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

[MarcieL]

Where are the post numbers located I cannot see any .

 

[truthr]

Where are the post numbers located I cannot see any .

They are on the bottom right hand side of the post
#post Like +Quote Reply

 

[PATRON]

Watch on Netflix DURTY MOUNI episode 2 Paiday loans Similar like NM Thay were not be able to be convicted by judge because Thay still according to low Senetor convict them for running UNETICAL business and send them 16 years bichaind bars

 

[MarcieL]

We're are now on our own, I think we can appeal what "our lawyer' neglected to do. It looks like there are a few of us continuing the fight this way. Filing a dispute note like aden2 has mentioned makes sense. There are also other options less drastic than opting for bankruptcy. You should discuss the best option for you with a bankruptcy lawyer/advisor. We hope the class action suit goes ahead so that we can join it. Let's keep searching and praying.

Have you checked with your own lawyer on this?

 

[MarcieL]

They are on the bottom right hand side of the post
#post Like +Quote Reply

Not on my phone wonder why?

 

[Petus@18]

In retrospective, Jim Belfry, was very deceitful, he convinced all of us to join forces with him and Geldert by making false claims (i.e. there was never a class action lawsuit being litigated; but merely, it was ‘his own claim’ being brought forward to the courts as a test case, that ultimately was financed by all of us!). We were influenced by Jim Belfry to hire Geldert; I remember one of Jim's comments being that "Michael Geldert, as an attorney, was ‘one of the best’. What a joke!

 

[Frau Blucher]

We were influenced by Jim Belfry to hire Geldert; I remember one of Jim's comments being that "Michael Geldert, as an attorney, was ‘one of the best’. What a joke!

It speaks volumes of Geldert’s incompetence when he ignores the Judges suggestions at the super conference

 

[lost and confused]

BC Law Society - taken directly from their website -
Protecting the public interest
Ensuring the independence, integrity, honour and competence of BC lawyers.

The BC Law Society has system in place for accepting feedback. Have you spoken up? Filed a complaint? Provided feedback?

 

[CleoB]

BC Law Society - taken directly from their website -
Protecting the public interest
Ensuring the independence, integrity, honour and competence of BC lawyers.

The BC Law Society has system in place for accepting feedback. Have you spoken up? Filed a complaint? Provided feedback?

You bet. Filed a complaint. If there's anyone here that hasn't, why are you waiting?

 

[GypsyOne]

In retrospective, Jim Belfry, was very deceitful, he convinced all of us to join forces with him and Geldert by making false claims (i.e. there was never a class action lawsuit being litigated; but merely, it was ‘his own claim’ being brought forward to the courts as a test case, that ultimately was financed by all of us!). We were influenced by Jim Belfry to hire Geldert; I remember one of Jim's comments being that "Michael Geldert, as an attorney, was ‘one of the best’. What a joke!

Did you have a better alternative at the time? Jim Belfy stepped up at a time when no one else was doing anything and worked tirelessly for well over a year to marshall an effective opposition to Northmont. The fact the case was lost in court was a surprise and a shock to everyone including Jim and Michael, because it seemed certain we had overwhelming right on our side. It's easy to blame the front-line people for a loss, although it does appear that significant mistakes were made, but I'm not certain the Almighty Herself could have won this case against this opposition (with the aid of millions of our dollars) and this court system.

 

[Petus@18]

Did you have a better alternative at the time? Jim Belfy stepped up at a time when no one else was doing anything and worked tirelessly for well over a year to marshall an effective opposition to Northmont. The fact the case was lost in court was a surprise and a shock to everyone including Jim and Michael, because it seemed certain we had overwhelming right on our side. It's easy to blame the front-line people for a loss, although it does appear that significant mistakes were made, but I'm not certain the Almighty Herself could have won this case against this opposition (with the aid of millions of our dollars) and this court system.

Really???? The reason Jim worked tirelessly for well over a year was because he needed a 'bunch of foolish people' to pay for his defense! We could have retained a real lawyer and would not be in this mess. Jim harmed all of us, including our families, by referring us to the 'entertainment lawyer'. I can assure you that based on the incompetence of this lawyer, we lost big time! If thinking the way you do makes you happy, good for you

Amen. I am moving on.

 

[ecwinch]

IMHO the fault here is in doubling and tripling down after the Special case ruled on the major issue. As the court observed - the kitchen sink approach. That just made a bad situation worse and gave people false hope.

I don’t see in any of the posts where MG took the step of informing clients on what might happen if he failed. Given the fees he was collecting for “managing” the case, you have wonder where his interest truly lied.

 

[lost and confused]

IMHO the fault here is in doubling and tripling down after the Special case ruled on the major issue. As the court observed - the kitchen sink approach. That just made a bad situation worse and gave people false hope.

I don’t see in any of the posts where MG took the step of informing clients on what might happen if he failed. Given the fees he was collecting for “managing” the case, you have wonder where his interest truly lied.

I put my faith and trust in a lawyer. The “rosey” updates were always so positive. Information was not transparent and shared in a timely manner (and is still not being shared upon withdrawal despite several requests). The legal realm is not my area of familiarity, and that is why I hired a lawyer to help navigate and provide counsel. I feel misled and that I was misinformed and not given the legal counsel that I hired. I now feel like I am in a worse predicament. Now that I have read more and with the sharing of info from this group and others, I have come across numerous harsh cristicisms by other legal professionals. Many descriptions like abuse of process, vexatious, throwing the kitchen sink hoping something will stick, lawyer antics, etc. The lawyer never shared this side...and in my opinion did not head warnings about failures or action. More retainers were requested with more promise....and of litigation strategy that did not materialize (ie class action).

 

[CleoB]

IMHO the fault here is in doubling and tripling down after the Special case ruled on the major issue. As the court observed - the kitchen sink approach. That just made a bad situation worse and gave people false hope.

I don’t see in any of the posts where MG took the step of informing clients on what might happen if he failed. Given the fees he was collecting for “managing” the case, you have wonder where his interest truly lied.

Without prejudice
Oh we now know exactly where it lies.....his pocketbook. You're right though MG wasn't informing his clients on what might happen, he just sent out emails about how unfair things were and that he had "an ace up his sleeve". He kept leading us on with his lies. He's a con man, not a lawyer. Without prejudice

 

[Stung]

I put my faith and trust in a lawyer. The “rosey” updates were always so positive. Information was not transparent and shared in a timely manner (and is still not being shared upon withdrawal despite several requests). The legal realm is not my area of familiarity, and that is why I hired a lawyer to help navigate and provide counsel. I feel misled and that I was misinformed and not given the legal counsel that I hired. I now feel like I am in a worse predicament. Now that I have read more and with the sharing of info from this group and others, I have come across numerous harsh cristicisms by other legal professionals. Many descriptions like abuse of process, vexatious, throwing the kitchen sink hoping something will stick, lawyer antics, etc. The lawyer never shared this side...and in my opinion did not head warnings about failures or action. More retainers were requested with more promise....and of litigation strategy that did not materialize (ie class action).

We all placed our trust in the legal system. It is why we agreed to proceed. MG was a Shepard with a flock and who I personally thought had a heart. A true caring for his clients is what he portrayed but seemingly overnight turned into a ferocious wolf/shark with no heart at all. His interests became one of serving his clients to serving KW and Northmont with no further regard for negotiations or an acceptable settlement on our behalf.

In the BC Law Society Code of Profesional Conduct.:
https://www.lawsociety.bc.ca/suppor...standards-of-the-legal-profession-–-an/#2.1-3

References are made to honor and integrity which I have seen severely lacking in MG since late last year. Honestly, lawyers exist to provide fair justice and to help those that are not able to help themselves on their own.

It is the hope of myself and many others he be investigated and reprimanded for his questionable 'professional' conduct.

 

[SAV]

As I have mentioned before. MG at the beginning of this this should have gotten all of us to pay the renovation fee into trust. And convinced the judge that the fees would be held there until the dispute is resolved. And that the interest should not have been accumulating. Any judge would have agreed to that and likely NM would have as well. At this point when we have all lost this case we all would have been happy to just pay the renovation fee back in 2013. Also he should have argued straight away that the maintenance fees should also stop as we were in this dispute. Or that we the fees should have been paid in to trust again until the dispute was resolved. The thing that killed us all was the interest. My renovation fee was $8000, my maintenance fees over 5 years were $5000, and the interest on this craziness was $31,000. Total for me was $44,000. I'm sure we were all in the same boat. MG is a one man legal firm and is like 32 years old. He had no right to take this on and NM lawyers ran circles around him. But he made $3 million on it. Just totally inexperienced and a fool. Not sure who picked him but what a mistake. Well onward and upward!!

 

[ecwinch]

Completely agree with the post above.

So if he is 32 now, then in 2013 he would have been 28 or so. Assuming a standard university and law school program of seven years, that would seem to indicate that he was a year or two out of law school when he took on this complex case. Assuming he passed the bar on first try.

Does anyone know if MG has ever tried a case in front of judge?

 

[greyskies]

As I have mentioned before. MG at the beginning of this this should have gotten all of us to pay the renovation fee into trust. And convinced the judge that the fees would be held there until the dispute is resolved. And that the interest should not have been accumulating. Any judge would have agreed to that and likely NM would have as well. At this point when we have all lost this case we all would have been happy to just pay the renovation fee back in 2013. Also he should have argued straight away that the maintenance fees should also stop as we were in this dispute. Or that we the fees should have been paid in to trust again until the dispute was resolved. The thing that killed us all was the interest. My renovation fee was $8000, my maintenance fees over 5 years were $5000, and the interest on this craziness was $31,000. Total for me was $44,000. I'm sure we were all in the same boat. MG is a one man legal firm and is like 32 years old. He had no right to take this on and NM lawyers ran circles around him. But he made $3 million on it. Just totally inexperienced and a fool. Not sure who picked him but what a mistake. Well onward and upward!!

We should have hired you as our lawyer.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

 

[Spark1]

We can blame who ever we want but the true blame is the Trustee of the resort. The unfair practice was the Freedom to Choose done by the Supplier in Calgary Alberta. Where in our Lease Contract does it say we have to accept their Cancellation? Where in the Lease does it say we have to accept Capital Expenditure like $4100 to replace the condo’s? Special assessment was meant for maintenance not replacing the condo. They sure would not use the only cancellation that was in our contract if you owed money after 16 months so they decided to come up with their own phoney one and you were not cancelled. The bottom line here is we bought because of the lease contact which was the right to use and at the end of the lease you do not own any property. If I leased a new Truck fo 5years and the dealership takes the truck from me and still charges me monthly fees am I going to keep on paying for the lease ,hell no. Why does Northwynd feel they have the right to stop us from using the resort when we paid for that right to use when we bought the timeshare and what gives them the right to charge any interest on something that we paid for and they stopped us from using. Look at their phoney Unilateral ammendments to our Contract. Use the modification part of our lease contract and saying all lease contracts prior to 2003 are now VIA’s. That is a modication bull *bleep*. Your phoney Cancellation Agreement called us all VIA’s in 2013. We signed the Fairmont Consumer Protection document witnessed by Collin Knight and we sure the hell did not see anything pertaining to the Freedom To Choose. Northwynd you know we’re you can shove this.

 

[CleoB]

We can blame who ever we want but the true blame is the Trustee of the resort. The unfair practice was the Freedom to Choose done by the Supplier in Calgary Alberta. Where in our Lease Contract does it say we have to accept their Cancellation? Where in the Lease does it say we have to accept Capital Expenditure like $4100 to replace the condo’s? Special assessment was meant for maintenance not replacing the condo. They sure would not use the only cancellation that was in our contract if you owed money after 16 months so they decided to come up with their own phoney one and you were not cancelled. The bottom line here is we bought because of the lease contact which was the right to use and at the end of the lease you do not own any property. If I leased a new Truck fo 5years and the dealership takes the truck from me and still charges me monthly fees am I going to keep on paying for the lease ,hell no. Why does Northwynd feel they have the right to stop us from using the resort when we paid for that right to use when we bought the timeshare and what gives them the right to charge any interest on something that we paid for and they stopped us from using. Look at their phoney Unilateral ammendments to our Contract. Use the modification part of our lease contract and saying all lease contracts prior to 2003 are now VIA’s. That is a modication bull *bleep*. Your phoney Cancellation Agreement called us all VIA’s in 2013. We signed the Fairmont Consumer Protection document witnessed by Collin Knight and we sure the hell did not see anything pertaining to the Freedom To Choose. Northwynd you know we’re you can shove this.

If the true blame is the Trustee of the Resort then why didn't Geldert pick up on that? Why didn't he use the Fair Trade Act or Consumer Protection Act as an arguement. Northmount say how inexperienced Geldert was and used that to there advantage. Geldert should not have taken on this case period.

 

[CleoB]

Completely agree with the post above.

So if he is 32 now, then in 2013 he would have been 28 or so. Assuming a standard university and law school program of seven years, that would seem to indicate that he was a year or two out of law school when he took on this complex case. Assuming he passed the bar on first try.

Does anyone know if MG has ever tried a case in front of judge?

I wondered that as well.

 

[CleoB]

Completely agree with the post above.

So if he is 32 now, then in 2013 he would have been 28 or so. Assuming a standard university and law school program of seven years, that would seem to indicate that he was a year or two out of law school when he took on this complex case. Assuming he passed the bar on first try.

Does anyone know if MG has ever tried a case in front of judge?

I've just checked the BC Law Society website and Geldert started practicing Sept 19/2006 but it doesn't say anything about whether he has litigated or not.

 

[CleoB]

Without prejudice
From the Government of Canada website.
http://www.ic.gc.ca/app/ccc/srch/nvgt.do? lang=eng&prtl=1&sbPrtl=&estblmntNo=234567123735&profile=cmpltPrfl&profileId=501&app=sold

Geldert Law Corporation is an international full-service law firm operating from its head office in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Geldert Law provides the full range of legal services permitted by the Law Society of British Columbia. In particular, the firm focuses on providing Immigration and Entertainment legal services.

Full service International law firm......talk about false advertising.
Without prejudice

 

[Shake Down]

Brings us back to this still open file from what I understand S-134766 Merriman & Heyadat vs Northwynd June 25/2013

72. Misrepresentation: The defendants (Northwynd & listed companies) entered into Timeshare agreements knowing that they will not able to fulfill the terms.

73. The Trustee: Philip Matkin failed to exercise its obligations as a trustee for all the Timeshare Owners. Starting from 2004, almost all companies involved in the Fairmont Resort have its registered office and Records Office at the MATKIN LAW OFFICE. The Trustee filed a petition on April 16, 2013 where he is so personally involved as the Petitioner, Trustee and Respondent.

* Poly B issue?

63. The defendants (Northwynd & listed companies) state that 14 of 17 buildings the Fairmont Resort were built using pipes constructed with a type of plastic known as polybutylene ("Poly B").

64. The defendants (Northwynd & listed companies) now allege that the primary reason the renovation project needs to go forward is the Poly B issue. A class action was commenced against the company, Dupont and the action was subsequently settled in 2007.

65. Dupont agrees to pay compensation for the repair costs as well as the damages caused by its defect products.

66. The defendants failed to take any action seeking compensation from Dupont on behalf of the Fairmont Resort.

And I like this one #67. The defendants owed a duty of care to act in the interest of the Timeshare Owners and the Fairmont Resort.

It just makes you bang your head against a wall

 

[LilMaggie]

I've just checked the BC Law Society website and Geldert started practicing Sept 19/2006 but it doesn't say anything about whether he has litigated or not.

MG is on record as being called to the bar in BC in 2006. He appears to have graduated high school in 1993, so he is a tad more than 32 years of age. I will need to do more research re: litigation experience.