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

[LookingForAnswers]

I did file the form 67, but not an affidavit. I was hoping that the form 67 would be sufficient. Any thoughts on that?

Also, I did the form 67 in my name only. My husband is also an owner with me. Should he do one as well? And then, do we do one for each share we own? We have one annual and one bi-annual.

 

[renoman]

Court Update

We are signed on with Docken Kylm. The letter they have sent us defines 7 more hearings from July 5th to Sep 14th, all as file deadlines or to argue points. I think the form 67 deadline has passed? But not sure. There will then be a 3 day hearing at the end of Sep (no dates yet) to wrap it up, maybe. But who knows.


QUOTE=jekebc;1487430]I attended Court Hearing June 25 - a somewhat disjointed process. The purpose was to establish a process and schedule that the issues re the Matkin-Nothmont Petition could be addressed. The outcome was simply the Master directing the lawyers involved to confer and make submissions to a further hearing now scheduled for July 12.

Northmont's lawyer attempted to downplay the process, stating that over 5000 timeshare owners had responded to them, and that the lawyers attending only represented a small minority of dissenting owners. The Master had reviewed the documents many of you filed and simply didn't buy into Northmont's arguments - so we achieved something.

There was some consensus that two key issues need to be dealt with some priority.
1) Does Northmont have the right under the existing contracts to charge Lessees and Co-Owners with the Renovation Fees? and,
b) Should Northmont be allowed to charge a Cancellation Fee for owners that want out of their contracts.

These two issues will not be decided on July 12, but the intention is to agree on an outline as to how the arguments will be presented and the schedule to get a Court Decision. There will be a process for the lawyers to submit other issues that need to be decided on such as the Summer Reservations and access to Northmont/RVM documents.

And regarding Form 67 submissions:
Thank you to all that prepared and submitted Form 67, Affidavits and supporting documents - it had an impact on the Master's decisions. There is still no deadline for further submissions from those that have not as yet sent a Form 67.

I still suggest that every owner:
1) Not make any further payments to Northmont/RVM/Northwynd pending a Court ruling and cancel any payments in process.
2) Ensure a letter has been sent to Northwynd et al advising their letters have caused duress and thus no payments will be made pending a Court ruling.
3) Have a Form 67, and preferably an Affidavit and supporting documents, ready for submission when a new deadline is established.

If you know of any owners that have not retained legal counsel re the Sunchaser issues and if they are looking for assistance, please have them email me at thebelfrys@shaw.ca[/QUOTE]

 

[LookingForAnswers]

Just got this reply to my email informing them I decided to wait for the court decision before we made any decisions. It appears they intend to use threat of interest charges to force us to pay before any court order has taken place...hmm ... interesting

Good Afternoon,



Thank you for your letter dated May 29, 2013.



The decision to move forward with renovations was a decision made by the board of trustee’s not the leases holders. At this time these renovations can no longer be deferred and needs to be completed. The initial amounts that were advised for the renovations was based on all owners moving forward with their ownership, however Northwynd does fully expect a portion of the membership base will cancel their lease.



The issues that are surrounding the resort were not created by Northwynd, however Northwynd is looking to create a solution. The renovations are to ensure there is still a viable resort left for members to enjoy for the duration of their lease terms. If we did not have the renovations there are no guarantees there will be a resort left in the next year or two.



Members have signed a forty year lease to be responsible to pay all fees required with their lease. Under Operation Costs and Reserve for Refurbishment it does state the developer has the legal rights to charge this type of fee. The contracts are alos not drafter with any kind of exit clause, and Northwynd is not obligated to offer an exit option. Northwynd understands that peoples circumstances change and that not everyone can continue to afford this program for one reason or another, however they must still take care of the remaining owners and that is why costs from a cancelation request cannot be passed along to the remaining ownership base and therefore the cancellation fees are charged to the owners wishing to terminate their contract early.



Cancelled inventory is returned to Northwynd as there are no sales and marketing team in place there are no resale's of inventory occurring. Part of the cancellation fees goes to Northwynd to cover the cost of carrying the inventory ( as any inventory under Northwynd must be paid for by Northwynd) the remainder of the cancellation fee goes directly to the resort.



The May 31 deadline for the documents for either the Renovations or Cancellations to be submitted has not been extended. Should a member wait to make a decision for the court hearing to be determined, the member ‘s account is subject to interest.



Should you have any further questions or concerns, please free to contact our office and we will be happy to assist you.



Kind Regards,



Edith Starr

Vacation Ownership Services Representative

Northwynd Resort Properties Ltd.

 

[aden2]

To Edith Starr % Vacation Ownership Services Rep.; Northwynd Resort Properties Ltd.
The problem I have is your "Legacy for Life" , this was done back in 2009/2010, and I never became aware of the financial problems of now called Sunchaser Villas until May 2013. Fairmont was declared bankrupt and taken over by Northmont June 22, 2010. My document was dated Nov.29, 2010 and it was on Fairmont Vacation Villas stationery. If I had of known the problems in 2009/2010 I would not have agreeded to this "Legacy for Life". As far as I am concern this is called "FRAUD". I have just recently laid a charge with the R.C.M.P. for fraud against Northwynd Resort Properties.

 

[DarkLord]

The problem I have is your "Legacy for Life" , this was done back in 2009/2010, and I never became aware of the financial problems of now called Sunchaser Villas until May 2013. Fairmont was declared bankrupt and taken over by Northmont June 22, 2010. My document was dated Nov.29, 2010 and it was on Fairmont Vacation Villas stationery.

Fairmont and Northwynd are one and the same, that's why Northwynd continued using Fairmont's letterhead to sell the Legacy to life pacakge. If the renovation is not Northwynd's problem, it shouldn't be the problem of the Legacy to Life owners as well. What a double standard or scam Northwynd runs here.

 

[LookingForAnswers]

Good for you!

 

[DarkLord]

There was some consensus that two key issues need to be dealt with some priority.
1) Does Northmont have the right under the existing contracts to charge Lessees and Co-Owners with the Renovation Fees? and,
2) Should Northmont be allowed to charge a Cancellation Fee for owners that want out of their contracts.

These are the two key issues in this controversy.

If Northwynd loses on 1), they not only couldn't charge owners for the renovation and by their own admission, the resort is in need of repair to bring it up to the 5 star level they promise the owners. In other words, Northwynd will be paying for the renovation which will for all intense and purposes leads to Northwynd declaring bankrutpcy.

If Northwynd wins on 1), the owners can still get out, like most do anyway now without paying the cancellation fee unless Northwynd wins on 2) as well.

If the owners win on 2), most of us will just forfeit our rights of using the resort without paying the cancellation fee.

In summary, Northwynd has to win on both 1) and 2) to get money from us. Even then, most owners, myself included will just take a hit on our credit rating and not pay them.

Guess Northwynd didn't think it will be this difficult to pull this scam here in Canada versus the last time they did it in Mexico.

 

[aden2]

I truly believe that Northwynd/Northmont will not have much credibility attempting to prove that I did not pay some fee that they had asked when I wanted to walk away from my time share because they had asked me to pay for, when Northwynd broke the contract.

 

[ERW]

Quick question to all - our biennial lease time is in April 2014. I would like to book and deposit our time with Sunchasers and Interval sooner rather than later. Has anyone attempted lately to book their time for next year recently and what was the response from the Customer Service people at Sunchasers? Are they still grasping at charging the full maintenance and renovation amount or have they backed off at all? I don't want to let this drag on until February then get the 60 day booking restriction because I never booked soon enough.

 

[pdoff]

looking for answers

Just got this reply to my email informing them I decided to wait for the court decision before we made any decisions. It appears they intend to use threat of interest charges to force us to pay before any court order has taken place...hmm ... interesting

Northwynd oviously knew what they were getting in for-we sure didn't know that there was a bankrupt situation. If we did we would probably have left then. They say that they inherited the problem. Now they want to pass it on to the people that lease a few days of time a year.
It is their problem - not ours!
They should be renamed Passingwynd.

 

[Hotpink]

In Then Out

We made the initial payment on the $100.00 / month option, just to use our booked week at the end of June this year and everything was confirmed in writing by SVV. The kink was in the road closure in Canmore and we decided to stay in northern Alberta and see if and when we could use #1 to use some of our time. That did not happen so we lose the week.

Phoned and asked about booking the same week in 2014 and no problem just Pay your 2014 maintenance fees ( Based on 2013 rates ) the day of booking and you can reserve the Riverside unit for the last week in June of next year. The actual MF will be adjusted next January and you will have to make up the difference. Did not buy into that this year as we don't know if they will be operating next year. Did not book did not pay.

Following the initial hearing on June 25, 2013 we heeded the advice of a few posts here and from an independent council to:

1) cancel my/our consent for any pre-authorized debit given to NRP on May 31, 2013 at the financial institution where this PAD was initiated.

2) inform Northmont in writing that we had done so and would not make any further payments the renovation scheme nor make any interest payments they levy on us.

This all has been done and we did not tell them to pound sand but we will wait and see what the court will do and live with that result then

 

[Spark1]

Just got this reply to my email informing them I decided to wait for the court decision before we made any decisions. It appears they intend to use threat of interest charges to force us to pay before any court order has taken place...hmm ... interesting

Interesting,this statement the issues surrounding the resort were not created buy Northwynd. Why did they hire the same people that managed Fairmont vacation villas. Come on these are the same crooks ,just a different name. I would love to see these thieves go bankrupt. They do not know how to treat people and should not be in business. If this was a clear cut issue,why the court hearings? And hear we go again, if the timeshare owners,which own time not the resort did not give these honest people money one way or the other buy may31 they are going to start adding on interest. These are cowards that hide behind their lawyers and we all should be afraid. Start sending out bills with interest and us owners of time are going to send you bills for lost time with higher interest. This is not Mexico,we have rights in Canada.

 

[Rancher]

We have just returned from 5 days at Sunchaser and the resort does show its age and is in need of refurbishment.
I have not read all the posts on this site but do have an understanding of what is happening.
The original owners of Fairmont were FRPL. Now in order for them to sell their timeshares they were quoting an unrealistic maintenance fee at the time of about $400 per week. This did not allow them to place any funds in reserve for updating the units as needed. They went basically into bankruptcy and somehow everything went to Northynd. Now Northynd has this timeshare with no reserve funds and no money for refurbishment. The units need to be updated and where do think the money will have to come from. Yes the owners will be asked to pay for this.
The way I see it the owners have two choices. They either pay for the refurb. or let the resort continue to decline where no one will want to stay there or trade into it anymore.
It is unfortunate that it has come to this but they won't be the first or last owners hit with a special assessment.

 

[browger]

Maybe do your homework

We have just returned from 5 days at Sunchaser and the resort does show its age and is in need of refurbishment.
I have not read all the posts on this site but do have an understanding of what is happening.
The original owners of Fairmont were FRPL. Now in order for them to sell their timeshares they were quoting an unrealistic maintenance fee at the time of about $400 per week. This did not allow them to place any funds in reserve for updating the units as needed. They went basically into bankruptcy and somehow everything went to Northynd. Now Northynd has this timeshare with no reserve funds and no money for refurbishment. The units need to be updated and where do think the money will have to come from. Yes the owners will be asked to pay for this.
The way I see it the owners have two choices. They either pay for the refurb. or let the resort continue to decline where no one will want to stay there or trade into it anymore.
It is unfortunate that it has come to this but they won't be the first or last owners hit with a special assessment.

Maybe you better read older posts, and maybe do your homework.......who
told you that we pay $400.00 a week. We might have paid $400.00 16 to 18 years ago. We have been paying almost $1,000 for our week for several years. What I think I am hearing is a 'version' from the other side. Again, do your homework and then make a qualified response, by reading 'this sides' version, and 'doing your homework'.

 

[gnorth16]

These are the two key issues in this controversy.

If Northwynd loses on 1), they not only couldn't charge owners for the renovation and by their own admission, the resort is in need of repair to bring it up to the 5 star level they promise the owners. In other words, Northwynd will be paying for the renovation which will for all intense and purposes leads to Northwynd declaring bankrutpcy.

If Northwynd wins on 1), the owners can still get out, like most do anyway now without paying the cancellation fee unless Northwynd wins on 2) as well.

If the owners win on 2), most of us will just forfeit our rights of using the resort without paying the cancellation fee.

In summary, Northwynd has to win on both 1) and 2) to get money from us. Even then, most owners, myself included will just take a hit on our credit rating and not pay them.

Guess Northwynd didn't think it will be this difficult to pull this scam here in Canada versus the last time they did it in Mexico.

Northwynd wants the land. If they can make you pay to get rid of it, even better. Northwynd would be happier than a pig in s#it if everyone got fed up and walked away.

After all this BS, I am sure that most owners would be glad to walk away from their TS and not pay anything - Playing right into the hands of what Northwynd wants. I am sure that within 5 years, it will be some form of Condos along the creek and by the clubhouse.

 

[Spark1]

We have just returned from 5 days at Sunchaser and the resort does show its age and is in need of refurbishment.
I have not read all the posts on this site but do have an understanding of what is happening.
The original owners of Fairmont were FRPL. Now in order for them to sell their timeshares they were quoting an unrealistic maintenance fee at the time of about $400 per week. This did not allow them to place any funds in reserve for updating the units as needed. They went basically into bankruptcy and somehow everything went to Northynd. Now Northynd has this timeshare with no reserve funds and no money for refurbishment. The units need to be updated and where do think the money will have to come from. Yes the owners will be asked to pay for this.
The way I see it the owners have two choices. They either pay for the refurb. or let the resort continue to decline where no one will want to stay there or trade into it anymore.
It is unfortunate that it has come to this but they won't be the first or last owners hit with a special assessment.

It sounds like you are one of the FRPL investors at 12 per-cent. Nobody can tell me if the maintenance fees that we have been paying were used according to the agreements that we signed,not the Legacy for Life agreement,that this resort could of been refurbished the way it was supposed to be. You can not buy resorts and time in different countries and refurbish the resort with our maintenance fees. FRPL went down over 43 million dollars written off buy the Alberta gov't. What makes you think Northwynd can manage this resort? Check out the Rancho Banderas resort in Nuevo Vallarta and then tell me if the timeshare owners can trust Northwynd. If you like,hrough your money into the hands of Northwynd but not me.

 

[fairmontlvr]

Any Riverview owners here?

I am curious if there are any Riverview owners on here. To refresh everyone's memory, Riverview (not to be confused with the oldest units called Riverside) units were those closest to the bridge and were the newest having granite countertops and the most modern features. One of the selling points of those units was the exclusivity of having the option to stay in any of the units at either Riverview, Riverside or Hillside but conversely, those that bought into Riverside or Hillside could not book into the units at Riverview.

So my question is did those that bought into the Riverview units, were they also asked to contribute to the renovation plan to upgrade the older units? One could argue that the more modern units at Riverview may not need extensive renovations and could be excluded.

 

[aden2]

We bought into Riverview, and yes were had two options: 1) buy into the reno. program; 2) pay to cancel timeshare. To make it worse we bought into the "Legacy for Life" and were lied to about Fairmont doing so well...

 

[GypsyOne]

Rancher says: "....The way I see it the owners have two choices. They either pay for the refurb. or let the resort continue to decline where no one will want to stay there or trade into it anymore.
It is unfortunate that it has come to this but they won't be the first or last owners hit with a special assessment."

There is another option. The real owners of the Resort and the ones who are the benefactors of this renovation (The Northwynd et al group) come up with the funds to restore their resort. The timeshare owners, at least not the original Vacation Villa leaseholders, are not the owners of this property, they are lessees / tenants and therefore not responsible for capital restorations. The lessees (Timeshare Owners) bought the right to accommodation for a certain fixed period, and then the right expires with no residual value. As lessees, they have an implied (or explicit) warranty of habitability and quiet enjoyment for the period of the lease. That is what they pay rent (maintenance) for. It is the responsibility of the lessors (owners) to provide that habitability and quiet enjoyment. And once the fixed term lease expires, it is the real owners of the property who will continue to benefit from capital restorations.

If the lessors / owners are not prepared to inject capital into their resort to bring it up to the standard they represented when they sold timeshares, and the Resort goes bankrupt, so be it. That is what happens when you sell timeshares in a faulty facility, misrepresent it's quality, and mismanage the funds.

 

[Spark1]

Rancher says: "....The way I see it the owners have two choices. They either pay for the refurb. or let the resort continue to decline where no one will want to stay there or trade into it anymore.
It is unfortunate that it has come to this but they won't be the first or last owners hit with a special assessment."

There is another option. The real owners of the Resort and the ones who are the benefactors of this renovation (The Northwynd et al group) come up with the funds to restore their resort. The timeshare owners, at least not the original Vacation Villa leaseholders, are not the owners of this property, they are lessees / tenants and therefore not responsible for capital restorations. The lessees (Timeshare Owners) bought the right to accommodation for a certain fixed period, and then the right expires with no residual value. As lessees, they have an implied (or explicit) warranty of habitability and quiet enjoyment for the period of the lease. That is what they pay rent (maintenance) for. It is the responsibility of the lessors (owners) to provide that habitability and quiet enjoyment. And once the fixed term lease expires, it is the real owners of the property who will continue to benefit from capital restorations.

If the lessors / owners are not prepared to inject capital into their resort to bring it up to the standard they represented when they sold timeshares, and the Resort goes bankrupt, so be it. That is what happens when you sell timeshares in a faulty facility, misrepresent it's quality, and mismanage the funds.

This is the only way the supreme court judge should look at this situation.

 

[Meow]

I wish I could be as optimistic, Spark 1. Our chances are 50/50 at best. Northwynd seems to be very careful in their approach in this and doing things by the book. Judges are very unpredictable. Northwyn could just as easily come out looking like the 'White Knight', trying to save the resort and salvage the investments of the REIT investors and the timeshare lessees/owners. We are led to believe there are about 5000 timeshare owners/lessees that have bought into Northwyn's plan. Those of us involved in the legal challenges are in the minority. The judge can easily take the position that we are just disgruntled parties looking for loopholes to get out of our lease or 'Legacy for Life' contractual obligations. No matter, it could be a long and costly process through the courts. I worry that people will bail out as the costs to stay in begin to accelerate. Northwynd has more stayng power than we do!

 

[Hey lady]

5000 out of 15,000 in favour?

According to Northwynd 5000 members are in favour. That leaves 10,000 members not in agreement (15,000 total membership). Can some one comment on why a judge would say the rest (10,000) are just a bunch of disgruntled complainers and agree with the minority,5000.

 

[fairmontlvr]

I wish I could be as optimistic, Spark 1. Our chances are 50/50 at best. Northwynd seems to be very careful in their approach in this and doing things by the book. Judges are very unpredictable. Northwyn could just as easily come out looking like the 'White Knight', trying to save the resort and salvage the investments of the REIT investors and the timeshare lessees/owners. We are led to believe there are about 5000 timeshare owners/lessees that have bought into Northwyn's plan. Those of us involved in the legal challenges are in the minority. The judge can easily take the position that we are just disgruntled parties looking for loopholes to get out of our lease or 'Legacy for Life' contractual obligations. No matter, it could be a long and costly process through the courts. I worry that people will bail out as the costs to stay in begin to accelerate. Northwynd has more stayng power than we do!

Just because 5000 owners may have opted to either one of the two packages, it does not mean they agree with Northwynd. What percentage of these 5000 opted to stay and what percentage opted to get out?
How many of these 5000 felt they had a gun to the head and were forced to make a choice in fear of creditors coming after them?
If there are close to 15000 owners and only 5000 actually chose one of the two alternatives then the way I see it is that two thirds of the owners have not responded to either choice despite the threats of accruing interest charges.
I think there are many that have not opted to register with a lawyer and are awaiting an outcome by the courts.

 

[Meow]

I expect the judge will look at the terms of the lease documents and the terms of the contracts for the Legacy for Life owners and determine our rights and the rights of Northwynd. No one can predict how the judge will see it. I'm not sure that the numbers in either camp should have any influence.
I am also disappointed that there are owners/lessees like TSBS (see post #666) that are prepared to have a free ride and take advantage of a favorable result (if any) of the legal actions that some of us are funding.

 

[CleoB]

I expect the judge will look at the terms of the lease documents and the terms of the contracts for the Legacy for Life owners and determine our rights and the rights of Northwynd. No one can predict how the judge will see it. I'm not sure that the numbers in either camp should have any influence.
I am also disappointed that there are owners/lessees like TSBS (see post #666) that are prepared to have a free ride and take advantage of a favorable result (if any) of the legal actions that some of us are funding.

If this turns into a class action lawsuit I believe the people that haven't signed up will be SOL. At that point they will have to hire their own lawyer and fees could be much higher for them.