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

[Late2Game]

Good money after bad . . .

Link to Rafter Six story below:

http://globalnews.ca/news/1082659/rafter-six-ranch-packs-it-in-for-good/

It's a damn shame. . . .the story says it all.

Will the newly renovated Fairmont encounter a similar outcome two years from now?

.

 

[DarkLord]

http://globalnews.ca/news/1082659/rafter-six-ranch-packs-it-in-for-good/

"That came after the Cowley family made a deal with resort developers who then went into receivership, leaving the family with a massive amount of debt."

This is Northwynd's MO, leaving people with debt while they walk away. Those who consider staying should really give it a second though after learning what happened to Rafter Six Ranch who had successuflly run for a few decades before Northwynd came alone.

 

[INTEGRITY]

I have read the entire thread. I also joined in with the lawyers. I am sad to see my initial $14,000 investment go up in smoke, but it is not worth it anymore to pay these ridiculous demands. Northwynd can have it. I did not pay maintenance for 2013 when I first saw the notice. Don't pay these crooks another cent. You will only be held hostage as they will focus their efforts on people who do pay, because they will follow the money. I am sure they will come back to the current owners who want to stay in a very short time and demand even more money.

My wife and I have just joined the Resistance. We are dubious of the integrity of Northmont and want out. We are confused if we join the appeal whether we will be able to get out, even if we win the appeal. Does anyone know whether we could get out IF we win the appeal?

 

[no_more]

I drove by the Northwynd offices around lunch time today - no lineup of people at the door unlike the last time. I didn't see a soul coming or going. Their office building is still named Fairmont Place.

 

[GypsyOne]

My wife and I have just joined the Resistance. We are dubious of the integrity of Northmont and want out. We are confused if we join the appeal whether we will be able to get out, even if we win the appeal. Does anyone know whether we could get out IF we win the appeal?

Since you are signed up with a lawyer, you could get a quick opinion with an email. Northwynd would certainly have a tough time taking collection action if they lose the appeal. I'm okay crossing that bridge when we come to it.

 

[no_more]

another drive past Northwynd offices

I drove by the Northwynd offices around lunch time today - no lineup of people at the door unlike the last time. I didn't see a soul coming or going. Their office building is still named Fairmont Place.

took another drive past the northwynd offices out front at 445 this afternoon - the main office appeared closed, and maybe 6 cars in the parking lot - this in spite of their office hours now showing as 8-6 on their website.

nobody in sight, much less people lined up outside paying the extortion fee.

 

[NoMas]

Good!

No_More that makes NoMas smile!

 

[ClanMac]

So Proud

I am so proud of all of you all, you are true Trojans. There is no defeat until you give up, and we are in it all together.

For those of you who inquired; winning the appeal is what sets the stage for walking away from this mess without being bled for another cent. It certainly eliminates the validity of including the stay in or buy out addition to the maintenance fees; and essentially draws attention to the limits of the original contract to begin with. Justice Loo was not focused, nor was it intended for her to focus on whether the contracts carried over from the Creditor Protection agreement were still valid. This agreement in 2010 primarily focused on whether it was legal for the creditors to accept a proposed plan from Northwynd that would allow them to carry the debt, make a lot of money on TS sales and conversion of lessees to the fee simple RCI program, pay interest on the loan to the creditors, essentially have the principal paid in full by 2015, and for the creditors to start making a profit on the property. Consideration for the TS lessees was to be based on fair treatment; and included an association that was to have input into the management decision-making and an open and transparent relationship with respect to the dealings of the trust that took care of the TS equity. The ruling by Judge Romaine was that only under these circumstances would Queen's Bench approve "the arrangement".

Guess what, you already know the answer to this. The details of this arrangement were never fulfilled. The original contractual agreements made to Fairmont that were carried over on these conditions were breached, and the contract has been continually breached since.

I erred in my previous post when I suggested that the lawyers that both are/were hired by Northwynd that have/had investments into the trust were suspect of malpractice due to an obvious conflict of interest; I should have stated that they would likely be guilty of engaging in a "dual relationship", which is forbidden by the Colleges that govern our practices.

It is encouraging that No_More is perhaps witnessing first hand the last of the rats abandoning the sinking ship. Take care my friend and don't get busted for stalking, ha ha!!!

 

[no_more]

rafter six video on global calgary

I just watched the video on Global TV Calgary about those people losing their ranch as a result of a "predatory resort developer".

I am spitting mad over this - and more determined to fight than ever. I hope there is a happy ending for these people, and the "resort developer" in this high profile story gets nailed. I think the chat with the RCMP will last more than 15 seconds this time.

why aren't the consumer affairs reporters in western Canada reporting on these people ? I don't get it.

Don't pay these people one cent. Sign up with Geldert Law or Cox Taylor and let's expose these people and stop them.

 

[no_more]

it was a drive by clanmac !!

I am so proud of all of you all, you are true Trojans. There is no defeat until you give up, and we are in it all together.

For those of you who inquired; winning the appeal is what sets the stage for walking away from this mess without being bled for another cent. It certainly eliminates the validity of including the stay in or buy out addition to the maintenance fees; and essentially draws attention to the limits of the original contract to begin with. Justice Loo was not focused, nor was it intended for her to focus on whether the contracts carried over from the Creditor Protection agreement were still valid. This agreement in 2010 primarily focused on whether it was legal for the creditors to accept a proposed plan from Northwynd that would allow them to carry the debt, make a lot of money on TS sales and conversion of lessees to the fee simple RCI program, pay interest on the loan to the creditors, essentially have the principal paid in full by 2015, and for the creditors to start making a profit on the property. Consideration for the TS lessees was to be based on fair treatment; and included an association that was to have input into the management decision-making and an open and transparent relationship with respect to the dealings of the trust that took care of the TS equity. The ruling by Judge Romaine was that only under these circumstances would Queen's Bench approve "the arrangement".

Guess what, you already know the answer to this. The details of this arrangement were never fulfilled. The original contractual agreements made to Fairmont that were carried over on these conditions were breached, and the contract has been continually breached since.

I erred in my previous post when I suggested that the lawyers that both are/were hired by Northwynd that have/had investments into the trust were suspect of malpractice due to an obvious conflict of interest; I should have stated that they would likely be guilty of engaging in a "dual relationship", which is forbidden by the Colleges that govern our practices.

It is encouraging that No_More is perhaps witnessing first hand the last of the rats abandoning the sinking ship. Take care my friend and don't get busted for stalking, ha ha!!!

I won't clanmac !! That's as close as I want to be to them ever again. I was dropping off some donations at the Worldserve thrift store which is only 3 blocks away on 58 avenue - I found it very ironic that the building was called Fairmont Place and there was also a "For Lease" sign out front of it ... must be some room at the inn ...

 

[Northwynd CC]

I just watched the video on Global TV Calgary about those people losing their ranch as a result of a "predatory resort developer".

I am spitting mad over this - and more determined to fight than ever. I hope there is a happy ending for these people, and the "resort developer" in this high profile story gets nailed. I think the chat with the RCMP will last more than 15 seconds this time.

Northwynd is not and has never been involved with Rafter Six.

From Rafter Six's own website:

"As you may, or may not be aware, Stan and Gloria entered into an agreement with a Calgary resort developer in 2008 to expand Rafter Six Ranch Resort. The resort land and buildings were put into the agreement and the joint venture partner would provide the development expertise and funding. Unfortunately, it was at the beginning of the recession and our joint venture partner went into a form of receivership which left us on our own to swim in the sea of debt that was amassed during the initial stages of the agreement. We have now become a casualty of this event."

Northwynd did not exist in 2008. Fairmont did. Northwynd is not Fairmont (Misconception #8).

 

[DarkLord]

Northwynd did not exist in 2008. Fairmont did. Northwynd is not Fairmont (Misconception #8).

Make no mistake and absolutely no misconception here, Northwynd IS Fairmont.

 

[no_more]

Geldert Law and Cox Taylor have advised that anyone seeking to participate in the appeal should contact them immediately.

 

[MFD]

Questions for Northwynd

Why couldn’t you renovate only the bare bones of what was needed (Poly B Pipes, major issues)? Instead you also chose to renovate and replace other things that are not yet necessary like furniture, fixtures, ect. Was it because of the additional 15% management fee you guys get on a larger amount? Majority of us owners will only stay there one week out of the whole year, I’m sure most of us would be fine “slumming” it out with smaller TV’s and dated furniture (although they are still quite comfy and cozy and far from needing replacement). Especially if it meant we could potentially save half the amount you would be charging us. It’s hard for us to believe that you guys are “good guys” and are looking for a solution for us when you’re making many unnecessary updates at our expense. Was it because you had hoped that many would just cancel after seeing such a large bill? And it seemed that the option to Cancel was just suspiciously slightly lower that the amount was to Renovate, so either way it was a win-win for you. You would either get the amount you wanted from us, or you would get a slightly lower amount and also get our timeshares back.

As I understand it, you guys are unit holders that invested into Fairmont and lost everything when Fairmont went under. You keep claiming that it is Fairmont that we should be blaming and if there was someone to go after it should be them. But it seems now that because you cannot go after Fairmont to get your money back, you have decided to go after us “owners” instead. We did not invest into something hoping to gain more money from it. You did. We only invested into our timeshare in order to gain a nice relaxing vacation with our family. You made a bad investment, and I’m sorry that happened. We didn’t, so making us pay for your mistake is unfair and unethical.

Honestly, if you had only charged me $1000-$2000 instead of the $4000 (now over $5000) to Renovate only what was absolutely needed and perhaps taking a smaller management fee, I would’ve been upset, but I would’ve thought about it and seen that you were actually thinking about what was financially reasonable for us “owners” and considering the fact that I would be willing to pay a couple thousand for continued vacations, I would have written the cheque.

 

[browger]

Wondering?

Ever since I replied on this web site, I am getting the following notifications:

Web Attack:Malicious Website Accessed 2
Severity High
Activity: An intrusion attempt byxjrrpkaxz.serveftp.com was blocked
Date: Every time I go on this site

My Security has been able to block it.

This is concerning?

Anyone else have this problem?

 

[ClanMac]

computer attacks

Browger:

I was attacked pretty badly and it took me and some computer savvy friends to clean it all out, re-configure and set up a new security system. I think No_More got attacked too. I believe some of us are being targeted, and it's very clear that a lot more than general monitoring of this site is ongoing.

Don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure who might be doing this!!!

 

[no_more]

hi browger and clanmac

Browger:

I was attacked pretty badly and it took me and some computer savvy friends to clean it all out, re-configure and set up a new security system. I think No_More got attacked too. I believe some of us are being targeted, and it's very clear that a lot more than general monitoring of this site is ongoing.

Don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure who might be doing this!!!

given the amount of money at stake, would not surprise me ...

 

[ClanMac]

Northwynd CC:

As much as the great lengths you go to to distance yourself from Fairmont, and granted Northwynd isn't Fairmont; Northwynd was a formed company, not a brand new entity other than in name. As a matter of fact in the original CCAA agreement Northwynd is described as newly formed.

Formed from what? You go even further to state that all your management had nothing to do with Fairmont, and were all new. Really? Then how do you explain that Patrick Fitzsimonds who came in as your CEO was still trying to buy out a TS lessee from Fairmont as a result of the fraud that occurred with the Ranchos Banderos resort. This was before or during the settlement and is a matter of public record.

Further, do you think we are naive enough to think the RCMP investigation into the Rafter 6 fiasco is focusing on a business. You know they are targeting individuals involved. You can't put handcuffs on a business, but you sure can on individuals who ransacked a treasure and devastated a community and a heritage!!!

 

[browger]

"No more" Computer attacks

I just wanted to let everyone know, there have been no more incidents on
my computer. Our Security system has done its job. I havn't seen any
postings and I wanted everyone to know.

We so appreciate everyone's input, and this is what has guided us through
these very difficult times.

Thanks again to everyone for your valuable knowledge.

(PS:If there is any other activity, I will let everyone know)

 

[browger]

Att: No_more

Did you send me a private message. I won't open, as I am wary.

Sorry

 

[no_more]

yes I did Browger. there is a private messaging service on tug bbs which I have used with several individuals.

you are wise to be wary. if you choose not to open, I totally understand. I won't know either way.

regards, no_more

 

[ClanMac]

Where is HotPink?

Don't want to lose you, and can't begin to tell you how important the info you sent.

Take Carre

 

[Joron10]

Premier Association?

My friends bought in Fmt about 10 yrs after we did. They were offered to buy into a program called Sunchaser Premier Owners Association and thru this, they no longer technically own in Fmt. They do pay their fees but they are free from paying any of these Reno fees. Anyone hear of this or bought into it? I heard nothing and was wondering how Northwynd those people to offer it to. If it wasn't for my timeshares, I could be taking some really nice vacations!

 

[Joron10]

Premier association

I should mention, they bought into this premiers association last year after owning for about 8 years. I would have appreciated the same offer!

 

[Spark1]

I should mention, they bought into this premiers association last year after owning for about 8 years. I would have appreciated the same offer!

This has been brought up before and ,if you want answers join one of the two lawyers that is working on the appeal. This being Geldert Law or Cox Taylor. This is part of their agenda. I am betting that most of them golf. Most of them have belonged to this resort as long as us or longer and I am sure their golf balls have done more damage to the main structure on the 7000 building then what we did.
The question is who is paying for all the open spaces this has created and why wasn't all of us offered this. More double standards. When they say 14500TS are responsible for paying the extortion,take off almost 700 SPOA members and that means us 13800 TS will be paying for all the damage they did. Our friends that belong to this SPOA golfed out there last year and stayed at Sunchaser and you are responsible for their part of their maintenance fees and the huge Justice Loo's renovation fee. How do you feel knowing this? This is more creative accounting buy JustFacts.