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

[Spark1]

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.

Walk away From Timeshare
After years of paying maintenance fees on two contracts with the Mayan Palace ,it decided I had had enough. I could no longer get the weeks I wanted, even when I tried to book 6months away from my travel date. I had fully paid off my contract in the 90's. I didn't want that back ,only wanted to stop throwing good money after bad. When I really closely red my contract I could not see where LEGALLY said I must pay the maintenance fee. I took it that if I did not I would no longer be a member and could no longer book at the resort. Big deal. That's exactly what I wanted. I took the contacts to a lawyer who agreed with me. He sent a letter to MP that said since I was no longer able to book the weeks I wanted he considered the contract frustrated and null and void. He also said not expecting them to agree, that we wanted my initial payment back and they had two weeks to respond or further legal action would be taken. As soon as they got that letter I was called at home asking me to explain what the issue was. I unloaded on the lady. After I was done she said I'd be emailed two pep files for my wife and I to sign and send back to them. After that they will send me a letter stating that my contracts with the Mayan palace are over Happy Days are here again
My advice to anyone in the same position as me is to get a lawyer to send them a official legal challenge to paying any fees.

 

[Disappointed W]

Northwynd will liquidate

I don't think that Northwynd will restructure, I think that they are trying to collect money to try to pay off investors who are looking at a class action against them. They are attempting to collect from timeshare owners, who are easily manipulated into paying them whatever they ask. They fear the action of big money investors, and so are passing the losses to us. I think it is a matter of time before they will declare bankruptcy, and so the end of any threat of collections.
I have posted this before, found on this link:

http://www.redweek.com/forums/messages?thread_id=16969

1 year ago
Apr 26, 2012

Hello Chris. In past years there has been a meeting in spring to update FRPL Finance investors on what's been happening with Makaha. None this year though, so in searching the web I came across your post which is the most recent I could find. Actually I was wondering whether this investment was a total write off and if so would use it on my company's year end, September 30. Looks like it's still limping along? Have there been any further updates? I'll try northwyndinvestorsaction group@ymail too.


chrisb727 wrote:
Northwynd Investors Action Group was recently established by a group of investors/unitholder that have major concerns about the dwindling assets and the questionable management and connection to the previous owners FRPL/Fairmont Resort Properties. The goal of the group is to remove all essence of FRPL / Fairmont from their new company that is floundering that it experinced under the same control before the bankruptcy, take control of their own company and start returning investors money to them.

The Action Group is presently working with the FRPL appointed Board of Trustees and management of Northwynd in a transition of control of our company and assets. Since their agreement in general, they have sent a Northwynd lawyer onto the Investors Action Group and have not backed out of their agreement to transition. The group is also reviewing business options with the CEO to explore ways to achieve the #1 goal of the group, protect remaining assets for the investor.

If anyone is interested in joining our group or commenting on their regretted investments, please email to northwyndinvestorsaction group@ymail

 

[Spark1]

I don't think that Northwynd will restructure, I think that they are trying to collect money to try to pay off investors who are looking at a class action against them. They are attempting to collect from timeshare owners, who are easily manipulated into paying them whatever they ask. They fear the action of big money investors, and so are passing the losses to us. I think it is a matter of time before they will declare bankruptcy, and so the end of any threat of collections.
I have posted this before, found on this link:

http://www.redweek.com/forums/messages?thread_id=16969

1 year ago
Apr 26, 2012

Hello Chris. In past years there has been a meeting in spring to update FRPL Finance investors on what's been happening with Makaha. None this year though, so in searching the web I came across your post which is the most recent I could find. Actually I was wondering whether this investment was a total write off and if so would use it on my company's year end, September 30. Looks like it's still limping along? Have there been any further updates? I'll try northwyndinvestorsaction group@ymail too.


chrisb727 wrote:
Northwynd Investors Action Group was recently established by a group of investors/unitholder that have major concerns about the dwindling assets and the questionable management and connection to the previous owners FRPL/Fairmont Resort Properties. The goal of the group is to remove all essence of FRPL / Fairmont from their new company that is floundering that it experinced under the same control before the bankruptcy, take control of their own company and start returning investors money to them.

The Action Group is presently working with the FRPL appointed Board of Trustees and management of Northwynd in a transition of control of our company and assets. Since their agreement in general, they have sent a Northwynd lawyer onto the Investors Action Group and have not backed out of their agreement to transition. The group is also reviewing business options with the CEO to explore ways to achieve the #1 goal of the group, protect remaining assets for the investor.

If anyone is interested in joining our group or commenting on their regretted investments, please email to northwyndinvestorsaction group@ymail

The court approved the purchase on june the 22 /2010
units will remain registered in the name of Carthew Registry Services Ltd (the trustee) which is independent of Northwynd. So the timeshare rights that are and WILL CONTINUE to be registered with the trustee, will remain FULLY PROTECTED. We are very lucky timeshare owners to have Philip Matkin looking after our interests and i am sure he knows where our reserve fund is and maybe the next time he petitions the supreme court of BC to put the screws to the timeshare owners he will have a meeting with us first. What is is position with Northwynd.

 

[Spark1]

I don't think that Northwynd will restructure, I think that they are trying to collect money to try to pay off investors who are looking at a class action against them. They are attempting to collect from timeshare owners, who are easily manipulated into paying them whatever they ask. They fear the action of big money investors, and so are passing the losses to us. I think it is a matter of time before they will declare bankruptcy, and so the end of any threat of collections.
I have posted this before, found on this link:

http://www.redweek.com/forums/messages?thread_id=16969

1 year ago
Apr 26, 2012

Hello Chris. In past years there has been a meeting in spring to update FRPL Finance investors on what's been happening with Makaha. None this year though, so in searching the web I came across your post which is the most recent I could find. Actually I was wondering whether this investment was a total write off and if so would use it on my company's year end, September 30. Looks like it's still limping along? Have there been any further updates? I'll try northwyndinvestorsaction group@ymail too.


chrisb727 wrote:
Northwynd Investors Action Group was recently established by a group of investors/unitholder that have major concerns about the dwindling assets and the questionable management and connection to the previous owners FRPL/Fairmont Resort Properties. The goal of the group is to remove all essence of FRPL / Fairmont from their new company that is floundering that it experinced under the same control before the bankruptcy, take control of their own company and start returning investors money to them.

The Action Group is presently working with the FRPL appointed Board of Trustees and management of Northwynd in a transition of control of our company and assets. Since their agreement in general, they have sent a Northwynd lawyer onto the Investors Action Group and have not backed out of their agreement to transition. The group is also reviewing business options with the CEO to explore ways to achieve the #1 goal of the group, protect remaining assets for the investor.

If anyone is interested in joining our group or commenting on their regretted investments, please email to northwyndinvestorsaction group@ymail

Disappointed has written a lot of interesting posts page 8 post 177 and post 264 page11 and posts 931 down to 935 page 38 and now on the last page. It is time for other timeshare owners to write posts. Like knowing that 5 of the major bond holders were employees of FRPL and they held top positions with FRPL and they are blaming FRPL for the way the resort was run and they were the top management before FRPL bankrupted. Would you trust these people with your money. Will you just walk and run, will you hire a lawyer and if they lose will you still walk and run or will you pay the 3800 cancellation knowing it is just going into the bond holders pockets and not the resort or will you pay the Reno fee knowing only 2005 paid Reno fees out of 7000 timeshare owners and there could be a lot of 100.00 ones in this group so they could use the home resort because they paid maintenance fees. We know this resort will never be totally renovated and the question is what will the other 7500 timeshare owners do? My question to the 5 X employees with FRPL ,what happened to the Reserve Fund? It will be nice to hear from other posters.

 

[JustFacts]

Injunctions

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.

An appeal has no impact on the finality of the decision or a collection agents ability to contact you. However, Darklord identifies an important point people should think about...

The Canadian legal system has a process called an Interlocutory Injunction. If you want to read about the mechanics in detail you can go here:

http://www.mccarthy.ca/pubs/Urgent_Relief_BVeenstra.pdf

This is the concept Darklord *thinks* occurs by filing an appeal, but is wrong. Injunctions which cease an activity are a specific legal process that must be filed by the lawyers. If they don't, everything continues on as normal during a legal proceeding.

This leads to two big questions:

1) Why didn't the owners lawyers file an injunction?

If the owners allegations were true, an injunction should have been filed because the consequences of not filing were so high. This should have been a big clue about the lawyer's confidence in the case.

2) Did the owners lawyers explain the consequences of proceeding without an injunction?

It seems pretty evident from this forum that many owners do not understand they have been in default since the due date of the invoice and somehow thought the court case "stopped the clock."

The owners lawyers should have explained to their clients that without an injunction, the contract continues as is until they prove in court that it has been violated. This is a huge piece of information because it means the owners are incurring interest on overdue balances, new maintenance fees, and can be taken to court for collections.

This is true of an appeal or a future breach of contract suit. Since a breach of contract suit would take years, it is quite likely an owner could be taken to court for payment of defaulted balances and have that suit complete long before the breach of contract.

Owners should have been told the smart thing to do was keep their account current to keep from being in default which is still true today. Then, at least when you lose you don't end up owing thousands more than you should have.

 

[JustFacts]

Collection costs

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.

ERW's analysis makes a compelling case that Northwynd would pursue even if it cost them $2,000. The trick is it won't cost Northwynd anything.

Owners need to read their contracts. There is a specific indemnity clause at the end of the contract that deals with costs of enforcing the contracts. The owner is liable for all costs of Northwynd collecting from them.

If you owe $5,000, Northwynd won't take you to court for $5,000, spend $2,000 to do it and end up with $3,000. Northwynd will take you to court for $7,000, spend $2,000 to do it and end up with the $5,000 you originally owed.

Even if a judge doesn't award the $2,000 directly against the owner being sued, collection and legal costs still fall within "all costs of the resort" which means they'd get charged to the whole group of owners. One way or another, Northwynd isn't paying the legal bill.

 

[JustFacts]

Overdue bills incur interest

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..

To repeat my previous post. Owners need to read their contracts. There is a specific obligation to pay clause in the contract that states the owners are responsible for interest of 2% per month on outstanding balances.

Northmont has not "decided they are entitled to interest at > 26%" any more than Visa has "decided they are entitled to interest at 22%" when you don't pay your bill on time. It has formed part of your contract since the day you signed it. Interest goes directly to the resort which offsets costs for all the owners who aren't delinquent.

If you didn't want to be charged interest, you should have paid your bill or you should have got your lawyers to file an injunction.

 

[JustFacts]

We lost the Special Case because our lawyers could not introduce our best defence - a multitude of misrepresentations and breaches of contract.

If breach of contract was really your "best defence", why did the owners fight the special case at all? Are you suggesting the lawyers wasted $300,000 of owners money and six months of time fighting the wrong battle? Because that time and money is now wasted. None of the lawyers are offering to continue to fight for free.

If I had just spent $300,000 in legal fees and wracked up thousands of dollars in extra costs and my legal counsel had ignored my "best defence", I'd be pretty pissed off.

I would also refer to my first post today. If Northwynd has really breached its contracts, the owners should have already filed an injunction to stop their activities. The fact no injunction has been filed or is even being contemplated speaks volumes.

Owners who have read Justice Loo's ruling in full should be thanking her for the level of detail she provided. Justice Loo has gone to great lengths to explain two things to the owners:

1) Pursuing further justice through a breach of contract argument would result in unnecessary litigation, be timing consuming, and expensive.

2) If you try, you'll lose.

Justice Loo included everything you could possibly need in her ruling to realize the futility of the breach of contract argument.

The largest set of allegations made by the owners are all that Fairmont were bad guys and did a bunch of damage to the resort. The problem is those allegations are irrelevant. Justice Loo specifically addressed this (paragraph 111) by stating "it appears to me that Northmont acquired the Foreclose Assets - including the vacation interval agreements - free and clear of any pre-existing liablities of Fairmont or any claims that the owners may have had against Fairmont." In other words, if Fairmont did bad things, the owners should have sued Fairmont 4 years ago.

The owners argued that the deferred maintenance has caused damage. Justice Loo specifically addressed this (paragraph 97-100) by stating "there is no evidentiary or legal basis before me to found the argument that deferred maintenance has resulted in damage" and "the owners do not cite any legal basis to found the argument that they are relieved of the obligation to pay for repair costs associated with failure to maintain, or a deferral of maintenance." In other words, the owners *did* argue this, produced no evidence or legal basis to support their position that damage had occurred and even further, produced no legal basis to support their position that even if damage had occurred, it would somehow stop them from being liable.

Justice Loo specifically addressed the renovation plan (paragraph 95) by stating "I am satisfied that the renovation plan reflects a reasonable course of action...and the costs associated with it fall within the contractual obligations of the owners." This means you *cannot* argue the renovation plan is wrong in any future breach of contract suit.

Lastly, Justice Loo addressed the management of the resort (paragraph 82) by stating Northmonts "contractual responsibility to manage the resort in a prudent and workmanlike manner, does not impose on it the obligation of an insurer, and necessitates only that it acts reasonably." You might think Northmont should have done something else, like provide the financial statements sooner, but their obligation is only to have acted reasonably.

The entire breach of contract argument is summed up by paragraph 52 of Justice Loo:

"<owner> suggests that there are things that were not done by either Fairmont or Northmont, and that the project renovation fee covers damage caused by lack of maintenance in the past and contends that the owners are not liable for damage caused by lack of maintenance. However, <owner> cannot say what damage might have been caused by lack of maintenance, or what ought to have been done and was not done by Fairmont or Northmont, and the owners concede that <owner> is not an expert"

It is one thing to make a bunch of wild accusations on the internet behind a veil of anonymity. It is another thing to make them in a court of law and produce fact, law, and evidence to support them.

Bottom line - This case cries out for justice, and the only way to obtain justice is through the courts.

Justice which has been achieved through the courts at great cost to both sides.

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

If you choose to ignore it...

 

[DarkLord]

JustFacts, my advice to you is if you at least declare your real intention is to be the month piece of Northwynd, you'll find your posts are at least worthy of responses.

Other than that, I can only repeat my earlier advice to you of finding other gainfully employment as you know Northwynd won't be there for long.

 

[JustFacts]

JustFacts, my advice to you is if you at least declare your real intention is to be the month piece of Northwynd, you'll find your posts are at least worthy of responses.

Other than that, I can only repeat my earlier advice to you of finding other gainfully employment as you know Northwynd won't be there for long.

I neither want or need a response to anything I post. There are two types of owners visiting this site. Those looking for information and those that have already made up their mind.

I am trying to provide information to the first group. Most owners are neither for or against anything and are just looking for information.

I am not naïve enough to believe my posts will have any impact on the second group. If you won't listen to a supreme court justice, you aren't going to listen to me. Your response is exactly what I expect. An inflammatory statement devoid of a counterargument designed to scare me and others which simply reinforces the validity of my statements.

Constructive debate is healthy. Letting people make up their own mind based on as much information as possible is healthy. People are smart enough on their own to decide how much or how little weight to put on anyone's posts which is why I post facts, not opinions.

 

[DarkLord]

I am trying to provide information to the first group. Most owners are neither for or against anything and are just looking for information.

You're trying to fool people gullible enough to fall for your scare tactic for you to make a few quick bucks and then declare bankruptcy.

If you are looking for information, consult a lawyer like Geldert at sunchaser@geldertlaw.com and make your decision. JustFacts is employeed by Northwynd to try to scam you money.

 

[Hotpink]

Lake Okanagan Bargains

Back in July the asking price for the resort was Just over 14 Mil. Now it is just a shade over 10 Mil. There were just a hand full of units for sale at the resort
and now there are over two dozen for sale with 20 one bedroom units ranging in price from $500.00 to the mid four figures. By comparison on the www.sellmytimeshare.com site at Fairmont there are far more depending on how you narrow you search to Riverside ,Hillside or Riverview and totals about 84 units the vast majority being 2 bedroom lock offs. the prices go from the sublime to the ridiculous and they are all basically the same units with some difference in years remaining on the lease.
When we spoke with a realtor in Invermere in 2012 he said we would be lucky to get $1,000.00 to $1,500.00 less his fee of $500.00. This year they would not take our listing as they are now considered worthless and if you can find a buyer Good Luck.
Looks like our units at Lake Okanagan and Hillside are worth less combined than the walk away fee Mr. Wankel is demanding.
If I had a vehicle with a major mechanical problem and it would cost more to repair it than I could get for selling it or trading it on an other more reliable vehicle then I would take the bus home and let the shop have it for whatever they wanted to do with it.
We can rent over in the valley for a week for an amount that is less than the proposed 2014 maintenance fee listed for Northmont .
Our OLD contracts are very specific about what happens should you fail to pay maintenance fees. You cease to have access to the resort(s).We have enjoyed our many years at both of these resorts and at many other trades, but I will suggest Mr. Wankel stop weaseling money from the gullible among us and will need to learn the craft of being successful at pounding sand

 

[Tacoma]

JustFacts

Joined in November and only posts under this topic. Northwynd is getting desperate.

JustSaying

 

[Quadmaniac]

ERW's analysis makes a compelling case that Northwynd would pursue even if it cost them $2,000. The trick is it won't cost Northwynd anything.

Owners need to read their contracts. There is a specific indemnity clause at the end of the contract that deals with costs of enforcing the contracts. The owner is liable for all costs of Northwynd collecting from them.

If you owe $5,000, Northwynd won't take you to court for $5,000, spend $2,000 to do it and end up with $3,000. Northwynd will take you to court for $7,000, spend $2,000 to do it and end up with the $5,000 you originally owed.

Even if a judge doesn't award the $2,000 directly against the owner being sued, collection and legal costs still fall within "all costs of the resort" which means they'd get charged to the whole group of owners. One way or another, Northwynd isn't paying the legal bill.

Actually it isn't - if you go to court and a judge theoretically rules on your behalf, they will assess costs which is usually a court filing fee. You can put whatever you want in a contract, but only a court can assess costs when you take the matter there. You can only sue for the actual amount, not plumped up with "costs" which a court will disallow immediately. If you can prove that they owe $4000 for special assessment plus $1000 MF, that is what you are allowed to sue for. You can not add $2000 to it for "costs in advance".

That is the same situation as most cases where there was some sort of contract. A judge makes a ruling on who he feels is right in the matter and decides upon a judgement that he/she thinks would be fair in the situation. If the judge determines a contract or agreement was unfair, they will determine their own amount. The contract terms will be considered by a judge but they are highly unlikely to assess the fees you are suggesting.

Even in higher courts, when they assess "court costs" such as solicitor costs, it is way less than the actual cost of a lawyer as there is a set fee schedule. On average, it's maybe 20-25% of what your real legal costs maybe. They give you a set fee for each stage you had to go through like examination for discovery, etc, etc.

This is coming from real world experience of having to sue people and guaranteed, Northwynd would not be getting close to this IF they win. They will be lucky to break even with legal costs IF they are able to collect after getting a judgement. Getting a ruling in their favor is only the start of the battle, collecting a judgement is a whole different ball game. So they're going to spend all their resources suing owners on the hope that they can pay - to only break even maybe ? Doesn't make sense.

The most likely scenario and least costly is to send it to collections which will usually take 25% off the top if they can collect. Anyways you slice it, it will not be easy for Northwynd to collect period.

 

[DarkLord]

You can put whatever you want in a contract, but only a court can assess costs when you take the matter there. You can only sue for the actual amount, not plumped up with "costs" which a court will disallow immediately. If you can prove that they owe $4000 for special assessment plus $1000 MF, that is what you are allowed to sue for. You can not add $2000 to it for "costs in advance".

Quad, I didn't want to dignify JustFacts propaganda with a respond. But as someone who had experienced in small claim court, you're absolutely right. Actually, winning the case was easy but trying to collect was nigh on impossible.

I think my initial guesstimates (spending $2K to collect $5K) was kind of generous. If it was up to me, anything less than $5K is not worth suing for in small claim considering the costs even if you almost are guarantee to win.

If worse come to worse for the owner, Northwynd will almost certainly give the owners a better deal than they are now. For they know suing 10,000 owners individually in small claim is just not very wise or feasible.

Owners, if you are sitting on the fences, my advice is to contact a lawyer like Geldert. If it was up to me, I fight until the end. And even if I shall lose, the deal Northwyn will offer me is certainly gonna be better than what they are offering now. That's just common sense.

The fact that Northwynd is sending their own people, like JustFacts, posting here just proves that they know they don't have a good case.

 

[Quadmaniac]

Quad, I didn't want to dignify JustFacts propaganda with a respond. But as someone who had experienced in small claim court, you're absolutely right. Actually, winning the case was easy but trying to collect was nigh on impossible.

I think my initial guesstimates (spending $2K to collect $5K) was kind of generous. If it was up to me, anything less than $5K is not worth suing for in small claim considering the costs even if you almost are guarantee to win.

If worse come to worse for the owner, Northwynd will almost certainly give the owners a better deal than they are now. For they know suing 10,000 owners individually in small claim is just not very wise or feasible.

Owners, if you are sitting on the fences, my advice is to contact a lawyer like Geldert. If it was up to me, I fight until the end. And even if I shall lose, the deal Northwyn will offer me is certainly gonna be better than what they are offering now. That's just common sense.

The fact that Northwynd is sending their own people, like JustFacts, posting here just proves that they know they don't have a good case.

Yes you are right. Justfacts is trying to create fear in people as most are not into litigation and will probably be easily convinced to avoid having to deal with the headache.

Northwynd can spend resources trying to collect, but I think there will be more people than they expect resisting payment and any "additional" charges on top of that. Diminishing return....

 

[gnorth16]

In other words, if Fairmont did bad things, the owners should have sued Fairmont 4 years ago.

Same offices, same personnel, same investors, just a new name. Justice Loo must have her head up the wazoo not to realize this!!!

If you choose to ignore it....

 

[gnorth16]

When we spoke with a realtor in Invermere in 2012 he said we would be lucky to get $1,000.00 to $1,500.00 less his fee of $500.00. This year they would not take our listing as they are now considered worthless and if you can find a buyer Good Luck.

If anyone still has their heart set on staying at Sunchaser, simply look at exchanging in with a different TS or using a getaway with II or RCI. Combined between the two prioerties, there were over 500 units availalbe including xmas, Spring Break and summer units. I personally like the area in June and September for golf and there are lots of units available. If you like mud season....whoa!!!! TONS!!!

Plus, you can keep tabs on the resort while continuing the fight...

 

[GypsyOne]

The timeshare industry is a snake pit. Where else can you buy a property for say $16,000 and then pay the company another $3,200 to take it back? But thats not all - also pay for a year's maintenance on the property you don't have. So you've paid about $20,000 and you've lost say 2/3rds of the vacation experience you paid for. Something like buying a car from a dealer for $16,000, then paying them another $3,000 to take it back, but also agreeing to pay for the next year's gas, oil, and repairs. Only in the Alice in Wonderland world of the timeshare industry could that happen.

Could also happen I guess if you have a homer court decision. Can't have a bankrupt resort on our hands. Can't lose all that tourist money coming into the province. Can't lose all that re-construction activity. Gotta enrich those rich owners. So stick it to the timeshare owners!

 

[DarkLord]

The timeshare industry is a snake pit. Where else can you buy a property for say $16,000 and then pay the company another $3,200 to take it back?

That's the reason Northwynd this whole time hid behind the obscure language of the contract didn't promote dialogue with the owners.

It is a regret that some of the owners are pensioners who'll succumb to pressure and pay Northwynd off.

I've talked to a lawyer and ask him not only to fight Northwynd about paying the cancellation or renovation fee, but to luanch the offensive to seek compensation from false advertisement. Likely we won see a dime from this lawsuit but we'll bring the gangs of Kirk Wankel to justice.

 

[Rider Nation Rocks]

Still More Questions than Answers

New poster here no agenda just looking for real facts. Wondering if anyone else has received no further contact from Sunchaser since the April 12 letter. Most posts have referred to a recent mailing and an increase in fees both to go and to stay. Others talked of e-mail contact in the summer. We received the letter in April and chose to ignore it. Blows my mind that the April letter came in a normal envelope and that they would pursue collections or whatever with no registered letter or further attempts to contact.
We had paid our 2013 maintenance fee in January and were allowed to book and use our week in July with no complications. Normally one would expect to see your 2014 maintenance fee bill about this time of the year.
Is our status different than most in that we have never signed any contract or agreement with FMV, Northwynd or Sunchaser. Rather we purchased from a realtor in Invermere 13 years ago and really only have a
realtors contract showing we own a leasehold interest at FMV.
Have been following this thread since April and am still very much suspicious of throwing more funds into a sinking ship. Curious if anyone else has a similar story. Don't feel like contacting Sunchaser to raise attention if I have fallen off their map.

 

[DarkLord]

Rider Nation, I'm in the same boat as you as I bought resell. If you received the April letter, doubt you would have fallen off the map. Best bet is to call up Geldert, for $150, it's much cheaper and less headach to let the lawyer deal with Northwynd than doing it yourself.

I think at the stage, Northwynd is picking off the low hanging fruit first, the owners who will pay up. Don't know how they will deal with the more indignant owners like myself later.

 

[DarkLord]

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rafter-six-ranch-closing

Another Northmount or Northwynd's good deed. Rafter Six Ranch had a dealing with them and is now closing shop. Think long and hard before giving Northwynd another dime of your money.

 

[gnorth16]

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rafter-six-ranch-closing

Another Northmount or Northwynd's good deed. Rafter Six Ranch had a dealing with them and is now closing shop. Think long and hard before giving Northwynd another dime of your money.

Very sad indeed.

Anything to add "Just Facts"? Or is everything about the Rafter Six Ranch hearsay and defamation...

If I lost my business, home and livelihood to a scam artist, I would probably have a 6x8 "timeshare" provided for me for at least the next 25 years....:ignore:

 

[pdoff]

Dissedent Owners

I remembered that Mr. Wenkel refered to us as "Dissenting Owners". I wasn't sure if I liked that terminology - but when I looked up that term relating to business - I thought the following quote was applicable:

How to Deal with the Dissedent - "The majority Shareholder or Partners must take great care to play everything by the book to avoid unnecesary claims against them. This means that they must continue to observe statuatory rules governing the management of the Company, procession of financial information and voting procedures. Otherwise the dispute that could have been reasonably quickly sorted out becomes difficult."

Sounds like good advise!