started. The letters people have been writing to the Judge. The consumer affairs possibility. The RCMP angle. Anyway i think we should just get ourselves organized and see there is something we can do.

I am willing to pay for and book a room at the Carriage House in Calgary this coming Tuesday at 7:00. Lets get the word out to as many people as we can on this forum, twitter and Facebook. Let Danielle from the talk show know we are getting together so she can get the word out. Lets get the news channels know we are getting together. I don't have access to all of these things (twitter Facebook etc) so can you all help to get this moving forward. I would also be willing to reach out to some legal firms to see if someone can help us well. I have some experience in litigation and may be able to bring someone forward (or if anyone has any suggestions for legal firms)

If i get enough positive response i will confirm the meeting room. Let me know what you all think. Others from BC or Edmonton could come as well. Lets get as many people involved as possible.

I don't have huge time as i have my own business to run so any help would be great. This needs a lot of urgency as we are running very thin on time.

A few points:
1. I am scheduled to be in Edmonton on Tuesday night as I am giving a talk to an industry Association on Wednesday. I can't cancel the hotel room (just checked) but could drive up after the meeting, so let me know.
2. Agree that ID and statements would have to be presented. Bear in mind though a statement can be counterfeited, so one would need to go off MG's list to see if the person actually had an account.
3. I'm not sure I have agreed to anything UNTIL the sign the papers and send them in. We also ONLY selected Option 1, because we were supposed to see what was negotiated and then approve it. In no way did we approve for MG to give the farm away.
4. He was correct in someone's statement that we didn't organize years ago to take over the resort. That was because... IF EVERYONE... remembers he said we would get out cheap and prevent them from levying costs for the next unknown years. Many of us wanted to stay, but as the future was completely unknown AND undefined it was too risky. Appears this was as well.

I for one would be prepared to stay at the resort and make life hell for KW and staff. I have been asked a couple of times to sit on the Association Board for our TS in CA, but not into the commitment AND it is being run exceptionally well. I would though commit to this one. If we had a decent number of very committed people, it could work. We may never be able to pull this "resort" totally out, but it likely could be turned into a viable vacation spot. From the inside, all sorts of interesting things could transpire...audits, job descriptions, buyouts, etc. could actually be a lot of fun.

 

[Tanny13]

A few points:
1. I am scheduled to be in Edmonton on Tuesday night as I am giving a talk to an industry Association on Wednesday. I can't cancel the hotel room (just checked) but could drive up after the meeting, so let me know.
2. Agree that ID and statements would have to be presented. Bear in mind though a statement can be counterfeited, so one would need to go off MG's list to see if the person actually had an account.
3. I'm not sure I have agreed to anything UNTIL the sign the papers and send them in. We also ONLY selected Option 1, because we were supposed to see what was negotiated and then approve it. In no way did we approve for MG to give the farm away.
4. He was correct in someone's statement that we didn't organize years ago to take over the resort. That was because... IF EVERYONE... remembers he said we would get out cheap and prevent them from levying costs for the next unknown years. Many of us wanted to stay, but as the future was completely unknown AND undefined it was too risky. Appears this was as well.

I for one would be prepared to stay at the resort and make life hell for KW and staff. I have been asked a couple of times to sit on the Association Board for our TS in CA, but not into the commitment AND it is being run exceptionally well. I would though commit to this one. If we had a decent number of very committed people, it could work. We may never be able to pull this "resort" totally out, but it likely could be turned into a viable vacation spot. From the inside, all sorts of interesting things could transpire...audits, job descriptions, buyouts, etc. could actually be a lot of fun.

Let’s do it..

 

[FairSun]

Read the settlement agreement - 162% is in there. There is no ruling on interest or costs if you’ve agreed to the settlement. Just the Messenger...

The "Minutes of Settlement" at point 14 states: "Should any of the Geldert Group Owners, excluding the Deferred Geldert Group Owners, fail to pay by February 28, 2018, Northmont may enter and enforce the executed consent judgment as against that Geldert Group Owner, without further notice."

 

[FairSun]

Read the settlement agreement - 162% is in there. There is no ruling on interest or costs if you’ve agreed to the settlement. Just the Messenger...

Also, in the "Minutes of Settlement" point 8 states: "The Geldert Group Owners shall each consent to judgment in the amount of 162% of the Current Statements, plus contractual interest from November 30, 2017, as set out in each individual Geldert Group Owners' Vacation Interval Agreement."

 

[truthr]

Also, in the "Minutes of Settlement" point 8 states: "The Geldert Group Owners shall each consent to judgment in the amount of 162% of the Current Statements, plus contractual interest from November 30, 2017, as set out in each individual Geldert Group Owners' Vacation Interval Agreement."

Are they ACTUAL minutes? Recorded by a neutral third party? Or simply a synopsis of what they WANT you to know?
Considering the amount of money involved there should have been much more transparency, 3 arbitrators (1 for them, 1 for us, 1 neutral), members of the litigation group who ACTUALLY knew what was going on, attorneys for both sides, etc., etc.

 

[Ultimate_Betrayal]

Is our Council being extorted (manipulated) somehow to throw us under the bus??

If you have information you think would be helpful and want it brought forward but don’t know how send me an email (anonymously if you like) and we can figure it out. back123@shaw.ca


Back in 2013 a group of about 4000 started out to contest Northmont plan to levy a special assessment, which also allowed Northmont to receive their 15% management fee, to pay for extensive upgrades to the tune of $40,000,000 for all of the older Fairmont buildings in Fairmont using the Poly B issue as their primary catalyst to initiate this upgrade which actually doesn’t affect all of the Fairmont structures.

This brought our group together but as we have moved along Counsel has a conscientious effort to keep us segregated – why is this and why is it such a threat to Counsel to keep us together?

A lot of money was spent and work went into preparation of the trial but key evidence related to structural content and an accounting analysis were dropped and Counsel instead “threw the kitchen sink at the Judge to see what would stick” during the trial instead of presenting the facts and work done by the various committees involved in helping Jim Belfry and Counsel prepare for trial.

One thing that has always resonated with me is I questioned why a real financial audit was never done and I was told because of cost being a couple of hundred thousand dollars at the time but with say 1,600 people paying into the fund this only worked out to $125ea. and if it was so critical that was a pretty cheap investment.

Fast forward to today, we actually don’t know the real number of the group left and it could still be as high as 1600 members as it has recently been severely fractured in a course of action taken by council that started at the end of October after the latest trial loss and our council finally felt it was time to enter into negotiations with Northmont at the direction of Judge Young which no one denied was the right thing to do.

We don’t know why but our council fast-tracked an extremely prejudicial settlement agreement that is allowing Northmont to punitively capitalize on the group or forced members to leave and face Northmont on their own head on.

We continue to receive useless advice along with messages not to discuss amongst ourselves and when we ask questions we are not getting answers from Council just BS and threats we are being watched – why are we not being provided proper advice and what is being hid?

Negotiations on our side were not entered into in good faith and our council decided our fate without consent. This is why we are fighting as our right to decide was taken from us and other remedies as instructed by Judge Young were not followed so the clock is ticking down quickly for us to get help.


How was false consent obtained, let me explain to people who may not know,
In October a document was sent out called the SIF (Sunchaser Instructions Form) by our Counsel requesting an update on contact info and our consent to enter into negotiations with Northmont which was one of Northmonts conditions due to be handed in by November 10th to Counsel.

Our Counsel grievously is misrepresenting this SIF document as our individual consent and alone signed what appears to be a binding prejudicial negotiation settlement agreement with Northmont executed on December 14th.

Now Counsel did gave an option for people to opt out of negotiated settlement agreement up to December 29 and if they did not they would be bond to the terms of the executed agreement.

Fair enough it appears people had 15 days to make their decision – well no, the terms of the negotiated settlement agreement were only presented to the group members on January 10th so how can anyone have made a decision to consent or leave without knowing any facts?

The negotiated settlement agreement document itself is so well crafted it is a work of legal and suppressive art that goes far beyond your typical gag type agreement typically engaged in when people settle a dispute. It is far above beyond the capacity of the work our Counsel could have produced but Counsel too is protected by law and any legislation means if found Counsel itself has made a mistake.

The fate of our splintered group is being decided as we speak first to the tune of about 1300 people having to pay approximately $45,000,000 by mid February to be released and if they don’t our council allowed a further penalty to be applied to a judgement that goes into effect immediately.

The other part of our splintered group is in a much more vulnerable position as council has already initiated steps at the beginning of December for people to fend for themselves without following proper court procedures so many are being left exposed.

People from the both groups have been very active and we believe council is now in self-preservation mode and desperately trying to backtrack and initiate damage control to give the impression things have been done correctly for the smaller group but dates on filings and emails show how disastrously they dropped the ball for these individuals and continue to do so. Documents being provided are not being sent out with court seals – what is real or not?

Much irreparable damage has already occurred as a result of councils actions and they also forfeited key negotiation factors by abandoning costly Petitions on December 15th that Northmont required to move their plan forward to realign the Fairmont properties and contest the single contract all lease holders have been grouped under even though 8 or 9 different contracts actually exist.

 

[Bewildered]

Wow what a complete moron that lawyer was on Danielle Smith show, doesn’t know whether NM should have to pay maintenance and RFP costs on units they have stolen back???. And judgement on interest? What judgement, Judge Youngs judgement recommending everyone play nice and come to a reasonable agreement, yeah still at the reasonable 26.8%!
Come on Judge let’s hear some news on what your supposedly pondering!!
Now if people aren’t getting the message that everyone of the 1300 MG clients and all the rest of you don’t think that gov. officials and the courts have some responsibility to close the loop on this, then I guess continuing to call them is a waste. Personally, with very few options I think now is the time for all you sitting on the fence to make those calls because Judge Young, Service Alberta and the Justice Minister are our last chance.

 

[Tacoma]

Ironic that the only one that gets this is Danielle Smith and for many years I was not a fan. I have very much changed my tune she is intelligent and willing to tackle the tough issues. I too was not impressed by the lawyer talked a bit like a politician not easy to follow his point. However still very good of him to attempt to understand this train wreck.