TUG MEMBERS: Joining TUG does not automatically register you as a user of the TUG Bulletin Board. You must register yourself.


*ads are disabled when logged in as a member*
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 24 years!

    Join tens of thousands of other owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered!
    Dismiss Notice
  3. TUG started 25 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Check out our happy birthday post here: Happy Birthday TUG!
    Dismiss Notice
  4. TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $10,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $10Million dollars
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free! Join tens of thousands of other owners who get this every week! Latest resort reviews and the most important topics discussed by owners during the week!
    Dismiss Notice
  6. TUG is trying out a new program that will trade you a TUG membership for a Timeshare resort review if you are an expired member, or even just a guest here on the forums!

    Read more here
    Dismiss Notice
  7. Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    Read more Here
    Dismiss Notice
  8. Follow the TUG Member Banner as it travels the world on vacation with Timeshare owners! Also sign up to get the banner sent to you so you can submit a photo of your vacation with the banner to share with TUG! Banner Thread
    Dismiss Notice
  9. A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!
    Dismiss Notice

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

Discussion in 'Canada Timesharing' started by htusa2002, Nov 22, 2012.

  1. lost and confused

    lost and confused Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2018
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    13
    Hard to fathom that more than half a dozen respected Judges and Justices in two provinces rendered corrupt decisions yet a very inexperienced lawyer was just trying to make the best of a bad situation which resulted in not only many reprimands, court losses but people losing their life savings (past and future).

    Not knowing much about the law I trusted Geldert's website that he was what he professed to be "a leading global law firm" and furthermore how could the number of clients possibly be wrong about him. A lot of the clients are either professionals or retired professionals.

    As time went by we discovered that Geldert is a "one man show" with little to no litigation experience let alone business/contract and negotiation expertise. By then we were already part of the "Geldert group" with no way out but to give in to Northmont's demands - demands that Geldert assured us he would untangle us from, we just had to be patient as his plan came to fruition. A plan that none of us was privy to, a plan that obviously had no legal basis. He kept feeding us what we wanted to hear so we would keep the "group" together to fight Northmont - strength in numbers and all that bs. MG kept requesting more retainer money from us and encouraged us to “stay the fight"….we kept paying as he led us to believe we were close to an end. And right to the end there was talk of a class action…we paid for research into it and were led to believe that would be the course of action…but it never materialized. When MG withdrew as our lawyer, I started reading transcripts and court decisions - multiple judges slapped him (and us) with abuse of process, vexatious and res judicata. He prolonged and delayed matters in the court with no valid legal grounds. Meanwhile, as we took his advice and initially stopped paying maintenance fees (placing us in breech of contract), the years accumulated with not only maintenance fees but interest as well. We originally retained MG to investigate if the RPF was something valid that Northmont could charge us with and then give us the option to stay or go.

    KW….he is a business man who assumed a position in what was perhaps a failing resort with lots of challenges. Although we may not have initially liked his “plan” and perhaps deemed it to be unfair (the RPF), the courts did decide that he WAS able to charge the RPF and he was not doing anything wrong. KW WON every court case infront of him…..we/MG lost all. At no time has the court system deemed KW actions to be inappropriate, but yet he has been vilified. Who has vilified him? MG and many others…..just read previous posts here. Has this been justified? KW has faced many years of litigation AGAINST him, won all of them. He has been demonized and vilified. He has a resort to run, filled with people who did not cause all this grief and expensive litigation. KW has the ability to charge the RPF. We lost on several occasions.,,,many courts decided. We had our days in court……sadly our YEARS in court! It was our own representation that was labelled on many occasions as being vexatious, abuse of process and res judicata. Period. We lost. So what would you have KW to do??.......just let us walk away?

    Many of us believed MG. It was presented as us vs KW. The big challenge now is to take a look at the FACTS. Remove emotions (I know it is hard). Remove “opinions” and personal bias, assumptions, what we were told and “believed” to be true. Logic and facts should take center stage.

    Perhaps my frustration now comes taking a look objectively at the path I went down with MG. I have read, done research, chatted with people, sought additional legal advice and tried to look objectively at the situation in hindsight. I wish I knew then what I know now. I believe I was lied to on several occasions, by my own legal counsel – someone I placed trust in, paid and looked to guidance for.

    For those who say MG didn't lie? What about the last whopper promise "Should the settlement discussions develop into an agreement that we believe can be recommended to you, we will provide a copy to the group for final input prior to finalizing those terms"? Did anyone actually receive a copy for final input? Or just some formula for the financial part, plus, plus but no terms? Minutes of the meeting? I know that I specifically asked MG for the minutes on multiple occasions and to this date, have not received them. For me, this was one of the biggest lies in the process.

    I can say that KW never lied to me. He is a business man hired to run a resort and take care of the owners. He has been litigated against over several years and won and has not been proven guilty in a court of law of doing anything wrong. He has been demonized and faced many unproven accusations. There have been “theories” of fraud, collusion and “corruptness”. None of these theories have been proven with hard facts. I have read much name calling, assumptions, opinions, personal biases….but come on, we need FACTS and rationale. As the old saying goes, anything short of facts can be assumptions….and that makes one look like an ass___

    Do I feel financially abused? Most definitely!! I am financially devastated over this. Ironically, the FACTS do not primarily point to the hands of KW/Northmont.

    If you feel the need to respond or comment, please keep it FACTUAL and real. I think it is fair to say that we have all been touched through this situation by inaccurate information, assumptions, perception……just read many posts here and emails received. Keep it FACTS based and in reality.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2018
  2. dotbuhler

    dotbuhler Guest

    Joined:
    May 12, 2013
    Messages:
    139
    Likes Received:
    225
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Location:
    Sheho,SK, Canada
    I've often said that this lawyer should be held for HIS abuse of process, etc. There are, in fact, several cases recently where the guilty party, a.k.a. "the lawyer" has been the one found guilty by the Judge; was fined and professionally censured. Geldert NEEDS to be made an example for this!
    .
     
  3. newname

    newname Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    13
    Location:
    Saskatchewan
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2018
  4. newname

    newname Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    13
    Location:
    Saskatchewan
    Well said Lost and confused
     
  5. ecwinch

    ecwinch Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,818
    Likes Received:
    486
    Trophy Points:
    468
    Location:
    San Antonio
    There is the saying "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity".

    In regard to MG's actions, I think it is more true than not.
     
  6. Palms to pines

    Palms to pines Guest

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2017
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Resorts Owned:
    Northwynd/Northmont/Sunchaser
    Yeah, not happy that I was paying for stupid for four years either.
     
    dotbuhler and ecwinch like this.
  7. GypsyOne

    GypsyOne Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Once you have a court system that is at best biased and at worst corrupt, then everything else is irrelevant. You could have The Almighty herself defending the case and you would still get a bad decision from a loaded court. We got a bad decision, but to properly assess blame you have to look at the system within which we and our team were working.
     
    dotbuhler likes this.
  8. ecwinch

    ecwinch Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,818
    Likes Received:
    486
    Trophy Points:
    468
    Location:
    San Antonio
    Dont get me wrong - what happened here is grossly unfair. But given the long litigation history of this case and the number of judges who reviewed the legal issues presented, I do not think the facts support that conclusion.

    Consider for a moment what your decision would have been four years ago if you clearly knew the legal status of your rights. Or if MG had clearly explained what could happen if court did not see the legal issues the way he thought they should.
     
    lost and confused and J's Garage like this.
  9. GypsyOne

    GypsyOne Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    103
    It is the unanimity of a number of judges in several courts on all points that makes this decision highly questionable. First, Justice Loo of the BC Supreme Court played her role by incorrectly, ruling that tenants are responsible for capital structure of the property; that capital costs are included in the list of maintenance expenses; that a timeshare Owners Association need not be provided despite what the lease says; that the default buy-back clause in the leases could be ignored; that lease agreements could be modified without approval of the lease holders. In other words, the Courts completely trampled on the only document protecting us, which was our lease agreements. Then Justices of the BC Court of Appeal circled the wagons and fell unanimously in line with Justice Loo's interpretation and decision. That a number of Justices in several levels of courts could rule unanimously and identically on ALL points defies logic. One would think there would be somewhere in deliberations and rulings a dissenting voice on something in our favor. That is why I can't help but conclude that the court system is at best biased and at worst corrupt.
     
    dotbuhler and MarcieL like this.
  10. T-Dot-Traveller

    T-Dot-Traveller TUG Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2015
    Messages:
    1,600
    Likes Received:
    510
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    Canada
    Resorts Owned:
    Mayan Palace Regency
    Hi GypsyOne ,
    As you may know from Canadian news reports (Nov 1 / 2 -2018) - the province of Newfoundland lost it’s case to reopen the contract with Hydro Quebec on revenue split of profits from the Churchill Falls Electic Generating Dam & facilities . The ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada basically said - a contract is a contract - no matter how unfair to one of the signees .

    I think all the timeshare owners got screwed by the courts .
    Newfoundland thinks it got screwed too.

    I am not sure that anything will be rectified in either case .
     
    dotbuhler likes this.
  11. ecwinch

    ecwinch Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,818
    Likes Received:
    486
    Trophy Points:
    468
    Location:
    San Antonio
    Unfortunately you misstate the key finding that every court has reached - that the legal nature of your contract is not a lease, and you are not a tenant. That you entered into a "right to use" timeshare estate.
     
    T-Dot-Traveller likes this.
  12. GypsyOne

    GypsyOne Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    103
    And therein lies the problem - the proactive courts decided they would favor the Developer and re-interpret the ordinary meaning of the word lease. Words should have meaning, and in my simple world a lease is a lease is a lease with common everyday definition applying. In our case, we are leasing time in a resort facility, we do not own the facility, nor are we responsible for its capital structure. 15,000 timeshare owners thought similarly. Proactive courts should not be ruling that they all got it wrong, that, in fact, a lease means something else.
     
  13. GypsyOne

    GypsyOne Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    103
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2018
    dotbuhler likes this.
  14. ecwinch

    ecwinch Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,818
    Likes Received:
    486
    Trophy Points:
    468
    Location:
    San Antonio
    Yes, words should have meanings. But the general idiom is that "actions speak louder than words".

    So courts rely both on the verbiage in the contract and the conduct of the parties in determining their legal rights. Here the court(s) found both the words in the terms of the agreement and the conduct of the parties reflected a contract to enter into a right to use timeshare estate.

    There is a cause of action in regard to Fairmount mis-representing the nature of the contract. But MG not only failed to assert that claim, but virtually waived it early in the proceedings.
     
    dotbuhler likes this.
  15. GypsyOne

    GypsyOne Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    103
    We're back to the point that the BC courts were trying to find a way to favor the developers over the timeshare owners, probably because the Province of BC did not want a popular tourist destination to fail nor have to prop it up with public money. And when you are looking for something, usually you will find it. Among other things, the Courts decided that a lease was not really a lease it was something else that favored the Developers. And so far as "actions speaking louder than words", the whole point of having words recorded in contract form is to define the rights of each party and prevent actions from abusing the intent of the agreement. Once again, the BC courts in this case were somewhere between highly biased and corrupt.
     
    dotbuhler and MarcieL like this.
  16. Floyd55

    Floyd55 Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2018
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    89
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Resorts Owned:
    Fairmont
    Totally agree with your interpretation on this Gypsy One. If only we had competent legal representation that would have warned us of what was happening early on rather than slogging ahead defeat after defeat promising that things would get better if we just hung in there a little longer! What a crock that turned out to be!
     
    dotbuhler, MarcieL and GypsyOne like this.
  17. Spark1

    Spark1 Guest

    Joined:
    May 8, 2013
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Location:
    Ponoka alberta canada
    There is a lot going on Facebook do not miss the conversation. Richard Gotfried is now part of our group. Check on YouTube and Richard apparently is explaining how you can join the Sunchaser Group
     
    dotbuhler likes this.
  18. owner1

    owner1 Guest

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2014
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
     
  19. GypsyOne

    GypsyOne Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2013
    Messages:
    191
    Likes Received:
    140
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Owner1, I'm calling BS on you. No conspiracy theory; I just want my lease agreement to actually mean something, and for the courts to protect the integrity of my lease agreement if such is necessary. The courts did not protect my rights under the lease agreement, and for that I blame corruption in high places. Not conspiracy theory, just opinion.
    My lease agreement was violated in four main ways:
    1. I am a lessee, not a lessor or owner of real estate. I am not responsible for capital costs. Capital costs are the responsibility of the real estate owner.
    2. Timeshare owners were promised a Timeshare Owners Association. They did not get it.
    3. Clause 13 of the lease agreement, which gives a formula in the event of default, was completely ignored. Instead the developer (Northmont) went to court to obtain and got the Great Canadian Timeshare Cash Grab.
    4. With the blessing of the Courts, lease agreements were unilaterally amended without the concurrence of timeshare owners.
    These BC Court decisions have to be about the strangest outcome of Court action in the history of Canadian jurisprudence. How the courts could find everything in favor of the developer Northmont and nothing compelling at all from the timeshare owners' case defies logic. I have to ask why.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2018
    dotbuhler and Palms to pines like this.
  20. Spark1

    Spark1 Guest

    Joined:
    May 8, 2013
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Location:
    Ponoka alberta canada
    Ignore this guy. He would even get upset if you called him one of the bond holders. The truth of the matter is whoever fell for the cancellation right away also paid the renovation fee as well and many paid the gag order scam and they are not released. This is a lease. On April 12,2013 we all received the Freedom To Choose,reason to stay. When you read this document Kirk Wankels directive under DECISION NECESSITY said this if any of our invoiced Timeshare Members (Biennial Even members have not been invoiced) have not chosen a payment option for the RPF or chosen the Freedom to Choose Option by May 31,2013, they will be in DEFAULT of their maintenance fees and subject to the default Provisions outlined in their Vacation Interval Agreement. The provisions Kirk Wankel listed under this Paragraph are not listed under item number 13/ Default of the Lessee in any payment required under this LEASE: He is telling us we are in Default even before there is one court case and keeping us out of the resort. This means our contracts have been terminated. We have been in DEFAULT for 51/2 years. Owner #1 read Default Of The LEESEE IN ANY PAYMENT REQUIRED UNDER THIS (LEASE:) The 16 months is gone. The same story every one had to pay the 26.8% interest not true JUSTICE YOUNG ruled No more than 5% in a year. Justice Gill will not change because Northmont wants him too. Our member of Parliament RICHARD GOTFRIED says we own nothing. The reason a lot of this happened the way it did is the Service Alberta Minister should of acted using the FAIR TRADING ACT. This is WHY Bill 31 was passed Dec.13, 2017 Prohibiting businesses from making unilateral amendments to contracts, unless the Consumer is provided advance notice and given the right to cancel the contract. This is covered under my contact under items 37 and 38.
     
  21. Rider Nation Rocks

    Rider Nation Rocks Guest

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2013
    Messages:
    16
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Rider Nation
    Long time passing for Justice Gill. Two months and still no ruling. Is the whole BC and Alberta justice system about to be thrown under the bus or will the status quo of incompetent foul smelling questionable decisions continue. Anyone know what was really on the table. I get that the Oct 10th hearing dealt with the 5% vs loan shark interest rates, but were there appeal arguments related to the original Judge Young decision from a year ago also presented that day as well. After five years I guess a couple extra months may not be significant but it seems like a long time, unless Justice Gill is attempting to revisit the entire five year cluster*&^%($$$. i mean ordeal. I sort of have lost interest after five years but still check in on occasion and sure am curious if there is really only 72 or whatever who still have skin in the game.
     
    aden2 and dotbuhler like this.
  22. lost and confused

    lost and confused Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2018
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    13
    Justice Gill's decision on the appeal and cross appeal was filed today. Attached is the PDF.
     

    Attached Files:

    ecwinch likes this.

Share This Page