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

[Floyd55]

Our contract has that too, but does Belfry’s? The way things have gone down, I predict it is totally toothless. What a tragedy is right.

Funny you should mention Jim Belfry....haven't heard from him in a long, long time. I have to wonder if he didn't orchestrate some kind of exit deal after the test case failed miserably. Meanwhile the rest of us kept on being strung along by MG to our ultimate demise! Thanks a lot Jim! Could have at least given the rest of us a heads up when you slipped out of this mess! Maybe I'm wrong and he is in this with us to the bitter end, but I doubt it. Interesting irony since he was the one that rallied us all together at the beginning to fight this injustice. But ultimately he became a big part of our downfall since all of our leases became his VIA, not cool. Hindsight is 20/20!

 

[Misled]

I offered to have a meeting at the Carriage House on Tuesday. I have decided not to go forward with this. I have read even more of the judgement from Judge Young. Even though this has been complete fraud basically we decided to hook our train to the wrong law firm. Its clear to me that he was really not anywhere in the same league as the Northmount lawyers. And he just kept making things worse and worse the longer he tied things up. If you read the judgement she says he was basically frustrating her as well as frustrating the court system. She had no choice but to rule in favour of Northmount as they had clear and concise arguments for their case and obviously a very good legal strategy.

And this is basically what Mathew Farrell was saying on Danille Smiths talk show today as well. The contracts we signed and the fact that there is not any legislation to protect timeshare purchasers in Alberta and BC means that companies like Northmount can write anything they want into these contracts we signed. Like 2% per month compounded monthly on delinquent fees is legal. Gilbert was also not successful in convincing the judge that we are renters not owners. The way our contract were written left the door open to interpretation as to whether we are owners of the resort or renters. The Northmount lawyers convinced the judge we were owners and consequently responsible for the renovations of the resort. Again no laws in Alberta and BC to protect timeshare owners of this. The fact that Northmount does not have to pay its proportion of the renovation fee is also the fault of Gilbert. He missed his chance to properly argue this and then it was too late.

I will write to the above noted entities to tell our story but I'm afraid we are all screwed. And hope that the government get their act together to write some laws to protect future timeshare purchasers in our provinces.

Im sick about it all. But I'm gonna move. $42,683 given to Northmount and their slick lawyers. Wow what a tragedy

To correct one thing mentioned in this post there are in fact consumer protection laws in Alberta that are designed to prevent unfair commercial practices such as those used by Northmont. These are detailed within the Alberta Fair Trading Act (now called the Alberta Consumer Protection Act). For example, the unilateral contract amendments and the imposition of arbitrary cancellation fees are both defined as unfair and illegal practices in Alberta legislation. The problem is that the Geldert group Lawyer’s did not use these consumer protection laws in their arguments to judge Young in Alberta. To that end the Geldert group Lawyer’s were grossly incompetent. Regardless of judge Young’s ill informed decision the fact remains that these 2 practices of Northmont are illegal under Alberta law. This egregious non compliance with Alberta law needs to be reported to your MLA, judge young, and Service Alberta who has done nothing to enforce these laws to protect consumers.

 

[LilMaggie]

I offered to have a meeting at the Carriage House on Tuesday. I have decided not to go forward with this. I have read even more of the judgement from Judge Young. Even though this has been complete fraud basically we decided to hook our train to the wrong law firm. Its clear to me that he was really not anywhere in the same league as the Northmount lawyers. And he just kept making things worse and worse the longer he tied things up. If you read the judgement she says he was basically frustrating her as well as frustrating the court system. She had no choice but to rule in favour of Northmount as they had clear and concise arguments for their case and obviously a very good legal strategy.

And this is basically what Mathew Farrell was saying on Danille Smiths talk show today as well. The contracts we signed and the fact that there is not any legislation to protect timeshare purchasers in Alberta and BC means that companies like Northmount can write anything they want into these contracts we signed. Like 2% per month compounded monthly on delinquent fees is legal. Gilbert was also not successful in convincing the judge that we are renters not owners. The way our contract were written left the door open to interpretation as to whether we are owners of the resort or renters. The Northmount lawyers convinced the judge we were owners and consequently responsible for the renovations of the resort. Again no laws in Alberta and BC to protect timeshare owners of this. The fact that Northmount does not have to pay its proportion of the renovation fee is also the fault of Gilbert. He missed his chance to properly argue this and then it was too late.

I will write to the above noted entities to tell our story but I'm afraid we are all screwed. And hope that the government get their act together to write some laws to protect future timeshare purchasers in our provinces.

Im sick about it all. But I'm gonna move. $42,683 given to Northmount and their slick lawyers. Wow what a tragedy

Funny...the heading on my agreement says "Vacation Lease", and I am referred to as a "lessee" throughout. What is so complicated? I have leasehold interest only according to my contract.

 

[Misled]

Funny...the heading on my agreement says "Vacation Lease", and I am referred to as a "lessee" throughout. What is so complicated? I have leasehold interest only according to my contract.

Absolutely correct you are not a owner you are a lease holder (or renter ) for a fixed term

 

[ecwinch]

The wording is vague as it says if they accept leasee timeshare doesn’t say they will or are obligated to. I just wonder how much teeth that clause has? I have the same in my contract.

The court ruled that was an option, and not an obligation. As it lacks the express language that they are required to do so.

 

[Tanny13]

The court ruled that was an option, and not an obligation. As it lacks the express language that they are required to do so.

Not only were we led to believe in the sales presentation that we could walk at any time, we were told we would get PAID to walk. Our scenario is slightly different than that now...

 

[ecwinch]

Not only were we led to believe in the sales presentation that we could walk at any time, we were told we would get PAID to walk. Our scenario is slightly different than that now...

But the legal entity that made those representations is no more. Time and time again the court has come back on that key issue. I know you (and others) want to view Fairmont and Northwind as the same legal entity, but in the eyes of the court that argument is moot.

 

[Palms to pines]

I think sometimes it would be good if there was some common sense. What would a reasonable person think?? There is a clause in the contract from 1997 that quotes a formula for refund should the leasee default on payments and essentially loose rights to the timeshare. Pretty sure that was the intent or why even put it in the contract at all? All of this hair splitting and everything going Northmont’s way has given me a headache. As has paying for years of maintenance fees when we were advised not to pay and interest rates that loan sharks would use! Do I want to pay another $34,000.00 on top of the $5,600.00 we were scammed out of for Legacy For Life to have nothing? Hell no! Sunchaser Timeshares - pay your money for nothing and get your ulcers for free!

 

[Misled]

Alberta has consumer protection laws that do apply to this situation. Therefore everyone involved should read the Alberta Fair Trading Act and focus on section 6 (3) unfair practices section 7(1) cancelling agreements also look at Bill 31 amendments, section 6.1 unilateral changes to contracts, section 6.2 (4) cancellation following notice of unilateral change. The above are defined as unfair and illegal practices under Alberta law, so why is the government not holding Northmont accountable for violating these laws??? Call your MLA and demand to know why Service Alberta is not enforcing these laws.

 

[Scammed!]

Alberta has consumer protection laws that do apply to this situation. Therefore everyone involved should read the Alberta Fair Trading Act and focus on section 6 (3) unfair practices section 7(1) cancelling agreements also look at Bill 31 amendments, section 6.1 unilateral changes to contracts, section 6.2 (4) cancellation following notice of unilateral change. The above are defined as unfair and illegal practices under Alberta law, so why is the government not holding Northmont accountable for violating these laws??? Call your MLA and demand to know why Service Alberta is not enforcing these laws.

Which I mentioned before. The settlement was signed on December 14 without our consent or input and Bill 31 was passed on the 13 of December 2017. The judge made her judgement in October but due to interest and cost issues they ignored her orders this case should follow under this bill and quash this crime.

 

[CleoB]

Funny you should mention Jim Belfry....haven't heard from him in a long, long time. I have to wonder if he didn't orchestrate some kind of exit deal after the test case failed miserably. Meanwhile the rest of us kept on being strung along by MG to our ultimate demise! Thanks a lot Jim! Could have at least given the rest of us a heads up when you slipped out of this mess! Maybe I'm wrong and he is in this with us to the bitter end, but I doubt it. Interesting irony since he was the one that rallied us all together at the beginning to fight this injustice. But ultimately he became a big part of our downfall since all of our leases became his VIA, not cool. Hindsight is 20/20!

I've heard that Belfry had his timeshares in his company name and that his company went bankrupt so he didn't have to pay anything. Not sure if that's true but it would explain him not being around anymore.

 

[GypsyOne]

I think sometimes it would be good if there was some common sense. What would a reasonable person think?? There is a clause in the contract from 1997 that quotes a formula for refund should the leasee default on payments and essentially loose rights to the timeshare. Pretty sure that was the intent or why even put it in the contract at all? All of this hair splitting and everything going Northmont’s way has given me a headache. As has paying for years of maintenance fees when we were advised not to pay and interest rates that loan sharks would use! Do I want to pay another $34,000.00 on top of the $5,600.00 we were scammed out of for Legacy For Life to have nothing? Hell no! Sunchaser Timeshares - pay your money for nothing and get your ulcers for free!

The clause you are referring to is the Default clause, which is #13 in my lease. I made that very point several times when we were preparing our case, but that interpretation was denyed by the courts on the basis of one little word - "IF" - "If the Lessor accepts the deemed offer." My common sense interpretation is that the Default clause comes into play if the Lessor chooses to take back the timeshare as remedy for default of payment. Then the Lessor will take back the timeshare and reimburse the timeshare owner at one third the value of remaining timeshare, which seems like a reasonable remedy for default of payment. Or the Lessor could choose not to accept the deemed offer and seek remedy some other way. The key point being that if the Lessor takes back the timeshare, the Lessee is reimburse for a fraction of remaining time. I don't see how the courts could completely ignore a lengthy default formula in the lease as having no purpose or meaning and instead allow an altogether different arbitrary formula (or money grab).

Another common sense interpretation I found strange is in the list of operating expenses, which is Clause 5 in my lease. First of all the expenses are categorized as "Operating Costs" and not "Capital Costs." Then there is a list of sixteen operating expenses that includes items as trivial as say, "garbage disposal." Wouldn't you think that if we were intended to replace walls, roofs, plumbing pipes, etc. costing upward of $40 million that expenses of such magnitude would be covered in much more detail and description than lumping them in with the miscellaneous?

No question in my mind that influential people didn't want this popular tourist destination with its flawed buildings to fail, and that the timeshare owners would be the sacrificial lambs to hold it together.

 

[GypsyOne]

I've heard that Belfry had his timeshares in his company name and that his company went bankrupt so he didn't have to pay anything. Not sure if that's true but it would explain him not being around anymore.

There could be other reasons.

 

[LilMaggie]

Alberta has consumer protection laws that do apply to this situation. Therefore everyone involved should read the Alberta Fair Trading Act and focus on section 6 (3) unfair practices section 7(1) cancelling agreements also look at Bill 31 amendments, section 6.1 unilateral changes to contracts, section 6.2 (4) cancellation following notice of unilateral change. The above are defined as unfair and illegal practices under Alberta law, so why is the government not holding Northmont accountable for violating these laws??? Call your MLA and demand to know why Service Alberta is not enforcing these laws.

Many of us have written the Minister of Alberta Services, Stephanie McLean. She is a lawyer and should be well aware that we have been subjected to unfair practices and yet her office has dismissed us.

 

[Tanny13]

But the legal entity that made those representations is no more. Time and time again the court has come back on that key issue. I know you (and others) want to view Fairmont and Northwind as the same legal entity, but in the eyes of the court that argument is moot.

Well then our contracts should have been null and void.

 

[Scammed!]

The clause you are referring to is the Default clause, which is #13 in my lease. I made that very point several times when we were preparing our case, but that interpretation was denyed by the courts on the basis of one little word - "IF" - "If the Lessor accepts the deemed offer." My common sense interpretation is that the Default clause comes into play if the Lessor chooses to take back the timeshare as remedy for default of payment. Then the Lessor will take back the timeshare and reimburse the timeshare owner at one third the value of remaining timeshare, which seems like a reasonable remedy for default of payment. Or the Lessor could choose not to accept the deemed offer and seek remedy some other way. The key point being that if the Lessor takes back the timeshare, the Lessee is reimburse for a fraction of remaining time. I don't see how the courts could completely ignore a lengthy default formula in the lease as having no purpose or meaning and instead allow an altogether different arbitrary formula (or money grab).

Another common sense interpretation I found strange is in the list of operating expenses, which is Clause 5 in my lease. First of all the expenses are categorized as "Operating Costs" and not "Capital Costs." Then there is a list of sixteen operating expenses that includes items as trivial as say, "garbage disposal." Wouldn't you think that if we were intended to replace walls, roofs, plumbing pipes, etc. costing upward of $40 million that expenses of such magnitude would be covered in much more detail and description than lumping them in with the miscellaneous?

No question in my mind that influential people didn't want this popular tourist destination with its flawed buildings to fail, and that the timeshare owners would be the sacrificial lambs to hold it together.

What the "Officials" are missing is there is nothing that will hold it together ever! The money isn't going into the "resort" (NAFR)....all the money will be gone into this scam....0ver 1300 lives will be devastated. Tumbleweeds will roll around as the wind blows through the once beautiful resort, that is now a skeleton of families, love, and laughter of years gone by.

 

[Been Around Awhile]

What the "Officials" are missing is there is nothing that will hold it together ever! The money isn't going into the "resort" (NAFR)....all the money will be gone into this scam....0ver 1300 lives will be devastated. Tumbleweeds will roll around as the wind blows through the once beautiful resort, that is now a skeleton of families, love, and laughter of years gone by.

YES!

 

[Sheeptoslaughter]

Yes its very sad take such a nice place and strip it down to a skeleton of whAt it was. Its always been about money. Never about improving for the lessees and working with the 15,000 who had invested a substantial chunk of their money already for 40 + years. Its all about greed and look whats left. A bunch of boarded up buildings and the rest look rundown. Now its destroying another 1300+ lives to punish people for attempting to right a wrong to their contracts. Throw out the 26.82% interest, replace it with something more in line like 5%. theyve already lost years of usage,maintenance fees charged when resort was barely being used should more than cover court fees and legal fees. Hell in good faith give them a year or two back if they paid???? A little goodwill goes a long way. KW may have succeeded in the courts but as a human being running a resort sucking people life savings to punish yes punish them !!!! For having an opinion different than him. I hope it was worth it to throw 75% of it away i bet KW thought theyd all be thrilled to pay 1000'S more in fees to stay. Kw may have succeeded in collecting millions upon millions but Id be willing to bet 5 years from now most of property has been sold off, not improved and hes living life offshore somewhere with all the money he paid himself to manage. Like all lawyers who are well paid despite the outcome kw been paying himself well through all of this. All 15,000 lessees have lost their money some 2-3 times the investment, the town of fairmont has surely lost a ton of business and its left such a sour taste that nobody wants to go near that area. The economic impact is huge as there is always a ripple effect Anyone who remains has a fraction of what it once was. Thanks to all who participated in this fiasco to suck more money out of people who had already been paying in good faith. Had they not been blocked from resort while sorting it out maintenance fees would have been paid too and??? Bringing money into the Resort Perhaps,just perhaps they may have decided then to pay or get out. JMO.

 

[Been Around Awhile]

But the legal entity that made those representations is no more. Time and time again the court has come back on that key issue. I know you (and others) want to view Fairmont and Northwind as the same legal entity, but in the eyes of the court that argument is moot.

But they are the same entity for the purposes of the contract, are they not? Otherwise, why does the contract survive the bankruptcy? Is Northmont not due the same rights under the contract that were due Fairmont? Is Northmont not still obligated to deliver the same elements of the contractual exchange as was Fairmont? The lessees certainly are.

I think the bankruptcy court made a grievous mistake not insuring 18,000 interests were represented during these deliberations.

 

[Plus454]

Statute of Limitations? Hi all, I've found the question asked on here and some guessed answers but I haven't found a definitive answer on how Alberta Statute of Limitations laws affect this claim. In particular, when does the clock start? Did getting involved in this fruitless legal maneuver restart the clock?

 

[GypsyOne]

What the "Officials" are missing is there is nothing that will hold it together ever! The money isn't going into the "resort" (NAFR)....all the money will be gone into this scam....0ver 1300 lives will be devastated. Tumbleweeds will roll around as the wind blows through the once beautiful resort, that is now a skeleton of families, love, and laughter of years gone by.

I see no reason to expect the Resort will fail. Yes, the white-collar gang of perpetrators will probably skim off millions for themselves, but they will also spend tens of millions of our money on maintaining and enhancing the value of the property because it will be profitable to do so. Fairmont in the Columbia Valley is one of the more beautiful pieces of real estate on the planet with many recreational activities in the area and a ready and willing customer base in two countries and in four directions prepared to buy in, just as over 15,000 timeshare customers thought they were buying a dream vacation for themselves for the rest of their lives, or an asset to bequeath to family. A new generation of vacation seekers unaware of what went before will come along with descretionary money to spend. The problem with the timeshare model is that it has the elements that can attract the white collar gang of opportunists - control of an attractive property in a beautiful area; a cash flow of tens of millions of dollars; a widespread and diverse customer base that makes organization difficult; a provincial government that does not want a popular tourist destination to fail, nor do they want to inject government funds into the resort to prop it up, along with a compliant judicial system (McLeans Magazine, February 11, 2017 "Welcome to British Columbia, Where You 'Pay to Play.'); very little or vague oversight and consumer protection; lease agreements that apparently a compliant judicial system can unilaterally interpret or change to suit the desired result. Over 15,000 timeshare owners have been fleeced, including those that paid to stay, probably making this the biggest white-collar heist in Canadian history. We await to see if anyone in authority has the courage and the will to do something about it.

 

[Scammed!]

I see no reason to expect the Resort will fail. Yes, the white-collar gang of perpetrators will probably skim off millions for themselves, but they will also spend tens of millions of our money on maintaining and enhancing the value of the property because it will be profitable to do so. Fairmont in the Columbia Valley is one of the more beautiful pieces of real estate on the planet with many recreational activities in the area and a ready and willing customer base in two countries and in four directions prepared to buy in, just as over 15,000 timeshare customers thought they were buying a dream vacation for themselves for the rest of their lives, or an asset to bequeath to family. A new generation of vacation seekers unaware of what went before will come along with descretionary money to spend. The problem with the timeshare model is that it has the elements that can attract the white collar gang of opportunists - control of an attractive property in a beautiful area; a cash flow of tens of millions of dollars; a widespread and diverse customer base that makes organization difficult; a provincial government that does not want a popular tourist destination to fail, nor do they want to inject government funds into the resort to prop it up, along with a compliant judicial system (McLeans Magazine, February 11, 2017 "Welcome to British Columbia, Where You 'Pay to Play.'); very little or vague oversight and consumer protection; lease agreements that apparently a compliant judicial system can unilaterally interpret or change to suit the desired result. Over 15,000 timeshare owners have been fleeced, including those that paid to stay, probably making this the biggest white-collar heist in Canadian history. We await to see if anyone in authority has the courage and the will to do something about it.

Canmore said the same thing at first and in the end went bankrupt .........we lost what we had just put into that one. Used it three times. Thank God they didn't come for more money!!!!..........so we lost two timeshares in same time frame....."INWTSAFTA" (I NEVER WANT TO SEE ANOTHER $UC$$%^ TIMESHARE AGAIN!)

 

[GypsyOne]

Canmore said the same thing at first and in the end went bankrupt .........we lost what we had just put into that one. Used it three times. Thank God they didn't come for more money!!!!..........so we lost two timeshares in same time frame....."INWTSAFTA" (I NEVER WANT TO SEE ANOTHER $UC$$%^ TIMESHARE AGAIN!)

The difference being that Canmore didn't come for more money to prop it up. I presume they thought they could never get away with such a brazen act of contract violation. They probably regret not hiring Wankel to explain how it could be done.

 

[Inquiringmind]

Statute of Limitations? Hi all, I've found the question asked on here and some guessed answers but I haven't found a definitive answer on how Alberta Statute of Limitations laws affect this claim. In particular, when does the clock start? Did getting involved in this fruitless legal maneuver restart the clock?

I don’t know the answer to this question, but it is an excellent one. If applicable , Staute of Limitations, 2 years in Alberta, would dramatically reduce my amount owing. Can someone give a legal opinion?

 

[Been Around Awhile]

The money that is being ordered to be paid to Northmont by the courts is out of all proportion to any harm caused by the lessees or any damage resulting from the delays in the renovation. Firstly, those who paid to stay contributed millions to the renovation plan and all of that money has yet to be spent. Thus, there is no material harm to date. Secondly, Northmont advanced and is getting judgments on an estimated plan that is both extravagant in price per-square-foot and for twice the number of units remaining within the property (#NAFR). The courts, Loo, Fitzpatrick and Young have not even taken into consideration that the property (#NAFR) is half of what it was when the Renovation Plan was advanced. Yet Northmont is not being reasonable and is charging for everything they possibly can, undermining any possible trust remaining lessees or creditors or even the Columbia Valley as a whole would have in Northmont. They aren't selling vacation intervals. Northmont is going to cash-out and dash for the Carribean. Thanks Judges.

Further, Northmont failed to act reasonably regarding expenses and mitigate the consequences of the greatly reduced occupancy of the property
(#NAFR). They made no effort to reduce or control Maintenance Fees.

Northmont made no effort to work cooperatively with the lessees, none. They said here's the plan, don't like it? Then you can pay your share or, you can pay to leave. Northmont and Northmont alone caused this protracted dispute.

The courts, the Judges, they facilitated this theft. They've made no effort whatsoever to insure the money will in fact benefit the property (#NAFR). It's their responsibility to enforce the law, not just declare a winner in the debate between lawyers.