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

[tdjanzen]

The problem with this logic is it assumes paying the lawyer will lead to victory.

The lawyers already had six months and hundreds of thousands of dollars at their disposal and still lost an overwhelmingly one sided ruling. Yet somehow you think it'll work out better next time because why exactly? Justice Loo's ruling was pretty thorough.

When you lose, you end up paying the lawyer AND them and it is anything but the cheap alternative.

You could have cancelled in May for $3,200. You've already lost:

Whatever legal fees you paid.
$600 in interest on your renovation fee.
$1,000 for your 2014 maintenance fees.

Assuming you continue to default through an appeal or other lawsuit, both of which could easily take years, you'll lose:

$1,300 in interest each year on the renovation fee
$1,000 per year for maintenance fees
$300 per year in interest on the maintenance fees

That's before you pay your lawyer a penny. I wonder how many people who cancelled in May regret their decision?

I had not realized that Sunchaser had already published their usurious rates of interest as punishment to owners exercising their legal right. Or is this just supposition?

I can tell you of the dozen or so people that I know that paid to get out, not a single one of them has any regrets. They regretted being put into such a position. They regretted that they would NEVER spend another nickel at Fairmont Hot Springs - it is a very nice vacation spot.

But what Northmont doesn't seem to get or care about is that I didn't go into a contract to get a specific timeshare. I entered into my contract 15 or so years ago because it was a good destination and I trusted that the management company's interests would also be my interests. They wanted to run a good operation so that they could sell more units to more owners.

Sadly, my reason for participating in the lawsuit is that the trust has been abused. The manner in which all of this was carried out can only suggest a motivate other than it's good for the development so it's good for you. I'm sorry, it isn't a good deal for any timeshare owner. Some owners may have found it tolerable and continued but it is not a good deal. And trust me, there will be a huge difference in the way they communicate to their friends about a tolerable deal and a good deal.

But honestly Northmont admittedly doesn't care. If they get enough people to quit, they'll just flip them units as condos. If they convince enough people to essentially re-purchase their units, they will continue. And then hope they can snooker enough new people to fill in the gaps. If that doesn't work, they will just add to the maintenance fee amount over and over again because that is what Justice Loo's decision will allow them to do.

I don't regret participating in the lawsuit and honestly as another poster stated, each person will have to decide for themselves what to do. I just feel sorry for those that decided to continue on because I can't shake the feeling that this whole money grab was designed to fleece the sheep quickly.

 

[Spark1]

Honestly, I am not going to be overly critical of Madame Justice Loo's decision. It is what it is. I am disappointed she did not make provisions to protect the consumers (i.e placing all reno fees in trust to ensure they are used as such, establishing a timeshare owners group for more fair representation of the owners) but then that was not the question asked of her so I'm not sure if she would have the latitude to make such rulings. That would be for another legal case.

I think JustFacts is correct when he/she says the decision of the courts was just that-the court's decision, not the Province of BC's for "political" reasons. The other fact of life is that when you go to court, your lawyer should be saying something like "I think we have a case but remember, the courts can go in either direction and nothing is guaranteed". Any lawyer worth their weight in cash will explain it that way - I've been involved in too many court cases (no, I'm not a lawyer, just get involved with company legal issues) to believe otherwise. There are no "sure things" in law. Myself, it is time to sit down and make a decision to stay or go. Justice Loo's decision was addressing a relatively simple question posed to her as to whether or not Northmont's course of action was legal or not. I don't like her decision, as many of us don't, but that was her decision. Appealing or launching a class action, etc. will take a long time and a lot of money. Personally, I would rather get through this and carry on, whatever my decision is. But that is a personal choice everyone needs to make and depends on your own resources, how much you have invested in your timeshares, etc. If ultimately I do decide to leave, my only regret is giving in and losing the remaining time we had purchased. But the reality is that vacations can now be bought on the internet very cheaply and maybe paying for mtce fees, deposit fees, lock-off fees, booking fees, Interval memberships just don't make it worthwhile any more.

Save your money. The cancellation form they are using is not a cancellation. I showed service Alberta this form and they read it and told me that this will not cancel you until they decide and you will pay until they turn you loose.
Mr Wankel said 7000 timeshare owner paid cancellation or reno fees. So 2805 paid reno and 4195 paid cancellation. So cancellation money goes to the bond holders and 15% goes off the reno money. there is not a lot left to do the 40million + reno job. The other 7500 should save their money because this reno plan will never collect 40 million to complete this major reno job.

 

[Spark1]

I had not realized that Sunchaser had already published their usurious rates of interest as punishment to owners exercising their legal right. Or is this just supposition?

I can tell you of the dozen or so people that I know that paid to get out, not a single one of them has any regrets. They regretted being put into such a position. They regretted that they would NEVER spend another nickel at Fairmont Hot Springs - it is a very nice vacation spot.

But what Northmont doesn't seem to get or care about is that I didn't go into a contract to get a specific timeshare. I entered into my contract 15 or so years ago because it was a good destination and I trusted that the management company's interests would also be my interests. They wanted to run a good operation so that they could sell more units to more owners.

Sadly, my reason for participating in the lawsuit is that the trust has been abused. The manner in which all of this was carried out can only suggest a motivate other than it's good for the development so it's good for you. I'm sorry, it isn't a good deal for any timeshare owner. Some owners may have found it tolerable and continued but it is not a good deal. And trust me, there will be a huge difference in the way they communicate to their friends about a tolerable deal and a good deal.

But honestly Northmont admittedly doesn't care. If they get enough people to quit, they'll just flip them units as condos. If they convince enough people to essentially re-purchase their units, they will continue. And then hope they can snooker enough new people to fill in the gaps. If that doesn't work, they will just add to the maintenance fee amount over and over again because that is what Justice Loo's decision will allow them to do.

I don't regret participating in the lawsuit and honestly as another poster stated, each person will have to decide for themselves what to do. I just feel sorry for those that decided to continue on because I can't shake the feeling that this whole money grab was designed to fleece the sheep quickly.

What the lawyers have to do is get them on all the breaches.
Audited statements
Fairmont finance running up a 40million+ debt which is terrible management and now Northmont has the same management
Mr. Matkin the trustee at the time of the foreclosure was also the lawyer for Northmont who obtained the order from the alberta court which may have limited the owners rights.
the "cash grab' of the cancellation fee and the revelation that northmont intended to use the cancellation funds to reimburse bond holders.
Northmont driving down the value of our timeshare investment to zero and driving up the maintenance fees causing timeshare owners to walk away from this resort and now they can resell the condos.
Poor exchange value not what we expected
Keep in mind ther is no obligation on any owner to pay the cancellation fee.

 

[Tacoma]

I for one do not question Justice Loo's decision. The scope of the legal case was very narrow. All she had to decide was if Northmont had the right to charge a cancellation fee and if they had the right to charge a renovation fee. She decided yes for both of them. Everything else about their breaches was not heard in count and will not be heard on the appeal either.

In spite of this I am willing to keep paying lawyers to fight this. I do not expect to win the appeal. Unless we launch a suit on their breaches of contract I do not believe we will ever win. That said I still prefer to pay lawyers than this group.

If it is true than they are now charging over $3800 to walk from over $3100 before and ridiculous interest rates on maintenance fees owing all I can say is how can this be legal in Canada? Is their no one who can stop this group? As I and others have said if you own any timeshares in BC dump them. This gives carte blanche to any unscrupulous management company to charge anything that they want. Why wouldn't they?

The good news is I'm at the stage of life where a mark on my credit score is not the end of the world.

 

[gnorth16]

Why not have a vote to have the timeshare dissolved and the assets sold. Any proceeds from the sale would be returned to the owners...

Q: Why was this option not given before the decision to reno by Southwynd?

A: Because they would not get any money out of it (15% of reno fees) and would also lose their management fees.

So "Just Facts", why not?!?

 

[Wynnvegas]

When you break a phone contract, what happens????

Wow!!! Is all I have to say about some of these comments especially on attacks against Justice Loo and the employees of Northwynd/Northmount. People will only see and hear what they want to when it isn't what they want to hear. When you sign a 3 year contract with Telus for example, should you break that contract, you must pay out the contract, you can not simply just walk away with no penalities. It's a fair trade. Though it may sound like a phenomenal idea at the moment to purchase 40 years at a beautiful resort, things happen and in this case Northmount took over after Fairmont went bankrupt and they are giving owners two options. Stay or go. If your so unhappy and never use your timeshare or have money to pay the maintenance fee, then walk away. It's quite simple. No future obligiations, being able to break your contract for a small price. It's cheaper then paying maintenance fees for the next 40 years. I think certain people should be an adult and deal with it. This is cememted with the court ruling in Northmount's favor. I been to Fairmont as my sister owns here and it's beautiful, but it does need some work, though it wont be a 5 star like Wynn Encore--in Vegas but it has it's own unique charm and coziness. Fabulous family friendly place. My sister has already enrolled in a plan in May. She has no worries, not interest accruing on her account. Can't wait to attend in 2014. :whoopie:

 

[Wynnvegas]

You think paying a lawyer is better then cutting permanent ties with a resort that causes you so much grief knowing that you would never win? WOW!!!!!!! The lawyers are raking this up like it's Halloween!!! ish I was a lawyer at this moment!!!The options are crystal clear. This is quite fair. When you signed on the dotted line for 40 years, you must pay maintenance fees to help upkeep the resort and over the course of 40 years it's much more expensive than $4000. As in the credit rating not affecting your score, that excuse would be valid if you were 18 years old but not everyone get's wiser as the years go by I suppose. Why do people make things difficult when it's quite SIMPLE??

 

[Quadmaniac]

Wow!!! Is all I have to say about some of these comments especially on attacks against Justice Loo and the employees of Northwynd/Northmount. People will only see and hear what they want to when it isn't what they want to hear. When you sign a 3 year contract with Telus for example, should you break that contract, you must pay out the contract, you can not simply just walk away with no penalities. It's a fair trade. Though it may sound like a phenomenal idea at the moment to purchase 40 years at a beautiful resort, things happen and in this case Northmount took over after Fairmont went bankrupt and they are giving owners two options. Stay or go. If your so unhappy and never use your timeshare or have money to pay the maintenance fee, then walk away. It's quite simple. No future obligiations, being able to break your contract for a small price. It's cheaper then paying maintenance fees for the next 40 years. I think certain people should be an adult and deal with it. This is cememted with the court ruling in Northmount's favor. I been to Fairmont as my sister owns here and it's beautiful, but it does need some work, though it wont be a 5 star like Wynn Encore--in Vegas but it has it's own unique charm and coziness. Fabulous family friendly place. My sister has already enrolled in a plan in May. She has no worries, not interest accruing on her account. Can't wait to attend in 2014. :whoopie:

Couple of things, when you agree to a 3 yr contract for $XX per month for services, you don't get hit with a special fee a year down the line for an extra $300 you did not agree to when you entered that contract. If they want to charge the MF yearly, I think most would not have an issue, it is the renovation fee that is a problem.

The second thing, it is hard to believe with the number of new users joining, with no history here, in STRONG support of Northwind. It sounds like a shill to me.

Just saying....

 

[GypsyOne]

You think paying a lawyer is better then cutting permanent ties with a resort that causes you so much grief knowing that you would never win? WOW!!!!!!! The lawyers are raking this up like it's Halloween!!! ish I was a lawyer at this moment!!!The options are crystal clear. This is quite fair. When you signed on the dotted line for 40 years, you must pay maintenance fees to help upkeep the resort and over the course of 40 years it's much more expensive than $4000. As in the credit rating not affecting your score, that excuse would be valid if you were 18 years old but not everyone get's wiser as the years go by I suppose. Why do people make things difficult when it's quite SIMPLE??

You either know nothing about the issues or you have an agenda. The timeshare owners simply want what they contracted for, not to be delivered up as the cash cow for the benefit of Northmont in a poorly constructed resort with a history of very questionable business practices. The timeshare owners are the victims of numerous misrepresentations and breaches of contract. Breaches of contract are ample cause for invalidating the contracts. If not, what is the point of having a contract?

 

[Soccer Canada]

If you lease a kia for 4 years and agree to pay $450/month. Then 2 years in they send you a letter stating that you have 2 choices:
A. Pay $3200 to upgrade to a Lincoln
B. Turn in the Kia and pay a $4000 penalty for doing so.
There is no option to just keep paying $450/month, you just have the choice of A or B.
I dont care who anyone is, Northwynd Schill or not, you'd be pretty heated and you would challenge the CONTRACT in court.

 

[DarkLord]

Northwynd is trying to get this fast and quick. I will fight this until the last day. If we lose the group appeal or the appeal after. Northwynd can only collect through small claim. Assuming at that time, the amount in question is about $5000 in which they almost certain will need a lawyer and could easily rake up a few Gs in lawyers fee. It's like spending $2K to collect $5K, if you own bi annaul, it is even worse for them.

There's no doubt in my mind Northwynd will collect the cash and declare bankrupcy. So Wynnvegas and Justfact, you might as well start looking for other gainful employment now.

 

[Phew]

contract interpretation

As mentioned earlier we got out. Partly because we didn't think we would use a timeshare any more and partly because we were advised the original contracts may be interpreted to allow special assessments. Seems that is the ruling of the courts. Frankly I didn't read the contract and review it sufficiently before we bought. Like many others I just trusted that what we were told at a presentation was all there was. As it turned out we declined the offer at the presentation and subsequently bought on the resale market for a fraction of the presentation offer price. Should have been a clue that a timeshare lease is not an investment but just a prepayment for future vacations. Kind of like prepaying for your cell contract. The difference is the cell contract does not contain clauses that may be interpreted to allow special assessments based on future events. The court decision is not the problem. The problem is people not being cautious when entering into contracts without knowing the possible consequences. Partly it is the high pressure tactics used to get people to sign up and a limited time to reconsider. For me the lesson is valuable although the tuition was steep. I tell everyone to stay away from timeshares.

 

[Spark1]

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

Docken Klym is also appealing this and also going after Northwynn for all the breaches of our agreement.

 

[ERW]

Northwynd is trying to get this fast and quick. I will fight this until the last day. If we lose the group appeal or the appeal after. Northwynd can only collect through small claim. Assuming at that time, the amount in question is about $5000 in which they almost certain will need a lawyer and could easily rake up a few Gs in lawyers fee. It's like spending $2K to collect $5K, if you own bi annaul, it is even worse for them.

There's no doubt in my mind Northwynd will collect the cash and declare bankrupcy. So Wynnvegas and Justfact, you might as well start looking for other gainful employment now.

Not saying whether you should or should not pursue this through a lawyer - that is your prerogative. But if you think for one minute that Northwynd will not pursue outstanding fees through collections then small claims, I really think you should reconsider.

If 1000 people owe them $5000.00, you are looking at $5,000,000.00. Don't for one minute think they will "write off" $5,000,000.00. They will spend $2,000,000.00 to retrieve the outstanding $5,000,000.00 and gladly pay the collections angencies and lawyers to do so. The $2,000,000.00 is then written off - that is a far cry from a $5,000,000.00 w/o. If I could "invest" $2,000.00 to put $5,000.00 in my pocket to net $3,000.00, the answer becomes pretty clear.

Unfortunately there are some timeshare owners that read this forum that may take you seriously. Based on your statements, some of those folks are going to think that doing nothing will have no repercussions. I don't think that will be the case at all.

 

[ERW]

Wow!!! Is all I have to say about some of these comments especially on attacks against Justice Loo and the employees of Northwynd/Northmount. People will only see and hear what they want to when it isn't what they want to hear. When you sign a 3 year contract with Telus for example, should you break that contract, you must pay out the contract, you can not simply just walk away with no penalities. It's a fair trade. Though it may sound like a phenomenal idea at the moment to purchase 40 years at a beautiful resort, things happen and in this case Northmount took over after Fairmont went bankrupt and they are giving owners two options. Stay or go. If your so unhappy and never use your timeshare or have money to pay the maintenance fee, then walk away. It's quite simple. No future obligiations, being able to break your contract for a small price. It's cheaper then paying maintenance fees for the next 40 years. I think certain people should be an adult and deal with it. This is cememted with the court ruling in Northmount's favor. I been to Fairmont as my sister owns here and it's beautiful, but it does need some work, though it wont be a 5 star like Wynn Encore--in Vegas but it has it's own unique charm and coziness. Fabulous family friendly place. My sister has already enrolled in a plan in May. She has no worries, not interest accruing on her account. Can't wait to attend in 2014. :whoopie:

You cannot compare a cell phone or car lease with our timeshares. The timeshares were purchased in full up front along with an agreement to pay maintenance fees. That is not the case with a phone or auto lease. If you accept the argument that the previous owners did not maintain the units, is it fair to expect those that have faithfully paid those maintenance fees to pay for the repairs/renos? The people that took over the properties should have been aware of the conditions of those properties when they acquired them and factored that into their decision to take the properites or not. If at some point the new owners decide to sell the properties, the timeshare owners will not see any benefit or profit from that sale but the selling price will be considerably higher and therefore much more profitable because of the repairs/renos paid for by the timeshare owners.

Throughout all of this, I do not recall seeing any reference to how much, if any, Northmont is putting into the renos/repairs out of their own pocket versus what the timeshare owners are expected to pay. Anyone recall if this has ever been stated?

 

[Soccer Canada]

They will spend $2,000,000.00 to retrieve the outstanding $5,000,000.00 and gladly pay the collections angencies and lawyers to do so.

I do not think they have the money to pursue things in such a heavy manner. I would think they would try and deal with things in house. Furthermore I don't know of many collections agencies that would take on such a large, labor intensive job knowing that it was still filtering through the court process, and especially knowing that the company trying to collect could become insolvent at any time.

 

[GypsyOne]

I do not think they have the money to pursue things in such a heavy manner. I would think they would try and deal with things in house. Furthermore I don't know of many collections agencies that would take on such a large, labor intensive job knowing that it was still filtering through the court process, and especially knowing that the company trying to collect could become insolvent at any time.

They may or may not have the money to continue the fight, that is not the point. Lets assume that of the $millions the timeshare owners have been sending them, they have a war chest - of our money which was intended for maintenance of the resort. And one more reason the resort is in such poor condition.

We lost the Special Case because our lawyers could not introduce our best defence - a multitude of misrepresentations and breaches of contract. These points that we included in our affidavits were not admissible in court. ie. ".....that for the purpose of the statement of special case, and without prejudice, the court may assume that the agreements are valid and enforceable contracts." (paragraph 36 of the written Decision)

Once the court made that ruling, we could not win because we could not use our best defense. The same might also happen in the appeal. But it will not happen if we take the fight to them and sue for breaches of contract, because then we can introduce multiple example of breaches and misrepresentations. We will win if an enforceable contract means anything at all. If we don't win, you have to wonder about the ability or the wish of the court to enforce justice.

The strength of our case applies particularly to the holders of the original Vacation Villa Leases. In the original lease we clearly have the status of lessees, and thus not responsible for capital costs or improvements. An example is that if you lease an apartment, you are not responsible for replacement of a faulty roof. As a lessee you are paying for quiet enjoyment and implied habitability for the term of the lease. Habitability, meaning the apartment must meet normal standards of liveability. That is all you have. You have no ownership interest in the apartment, nor should you be expected to contribute towards its structural maintenance.

Our lease agreements are no different. But the injustice of the Northmont case is that they expect the lessees or tenants to replace and upgrade capital structure for which, we the tenants, will not benefit financially. We do not have an ownership interest in the capital structures. Once our 40-year fixed lease expires, we have no residual value. The value of the capital funds Fairmont expects us to contribute, which restores and upgrades the resort, accrue to the Northmont owners. After 40 years, we walk away with nothing and Northmont has a fully restored and very valuable resort. With this court ruling, you can be sure they will be milking the timeshare owners for all they can get.

Northmont/Northwynd fixed that little problem of the timeshare owners being tenants and not owners in a very clever way. About 2009 they blitzed the timeshare owners with a campaign to convert lease agreements to ownership agreements, or from lessees to owners in fee simple. A number of timeshare owners were convinced they were better off to be owners in perpetuity than to have a 40-year fixed lease. But they were duped. As well as now being implied owners, the contracts were amended to include being responsible for capital improvements. Clause 9 (now Clause 11) was expanded to add capital costs to operating costs. ie. ".....and to pay the costs of capital improvements that may from time to time be required." Adding insult to injury, the timeshare owners paid $6,000 or so for the privilege of having their rights weakened.

Tell me this. If being responsible for capital costs was indeed included in the original lease agreements, why did the companies feel it necessary to convert to Legacy For Life Agreements and add the capital cost clause?" The reason is simple, responsibility for capital costs was not included in the original leases.

Bottom line - don't pay the ransom and don't continue on with this gang. If you do, you'll be gouged one way or another for evermore. This case cries out for justice, and the only way to obtain justice is through the courts.

 

[Beaverjfw]

2014 Invoice from Northmont

Received my bill for the reno fee and next years maintenance fee. Northmont has decided they are entitled to interest at >26% annual interest rate if you didn't pay up by the end of last May.
They are also stating that if you accept the cancellation agreement, you will STILL have to pay the 2014 maintenance fee of $997.
So the choice now is pay $5,704.71 to STAY (incl. 2014 MF) or $3,822 + $997 to walk-away (wonder if you still get a week to use in 2014 on these terms?)

For those of you that decide to pay the reno fee and have a typical period of 19 yr left on your lease. You can budget your vacation costs as follows:
$5700 + $1000x 18 yrs (assumes annual fee never goes up...sure) divided by 19 yr x 7 days (133) or $178 per night.

Oh by the way... All this comes with the promise of aggressive collections..

If this doesn't sound too appealing, consider supporting an appeal of the Supreme Court ruling.

 

[DarkLord]

I do not think that Northwynd does or does not have the resource to sue us in small claim. What I am saying is whatever Northwynd is employing right now is purely scare mongering tactics. Assuming our appeal fails and our new lawsuit also fails (who knows how long this will take), then Northwynd would have a much stronger case to collect. And they'll have to go through small claim court thousands of times all over Canada. It's an arduous tasks for them to track down these owners for many of them probably would have moved.

And in small claim we can bring on our defense once again and by that time, who knows, the entire renovation scam might have unfold or canned by Northwynd.

My main point is this thing is far far from over just because of Justice Loo's adverse decisions against the owner. And in the end, I admit, there might be a small chance that the owners who joint the appeal might be in a worse financial position than before. But I think chances are the owners who appeal will not be in any worse position than we are now.

I would like to encourage owners not to fall for the shock and awe tactics by Northwynd. The number one thing on their minds is how to extract monies from us quickly and cleanly.

You might lose if you joint the appeal but you might win. If you pay now, you'll only lose.

 

[Spark1]

Received my bill for the reno fee and next years maintenance fee. Northmont has decided they are entitled to interest at >26% annual interest rate if you didn't pay up by the end of last May.
They are also stating that if you accept the cancellation agreement, you will STILL have to pay the 2014 maintenance fee of $997.
So the choice now is pay $5,704.71 to STAY (incl. 2014 MF) or $3,822 + $997 to walk-away (wonder if you still get a week to use in 2014 on these terms?)

For those of you that decide to pay the reno fee and have a typical period of 19 yr left on your lease. You can budget your vacation costs as follows:
$5700 + $1000x 18 yrs (assumes annual fee never goes up...sure) divided by 19 yr x 7 days (133) or $178 per night.

Oh by the way... All this comes with the take you over
If this doesn't sound too appealing, consider supporting an appeal of the Supreme Court ruling.

You have to also include what you originally paid for the timeshare and that will take it way over 200.00 dollars. I remember the sales pitch buy this timeshare and you will be staying in a nice condo much cheaper than a hotel . Not what I expected. Another breach. There is nothing in our agreement stating we have to pay the cancellation or you have to pay the maintenance fee or you have to pay the Reno fee. You might of agreed to pay a maintenance fee but where does it say you have to pay. If I am renting your condo and I agree to pay 800.00 a month and I quite paying it you can not force me to pay it but you can evict me. Northwynd can evict all of us. They are breaching our agreement and because of their breaches we do not have to pay them anything and they can release all of us. My wife and I live off of Canada pension and old age pension and we could not afford the first cancellation fee and we sure can not afford this one

 

[no_more]

contact info for legal representation

We are not going away and the numbers opposing this continue to grow with the biennial even owners now getting invoiced and joining this battle. The pressure tactics and outrageous financial demands of Northwynd this month after the judge's ruling just increase the opposition.

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 sunchaser@geldertlaw.com

 

[DarkLord]

Northmont/Northwynd fixed that little problem of the timeshare owners being tenants and not owners in a very clever way. About 2009 they blitzed the timeshare owners with a campaign to convert lease agreements to ownership agreements, or from lessees to owners in fee simple. A number of timeshare owners were convinced they were better off to be owners in perpetuity than to have a 40-year fixed lease. But they were duped. As well as now being implied owners, the contracts were amended to include being responsible for capital improvements. Clause 9 (now Clause 11) was expanded to add capital costs to operating costs. ie. ".....and to pay the costs of capital improvements that may from time to time be required." Adding insult to injury, the timeshare owners paid $6,000 or so for the privilege of having their rights weakened.

My sympathies to the Leagcy to Life owners. However, does that conversion apply to normal lease holders? I bought my lease resale and I never bought into the Legacy to Life program.

 

[GypsyOne]

My sympathies to the Leagcy to Life owners. However, does that conversion apply to normal lease holders? I bought my lease resale and I never bought into the Legacy to Life program.

If you have one of the original Vacation Villa Lease agreements, you are a lessee/tenant and therefore not responsible for capital improvements. If you have a Vacation Interval Agreement you have one of the conversions to a Legacy for Life in which they added a clause to include capital improvements. (see paragraph 10. I earlier said paragraph 11, which was incorrect) The reason they pushed for conversion is simple, they knew they were on shaky grounds in charging lessees/tenants for capital improvements. The clever part is them charging the Legacy For Life owners for the privilege of converting and being responsible for financing restoration of a rapidly deteriorating resort.

Justice Loo in her written decision brushes off the difference in contracts as irrelevant. Possibly for the Special Case, but not in a legal action for breaches of contract. Then the different contracts are very important.

 

[Spark1]

We are not going away and the numbers opposing this continue to grow with the biennial even owners now getting invoiced and joining this battle. The pressure tactics and outrageous financial demands of Northwynd this month after the judge's ruling just increase the opposition.

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 sunchaser@geldertlaw.com

I have been going through justice loos interpretation and I do not agree with her on item no. 9. Northwynd said there was no Reserve fund when fairmont finance was foreclosed on why. Philip Matkin definitely knows where this money that belonged to the timeshare owners went This was our trustee that was suppose to be looking after our interests and not fairmont or Northwynd. He is our enemy. We have to look at Audited Statements at least 10 years back. He has to be accountable for what happened with our reserve fund. This resort is in terrible condition so the reserve fund did not go to fix up the resort so where did it go?

 

[DarkLord]

If you have one of the original Vacation Villa Lease agreements, you are a lessee/tenant and therefore not responsible for capital improvements. If you have a Vacation Interval Agreement you have one of the conversions to a Legacy for Life in which they added a clause to include capital improvements. (see paragraph 10. I earlier said paragraph 11, which was incorrect) The reason they pushed for conversion is simple, they knew they were on shaky grounds in charging lessees/tenants for capital improvements. The clever part is them charging the Legacy For Life owners for the privilege of converting and being responsible for financing restoration of a rapidly deteriorating resort.

What Northwynd did to the Legacy for Life owners was nothing short of criminal. If you are a normal lease holder, all the more reason for you not to pay off Northwynd as you have a better argument not to pay for capital improvement.

If I were a Legacy for Life owner, I would push for more legal action as this a scam through and through.