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

[GypsyOne]

Fair? When is being underhanded and unprofessional fair?
I have spent the last couple of hours reading these entries. That might not seem like a lot of time to some people, however, it is to me. I have terminal cancer, so my time is valuable. I would not even be on this site had this timeshare company been honorable from the start.

I endorsed the lease with my ex in early 2007. They wrote I could have two weeks in Hawaii and one in Kelowna as an extra bonus for signing. They showed us places in Ontario and Newfoundland that we could trade for. It was a high pressure sale.

When I went home I called to book my weeks......image my surprise when there were no places in Ontario or NFL. Seems we were shown a "old" book. I then asked to book in Fairmont, nope all booked, maybe next year. Hawaii, booked, Kelowna booked for two years. This caused me to do more research and decide we wanted out. I call them Five days later to cancel this lease, which was in the 7 days allotted time. They continued to take monies from my account. After numerous emails and phone calls, we drove to BC, spoke to the manager and endorsed what we were told was a release, and were told it was taken care of.

I was then contacted in 2008, where I spent hours trying to deal with the issue. Finally I was told that it had been dealt with.

In early late 2012 I was again contacted, now by the new company who said they rewrote my contract and did not care what the previous company did. They said I owed 2010 and 2012 fees. I gave them the name of my bankruptcy agency and they were told the fees were written off. I requested confirmation in writing from the company and I received an email stated my account was finally fixed and we could move forward.

In early 2015 I was contacted again and this time when I cc'd them the email they completely disregarded it. I then received a call from the collection agency/law firm about the fact I owed over $15,000.00 with interest fees, reno fees etc. On a timeshare I had been told was finally dealt with.

The person on the phone was a complete "ass" for lack of a better word. He was rude, insulting and did not listen. His comment was I don't care what happened before the contract was rewritten you owe this money or we are going to sue you. I have attempted to deal with this in good faith. I have NEVER used this timeshare, I followed all the rules.

I wrote email after email trying to deal with the company and the collection agency/law firm. I NEVER receive any option to "pay" in 2013. Had I, I would have paid immediately. At that time I would have only owed 2014 and the cancellation fee. Yet, they said they had no contact info. Really I received their emails about collections, they had my phone number, or at least they gave it to the collection agency.

In Feb I was again called by the same "ass". He was even more of a jerk. I tried to tell him I could only pay $2,500.00 as even then that is my funds for palliative care. He said I don't care you have to pay it all or we will sue you and garnish your wages. i will be going on disability. His reply is we will take that also. I hung up.

Two weeks later I got another call from someone who did not disclose his name. He said he was calling from the law office and knew nothing about the collection agent and in fact seemed very nice saying he saw no notes in the file from them. He said he had managed to have other TS owners that day settle by paying 2 years of fees. I told him what I could pay and that I had no idea where my ex was. He told me he would call me back the next day after talking to the timeshare company and doing his best to settle. However, when I hit redial, surprise ......it was the collection agency.

I then wrote the company and gave them the same offer. They wrote back and said they would work with me and asked about my illness and requested verification from my doctor. I provided it to them immediately. The next thing I get is an email saying, sorry, if you cannot provide us contact for your ex we cannot help you. They acted like they did not know two of us were on the lease. Then when I gave them the last know address, they said we cannot help you! So really they just wanted someone to serve.

How is it, that they could take a settlement from one TS owner for two years, and not me? Now they say he has to agree to take on the lease? Yet, others can settle and walk away. I cannot pay and do the same?

And you think this is fair??? I don't. I never used the timeshare, I never received the option to buy out. I have offered all I can............

So if anyone has any ideas, I am open to listening. Please if you are just going to give me a negative comment.......save it. PS sorry for the long reply.

Your post cannot be read without asking, "where is the justice," "where are the consumer protection laws," "where is the compassion?" Northmont got their court compliance, which may not be right, but it is not surprising. Judge Fitzpatrick's ruling was not unlike Justice Loo's, and I wondered then if it was possible to get justice in a B.C. court. Justice Loo's flawed ruling was overturned on appeal; Judge Fitzpatrick's flawed ruling can also be overturned.

Fitzpatrick can surely not dismiss all arguments as being without merit when 14,500 innocent misled people thought they were buying timeshare in a functioning resort and then found out they had actually bought ownership of the resort; ownership, that is, so far as paying the bills and reconstructing faulty buildings and infrastructure, not ownership for having a voice in management, sharing in the profits, or owning a valuable, marketable asset. It is ownership for having full financial responsibility, but not ownership for having financial benefits. Fitzpatrick revealed her bias when she ruled that the contracts (leases & co-ownership agreements) actually say that the TS owners are responsible for paying "all costs (including reconstructing faulty buildings)", and that "if it is not TS owners who pays, then who?" I have a suggestion, and it is not rocket science - the people who are responsible are the owners, developers, and managers who had this flawed resort built or bought it out of bankruptcy and who intend to use it for their own personal gain. This ruling is one of the most egregious, court sanctioned consumer scams that has ever been wrongfully forced upon an innocent and unsuspecting public. It makes me wonder how the complicit can live with themselves.

So, Frustrated61, what can you do? Don't underestimate the court of public opinion. Your story should be extremely important as a human interest story and for educating the public of the pitfalls of buying vacation timeshare. A google search reveals nothing printed in the Invermere Valley Echo, which maybe shouldn't be surprising, since they don't want to publicize a story that could hurt business in the Valley. A Calgary paper might be interested, but you would have to be prepared to give your name. It takes courage to go public, something you have already demonstrated you have, and a lot of TS owners will be cheering you on. An email with the story such as you provided above might get the process rolling.

 

[xplor]

Your post cannot be read without asking, "where is the justice," "where are the consummer protection laws," "where is the compassion?" Northmont got their court compliance, which may not be right, but it is not surprising. Judge Fitzpatrick's ruling was not unlike Justice Loo's, and I wondered then if it was possible to get justice in a B.C. court. Justice Loo's flawed ruling was overturned on appeal; Judge Fitzpatrick's flawed ruling can also be overturned.

Fitzpatrick can surely not dismiss all arguments as being without merit when 14,500 thought they were buying timeshare in a functioning resort and then found out they had actually bought ownership of the resort; ownership, that is, so far as paying the bills and reconstructing faulty buildings and infrastructure, not ownership for having a voice in management, sharing in the profits, or owning a valuable, marketable asset. It is ownership for having full financial responsibility, but not ownership for having financial benefits. Fitzpatrick revealed her bias when she ruled that the contracts (leases & co-ownership agreements) actually say that the TS owners are responsible for paying "all costs (including reconstructing faulty buildings)", and that "if it is not TS owners who pays, then who?" I have a suggestion, and it is not rocket science - the people who are responsible are the owners, developers, and managers who had this flawed resort built or bought it out of bankruptcy and who intend to use it for their own personal gain. This ruling is one of the most egregious, court sanctioned consummer scams that has ever been wrongfully forced upon an innocent and unsuspecting public. It makes me wonder how the complicit can live with themselves.

So, Frustrated61, what can you do? Don't underestimate the court of public opinion. Your story should be extremely important as a human interest story and for educating the public of the pitfalls of buying vacation timeshare. A google search reveals nothing printed in the Invermere Valley Echo, which maybe shouldn't be surprising, since they don't want to publicize a story that could hurt business in the Valley. A Calgary paper might be interested, but you would have to be prepared to give your name. It takes courage to go public, something you have already demonstrated you have, and a lot of TS owners will be cheering you on. An email with the story such as you provided above might get the process rolling.

Many sad stories such as this one for many people in many situations, whether a TS owner (even in other resorts that should have been aware before buying), to investors of many less than honest scams who jumped at promises of gains. In many cases it is 'buyer/investor beware' in the end. Most are so well written and quickly signed by the buyer/investor based on honesty and 'what they are told', only to later to read exactly what they agreed to and signed. So been there and done it.

 

[ERW]

There are a couple of points I think should be made here.
1) The intent, desire and cause of the people that have challenged Northmont cannot be questioned. However, I think you have to keep in mind why the action was lost. The judge made it clear that it was the evidence presented that did not substantiate the claim. Before anyone goes on about appealing, you have to ask yourself if there is any additional evidence that can be presented or are there any other arguments to be presented that can significantly change the opinion and findings of a judge. If not, everyone should think twice as there will be no point to throw good money after bad. Case in point - although the two cases are very different, the judge in the Jian Ghomeshi trial stressed that the evidence given was basically not credible which is why Ghomeshi was found not guilty. It is basically the same for Northmont trial - the evidence provided was not enough to convince the judge that Northmont had done anything wrong. I do not like what Northmont has done any more than anyone else. If trials were won or lost on emotion, Northmont would have lost in the first hour but that is not how they are conducted. So unless there is further information to be presented, please think long and hard about appealing.

2) The above being said, it is very evident that the owners of timeshares at Fairmont/Sunchasers are entitled to an owner's association. Should that not be pursued?

 

[xplor]

There are a couple of points I think should be made here.
1) The intent, desire and cause of the people that have challenged Northmont cannot be questioned. However, I think you have to keep in mind why the action was lost. The judge made it clear that it was the evidence presented that did not substantiate the claim. Before anyone goes on about appealing, you have to ask yourself if there is any additional evidence that can be presented or are there any other arguments to be presented that can significantly change the opinion and findings of a judge. If not, everyone should think twice as there will be no point to throw good money after bad. Case in point - although the two cases are very different, the judge in the Jian Ghomeshi trial stressed that the evidence given was basically not credible which is why Ghomeshi was found not guilty. It is basically the same for Northmont trial - the evidence provided was not enough to convince the judge that Northmont had done anything wrong. I do not like what Northmont has done any more than anyone else. If trials were won or lost on emotion, Northmont would have lost in the first hour but that is not how they are conducted. So unless there is further information to be presented, please think long and hard about appealing.

2) The above being said, it is very evident that the owners of timeshares at Fairmont/Sunchasers are entitled to an owner's association. Should that not be pursued?

Agree and excellent advise. I am not sure on an appeal whether 'new' or 'further information' can be presented after the trial is over, if there is any. My understanding on appeals is only the evidences presented by both sides at the trial, case judgement the judge used to form her ruling and her observations during the trial (ie; lack of being able to back up evidence and being ill prepared) the judge made. If there is 'new evidence' that would warrant a new trial and it would have to be 'new' and substantial, it is rare because they will look at it against what the evidence was in the trial that relates to the 'new' info or whether it is relevant at all to change the judgement. I reread the judgement and have to agree there is absolutely nothing that jumps out in support of Belfrey and in fact quite the opposite showed there was no case from the beginning. Agree on emotion, let down and a need to fight on to 'what is 'right'' and 'righting a wrong'. One needs to really access their own emotion on this and whether one way or the other is correct for them.

 

[Punter]

There are a couple of points I think should be made here.
1) The intent, desire and cause of the people that have challenged Northmont cannot be questioned. However, I think you have to keep in mind why the action was lost. The judge made it clear that it was the evidence presented that did not substantiate the claim. Before anyone goes on about appealing, you have to ask yourself if there is any additional evidence that can be presented or are there any other arguments to be presented that can significantly change the opinion and findings of a judge. If not, everyone should think twice as there will be no point to throw good money after bad. Case in point - although the two cases are very different, the judge in the Jian Ghomeshi trial stressed that the evidence given was basically not credible which is why Ghomeshi was found not guilty. It is basically the same for Northmont trial - the evidence provided was not enough to convince the judge that Northmont had done anything wrong. I do not like what Northmont has done any more than anyone else. If trials were won or lost on emotion, Northmont would have lost in the first hour but that is not how they are conducted. So unless there is further information to be presented, please think long and hard about appealing.

2) The above being said, it is very evident that the owners of timeshares at Fairmont/Sunchasers are entitled to an owner's association. Should that not be pursued?

For anyone to think that a Judge cannot be Biased and/ or misinformed is, well, misinformed. And as for the entitlement to an owners association, it's a little too late for that. Was Northmont supposed to form one? Yes. Did they? No.

There seems to be an assumption that those on this board have not read the judgement. I have, and I am quite certain that everyone else has, read it and we are able to make our own desisions based on it.

 

[xplor]

For anyone to think that a Judge cannot be Biased and/ or misinformed is, well, misinformed ( That is something that the Appeals Court would have to be convinced of based on ??? evidence in the trial and not opinions.). And as for the entitlement to an owners association, it's a little too late for that. Was Northmont supposed to form one? Yes. (are you sure on this, because it is news to me and some others or are you speculating they should have according to ... ???)Did they? No.

There seems to be an assumption that those on this board have not read the judgement (some have commented they haven't read it or only browsed it, In fact only a few stated they have read it thoroughly). I have, and I am quite certain (assumption) that everyone else has, read it and we are able to make our own desisions based on it.

That is what everyone agrees on, every TS owner has their own choice what to do based on hopefully, facts.

 

[GypsyOne]

There are a couple of points I think should be made here.
1) The intent, desire and cause of the people that have challenged Northmont cannot be questioned. However, I think you have to keep in mind why the action was lost. The judge made it clear that it was the evidence presented that did not substantiate the claim. Before anyone goes on about appealing, you have to ask yourself if there is any additional evidence that can be presented or are there any other arguments to be presented that can significantly change the opinion and findings of a judge. If not, everyone should think twice as there will be no point to throw good money after bad. Case in point - although the two cases are very different, the judge in the Jian Ghomeshi trial stressed that the evidence given was basically not credible which is why Ghomeshi was found not guilty. It is basically the same for Northmont trial - the evidence provided was not enough to convince the judge that Northmont had done anything wrong. I do not like what Northmont has done any more than anyone else. If trials were won or lost on emotion, Northmont would have lost in the first hour but that is not how they are conducted. So unless there is further information to be presented, please think long and hard about appealing.

2) The above being said, it is very evident that the owners of timeshares at Fairmont/Sunchasers are entitled to an owner's association. Should that not be pursued?

I'm not surprised that both you and xplor would like to discourage an appeal, since you both paid the renovation fee. The more that agree to hand over their wallets to this gang of opportunists, the more there are to pay the never-ending cost of increasing maintenance fees and special assessments. The cost of maintaining a poorly constructed, prematurally deteriorating facility will continue for a long time. That is why many of those who paid are having second thoughts and inquiring if they can join the litigation group. When Judge Fitzpatrick ruled that the TS owners are responsible for "all costs", many realized there is no future to being fully responsible for propping up a failing resort.

 

[xplor]

I'm not surprised that both you and xplor would like to discourage an appeal, since you both paid the renovation fee. The more that agree to hand over their wallets to this gang of opportunists, the more there are to pay the never-ending cost of increasing maintenance fees and special assessments. The cost of maintaining a poorly constructed, prematurally deteriorating facility will continue for a long time. That is why many of those who paid are having second thoughts and inquiring if they can join the litigation group. When Judge Fitzpatrick ruled that the TS owners are responsible for "all costs", many realized there is no future to being fully responsible for propping up a failing resort.

Makes me wonder how many paid or unpaid TS owners still wants to join the litigation and try and revive the dead horse to run again after the judgement was so out of favor of the Belfrey case. Pay money many say they don't have to further litigate the 'no merit case'. However, as everyone has agreed, TS owners will decide on whatever merit they have, to pay up now or pay up later. Their resort is what it is which ever you slice this and they are locked into a contract they signed, whether they regret it now or not.

 

[ERW]

I'm not surprised that both you and xplor would like to discourage an appeal, since you both paid the renovation fee. The more that agree to hand over their wallets to this gang of opportunists, the more there are to pay the never-ending cost of increasing maintenance fees and special assessments. The cost of maintaining a poorly constructed, prematurally deteriorating facility will continue for a long time. That is why many of those who paid are having second thoughts and inquiring if they can join the litigation group. When Judge Fitzpatrick ruled that the TS owners are responsible for "all costs", many realized there is no future to being fully responsible for propping up a failing resort.

Nor should it be a surprise. From my perspective, the longer people hold out and do not pay, the larger the maintenance bills will be and the longer it will take to complete renovations. I still debate with myself whether I should have paid to give up the timeshare or paid the reno fee. I did not have a lot of confidence in the legal avenue - cases like this, even with the best of evidence, can go either way.

So, yup, I honestly have to say I would prefer people pay so things can get going but I know many folks have very strong feelings about that. Ultimately that is your decision. But if you really are determined to pursue this, get the advise of a different lawyer. It is kind of like a serious illness. A second opinion is extremely valuable in cases like this.

 

[ERW]

For anyone to think that a Judge cannot be Biased and/ or misinformed is, well, misinformed. And as for the entitlement to an owners association, it's a little too late for that. Was Northmont supposed to form one? Yes. Did they? No.

There seems to be an assumption that those on this board have not read the judgement. I have, and I am quite certain that everyone else has, read it and we are able to make our own desisions based on it.

I would be surprised if there was bias in the decision but it is not something that can be ruled out. Hopefully Judges are selected on their unbiased opinions, legal knowledge, etc. but they are, after all, human. That would be something only an appeal could answer but the approach of the legal group would have to be much different than that of the original case. I am not a lawyer but it was very evident in the decision that the lawyer on the side of the time share owners was not prepared. As I said before, if emotion had any influence on the outcome, Northmont would not have won. For better or worse, the Judge has to rely on factual evidence.

As far as an owners association, would you want an association formed by Northmont? I, for one, would not. I think it would have to be set up outside of the Northmont sphere of influence if it were to be credible.

 

[Lostmyshirt]

Shame on Northmont

at this point Im wondering if contacting a show like Marketplace or fifth Estate would be of value Northmont deserves a ton of negative publicity, and perhaps calls to Interval and RCI as well. There is so much intrinsicly wrong here. IF the time shares were sold and people were CLEARLY told that they would be paying any and all capital costs to the buildings I'm confident they would not have had the buyers they did I NEVER WOULD HAVE PURCHASED ANYTHING. I rent a week!!! thats it!!! I am NOT AN OWNER PER SE. Nobody asked me my opinion on anything. The owners of those properties collect a very healthy maintenance fee on top of the $$$ they sold those weeks for. How can it be my responsibility if they have mismanaged the resort?? I have no say, no owners association and no recourse to say no the the 40 million reno fee??? Does somebody know the actual math of the actual money collected yearly on top of the original investment? That could be paying for those repairs??? and if they are quietly pulling out weeks and not covering that portion of the fees how is that my responsibility??? If they sell them do I get a portion of those funds refunded back to my costs and my timeshare??? While Northmont continues to pay themselves well for the stellar job they think they are doing??? About time those selfish idiots listened to the people. You can't get blood from a stone. It would have been far smarter for them to negotiate something far more realistic or offered owners the opportunity to come and have their say especially when it will affect them. Yeah Northmont you won the case but you haven't won the war yet. You have alienated your client base many of whom CANNOT pay and many of whom will not pay. Because of YOUR mismanagement, those who paid still cannot trust you. If you truly want this to succeed you are not going to do it with the bully tactics you have used in the past. I'm willing to take the hit on my credit rating. But I would have been willing to DISCUSS instead of been ordered to pay something I did not bargain for. I still believe it is criminal.

 

[MFD]

at this point Im wondering if contacting a show like Marketplace or fifth Estate would be of value Northmont deserves a ton of negative publicity, and perhaps calls to Interval and RCI as well. There is so much intrinsicly wrong here. IF the time shares were sold and people were CLEARLY told that they would be paying any and all capital costs to the buildings I'm confident they would not have had the buyers they did I NEVER WOULD HAVE PURCHASED ANYTHING. I rent a week!!! thats it!!! I am NOT AN OWNER PER SE. Nobody asked me my opinion on anything. The owners of those properties collect a very healthy maintenance fee on top of the $$$ they sold those weeks for. How can it be my responsibility if they have mismanaged the resort?? I have no say, no owners association and no recourse to say no the the 40 million reno fee??? Does somebody know the actual math of the actual money collected yearly on top of the original investment? That could be paying for those repairs??? and if they are quietly pulling out weeks and not covering that portion of the fees how is that my responsibility??? If they sell them do I get a portion of those funds refunded back to my costs and my timeshare??? While Northmont continues to pay themselves well for the stellar job they think they are doing??? About time those selfish idiots listened to the people. You can't get blood from a stone. It would have been far smarter for them to negotiate something far more realistic or offered owners the opportunity to come and have their say especially when it will affect them. Yeah Northmont you won the case but you haven't won the war yet. You have alienated your client base many of whom CANNOT pay and many of whom will not pay. Because of YOUR mismanagement, those who paid still cannot trust you. If you truly want this to succeed you are not going to do it with the bully tactics you have used in the past. I'm willing to take the hit on my credit rating. But I would have been willing to DISCUSS instead of been ordered to pay something I did not bargain for. I still believe it is criminal.

I agree completely. Just out of principle, I refuse to pay these criminals a dime and am willing to take a hit on my credit as well if a reasonable settlement cannot be reached. And it also frustrates me how people like Explor and EWR, can come on here and start gloating and insulting the ones who've lost in the court ruling. Rubbing it in our faces, all the while trying to pretend that it you're doing it all in good graces is extremely in bad taste. If anything, with me at least you both managed to achieve the opposite in persuading me to "see the light". Your rants, some of which just dragged on for too long that I couldn't even finish reading, convinced me that if I ever had doubts with Gelbert before, I certainly don't anymore.

 

[xplor]

at this point Im wondering if contacting a show like Marketplace or fifth Estate would be of value Northmont deserves a ton of negative publicity, and perhaps calls to Interval and RCI as well.(Marketplace or Fifth Estate would look at all the angles, not only the TS owners who feel they have been ripped off, they would look at the issue of the condition of the resort, the contracts that were signed and the judgement. At best, they would advise to do your homework before signing a contact, but would outline other TS's have gone through the same issues and in the end it is the TS owners responsibility regardless the condition of the resort. Unless you could show their was something illegal which wasn't proven in the court trial. They will take on stories where there 'is a story'. The judgement would not help make this a story you want but would show there are some very frustrated TS owners who signed contacts) There is so much intrinsicly wrong here. IF the time shares were sold and people were CLEARLY told that they would be paying any and all capital costs to the buildings I'm confident they would not have had the buyers they did I NEVER WOULD HAVE PURCHASED ANYTHING. I rent a week!!! thats it!!! I am NOT AN OWNER PER SE. Nobody asked me my opinion on anything. The owners of those properties collect a very healthy maintenance fee on top of the $$$ they sold those weeks for. How can it be my responsibility if they have mismanaged the resort?? ( there was no proof of mismanagement in the trial I have no say, no owners association and no recourse to say no the the 40 million reno fee??? Does somebody know the actual math of the actual money collected yearly on top of the original investment? That could be paying for those repairs??? and if they are quietly pulling out weeks and not covering that portion of the fees how is that my responsibility??? If they sell them do I get a portion of those funds refunded back to my costs and my timeshare??? (They can not sell your TS that is under a legal contact to you to the end of you contract)While Northmont continues to pay themselves well for the stellar job they think they are doing??? About time those selfish idiots listened to the people. You can't get blood from a stone. It would have been far smarter for them to negotiate something far more realistic or offered owners the opportunity to come and have their say especially when it will affect them. Yeah Northmont you won the case but you haven't won the war yet. You have alienated your client base many of whom CANNOT pay and many of whom will not pay.(many had the money to gamble with the 'no merit' litigation group, but none to pay up the fees required by contact as per the judgement) Because of YOUR mismanagement, those who paid still cannot trust you(Biased opinion of someone who really is pissed off and doing a lot a venting misinformation). If you truly want this to succeed you are not going to do it with the bully tactics (is it bully tactics when you haven't paid your Visa or Master Card payments for 3 years and they want their money and send collection company and lawyers to collect plus their costs ??)same thing now the judgement has been made)you have used in the past. I'm willing to take the hit on my credit rating. But I would have been willing to DISCUSS instead of been ordered to pay something I did not bargain for. I still believe it is criminal.

(if you believe this to be 'criminal' report it to the police who will investigate it and find the judgment)

 

[xplor]

I agree completely. Just out of principle, I refuse to pay these criminals a dime and am willing to take a hit on my credit as well if a reasonable settlement cannot be reached. And it also frustrates me how people like Explor and EWR, can come on here and start gloating and insulting the ones who've lost in the court ruling. Rubbing it in our faces, all the while trying to pretend that it you're doing it all in good graces is extremely in bad taste. If anything, with me at least you both managed to achieve the opposite in persuading me to "see the light". Your rants, some of which just dragged on for too long that I couldn't even finish reading, convinced me that if I ever had doubts with Gelbert before, I certainly don't anymore.

There is no gloating, rubbing in your face or insults. The facts are the facts. Whether one wants to vent your frustrations and blame others for making some sense of these, go for it if it helps you. As mentioned before, do what you want, it everyone's own choice what they do and what they choose to say. Most can't afford to take the hit on their credit rating, because eventually they will get it from your wages, pensions or any income you have, because they have the judgement in their favor. Vent and rant, your still in the same place..

 

[GypsyOne]

Nor should it be a surprise. From my perspective, the longer people hold out and do not pay, the larger the maintenance bills will be and the longer it will take to complete renovations. I still debate with myself whether I should have paid to give up the timeshare or paid the reno fee. I did not have a lot of confidence in the legal avenue - cases like this, even with the best of evidence, can go either way.

So, yup, I honestly have to say I would prefer people pay so things can get going but I know many folks have very strong feelings about that. Ultimately that is your decision. But if you really are determined to pursue this, get the advise of a different lawyer. It is kind of like a serious illness. A second opinion is extremely valuable in cases like this.

Asking for a second legal opinion at this point would be like asking for a second medical opinion when you are on the operating table hooked up to tubes and monitors. The one bright spot in this mess is the legal counsel we have who are genuine in providing competant legal advise and reporting to us in a timely fashion. Keep in mind that our lead lawyer, Michael Geldert, retains other experts and lawyers to handle specialized areas of litigation. When there is a large number in the litigation group, the cost per person is very reasonable. I would gladly pay my portion of the legal costs on principle that I will not bow down to the outrageous demands of this white collar gang who are preying on innocent timeshare purchasers for their own enrichment.

All the 14,500 or so TS owners who bought into Fairmont will be losers one way or another. In my opinion, the biggest losers will be those who paid the capital rebuilding and renovation fee. By doing so they have agreed to remain partners with this "gang" and will be on the hook for escalating maintenance fees and special assessments for the remaining term of their 40-year leases in the case of lessees, and into perpetuity in the case of co-owners in the new and converted co-ownership agreements. I can't imagine a more depressing future. These faulty buildings, not built to code, will continue to deteriorate; the "gang" with their court compliance will continue to demand higher and higher maintenance fees to maintain a deteriorating resort and fund their lifestyle; and they will continue to demand more funds to renovate, replace, and upgrade the resort to enhance the value for unit/timeshare/condominium sales. These are units that the TS owners bought with their hard earned money to acquire, and paid more hard earned money to divest. With a friendly judge's ruling it will all be legal and the remaining TS owners will be captive stooges. Where is the justice? Where is the consumer protection? THEY MUST BE STOPPED!

 

[xplor]

Asking for a second legal opinion at this point would be like asking for a second medical opinion when you are on the operating table hooked up to tubes and monitors. The one bright spot in this mess is the legal counsel we have who are genuine in providing competant legal advise and reporting to us in a timely fashion. Keep in mind that our lead lawyer, Michael Geldert, retains other experts and lawyers to handle specialized areas of litigation. When there is a large number in the litigation group, the cost per person is very reasonable. I would gladly pay my portion of the legal costs on principle that I will not bow down to the outrageous demands of this white collar gang who are preying on innocent timeshare purchasers for their own enrichment.

All the 14,500 or so TS owners who bought into Fairmont will be losers one way or another. In my opinion, the biggest losers will be those who paid the capital rebuilding and renovation fee. By doing so they have agreed to remain partners with this "gang" and will be on the hook for escalating maintenance fees and special assessments for the remaining term of their 40-year leases in the case of lessees, and into perpetuity in the case of co-owners in the new and converted co-ownership agreements. I can't imagine a more depressing future. These faulty buildings, not built to code, will continue to deteriorate; the "gang" with their court compliance will contine to demand higher and higher maintenance fees to maintain a deteriorating resort and fund their lifestyle; and they will contine to demand more funds to renovate, replace, and upgrade the resort to enhance the value for unit/timeshare/condominium sales. These are units that the TS owners bought with their hard earned money to acquire, and paid more hard earned money to divest. With a friendly judge's ruling it will all be legal and the remaining TS owners will be captive stooges. Where is the justice? Where is the consumer protection? THEY MUST BE STOPPED!

Go for it. Your legal advice and litigation team worked (not so) well for you to this point as indicated in the judgement where they couldn't back up evidence and were ill prepared. Stick with the legal advice you know and don't get a second opinion, unless you think you are locked in to them because you are all over you heads in this with the losing team. Others will take a logical chose and stop the sinking and form a plan to deal with the issue they were led down. Every ones own choice.

 

[Quadmaniac]

take a logical chose and stop the sinking and form a plan to deal with the issue

Logic would state that with the number who have paid to get out and the number who are defaulting, it is a matter of time before the resort goes belly up or they rape enough money for the company to bankrupt it. It has been poorly managed for years and nothing will change. Putting good money after bad money is totally what describes this resort. Anyone crazy enough to pay them a cent is out to lunch.

An appeal will take years and time is not on their side as they need the revenue to keep the resort afloat. How long can they go before the funds are exhausted ? Do you think people will continue to pay as the ask for more and more money ? You will have more people defaulting from getting fed up with increased fees and assessments or it will become unaffordable for some. The writing is clearly on the wall, the resort is a sinking operation and I would rather fight the injustice rather than cave in to these thieves.

 

[xplor]

Logic would state that with the number who have paid to get out and the number who are defaulting, it is a matter of time before the resort goes belly up or they rape enough money for the company to bankrupt it. It has been poorly managed for years and nothing will change. Putting good money after bad money is totally what describes this resort. Anyone crazy enough to pay them a cent is out to lunch.

An appeal will take years and time is not on their side as they need the revenue to keep the resort afloat. How long can they go before the funds are exhausted ? Do you think people will continue to pay as the ask for more and more money ? You will have more people defaulting from getting fed up with increased fees and assessments or it will become unaffordable for some. The writing is clearly on the wall, the resort is a sinking operation and I would rather fight the injustice rather than cave in to these thieves.

That is a wild assumption of your own on all the points you are trying to make people believe, all assumptions based on nothing. People need to stop listening to assumptions and start working with facts. The company maybe doing much better they you 'think'. The resort is being repaired and functioning. It simply is a matter how long TS owners are willing to leave that bill unpaid and betting that the company will go bankrupt (as you assume) because less that 1000 of 14,500 had refused to pay. I am making an assumption many are making the choice to settle leaving a handful that will loss much more in the end. Rightfully, they should collect 100% plus legal costs if some wish to hold out.

 

[ERW]

I agree completely. Just out of principle, I refuse to pay these criminals a dime and am willing to take a hit on my credit as well if a reasonable settlement cannot be reached. And it also frustrates me how people like Explor and EWR, can come on here and start gloating and insulting the ones who've lost in the court ruling. Rubbing it in our faces, all the while trying to pretend that it you're doing it all in good graces is extremely in bad taste. If anything, with me at least you both managed to achieve the opposite in persuading me to "see the light". Your rants, some of which just dragged on for too long that I couldn't even finish reading, convinced me that if I ever had doubts with Gelbert before, I certainly don't anymore.

At no time have I ever gloated or insulted anyone on this site. I have tried to be as reasonable and unbiased as possible. Please re-read my posts and you will see that I have respected the decisions of those that have decided to fight Northmont. It is completely up to you. The one thing I have said was before going any further, please consult another lawyer for a second opinion. It is up to you if you elect to do so.

I didn't like paying the money for the reno fees but it was a decision I made. Sometimes I think I should have bought my way out of this whole mess, but I didn't and I will just have to live with that fact. What you decide to do is up to you. But gloat? No, I have never gloated nor have I insulted anyone. And if you think I have, let me know the message number so I can see for myself but I would be very surprised if you can come up with anything.

 

[Quadmaniac]

That is a wild assumption of your own on all the points you are trying to make people believe, all assumptions based on nothing. People need to stop listening to assumptions and start working with facts. The company maybe doing much better they you 'think'. The resort is being repaired and functioning. It simply is a matter how long TS owners are willing to leave that bill unpaid and betting that the company will go bankrupt (as you assume) because less that 1000 of 14,500 had refused to pay. I am making an assumption many are making the choice to settle leaving a handful that will loss much more in the end. Rightfully, they should collect 100% plus legal costs if some wish to hold out.

Not at all its all simple math. Yeah they are doing "better" as they are slowly draining the money out of the company so that it will have no choice but to declare bankruptcy just as Fairmont did. It's alot more than 1000, try 25%+ and that number is going up steadily. They have the money people paid to get out and the reno fees people have paid, but that will only last so long....

 

[xplor]

Not at all its all simple math. Yeah they are doing "better" as they are slowly draining the money out of the company so that it will have no choice but to declare bankruptcy just as Fairmont did. It's alot more than 1000, try 25%+ and that number is going up steadily. They have the money people paid to get out and the reno fees people have paid, but that will only last so long....

Sorry for repeating this, but these are your own wild assumptions to misled TS owners to stay in. Unless you are on the inside track of this company , dealing with facts only and know something the rest doesn't and your 'math'. It is my understanding that the larger majority have dealt with the payments whether they stayed or left and the annual fees continue to pay the costs of managing the resort. So your 'math' really doesn't add up.

 

[GypsyOne]

Not at all its all simple math. Yeah they are doing "better" as they are slowly draining the money out of the company so that it will have no choice but to declare bankruptcy just as Fairmont did. It's alot more than 1000, try 25%+ and that number is going up steadily. They have the money people paid to get out and the reno fees people have paid, but that will only last so long....

Without going into detail, the number of TS owners not paying is considerably larger than the number you imply.

 

[Quadmaniac]

Sorry for repeating this, but these are your own wild assumptions to misled TS owners to stay in. Unless you are on the inside track of this company , dealing with facts only and know something the rest doesn't and your 'math'. It is my understanding that the larger majority have dealt with the payments whether they stayed or left and the annual fees continue to pay the costs of managing the resort. So your 'math' really doesn't add up.

The only wild assumptions is yours that people are going to roll over and do what you want them to do Wankel.

 

[Punter]

That is a wild assumption of your own on all the points you are trying to make people believe, all assumptions based on nothing. People need to stop listening to assumptions and start working with facts. The company maybe doing much better they you 'think'. The resort is being repaired and functioning. It simply is a matter how long TS owners are willing to leave that bill unpaid and betting that the company will go bankrupt (as you assume) because less that 1000 of 14,500 had refused to pay. I am making an assumption many are making the choice to settle leaving a handful that will loss much more in the end. Rightfully, they should collect 100% plus legal costs if some wish to hold out.

A full 25% have not paid. That amounts to over 3600 people. 43% paid to leave which is over 6000 people. Northmont now owns 45% of the resort.

 

[Punter]

It will be very interesting to see what kind of an offer, if any, Northmont will come forward with. There are approximately 3600 people that haven't paid and of those 3600, how many of them will want to remain involved with Northmont? I'm thinking few if any. If the offer is a "pay to leave" one, remember where that money goes: directly into the management's pockets. That's right. It won't help out the future of the resort at all.
I for one am not too excited about giving the Management any money and given the state of the economy and some Of the recent posts, the offer will have to be extremely attractive for people to consider it.

I have stated this previously: Northmont rendered our Timeshares worthless the minute they offered the initial pay to leave option. Had they taken them back and tried to re-sell them, that would have showed an intention of wanting to remain in business. But to pocket the money and then plan to remove those units from the resort is simply greed. 6200 people paid to leave. That is around 20 million dollars IN NORTHWYNDS POCKETS and they reclaimed 43% of the units THAT THEY ARE PLANNING TO REMOVE FROM THE RESORT.