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

[Meow]

Sounds reasonable to me. I just hope that Justice Loo is capable of such clear thought.

 

[Shywon]

Any word from Oct 10 2013 court date

Has anyone heard anything on what happened from the Oct 10, 2013 court date.

 

[Beaverjfw]

Court Decision -still waiting

Nothing yet, but a decision is expected any day now. When it comes out you should be able to read it here.
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/supreme_court/recent_Judgments.aspx
I wouldn't pay any invoices for 2014 maintenance fees until the court rules.

 

[Shywon]

Thank you

Thank you and will watch the link and good to know about the 2014 maintenance fee.

 

[JustFacts]

The results of the special case were released on Friday and have been placed on the resorts website.

The conclusion is on the last page (51):

VII. CONCLUSION
[118] My conclusions on this special case are as follows:
a) Northmont is entitled to levy the Cancellation Fee;
b) Northmont is entitled to levy the Renovation Project Fee.

The reasons provide a lot of detail for the conclusions.

 

[gnorth16]

The results of the special case were released on Friday and have been placed on the resorts website.

The conclusion is on the last page (51):

VII. CONCLUSION
[118] My conclusions on this special case are as follows:
a) Northmont is entitled to levy the Cancellation Fee;
b) Northmont is entitled to levy the Renovation Project Fee.

The reasons provide a lot of detail for the conclusions.

For those searching, it is not on the supreme court website, just http://sunchaservillas.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Judgment-Summary.pdf

We note that in addition to Justice Loo’s comments, individual litigation would lead to unnecessary emotional stress
for our Owners. Instead of attempting to achieve a just, speedy, and inexpensive determination through this special
case, the Respondent Owners argued the process should be terminated and Northmont should conceivably “sue
everybody” forcing you to defend yourself personally while still not knowing the answer the questions posed in the
special case.

So really, Northwynd is doing you a favor by allowing you to pay to get out instead of taking them to court.

I have no dog in this fight, but I would not pay any fee(s). As mentioned before, Northwynd would be perfectly happy in the end if everyone walks away from their TS so they can start their condo projects. The more people who walk, the bigger the condo project. Any walk away fee is just icing on the cake for them.

 

[JustFacts]

The results are now posted on the BC Courts website:

http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/13/20/2013BCSC2071.htm

 

[Spark1]

The results are now posted on the BC Courts website:

http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/13/20/2013BCSC2071.htm

Keep in mind that all of us timeshare owners had our contracts breached my Northwynn not sending out audited statements according to our timeshare agreements. This took away our decision whether we wanted to sell this timeshare because of the problems at this resort. They are forcing us to follow the agreement but they also have to follow the agreement. We need to take these people to court and sue them.

 

[ERW]

I think it is very clear that we now have two options - stay or go - and there are costs associated with either alternative. Unless people are going to appeal the decision, I don't see any other way to proceed. Whether you
agree or not, she has found in favour of Northmont.

 

[GypsyOne]

How about doing nothing and just ignoring them and not paying. Are they really going to sue for a $3,100 cancellation fee when suing will cost more than $3,100? The fact remains they (Fairmont and Northmont) breached the contract and misrepresented in numerous ways, despite what Justice Loo says.

 

[Soccer Canada]

How about doing nothing and just ignoring them and not paying. Are they really going to sue for a $3,100 cancellation fee when suing will cost more than $3,100? The fact remains they (Fairmont and Northmont) breached the contract and misrepresented in numerous ways, despite what Justice Loo says.

They do not have to sue us is the issue. They can now take it to collections, and its completely enforceable using that means now. At least for Canadian owners. Also there is no such thing as Consumer rights when it comes to collections in Canada, they can pretty much do whatever they want, or pretty close to it.

 

[darklord700]

They do not have to sue us is the issue. They can now take it to collections, and its completely enforceable using that means now. At least for Canadian owners. Also there is no such thing as Consumer rights when it comes to collections in Canada, they can pretty much do whatever they want, or pretty close to it.

Collection agent or not, Northmount is going under. As long as some owners appeal, the decision is not final all of us. Would you pay a few grand just to have the collection agent not calling you? The collection agent can call me once and I'll block their calls after that. And I'll tell the collection agent to back off because I"m going to appeal.

Any monies you give will just end up in the crook's pocket, not going to the reno of the resort. Northmout can't fool me on that. Also, this is the judge's decision on Northmonut's application, it's not a trial so it is not a verdict. Big difference in there.

 

[TUGBrian]

article this morning on it

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/decision-reached-in-b-c-timeshare-dispute-1.1549367

 

[ERW]

If you think they will not pursue this with collections, think again. All they have to do is pick 5 or 10 owners, spend the money for the collections agents and set them loose. Those 5 or 10 will be used as examples. It may "only" be $3000 or $4000, but multiply that by 2000 or 3000 owners and you end up with millions.

I once had a collections company call me for $30.00 they thought I owed to Sirius satellite radio - if Sirius figured collections was appropriate for a $30.00 bill, $3000 or $4000 is easily justifiable by Northmont.

In my opinion, my wife and I need to sit down and decide which route to take. I personally don't see too many options other than staying or going.

 

[Beaverjfw]

Cancellation Fee - How Much?

Well, the court has ruled that Northwynd can charge a cancellation fee.
No where in all these proceeding have I seen anything that addresses HOW MUCH they can charge or whether what they ask for is justified. I would have paid to walk away back in April but not the amount they have asked for. Wanting the next 20 years of management fees seems to be ridiculous given they can rent these units and keep all the revenue.
Based on the Loo decision it sounds as if they could have asked for any amount. Why not ask for as almost much as the reno fee.
I will wait for more feedback from the lawyers on this and see where it goes but I don't plan on giving them my $3100. Even if it end up in collection or court some time in the future, I will make sure Northwynd ends up with a fraction of this amount in their pockets.
Now that this case has set precedent, just wait until they do this at their other properties and every slimy timeshare outfit in Canada starts with the same BS.

 

[Spark1]

Well, the court has ruled that Northwynd can charge a cancellation fee.
No where in all these proceeding have I seen anything that addresses HOW MUCH they can charge or whether what they ask for is justified. I would have paid to walk away back in April but not the amount they have asked for. Wanting the next 20 years of management fees seems to be ridiculous given they can rent these units and keep all the revenue.
Based on the Loo decision it sounds as if they could have asked for any amount. Why not ask for as almost much as the reno fee.
I will wait for more feedback from the lawyers on this and see where it goes but I don't plan on giving them my $3100. Even if it end up in collection or court some time in the future, I will make sure Northwynd ends up with a fraction of this amount in their pockets.
Now that this case has set precedent, just wait until they do this at their other properties and every slimy timeshare outfit in Canada starts with the same BS.

That agreement is not just for the timeshare owners to follow, it is also for Northwynn to follow. The judge did not comment on breaches of this agreement but I do know the only way you can get out of this contract is if Northwynn breaches our contract and they did. I still do not have audited statements for 2013 and the ones for 2010,2011, and 2012 were way to late. We have a right to know the financial situation of that resort just as they did when they took over the resort. We have to stand up to these people and not allow them to bully us. I do know if I knew the problems with this resort I would of dumped it. Blame the Alberta Government for this, this resort should of gone bankrupt instead of them writing off 43 million dollars and then turning it over to Northwynn to screw us. Now you know why Alberta Services would not take on this case.

 

[JustFacts]

Well, the court has ruled that Northwynd can charge a cancellation fee.
No where in all these proceeding have I seen anything that addresses HOW MUCH they can charge or whether what they ask for is justified.

Read lines 63, 64, and 69 of the ruling.

A collateral agreement is an agreement entered into between the parties. It can effectively be for "any" amount provided both sides agree and it is not an "unconscionable bargain that the courts should not enforce."

Why not ask for as almost much as the reno fee.

You have answered your own question about the reasonableness of the amount. They could have charged you the renovation fee.

 

[Beaverjfw]

Read lines 63, 64, and 69 of the ruling.

A collateral agreement is an agreement entered into between the parties. It can effectively be for "any" amount provided both sides agree and it is not an "unconscionable bargain that the courts should not enforce."

You have answered your own question about the reasonableness of the amount. They could have charged you the renovation fee.

The key phase here in a collateral agreement is "provided both sides agree". Northwynd could have had my agreement with a different fee.
What is now preventing Northwynd from rescinding their April offer for parties wanting to leave and changing it to a higher price or not offering it all.
From this ruling they will try to enforce payment of the renovation fee, together with any delinquent annual fees. They don't care about the option to leave fee, there's no agreement in place. Anything they get is just gravy, together with the free units that are surrendered.
Any day now expect a bill for $4100 + about $1000 for 2014 annual fees and another $900 or so if you are behind on 2013 fees. (I feel sorry for a friend with 8 weeks at this resort)

 

[Soccer Canada]

I spoke with Micheal Geldert today (seems to be the only lawyer to be committed to continuing the fight). Owners really need to get involved if they feel strongly against paying Northwynd/Northmont/RVM etc any more money. Geldert Law's retainer is very fair (I believe he mentioned $150-$200 for new clients, that would need to be confirmed by them), I feel for myself that I am better off to give a Lawyer who wants to win another few dollars as opposed to throwing away thousands more. Just my 0.02..

Robb

 

[darklord700]

I'll fight; $4K won't put me in the poor house but what Northmount did wad morally wrong and the decision was wrong.

Assuming you bought you TS lease in 2011 and after using it one time, you got hit by the reno fee, how would you feel?

Northmount not only deceived me by buying the TS but now I have to pay to get out?

Assuming Northmount is going under all you are avoiding is a few phone calls or letters by the collection agency for a while. And you cancellation fee is not going to help other TS owners about the reno because it goes straight to Northmount pocket and who's covering your part of the maintenance fee or reno fee? No one and that's why the reno is destined to fail.

Lower court decision is routinely overturned by the appeal court and I think there are errors in this decision so I'll keep on fighting with Geldert.

 

[gnorth16]

And you cancellation fee is not going to help other TS owners about the reno because it goes straight to Northmount pocket and who's covering your part of the maintenance fee or reno fee? No one and that's why the reno is destined to fail.

Walk away fee >>>> Where does it really go? (IMO to pay back investors that lost money investing in Fairmont Properties in 2008-09)
Reno fee >>>>> May actually go towards to the reno of SOME units

All units that are "walked away" upon or signed over to the HOA/foreclosed on become property of Northwynd. It can then be sold at a profit for their condo project.

In a perfect world for Northwynd, all owners walk away and pay the fee. Then they have a bag full of cash and a valuable property to develop condos and make money like originally intended, way more than could be made "managing a TS property"...

 

[jekebc]

Need to Appeal the Decision

I had an extended conversation with Michael Geldert regarding the decision by Justice Loo. I am quite disappointed by the one-sided decision, but also not completely surprised given the conduct and actions of Justice Loo during the hearings. She appeared to have accepted Northmont’s arguments from the start and did not appear to be open to consideration of any of the arguments submitted by the lawyers for the Sunchaser Timeshare Owners (the “Owners”)

We also faced the problem that Northmont was in many ways calling the shots since they had initiated the Petition. Justice Loo would not allow arguments that Northmont may have already been in breach of the Contract. We were also unable to address the question of Northmont’s responsibility to pay maintenance fees (and Renovation Fees) on the units it controls. If we want to have those arguments heard, we must consider either commencing our own action against Northmont and RVM, or use that argument as a defence against any collection action commenced by Northmont and RVM. And I don't see paying further monies to Northmont as a viable option. I believe they will simply collect as much monies as they can, divert it to their own pockets, and close the Resort in early 2014.

In my opinion, the judgment as it stands gives cart-blanche to Northmont to proceed with their renovation plans and sets a significant precedent for other timeshare operators in BC to proceed with similar actions in other Resorts. It is apparent from reading the Judgment Summary posted on the Sunchaser website that Northmont intends to actively pursue collection of the Renovation Fee or the Cancellation Fee from all Owners. Northmont will conveniently ignore the fact that the judgment only addresses two aspects of the original petition - it does not provide approval to modify the existing contracts by reassigning units and does not provide approval to downsize the Resort.

But also note that Northmont stresses the importance that the Owners obtain independent legal advice. I am urging all Owners to support an action to appeal this questionable decision by Justice Loo. I believe there are ample grounds for appeal on the basis of errors of fact and law in Justice Loo’s decision. Unless an appeal is filed, I believe all Owners will face aggressive collection action by Northmont. To me, the best defence against that action is to be represented by a lawyer and to direct that Northmont address all communication to that lawyer.

I believe that Michael Geldert has demonstrated that he can provide the most cost-effective representation for the Owners and I suggest that all Owners consider signing a retainer agreement with Geldert Law. My understanding is that Michael is asking for a total retainer that is significantly less than the other firms. I also understand each of the other law firms have decided not to participate further unless the majority of the Owners that signed as their clients pay an additional retainer.

To me, the first priority is to appeal the decision. The next is to prepare a defence against any collection action that Northmont and RVM may commence. And I understand that Michael is prepared to take those actions on our behalf, providing a sufficient number of owners join in that appeal

We should also consider commencing an action for damages against Northwynd, Northmont, RVM and the Trustee based on breach of contractual obligations, but only if enough Owners elect to go that route. And we must understand that would involve significantly more legal costs.

Please contact Geldert Law if you wish to have a lawyer represent you for the appeal and to act on your behalf in response to any collection action from Northmont.

Geldert Law - Michael Geldert 778-330-7775 Email michael@geldertlaw.com

 

[Spark1]

I had an extended conversation with Michael Geldert regarding the decision by Justice Loo. I believe Michael is as disappointed as I am by the one-sided decision, but also stated he was not completely surprised given the conduct and actions of Justice Loo during the hearings. She appeared to have accepted Northmont’s arguments from the start and did not appear to be open to consideration of any of the arguments submitted by the lawyers for the Sunchaser Timeshare Owners (the “Owners”)

We also faced the problem that Northmont was in many ways calling the shots since they had initiated the Petition. Justice Loo would not allow arguments that Northmont may have already been in breach of the Contract. We were also unable to address the question of Northmont’s responsibility to pay maintenance fees (and Renovation Fees) on the units it controls. If we want to have those arguments heard, we must consider either commencing our own action against Northmont and RVM, or use that argument as a defence against any collection action commenced by Northmont and RVM. And I don't see paying further monies to Northmont as a viable option. I believe they will simply collect as much monies as they can, divert it to their own pockets, and close the Resort in early 2014.

In my opinion, the judgment as it stands gives cart-blanche to Northmont to proceed with their renovation plans and sets a significant precedent for other timeshare operators in BC to proceed with similar actions in other Resorts. It is apparent from reading the Judgment Summary posted on the Sunchaser website that Northmont intends to actively pursue collection of the Renovation Fee or the Cancellation Fee from all Owners. Northmont will conveniently ignore the fact that the judgment only addresses two aspects of the original petition - it does not provide approval to modify the existing contracts by reassigning units and does not provide approval to downsize the Resort.

But also note that Northmont stresses the importance that the Owners obtain independent legal advice. I am urging all Owners to support an action to appeal this questionable decision by Justice Loo. I believe there are ample grounds for appeal on the basis of errors of fact and law in Justice Loo’s decision. Unless an appeal is filed, I believe all Owners will face aggressive collection action by Northmont. To me, the best defence against that action is to be represented by a lawyer and to direct that Northmont address all communication to that lawyer.

I believe that Michael Geldert has demonstrated that he can provide the most cost-effective representation for the Owners and I suggest that all Owners consider signing a retainer agreement with Geldert Law. My understanding is that Michael is asking for a total retainer of $150, significantly less than the other firms. I also understand each of the other law firms have decided not to participate further unless the majority of the Owners that signed as their clients pay an additional retainer much higher than the $150 Geldert law is requesting.


To me, the first priority is to appeal the decision. The next is to prepare a defence against any collection action that Northmont and RVM may commence. And I understand that Michael is prepared to take those actions on our behalf for the $150 retainer, providing a sufficient number of owners join in that appeal

We should also consider commencing an action for damages against Northwynd, Northmont, RVM and the Trustee based on breach of contractual obligations, but only if enough Owners elect to go that route. And we must understand that would involve significantly more legal costs.

Please contact Geldert Law if you wish to have a lawyer represent you for the appeal and to act on your behalf in response to any collection action from Northmont.

Geldert Law - Michael Geldert 778-330-7775 Email michael@geldertlaw.com

Who in their right mind would give these bandits any more money. The timeshare we once owned is worth zero and once Northwynn gets all the cancellation and Reno money they will just pocket it. Remember the management fee of 15% for doing nothing. That will still create a shortage for their big Reno job. There will be no end in sight the money they will want to collect from us. I have calculated what the 18 weeks of timeshare will cost me if I pay the Reno fee after only owning this for 12 years and it works out to 245.00 dollars a day after paying 14000.00 dollars to buy two weeks and they threw in a free week,7200 dollars maintenance fees and 12300 dollars for the Reno fee.
I will be paying all this money out for a investment that is worth zero. Only in Canada justice System. These 3 weeks are going up for sale and that is what Northwynn is going to get plus the 28 weeks that is left. We all should look at appealing this.

 

[JustFacts]

I am quite disappointed by the one-sided decision, but also not completely surprised given the conduct and actions of Justice Loo during the hearings. She appeared to have accepted Northmont’s arguments from the start and did not appear to be open to consideration of any of the arguments submitted by the lawyers for the Sunchaser Timeshare Owners (the “Owners”)

I thought you posted a summary of the hearing. Ah, I found it.

Here it is:
http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=htt...HReAQHjLLz6Hb-6RovUENAdM4lVguNQKvl7KFck5Q&s=1

I find it very interesting that the detailed summary you prepared immediately after the hearing did not make any mention that:
1) Justice Loo's "conduct" was inappropriate.
2) She was not open to arguments.
3) That the process was stacked against you.

In fact, nothing in your summary suggests anything except the process was thorough. Yet now that you've lost, suddenly Justice Loo's conduct was inappropriate. That sounds like a rationalisation and an attempt to re-write history which isn't even an opinion, let alone a fact.

Let me guess, there is noone to corroborate your claims.

I know that had I been in your shoes and legal counsel told me we had no chance of winning because the Justice was acting inappropriately, and the process was unfairly stacked against us, I would have started immediately rallying the troops for an appeal. I would have been yelling from the highest mountain and the 6:00 news that I had been wronged. I would have been warning them we were going to lose and planning for it. The one thing I would not have done is prepare a detailed summary of the proceedings that made no mention of these irreconcilable issues.

I wonder if we would have ever learned how unfair Justice Loo was if you had won...

 

[Spark1]

I thought you posted a summary of the hearing. Ah, I found it.


I find it very interesting that the detailed summary you prepared immediately after the hearing did not make any mention that:
1) Justice Loo's "conduct" was inappropriate.
2) She was not open to arguments.
3) That the process was stacked against you.

In fact, nothing in your summary suggests anything except the process was thorough. Yet now that you've lost, suddenly Justice Loo's conduct was inappropriate. That sounds like a rationalisation and an attempt to re-write history which isn't even an opinion, let alone a fact.

Let me guess, there is noone to corroborate your claims.

I know that had I been in your shoes and legal counsel told me we had no chance of winning because the Justice was acting inappropriately, and the process was unfairly stacked against us, I would have started immediately rallying the troops for an appeal. I would have been yelling from the highest mountain and the 6:00 news that I had been wronged. I would have been warning them we were going to lose and planning for it. The one thing I would not have done is prepare a detailed summary of the proceedings that made no mention of these irreconcilable issues.

I wonder if we would have ever learned how unfair Justice Loo was if you had won...

You seem to be a very happy person with the the judgement made by justice Loo. How do you think she would rule on Audited Statements being mailed out to timeshare owners in a timely fashion according to the agreement? Do you think it is important for timeshare owners to receive these statements by March 31 of each calendar year so they can decide to stay or sell this terrible investment. Is it just as important as the cancellation fee and the Reno fee?