Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 69

Thread: Class Action lawsuit Filed against Diamond Resorts

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by singlemalt_18 View Post
    If the complaint is to be believed, then you must subscribe to the Big Evil DRI Conspiracy theories that assume this has all been some elaborate scheme deliberatley hatched and embarked upon... count me in the camp that is not willing to go down that road.

    Caveat Emptor.

    There will be no winners... except for the lawyers.
    Also if the complaint is to be believed, the plaintiffs feel that the AOAO acted irresponsibly by trying to get its insurers to pay for the repairs.
    “Maybe you shouldn't dress like that.”

    “This is a blouse and skirt. I don't know what you're talking about.”

    “You shouldn't wear that body.”

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by singlemalt_18 View Post
    Just to be clear, unfair is not to be confused with illegal.
    No confusion here, "Illegal" is "Illegal" in my opinion. I've read the complaint and I have had the pleasure of communicating with a board member that has proof of "illegal" activity.

    Quote Originally Posted by singlemalt_18 View Post
    I'm not surprised by what is in the complaint. It appears to be a "kitchen sink" approach to throwing everything you can against the wall in the hope that something sticks.
    All lawsuits start out that way, full of allegations to get the attention of the judge. Throwing everything you can against the wall is just the start. During the "discovery" process, the defendant in this case will be exposed and new allegations will be made while the original ones are substantiated.

    My Las Vegas odds have DRI making settlement within one year.....
    But they didn't do anything "illegal".

    Quote Originally Posted by singlemalt_18 View Post
    There will be no winners... except for the lawyers.
    Well in most cases that may be accurate but not always (see below) and as stated on this post, this lawsuit has more to gain than a monetary settlement! Girard Gibbs LLP is no lightweight when it comes to Class Actions and Timeshare Developers!~

    The law firm of Girard Gibbs LLP today announced that two years after bringing a class action case against Securities America, Inc., its corporate parent securities America Financial Corporation and Ameriprise Financial, Inc., over 2,000 investors throughout the U.S. are receiving checks totaling $80 million. Investors will recover an average of over $30,000 per person.

    Let me repeat: this lawsuit has more to gain than a monetary settlement!

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    376
    A small group of timeshare owners and whole unit owners was able to wrest control of Hanalei Bay Resort from the developer/manager. There is hope for Poipu owners.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Jasonb334 View Post
    All lawsuits start out that way, full of allegations to get the attention of the judge. Throwing everything you can against the wall is just the start. During the "discovery" process, the defendant in this case will be exposed and new allegations will be made while the original ones are substantiated.
    Unfortunately, I didn’t sleep at Holiday Inn Express last night… but the last time I checked, you do not raise new charges once a case has started. That would be a fishing expedition and judges generally don’t appreciate someone wasting their time. Likewise you cannot claim the insanity defense in the middle of a case if you did not elect to do so in the beginning.

    For the case to proceed as a class action, the existence of a class first needs to be shown.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasonb334 View Post
    Let me repeat: this lawsuit has more to gain than a monetary settlement!
    Uh... It is ONLY about the money. (Or is the board member's name Jerry McGuire?)

    Unlike the Securities America case, nobody has been robbed in a ponzi scheme; they are only angry over being billed! Exactly what restitution is there to make for repairs that need to be made and have yet to begin? Is a judge supposed to rule that the property should be left to fall into disrepair and become unsuitable for occupancy based on the desires of a few? No wonder such an elaborate conspiracy needs to be claimed.

    Everyone has the choice to pay or not, and no one ever needs to go to Hawaii, so that probably rules out the human rights and civil rights angles.

  5. #25
    Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    15,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Jasonb334 View Post
    That's a pretty tough call....not really. Are you going to stand around and let your employer supervise illegal activity or do you stick to your ethics/morals, get up and quit? Easy decision for me....and I would not worry about being called a snitch if I uncovered "possible" or "probable" illegal activity that was affecting thousands of consumers. I would contact the law firm handling the case and offer up what I know.... but hey, I'm just here to help!



    I would contact the law firm handling the case and offer up what I know. A subpoena would nullify any employment contract regarding confidentiality (in most cases and surely this one).

    This is the second "possible" ex-employee that has stepped forward on this forum and a 3rd on another forum. I wonder how many more will surface now that the lawsuit is public information.
    yur on a roll
    RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by singlemalt_18 View Post
    Unfortunately, I didn’t sleep at Holiday Inn Express last night… but the last time I checked, you do not raise new charges once a case has started. That would be a fishing expedition and judges generally don’t appreciate someone wasting their time. Likewise you cannot claim the insanity defense in the middle of a case if you did not elect to do so in the beginning.
    Since I slept at the Marriott last night instead of the Holiday Inn Express, I was able to verify that the filing is a civil filing not a criminal filing..hence your comment about the insanity defense has no relativity whatsoever.

    Quote Originally Posted by singlemalt_18 View Post
    For the case to proceed as a class action, the existence of a class first needs to be shown.
    Good one Perry Mason,,,, that is the filing that was done last Friday!
    And then on certification, the case goes forward and "any" new allegations can be included. Do you not see in the filing that if three parties not currently named as defendants do not work something out in mediation, that they too will be named in the suit. "Discovery" could be called a fishing expedition and that's why it part of the procedure. First all they have to show is reasonable proof that the original alleged activity existed and upon "discovery" do you think everyone is going to close their eyes when proof of fraud and deceit show up in droves.
    Back to the three parties (uh - employees or related parties)... Hmmm wonder what they know and yes, it can be added in the future.
    I hope you are not confusing this with double-jeopardy, because that is not even relative in this civil case (so far).

    Quote Originally Posted by singlemalt_18 View Post
    Unlike the Securities America case, nobody has been robbed in a ponzi scheme; they are only angry over being billed! Exactly what restitution is there to make for repairs that need to be made and have yet to begin? Is a judge supposed to rule that the property should be left to fall into disrepair and become unsuitable for occupancy based on the desires of a few?
    No one forced anyone to sign anything, but of course they left out $65 million dollars worth of liability details. The non-disclosure alone will be grounds for restitution and the $30K figure is a coincidence but that is roughly what the average plaintiff got screwed out of... yes I said screwed out of... because when you are coerced into purchasing something without known defects, you are being SCREWED!


    Quote Originally Posted by singlemalt_18 View Post
    No wonder such an elaborate conspiracy needs to be claimed.
    Comical considering one of their ex-employees (or more than one) have informed the attorneys that they were aware of this "elaborate conspiracy" while working for the company. It's simple... all of us knew it... and know employees and others are stepping forward to prove it.

    For the record, there is no mention of "insurance" on the filing. That issue is not being litigated at this time against the defendants.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Jasonb334 View Post
    ... yes I said screwed out of... because when you are coerced into purchasing something without known defects, you are being SCREWED!
    Then by your very logic here, all of the long-term deeded owners, and everyone who purchased prior to Diamond acquiring Sunterra can simply have no claim at all against DRI...

    (I keep looking for the emoticon of a smiley dog running in a circle chasing its tail...)

    Now excuse me while I go back and read the chapter in Strunk and White on Mastering the Use of Quotation Marks... I must have missed that chapter.

  8. #28
    Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    15,333
    Quote Originally Posted by singlemalt_18 View Post
    Now excuse me while I go back and read the chapter in Strunk and White on Mastering the Use of Quotation Marks... I must have missed that chapter.
    The Elements of Style - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

  9. #29
    Senior Member dougp26364's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    2,206
    Quote Originally Posted by Jasonb334 View Post
    Let me repeat: this lawsuit has more to gain than a monetary settlement!
    While there might be more to gain than money, in the end, this will be like any other class action in that a few people, mostly lawyers, will walk away with a lot of money and the owners will get the bill and little more.
    Our timeshare and other photo's at http://dougp26364.smugmug.com/

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by singlemalt_18 View Post
    Then by your very logic here, all of the long-term deeded owners, and everyone who purchased prior to Diamond acquiring Sunterra can simply have no claim at all against DRI...

    (I keep looking for the emoticon of a smiley dog running in a circle chasing its tail...)

    Now excuse me while I go back and read the chapter in Strunk and White on Mastering the Use of Quotation Marks... I must have missed that chapter.
    Which would be about 90% of the owners at Poipu - since the resort was about 90% sold out before DRI took over Sunterra.
    “Maybe you shouldn't dress like that.”

    “This is a blouse and skirt. I don't know what you're talking about.”

    “You shouldn't wear that body.”

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •