Manhattan Club Lawsuit

Robert, what is your position and thoughts in regard to buy backs from the exhausted owners who want to get rid of TMC? The voters need to know.

Great question, Fibon. Perhaps Mr Tucker could also take a position on the Zimmerman strategy and whether he would support liquidation of the manhattan club to buy out owners.

Wayne 192 I am very curious - how did you happen to get on this web site - are you an owner at the Manhattan Club?? And if not, why are you advising us owners?

Also, I'm a little confused over a statement you made regarding the 3 options - you stated that one of them is that you bring an action in court, the defendant doesn't show up and I'm assuming you are granted the Judgement but what have you sued for? You say you are released from the time share and it appears you are saying you'd be released from any liability too. But if you have not paid any assessments, how are you released from owing them since they are owed to the Manhattan Club and not to the developer? How does the developer's non appearance waive them?

I checked the Royal Resorts at TUGBBS.com (Timeshare users group) There are several phases to the development, but they are all 30-year Right to Use. That means that after 30 years, ownership reverts to the developer and timeshare buyers are left with nothing. It is not permanent ownership. One property was sold prior to the 30 years, so timeshare owners were paid for the years they couldn't use (what you're calling the residual). I don't know the basis for the payment, but that does sound very different than "getting your money back after 30 years."

Sounds to me like someone is dealing 3-card Monte. Nice friendly patter, and someone even appears to have won. But none of it has anything to do with the Manhattan Club. It doesn't matter because now it's the suckers turn to step up to the table.

Jeff, can you block these people before someone takes them seriously and loses more money?

stop this back-and-forth challenges/bickering. of course frustration has set in ominously among us all. we're grasping at straws leading nowhere, with only talk, unfounded accusations and insinuating comments against each other......which leads us back to square one, NOWHERE.

this is what should be done (i'm not sure of procedure here): get the new (or acting) new york state attorney general or one with the equivalent authority in nyc or the federal attorney general to reopen this case in criminal court. i believe that eichner has been proven by schneiderman and by eichner's own admission statements, to have committed local fraud, i.e., selling TMC week via fraud and lies, and using the USPS to advertise this fraudulent enterprise (mail fraud, a federal offense). the proof is solidly identifiable via schneiderman's undercover activities vis a vis attending and taping fraudulent statements from sales presentations. it seems that we have an already presented case against eichner to pursue criminal proceedings.

Why are we seeing postings that are 6 years old??NH

nancya376 - Forum posts do not expire. The entire history remains on the forums thread. If you only want to see the most recent posts, then please click on the last page numbers under the Forum title.

tulip blossom: The voting rules established by TMC in the email I received clearly state that owners must vote "FOR" for three candidates and "ABSTAIN" for two candidates or your ballot is invalid. I am a nine year owner with no ties to Eichner. I submitted my resume and interest to run for the Board to the Nominating Committee (I don't know anyone on the Nominating Committee) and I was nominated.

Fibon, I would be in favor of TMC establishing a buy back program of Units from the Owners who want sell their Units to TMC

Chris, I don't agree with you much, but I don't think you have any ulterior motives. On the other hand, I don't think this site should be used to advertise questionable schemes and make dubious assertions. I believe some posters are not owners at all and have ulterior motives. As such, I do not consider this "bickering." I consider it sharing facts to prevent other members of this community from being victimized again. Feel free to disagree.

Dear Waynec, I am 1000% with you on that point. Further, I have been to small claims court (against auto insurance cos.), without a lawyer, twice and won each time. I no longer own, since TMC bought mine back for a paltry $200, years ago. That being said, like you said, if each member sues, they can all win. I told them all this pages of this dialogue ago. Only one member did it and she was bound by some non-disclosure agreement after and she went silent. I can surmise that she won. Not one other person, even with all this moaning will do anything about it. You're COMPLETELY right. GO GET THEM, people!!!!

nathan, i'm an owner with no ulterior motives. the earlier litigation by schneiderman vs eichner (TMC) was totally botched, the outcome of which left all owners in and holding a bag of manure. sharing facts is helpful, but without proactivity, is consistently leaving us frustrated and nowhere. my idea (which i admittedly am not able to plan or orchestrate) is constructive: re-open litigation against eichner in a legal venue which has more of a chance to offer owners the reasonable justice that they deserve, i.e., in criminal court for lies, fraud (both local and federal), misconceptions, and stealing (in effect) via exorbitant maintenance fees, and not giving some owners what they paid for: reservations and desired usage time.

i doubt that my statements, above, are in any way to be construed as disagreement with you. my only "ulterior motive", if you will, is that TMC owners are in this together, some hurting more than others, but still TOGETHER, and action needs to be taken immediately. as you probably surmised, i am still on the fence regarding legal representation by zimmerman. i think it should resume with a local (city), state or federal attorney general in a criminal venue. i hope we (all) are in agreement with this plan of action. SOMETHING....., A VIABLE AND IMMEDIATE PLAN.....other than constant commenting in this forum, needs to be established and pursued quickly.

Buy back by whom??? Remember, Eichner was the one who defrauded the owners - not who ever buys the management contract. The management is totally different from the development end. I don't see any foreseeable way that the new management company would be forced to buy back units from owners. As far as liquidating - that is pie in the sky thinking as there are quite a few owners who are very pleased with their purchase so also doubtful that is going to happen. That would involved continuous litigation and who would pay for that?? No - our only recourse would be against Eichner and his cronies and again, that will involve time and money. So - I hope Paul is elected and can discuss these issues with the other Board members.

Sorry for the confusion - is it Robert Tucker, not Paul who is running for the Board?

I believe I do remember your earlier postings - my question was where you filed your complaint ( court location) when you sued your auto. insurance companies? Our problem is that we would need to bring action in New York and I had been led to believe that the majority of M. C. owners are not from New York. So, if complaints need to be filed in New York, that would be a huge inconvenience for most of the owners filing individual complaints. Mr. Zimmerman recognized that a class action suit was not feasible and so I believe his approach is to bring individual cases. The owner you are referencing as having obtained a favorable outcome in her litigation was possibly Louise Smalls. I think she may be a Long Island resident and I'm sure Mr. Zimmerman could research to determine the status of her case. She is the one who was offering to sell her "procedures" to other M. C. owners for a price. Last year I emailed her to ask if her case had been resolved and she never replied.

Tulip, the small claims suit was brought by Irene Smalls and the independent board candidate is Robert Tucker. Unless Irene has actually been in touch with Sunildas, I wouldn’t assume anything about her case. Lots of folks stop contributing here for reasons we can guess.

Irene did share on the forum that she "won" her case. As I pointed out previously...winning and collecting are two different beasts. She is responsible for collecting whatever she won.

I know she filed. I do not recall her announcing that she had won. Can you tell me when or even about when she posted that message? Thank you.

She might have signed a non disclosure agreement because it is quite easy to sue a company like TMC, particularly after the OAG investigation. They probably do not want to spread the word. Whoever purchases the company must take on all liabilities, including debts.

And go after those who are behind in maintenance payments.