orange lake resorts class action lawsuit

[Beth Ann Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Beth Ann]

I am not at liberty to post the status of the suit at this time, although you pose very good questions, I don't think this is the place to answer them. We are asking the BIG QUESTIONS and I have my own team of legals coaching me through the steps in NY.

I'd call the states AG office to see what departments they suggest. Perhaps whatever office handles real estate law would be one source.

Still, I think you'll find that, even though you know you've been scammed, you're going up against a contract you signed and will stand the test in court. Is the firm taking this case on contingency or charging you fee's up front? What sort of track record to they have? How did you locate them, through referal or TV add? On what grounds do they believe they can get a judgement or, do they think that if they cost the company enough money by dragging them into court they'll pay you off because it's less expensive?

There are a LOT of people out there looking to seperate you from your money. Be VERY careful. It's not like this is new ground your breaking. While I haven't done it, maybe a search of court records showing former or similar civil cases against timeshare developers would be in order. Find out if anyone has been successful or if they have failed on merit alone (been tossed out of court). ASk the law firm you're dealing with if they've ever tried this and, if so, what were the results. think and ASK HARD QUESTIONS. Lead with your brain and not your emotions. You might not get the answers you want but you may get the anwers you need.

[aliikai2 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close aliikai2]

Et tu Brute

While we all sympathize with your distress, as adults we are allowed to make our own mistakes and also to take responsibility for them .

You and some of the other vocal posters on this thread seem to think that since you didn't research your purchase either before or after during the cooling off period that somehow you should still have the right to get out of your contract whole.

I wish that this were true, my first divorce cost me many hundreds of thousands of $$$, and all because society lied to me telling me how great being married was, and how happy all the married folks were, how 2 could live as cheaply as one, etc ...

Go ahead and attempt to sue, that is your right, nobody here is going to try to stop you, we have just attempted to inform you and the others that the law as written places the burden of proof on you, and that the developer has hired many attorneys to make sure that they are operating within that law.

fwiw,

Greg

Bnoble to mile- page 3 of the thread, insult! You all seem to ONLY see what you want to see as well- talk about tunnel vision!

[bnoble Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close bnoble]

Bnoble to mile- page 3 of the thread, insult!

If telling someone that proper grammar and spelling is important when using the written word qualifies as an insult---native speaker or not---then I'd wager that you will probably not enjoy being involved in a lawsuit very much at all.

I do wish you the best of luck in your endeavors.

[rikkis_playpen Diamond Club Contributor Find all posts View Profile Close rikkis_playpen]

Color me skeptical still.. I haven't seen any information showing a law firm and all the "class-action" posts seem to be from newbies, well- and JLB of course..

While I certainly understand that sales tactics in any industry can leave much to be desired- I still believe that you'd be hard pressed to find many products that are as regulated as timeshare!

Unsavvy consumers make mistakes.. It's as simple as that.. But I still believe the onus of responsiblity falls onto the consumer anytime they make a purchase.. Too often in our society, we expect Uncle Sam to step in and protect us from our own foolishness.

[Hobbitess Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Hobbitess]

Color me skeptical still.. I haven't seen any information showing a law firm

This is becoming a big glaring red flag for me as well. I wouldn't have much faith in a law firm willing to take the case but not willing to be identified as doing so to ever accomplish anything beyond spending my money. And if you've got a class action suit, the whole point is to demonstrate that the damage is being done to a large group of people, so I'm wondering why there isn't more specific info being offered on that as well. I don't doubt the sincere outrage expressed by the posters, but I do doubt that their lawyers really believe they have a case.

The sad fact is, the government can only protect people so much. That is why we teach our kids to "get it in writing" - what is in writing is what the government will defend. Any situation where it's one person's word against another - as when a salesperson lies, but also as when a customer hears things the salesperson didn't say - is always going to be a point of contention, because verbal untruths are very difficult to prove. Showing that someone deliberately lied to get you to do something are even harder to show. Not too long ago, nine out of ten Realtors would tell you that "property always increases in value" - current history (and considerable past history) shows pretty strongly that this isn't true, but most Realtors who said it truly believed it.

When it comes to TS suits, the developer usually has the advantage that they're defending the written contract the purchaser agreed to in writing. Even after the purchaser signed, there was a time period of some days they had the right to read what they'd signed, say, "That isn't what I wanted," and rescind. The timeshare system I know best, the person also signed a statement summarizing the contract without the legalese, so they don't have the excuse that they "didn't understand the contract," because they have a simplified version right there that a sixth-grader could get. From the government's perspective, they've done what they can to protect the public and their job is done.

I know nothing about Orange Lakes, but I'm guessing they have a similar process, and that it will be very difficult to fight. If a lawyer tells his or her client, "Sure, I'll get them for you; just hand over the money," but doesn't want the client mentioning the firm or the suit, that to me sounds a lot like a lawyer who is just trying to make money off of someone with a case they know they can't win.

[T. R. Oglodyte Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close T. R. Oglodyte]

This is becoming a big glaring red flag for me as well. I wouldn't have much faith in a law firm willing to take the case but not willing to be identified as doing so to ever accomplish anything beyond spending my money. And if you've got a class action suit, the whole point is to demonstrate that the damage is being done to a large group of people, so I'm wondering why there isn't more specific info being offered on that as well. I don't doubt the sincere outrage expressed by the posters, but I do doubt that their lawyers really believe they have a case. …

I was alluding to this a bit before in my comments on the related "scam" thread, but I think it bears a direct mention. It wouldn't surprise me one bit for a lawyer to offer support and encouragement to someone looking for redress on a matter such as this. They describe additional actions that can be taken, including the possibility of a class action suit.

At some point, though, it becomes necessary to actually do something. The attorney is then likely to ask for a retainer to do some actual work. The attorney particularly will do so if the attorney has significant doubts about whether the case is sufficiently strong to warrant taking on the case solely on contingency.

The purpose of the retainer will be to do additional work, which will lead to the attorney being able to evaluate the feasibility of further legal action, including the basis for a class action.

In other words, the attorney will be getting paid to determine whether the case is worth the attorney taking on a contingency basis.

++++++

This could be cynical - an attorney from the start is pretty sure that the case has no merit, but the attorney deduces that the client is willing to pay some fee enabling the attorney to research what the attorney is already relatively certain of.

But it doesn't have to be. An attorney could easily empathize with the clients feelings and be sincerely looking for a way to proceed.

But in the end it doesn't make any difference. If the attorney is looking for some retainer up front before taking on the case on a contingency basis, that's a flag that the case likely doesn't have merit.

Which means that in the end the client has poured good money after bad in trying to rid themselves of their timeshare.

[BoardGirl Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close BoardGirl]

Inappropriate or not financial rape is what it is.... Sorry, you took offense but this isn't about you, it is what was done to me and my family, hardworking, blue collar Americans........

No, it was consensual. If you were drugged or had a gun held to your head in signing those papers, then it was forcible. But I don't see those types of threats of bodily injury so can only assume that you willingly signed those papers. Which simply makes it a bad financial decision on your part. Not rape.

[rikkis_playpen Diamond Club Contributor Find all posts View Profile Close rikkis_playpen]

I just found another example of the wolf in sheep's clothing!

http://www.timeshareforums.com/forum...resources.html

This thread shows yet another scam group pretending to "advocate" for unhappy timeshare owners- all the while simply fleecing these "victims" for even more money!

Kudos to Bill McCollum for trying to shut down yet another scam! The article was in today's South Florida Business Journal..

Perhaps this example will at least help explain my skepticism..

[Hobbitess Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Hobbitess]

In other words, the attorney will be getting paid to determine whether the case is worth the attorney taking on a contingency basis.

Certainly, and I have no problem with that (although personally I wouldn't pay an attorney to do it in this case). My point was more that, if an attorney thinks there might be a case, why would they discourage their client from saying, "I'm think company X defrauded me, and Attorney Y is investigating"? If someone isn't at liberty to say who the attorney is, either there isn't an attorney, or the attorney has his own reasons for not wanting to be publicly associated with the case (like, fer instance, he knows darn well he can't do anything but is taking money from the client anyhow). There may be legitimate reasons an attorney wouldn't want his name associated with a case he or she was working on, but I don't know of any.

No, it was consensual. If you were drugged or had a gun held to your head in signing those papers, then it was forcible.

I personally don't demand that there be drugs or weapons in order to define a situation as rape, but the primary criteria for defining an incident is rape is consent. I disagree with the poster in defining this as rape because they clearly consented - the whole problem is that they signed a paper consenting to terms they didn't thoroughly examine. They're like someone who bought into a sex partner's claim that they were "a great lover," and are outraged to have discovered the partner's not a very good lover after all. Except there was a legal contract where the partner defined what "great lover" means in this case - and they agreed to it. So, no, I don't see many parallels to rape here.

[T. R. Oglodyte Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close T. R. Oglodyte]

Certainly, and I have no problem with that (although personally I wouldn't pay an attorney to do it in this case). My point was more that, if an attorney thinks there might be a case, why would they discourage their client from saying, "I'm think company X defrauded me, and Attorney Y is investigating"? If someone isn't at liberty to say who the attorney is, either there isn't an attorney, or the attorney has his own reasons for not wanting to be publicly associated with the case (like, fer instance, he knows darn well he can't do anything but is taking money from the client anyhow). There may be legitimate reasons an attorney wouldn't want his name associated with a case he or she was working on, but I don't know of any.

I don't disagree on bit with what you've said here.

BTW - another reason for an attorney to not come forth is because the attorney is too closely associated with the person raising the case. So the attorney needs to troll for someone more removed who can take over as the plaintiff.

[dougp26364 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close dougp26364]

This is becoming a big glaring red flag for me as well. I wouldn't have much faith in a law firm willing to take the case but not willing to be identified as doing so to ever accomplish anything beyond spending my money. And if you've got a class action suit, the whole point is to demonstrate that the damage is being done to a large group of people, so I'm wondering why there isn't more specific info being offered on that as well. I don't doubt the sincere outrage expressed by the posters, but I do doubt that their lawyers really believe they have a case.

The sad fact is, the government can only protect people so much. That is why we teach our kids to "get it in writing" - what is in writing is what the government will defend. Any situation where it's one person's word against another - as when a salesperson lies, but also as when a customer hears things the salesperson didn't say - is always going to be a point of contention, because verbal untruths are very difficult to prove. Showing that someone deliberately lied to get you to do something are even harder to show. Not too long ago, nine out of ten Realtors would tell you that "property always increases in value" - current history (and considerable past history) shows pretty strongly that this isn't true, but most Realtors who said it truly believed it.

When it comes to TS suits, the developer usually has the advantage that they're defending the written contract the purchaser agreed to in writing. Even after the purchaser signed, there was a time period of some days they had the right to read what they'd signed, say, "That isn't what I wanted," and rescind. The timeshare system I know best, the person also signed a statement summarizing the contract without the legalese, so they don't have the excuse that they "didn't understand the contract," because they have a simplified version right there that a sixth-grader could get. From the government's perspective, they've done what they can to protect the public and their job is done.

I know nothing about Orange Lakes, but I'm guessing they have a similar process, and that it will be very difficult to fight. If a lawyer tells his or her client, "Sure, I'll get them for you; just hand over the money," but doesn't want the client mentioning the firm or the suit, that to me sounds a lot like a lawyer who is just trying to make money off of someone with a case they know they can't win.

To me it's more than a red flag. My opinion is that there is no law firm as of yet. The more likely scenario is that a law firm has said they'll do some work but, they need cash. The kind of cash they need might not be so easy for one individual to come by but, if a group of people (class action) got together, the cost would be defered. I'm to the point that I believe that's what we're seeing happen here.

I see a lot of steps being taken that I don't believe are going to lead to anything else other than more trouble. Very few people with an ounce of common sense aren't going to follow a voice on an internet chat forum blindly into a financial hole.

I will give this group one thing. They are pretty good about trying to turn you're own words on you. It doesn't matter if it's logical or not, they will take what you say and try to turn it around on you.

The discussion seems to have ended. It's down to their way or the highway. It would be nice if they win but, even if this was a case being built against one of the management companies I own with, I wouldn't budge until I had the name of law firm handling the case. My Bull Stuff meter is pegged at this point.

[dougp26364 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close dougp26364]

No, it was consensual. If you were drugged or had a gun held to your head in signing those papers, then it was forcible. But I don't see those types of threats of bodily injury so can only assume that you willingly signed those papers. Which simply makes it a bad financial decision on your part. Not rape.

When someone doesn't have a strong enough case to influenece as many people as they would like, they'll move on to dramatic statements like being financially raped. This group has met a good deal of resistance on this forum to the idea that one can get out of a signed agreement, just because they didn't take the time to read what they had signed and are now remorsefull that they believed someone who had something to gain by getting them to hand them money. They don't want to hear anything different than they're right and the evil developer is wrong.

Despite how we may feel about the developer, we also understand that it was us who signed the contract. There was no gun, no threats, no force being used at all when we signed the contract. But if someone does the equivelent of stamping their feet and raising their voise ala dramatic reference then they think maybe they'll get more attention and sway people's opinion.

I guess it works for some but I doubt that it flies well with any of us here. To me it just shows the shallow depth of understanding this group has.

Maybe if they make enough noise and cause the developer enough grief and, if the price is small enough relative to the overall discomfort this group can cause the developer, maybe they'll get their money back.

[T. R. Oglodyte Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close T. R. Oglodyte]

When someone doesn't have a strong enough case to influenece as many people as they would like, they'll move on to dramatic statements like being financially raped. This group has met a good deal of resistance on this forum to the idea that one can get out of a signed agreement, just because they didn't take the time to read what they had signed and are now remorsefull that they believed someone who had something to gain by getting them to hand them money. They don't want to hear anything different than they're right and the evil developer is wrong.

And they will also say that anyone who doesn't agree with them:

• doesn't understand,
• has no sympathy,
• is insulting them by raising counterpoints and challenging their assumptions

All appeals to emotion, which is all that a person has left when the facts aren't in their favor.

[Hobbitess Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Hobbitess]

So the attorney needs to troll for someone more removed who can take over as the plaintiff.

Hadn't thought of that. Although I think if my uncle, say, said "Go find someone else to be plaintiff" - instead of saying, "I'm too close to this; let me introduce you to a trustworthy lawyer" - I'd wonder why. If there's a legit case, why dis-empower me by removing me from the whole process?

When someone doesn't have a strong enough case to influenece as many people as they would like, they'll move on to dramatic statements like being financially raped.

When there have been three large studies and a goodly number of smaller ones indicating that one in four women have dealt with rape or attempted rape, this tactic is usually a no-starter, because it's sure to piss people off. Someone in your audience has either been raped or knows someone who has, and they don't consider being lied to by a TS salesperson on par with the deep betrayal of rape. If you want to influence people, moving from having a poor argument (or an argument that's been dismissed as poor) to being actively offensive is a bad tactic.

[juliekaye Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close juliekaye]

Orange Lake

I am an owner at Orange Lake and new to this forum - can you tell me the problem that the class action suit addresses? Also - today I got a call from a company called Century Timeshare Grup who said they had an offer on my Orange LAke unit. I am not sure thisis a legitimate company and can find nothing on them online. DOes anyone know?