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

[Spark1]

This whole episode would be great entertainment if it wasn't my neck in the noose. Those who have always mocked and ridiculed time share should be having a good chuckle. Its like a lot of things in life. It is all good until its not.

http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/CSC-C...lection-firm-screw-over-one-of-his-cli-945393

Sounds like this guy is on the run. Hopefully a better jogger than attorney. Here is hoping.

This Francois Sauvageau operates just like Northwynd does. This is just another one of Northwynd's scare tactics. What we do not need is people panicking and paying Northwynd anymore money. Time owners that paid cancellation fees have hurt owners that are fighting these crooks and right now are not just concerned about the money but would like to see these crooks go to jail. We have great lawyers working on the appeal and we need to support them. There are other issues besides the appeal as indicated on posts 1285 and 1323. I have a lot of faith in ClanMac and hope to hear from him about what he has posted. Canadians have to quit being passive and close their wallets.

 

[GypsyOne]

Collection Action

It is more important than ever that TS owners sign on with one of the two law firms and join the battle to defeat this egregious money grab by Northmont. Northmont has retained the law firm of Sauvageau & Associates to commence collection action against the resisting TS owners. S & A have began serving draft Statements of Claim to TS owners in alphabetical order. This draft is for information, probably with the intent of intimidating the TS owners into paying. The draft has not been filed with the courts. My guess is they hope to scare owners into contacting them and negotiating a "deal" without going through the courts. For example, the claim against me plus costs is $8,173. But they are also seeking interest at 26.824% from May 31, 2013 plus full costs of the action. The total bill could be well over $10,000. It gets crazier and crazier. But I am speculating they are prepared to "sweeten" the deal if you pay quickly, say by knocking off the accrued interest. I'm not buying in. A completely unjustified money grab is still completely unjustified no matter how they tinker with the amount.

The only way to protect our interests is to sign on with one of the two law firms and fight. There is no free ride here. You need legal representation. As it stands now Northmont has unrestricted access to the TS owner's money to upgrade the resort for their financial benefit as they see fit. For example, in year 38 of a 40 year lease, Northmont could collectively bill the TS lessees for $10 million for capital upgrades to the resort. But the expense will not benefit the lessees because their lease expires in two years time. This must not be allowed to happen.

The legal cost to date is extremely low - much, much lower than the claim by Northmont. The appeal of the Special Case ruling looks to be shaping up really well. Realistically we cannot expect a quick resolution. But if there is any justice in the justice system, we will win.

 

[Beaverjfw]

Sauvageau Law Firm - What they are.

Here's information from Linkedin about Sauvageau. They are a small law firm with their own collection agency division. Here's what you can expect.

"we operate an hybrid organization (law firm/collection agency) and the collection methods we use allow us to separate the legal and sensitive files from the regular collection files right from the beginning of our collection activities and not only toward the end, as a last resort measure, as would our competitors. We call this process "legal scoring". Once accounts have been qualified for legal actions, we offer what we call “Collection Through Litigation”, a service that brings together the professionalism and credibility of a law firm with the advanced techniques and collection tools used by collection agencies. By determining in the first 90 days of collection which files should go legal and which files should follow the regular collection process, we allow our clients to make better decisions, quicker, and thus to recover more money, faster, all this without the extra costs normally associated with the use of legal resources. Our clients are always amazed by the results we can deliver early in their collection process using our collection-litigation ("legal scoring") method.

 

[GypsyOne]

Here's information from Linkedin about Sauvageau. They are a small law firm with their own collection agency division. Here's what you can expect.

"we operate an hybrid organization (law firm/collection agency) and the collection methods we use allow us to separate the legal and sensitive files from the regular collection files right from the beginning of our collection activities and not only toward the end, as a last resort measure, as would our competitors. We call this process "legal scoring". Once accounts have been qualified for legal actions, we offer what we call “Collection Through Litigation”, a service that brings together the professionalism and credibility of a law firm with the advanced techniques and collection tools used by collection agencies. By determining in the first 90 days of collection which files should go legal and which files should follow the regular collection process, we allow our clients to make better decisions, quicker, and thus to recover more money, faster, all this without the extra costs normally associated with the use of legal resources. Our clients are always amazed by the results we can deliver early in their collection process using our collection-litigation ("legal scoring") method.

I'm curious as to whether we'll be "legally scored" as sensitive or regular. Then once it is determined what category of miscreant that we are, does "advanced techniques and collection tools" mean that we will be water-boarded? Or, heaven forbid, does clients being amazed by the results mean thumbscrews, kneecapping, and genital electrodes?

 

[ClanMac]

Where are the financial statements for 2013. Most contracts stipulate they are to be provided by March 31st. I guess Northwynd believes it can continue to breach with impunity. Its not inconsistent with it's psychopathic nature.

 

[heydynagirl]

Got my email from S & A

Right on schedule as an "H", today I received a bill from S & A. My original bill was approx. $1700, the draft document has it now at $3398.

 

[gnorth16]

Right on schedule as an "H", today I received a bill from S & A. My original bill was approx. $1700, the draft document has it now at $3398.

So what are the extra fees? That is more than 28% interest (which in itself is disgusting!!!)

 

[heydynagirl]

So what are the extra fees? That is more than 28% interest (which in itself is disgusting!!!)

Apparently its all interest. Doesn't matter they aren't getting it.

 

[Meow]

I hope everyone who monitors this thread is onboard with either Cox Taylor or Geldert for the appeal. We will need all the help we can get. I do not look forward to be hounded to my grave by a sleazy lawyer from Ontario.

 

[heydynagirl]

Draft from S & A

Just an update, after re-reading the draft from the lawyer, it includes "costs" of 679.00 in addition to the original amount. Interestingly, my bill has gone from $1974 to $2718 to $3398. :ignore:

 

[gnorth16]

Just an update, after re-reading the draft from the lawyer, it includes "costs" of 679.00 in addition to the original amount. Interestingly, my bill has gone from $1974 to $2718 to $3398. :ignore:

I'm sure the $679 fee goes to the sleazy suits and the 28% interest is for just over a year. $1974 looks so much better now, which is why they do it. People cave and try to make a deal.

 

[GarryH]

Yup. Got mine two days ago too. (I'm in the 'H' group.)

The grand total is $3,398.09 including costs of $679.02. Let's see, that's $679 times, what, 6,000 hanging on to their wallets which brings the total costs to over $400,000. And I assume there could be a further percentage collection fee on the original amount.

I think I chose the wrong profession. Do law schools accept senior citizens?

 

[heydynagirl]

Yup. Got mine two days ago too. (I'm in the 'H' group.)

The grand total is $3,398.09 including costs of $679.02. Let's see, that's $679 times, what, 6,000 hanging on to their wallets which brings the total costs to over $400,000. And I assume there could be a further percentage collection fee on the original amount.

I think I chose the wrong profession. Do law schools accept senior citizens?

I'm just really glad I signed up with the lawyers. GarryH - you bill is exactly the same as mine.

 

[heydynagirl]

Yup. Got mine two days ago too. (I'm in the 'H' group.)

The grand total is $3,398.09 including costs of $679.02. Let's see, that's $679 times, what, 6,000 hanging on to their wallets which brings the total costs to over $400,000. And I assume there could be a further percentage collection fee on the original amount.

I think I chose the wrong profession. Do law schools accept senior citizens?

I got 4,074,000 - that's a lot of pay for little work. Im in the wrong profession too!!!

 

[GypsyOne]

Just an update, after re-reading the draft from the lawyer, it includes "costs" of 679.00 in addition to the original amount. Interestingly, my bill has gone from $1974 to $2718 to $3398. :ignore:

The bill might even be more. See Part 2: RELIEF SOUGHT

1. Judgement in the amount of (sum named which includes cost to commencement of action.)
plus
2. Interest from May 31, 2013 (sum not named).
plus
3. Full costs of collection action (sum not named).
plus
4. Such further relief as the Court deems just and proper in the circumstance. (sum not named).

This is a collection ploy to get you to settle without them having to take you to court. They scare the bejeezus out of you with a big bill but they will "negotiate" a lesser amount if you settle quickly. The proper response is to ignore their collection tactics and forward the correspondence to your (our) lawyer. I have confidence the courts will not condone this institutionalized highway robbery once our case is fully and fairly presented to the higher (and more qualified) Court of Appeal.

What I like about our case is that we have a large number of timeshare owners determined not to let this unscrupulous timeshare company get away with a most brazen and well planned scam perpetrated on innocent people who wanted nothing more than the lease of a pre-paid vacation. Rebuilding a failing resort for the benefit of the real owners of the property was not part of the deal.

Our legal costs per person are minimal because of our large numbers, and if we don't fight and win we will be at the mercy of this gang forever more.

 

[no_more]

meanwhile on the sunchaser website

The bill might even be more. See Part 2: RELIEF SOUGHT

1. Judgement in the amount of (sum named which includes cost to commencement of action.)
plus
2. Interest from May 31, 2013 (sum not named).
plus
3. Full costs of collection action (sum not named).
plus
4. Such further relief as the Court deems just and proper in the circumstance. (sum not named).

This is a collection ploy to get you to settle without them having to take you to court. They scare the bejeezus out of you with a big bill but they will "negotiate" a lesser amount if you settle quickly. The proper response is to ignore their collection tactics and forward the correspondence to your (our) lawyer. I have confidence the courts will not condone this institutionalized highway robbery once our case is fully and fairly presented to the higher (and more qualified) Court of Appeal.

What I like about our case is that we have a large number of timeshare owners determined not to let this unscrupulous timeshare company get away with a most brazen and well planned scam perpetrated on innocent people who wanted nothing more than the lease of a pre-paid vacation. Rebuilding a failing resort for the benefit of the real owners of the property was not part of the deal.

Our legal costs per person are minimal because of our large numbers, and if we don't fight and win we will be at the mercy of this gang forever more.

on the sunchaser website the freedom to choose cancellation forms are still there. in the past they have been very quick to pull information off the website that compromises them. so ...they just want money ... this is the final act of trying to intimidate people into paying them off. what a bunch of parasites, the whole lot of them.

in fact, I think this latest stunt will motivate a lot of people who have been ignoring this or sitting on the fence to sign up with a legal firm and fight this - for a fraction of the cost.

again, the firms are geldert law and cox taylor and they both have websites with their contact information.

 

[Anxiety123]

Paperwork to Lawyer today

I also received the Civil Suit notice. For some reason I did not receive the billing that came to everyone in Nov. so call Sunchasers and my dues have now gone from $2700 to $4900 just to get out. They included 27% interest and also 2014 Maintenance Fee and also a $500 collections fee. After contacting the lawyer, found out that we have not been sent to collections as of yet so if I would have paid to settle and get out, I would have been scammed out of an extra $500! Northmont/Sunchasers are not playing on the up and up. I as of today decided to sign up with Geldert Law as to protect myself from these people that are trying to get as much money as they can out of us owners. I could understand helping to pay for the upkeep of the resort as I have friends that own in Panorama and they pay an extra fee for future major renovations every 3 or for years but I am not sure why as owners we have to pay for the deficit that Northmont signed on for when they bought into the resort. I am assuming that this would have been a business decision at the time. There is one question I have never had answered. Years ago when the Riverview building was being built, friends of ours were staying in the condo right beside the Rec. Centre. When visiting them, I noticed that the unit were very small, rundown and concrete was crumbling. I did find that concerning that they would be building new buildings to sell but not taking care of the buildings they already had. I am thinking that they were just concerned at lining the pockets of the sale people that made tons of commissions and also to keep the sales personal in the office making good salaries.

I am now thankful we have two very good lawyers taking care of my interests in this matter.

 

[Hotpink]

Renovation

Copied from the Sunchaser site

*All villas will be converted to fully equipped B-side kitchens once the renovation is completed

Is that replacing like for like or is this just so they will be more saleable to other gullible souls such as us if they are reselling timeshares. Or perhaps we are just paying for upgrades to their property so they can sell them as individual units as part of a condo project

It appears that the renovation project is proceeding at a snails pace if you look at the update on the progress as od March 31 2014. Didn't see any financial postings , but based on past performance we should not be surprized that we won't have them any time soon.

Have not seen any dunning correspondence requesting monies from the Ontario collection/legal firm to date but I'm sure it will be coming and it will be forwarded to our collective legal counsel.

If this whole project goes bust I suspect the Valley residents and businesses will be quite negatively affected. Or maybe I should say when.

I'm sure the local media in the valley are getting a handle on the shenanigans that Northwynd is pulling. A lot of valley businesses were affected by the Fairmount bankruptcy in 2010. Read those public documents if you want to see the list.

Keep fighting the good fight

 

[ClanMac]

HP

The only legitimate audited financial statements over the past three years came from Collins Barrow for the fiscal year 2012. They concluded that there was every reason to suspect misstatement of financial transactions, not the least of which included "Fraud". There are no audited financial statements for the year 2013; which are stipulated by contract to have been sent to us by March 31st of this year.

There is clear evidence of illegal transactions involving the REIT which holds the income generated from the leaseholders. This involved the 'Trustee' who was approved by Northwynd during the alleged bankruptcy hearings for Fairmont. There is also evidence that Fairmont did not bankrupt; rather one of their holding companies did with 0 assets to claim; whereas their international REIT continued to hold assets and another subsidiary continued to solicit investments.

Their is also a report that suggests that Fairmont was funneling funds into Barbados while the Mexican, Hawaiian and other resorts in the REIT were deteriorating. There is already a substantiated history of Canadian offshore accounts in Barbados hiding from the CRA; and there is a substantial reward for whistle blowers to provide them with information that leads to a trail.

With the kind of money we know Fairmont/Northwynd has bled from those of us mislead into buying a week or two away at a reasonable cost; the reward would be huge! I hope some of the former insiders who got screwed by their psychopathic leader decide to get greedy too!

 

[GarryH]

Clanmac,

There is substantial information provided in your last post. This raises two questions:

1. Does Michael Geldert have in his possession substantive details of the evidence you have laid out here?

2. If he does, than how much of it can he use in an appeal of Justice Loo's decision?

The Loo decision was quite narrow on the issues she was asked for her opinion. Considering evidence outside of those two specific questions seemed to be of no interest to her during that process.

In other words, is there evidence beyond which this particular appeal will consider that would be more appropriate for criminal proceedings? Are the lessee/owners group the party that needs to pursue these allegations, now or after the appeal, or should we call the cops? From what you say, Northwynd/Northmont has a lot of scrambling to do when the light is shone in this darkened room.

 

[darklord700]

A little background info on this Sauvageau law firm, if you can call it that. Thanks to our friends on the Suncahser facebook page for finding it out.

http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/CSC-C...lection-firm-screw-over-one-of-his-cli-945393

 

[Spark1]

Clanmac,

There is substantial information provided in your last post. This raises two questions:

1. Does Michael Geldert have in his possession substantive details of the evidence you have laid out here?

2. If he does, than how much of it can he use in an appeal of Justice Loo's decision?

The Loo decision was quite narrow on the issues she was asked for her opinion. Considering evidence outside of those two specific questions seemed to be of no interest to her during that process.

In other words, is there evidence beyond which this particular appeal will consider that would be more appropriate for criminal proceedings? Are the lessee/owners group the party that needs to pursue these allegations, now or after the appeal, or should we call the cops? From what you say, Northwynd/Northmont has a lot of scrambling to do when the light is shone in this darkened room.

It is time Service Alberta got off the fence with this case. If I was one of the lease owners and received this email from these collection crooks I would be suing Northwynd for giving out this information. There is a Personal Information Protection act enforced buy Service Alberta. The Appeal is in full force and Northwynd is carrying on like there was no appeal. Service Alberta also knows that Northwynd can not amend lease owners agreements the way they have. My signature and my spouses signature would have to be on that lease document before I would honour it. This information came right from Service Alberta right to me buy a phone call from them. Northwynd promised me that they would never give out our personal information and look what they are doing. We should all get together ,fill out the proper Service Alberta forms and get Service Alberta off their butts.

 

[Hotpink]

Privacy

copied from the Sunchaser site

What We Will and Will Not Do With the Information You Provide Sunchaser Vacation Villas uses information generally to compile statistical data, keep in contact with users and provide them with a better interactive experience. Sunchaser Vacation Villas may use your information specifically for the following purposes: (i) to improve the content of our Site; (ii) to personalize and/or customize the content and/or layout of our Site for each individual visitor; (iii) to notify visitors about updates to our Site; (iv) to identify our visitors’ preferences; (v) to keep you informed about product and services (both ours and third parties’) in which you have expressed an interest; (vi) to establish your eligibility for special offers and discounts; (vii) to complete business transactions; (viii) to contact you as part of a promotion; (ix) to allow you to make a posting on the Site; (x) to administer individual accounts; (xi) to provide customer support; (xii) to meet legal requirements; (xiii) to provide Internet security; and/or (xiv) to analyze the collected information; and (xv) to send you a newsletter. If you have entered and won one of Sunchaser Vacation Villas contests, Sunchaser Vacation Villas and / or its sponsors may publish your first name and city of residence.

Looks like they are trying to cover their tracks .
Go to their site under owners and read the privacy policy and the general terms located at the bottom of the page in small print.
Enjoy the read. Maybe third party collections fall under vii. but that sounds like a stretch.

 

[Hotpink]

privacy act

go here and pay attention to Section 20

http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/P06P5.pdf

They are on a thin line if I read it correctly

 

[ClanMac]

Response to GarryH

Geldert is aware of what was in my last post and a whole lot more, and you ask good questions.

The focus of the appeal is limited and will in all likelihood not accommodate a lot of information outside of its rather narrow scope as defined by what Justice Loo was asked to address in the first place. Depending upon the approach taken there is an opportunity to challenge the validity of the decision based on factual information that questions the legitimacy of the contracts outside of qualifying the renovation project as an extension of maintenance fees. The question of contractual obligation is at the basis of the appeal, and if it is clear that the contracts were voided long before any demands for renovation fees were made, the dispute as to whether this obligation exists becomes moot. Northwynd/mont's consistent defensive claim is that they are not Fairmont and cannot be held responsible for Fairmont's past actions. Not only is this not entirely true it is irrelevant; as the contract was made with Fairmont and is dependent on Fairmont's as well as Northwynd's actions. Justice Romaine's ruling under the CCAA in 2010 did not involve a challenge to the legitimacy of the contracts involved in the plan of arrangement; rather assumed such and allowed for the transfer of the contractor's rights to Northwynd. It was and continues to be a false assumption and is subject to challenge; and if properly presented will be successful.

As for your second question; the police are well aware of what has transpired. In fact the commercial crimes unit has been involved and at the senior detective/investigative level. They recognize the legitimacy of the concerns that have been raised and have to balance the costs of pursing a formal investigation involving forensic audits against the likelihood of a successful prosecution for serious criminal offences involving a large number of victims for a huge amount of money. Their resources are limited and already stretched to the max, and they have confidence that civil lawsuits will be successful and perhaps lead to criminal charges. The CRA is a different story. Auditing is their business and they have no shortage of resources. In fact they have set up a special hot line for whistle blowing or information regarding offshore accounts held by Canadians or Canadian based businesses that may be avoiding tax; and they are already familiar with such in Barbados.