Report Abuse

perhaps my interpretation is inaccurate, but i recall that the court determined that eichner had 3 years to effectuate corporate changes as prescribed by the court's decision in litigation headed by the nysag, eri schneiderman. mr zimmerman's comments say: "Finally, in papers filed in the Tucker case, TMC asserts that the Eichners and their related entities are no longer TMC’s Sponsor and have been “replaced” by BlueGreen. We are presently investigating to determine the accuracy of this assertion, and if it is accurate, how such change was made and how it affects existing TMC members. At present, we are not aware of any public information which documents whether BlueGreen has legally assumed the liabilities and responsibilities of the former Sponsor." i also understand that bluegreen is somehow currently "in the TMC corporate picture" but i am unaware of the extent of bluegreen's immediate legal status in this corporate messy maze. some unraveling must be done in order for understandable corporate structure to be realized. it appears that this is the primary objective before any other further court actions (short of mr tucker's litigation) take place. these comments are obviously from one without legal expertise, but with common sense, which should also be considered [Q=jeanmarcz] UPDATE FROM ZIMMERMAN LAW GROUP Dear TMC owners: The long-awaited hearing in the Tucker v. TMC case was held on December 12, 2018. Because of a procedural issue, the Court was unable to order that TMC’s member list be provided to plaintiff. Significantly, given that plaintiff is ultimately likely to prevail on the merits of his claim against TMC since his goal of organizing members potentially adverse to TMC's board/management has been recognized by New York Courts as a proper purpose for seeking the list, the Court requested that counsel for both parties work together to try and resolve the issue so that plaintiff can send his message to all other TMC members without further court action. Counsel for both parties are presently exploring how to do so. This may entail allowing TMC to disseminate Mr. Tucker’s message though its service provider, advising all other members about the Assurance of Discontinuance and advocating for changes and reforms at TMC, so long as doing so is not cost-prohibitive and does not edit or censor Mr. Tucker’s message. Also, since TMC would undoubtedly have appealed a court decision granting Mr. Tucker the member list, the manner by which the Court requested the parties resolve the list issue will likely result in plaintiff’s message being disseminated to the other TMC members sooner and at less cost than would be the case if an appeal had to first be decided before he could access the list. There is no quick resolution of the underlying issues at TMC, including excessive maintenance fees, difficulty in reserving units, and the illiquidity of memberships, that the action we are preparing to file on behalf of those members who have retained us will seek to resolve. Relief will ultimately be attained if a court determines that the existing structure is, as we contend, oppressive and deserving of judicial intervention. Alternatively, relief will be attained if members organize in sufficient number to claim control of TMC’s board and management. While Redweek provides a platform to reach a limited subset of the members, plaintiff is seeking to organize a much larger number of members. Specifically, he seeks to organize at least 5% of the reported 18,000 TMC members, to work together to enact meaningful structural changes and reforms at TMC, and to help convert members’ presently “worthless” timeshare interests into cash or equity in a viable entity. Our contention that existing TMC memberships are worthless is based in part on the following facts: (a) TMC is offering to reacquire memberships in arrears for $100 cash; (b) the cost of staying at TMC may be lower for non-members than a member’s yearly maintenance fees; (c) members are unable to sell or transfer their interests to third parties; and (d) the demand for memberships on the secondary market is non-existent. We therefore encourage TMC members who have not yet retained us to do so and join with Mr. Tucker to effectuate the desired changes at TMC that will enable you to regain the value of your membership interest. Finally, in papers filed in the Tucker case, TMC asserts that the Eichners and their related entities are no longer TMC’s Sponsor and have been “replaced” by BlueGreen. We are presently investigating to determine the accuracy of this assertion, and if it is accurate, how such change was made and how it affects existing TMC members. At present, we are not aware of any public information which documents whether BlueGreen has legally assumed the liabilities and responsibilities of the former Sponsor. Jean-Marc Zimmerman Zimmerman Law Group 233 Watchung Fork Westfield, NJ 07090 T: (908) 768-6408 F: (908) 935-0751 E: jmz@tmcsuit.com[/Q]