Utah Stories

The Voice of Local Utah

Redmond Heritage Farms

by

raw milk farm cows
Photos by Richard Markosian

Grass-fed Dairy Farm

Redmond is one of those places you wouldn’t know existed unless you eschew I-15 and travel south on Highway 89. Compared to the interstate, this two-lane thoroughfare feels like an old country road.

This area has a ranching tradition dating back more than 100 years, a tradition maintained by places like the Burns Cowboy Shop in Salina, arguably the longest-running business in Utah. They have been making saddles and cowboy gear ever since they opened in the 1890s. In and around Redmond there are cattle pastures and open green fields yoked to azure blue skies with puffy white clouds. I’m here to visit Redmond Farms which supplies its Real Foods markets with fresh (non-pasteurized or homogenized) grass-fed milk.

The dairy I’m looking for was the catalyst for the now five Real Foods stores strategically placed throughout Utah. Here, milk is not a commodity but a health food item, fetching nearly $9.00 a gallon. Despite being more than twice the price of regular milk, the glass-bottled dairy product is currently not earning Real Foods a profit.

Redmond Heritage Farms owner, Rhett Roberts, spearheaded the legislation to allow stores (rather than only farms) to sell grass-fed milk. Six years ago, raw milk was nearly impossible to purchase without having a personal relationship with a dairy farmer. But the grass-fed milk movement is gaining momentum. Advocates say that grass-fed milk prevents early childhood asthma and food allergies and can be consumed by those who are otherwise lactose intolerant. The rise of grass-fed milk has been in response to consumer demand.

Government regulations favor industrial homogenized and pasteurized milk production.

DSC_0663
Farm Manager Jed Johnson

Roberts is the Redmond man responsible for Redmond Heritage Farms. “He basically wanted to have access to raw milk after reading about its health benefits, so he bought two cows,” says Darryl Bosshardt. Later they bought heritage Jersey cows from an Amish community back east. Very few dairy cows are anything other than Holsteins. They make up 93 percent of all dairy producing cattle. The Jersey cows are much smaller, eat less, produce less milk, but according to farm manager Jed Johnson, “It’s creamy delicious milk, and most people who try it never go back.”

 

Raw Milk

The difficulty in producing raw or “grass-fed milk,” as Roberts says, isn’t in production. It’s in getting through all of the red tape that the government has established. The USDA initially set up the requirement that all milk must be homogenized, or cooked as farmer Jed Johnson puts it, which he says kills our natural ability to digest the milk by killing off the lactase in it, the natural counterpart enzyme which allows us to digest the lactose in milk.

Homogenization and pasteurization laws were established as cities were becoming much more populated and dairy cows (for lack of pastures) were fed spent grain from breweries in industrial areas. Sometimes this grain would have problems (such as excessive bacteria) which would end up in the milk supply making consumers sick. Rather than making conditions in which dairy cows were housed more sanitary, the USDA instead decided to allow the unsanitary conditions in raising many cattle in a small space to exist, but counteract the negative consequences by homogenizing the milk. But, according to Johnson, head farmer at Redmond farms, the process of homogenization led to a lot of the healthy nutrients and benefits being removed from milk.

Roberts explains that Redmond Farms was set up as a business co-op so that Redmond employees could have access to raw milk and all of its health benefits. “Food the way that nature intended.” The salt mine and mineral operations financed the dairy operation, the foyer of Redmond minerals contains a company store, with all of the best foods Redmond has to offer. Redmond now has 150 cows, each producing around seven pounds of milk per day, supplying five stores statewide.

Roberts bought into Redmond minerals in 1999. “My motivation for getting involved in the health foods businesses,” Roberts explains, “started with my own family. We wanted to get better foods to eat, and we started shipping in food from other areas. Then we were having family and friends saying I want some too, so we were shipping in more and more. And we were shipping it in on tables. And there was enough interest where we said we ought to open a store, and so that’s how it all started.”

Roberts says that about the same time they had the idea to start a store they came up with the idea to start a small dairy. “We bought the cows from back east. We didn’t want to go the Holstein route because they have a lower butterfat content, and they tend to do volume rather than quantity; and they don’t to do well on grass. So we tried the Jersey, Guernsey and some brown Swiss. Most of the herd is a Jersey Brown Swiss mix.”

“It’s still not been profitable. We have been trying to perfect the production side and safety side. The cows produce on average maybe 30-40 percent less volume than an industrial diary.”

Roberts doesn’t demonize or vilify factory farmers but sympathizes with them. “We as the public are largely to blame for factory farms. The farmer is just responding to what the public wants.” While the natural milk movement has spread widely on the east coast, it’s just beginning to catch on in Utah. “People just don’t want to pay more for it, but it’s just because they don’t understand the value of what we call real milk. It’s far more nutrient dense. If you looked at it from a nutritional perspective it’s certainly less expensive. We are just looking it in terms of how much volume we are getting rather than simply the volume.”

Roberts adds, “The US spends 5 percent of our disposable income on food. Compare that to the Japanese who last time I checked was 27 percent. In Europe it’s 15 to 20 percent. We have gotten so used to paying so little for food, which isn’t really even food. And I think we have the health problems to show for it. We DSC_0644spend a lot more on health care which would be better spent on real food.”

Hobby Farming in Utah: Gov’t Forces one Man to Sell Land

by

DSC_0478
Photos by Richard Markosian

Thistle, Utah— Having driven for nearly 20 minutes in this town, the appearance could best be described as charmingly post-apocalyptic. There are many abandoned homes and former farm facilities. A few totally flooded roadside residential properties now serve as a rest stop for ducks and habitat for fish. The rains have made the pastures rich and lush, the hills are dotted with Angus cattle; and there is no sign of people. No smoking chimneys, no passing cars. With fog rolling in and crumbling edifices Thistle appears a up and coming ghost town, lovely in its dereliction.

In alignment with the apocalyptic theme, I come upon a sign that was clearly written by someone unhappy with a recent government action: “My property was deemed abandoned.” The sign belongs to long-time resident Randy (he didn’t offer his last name). The referred to action allowed the county to call the private road his father built a “public wilderness access road.” Randy said, “I would allow nearly anybody to use my road, but sometimes people would use it and party up there and leave litter. So the county, along with the Division of Natural Resources, decided to seize my property.”

Randy grew up ranching in the area. He raised alfalfa in Spanish Fork until the city decided to zone his property commercial, causing his taxes to skyrocket, forcing him to sell his pasture to developers. Besides changes to zoning laws, Randy blames the federal government for the problems ranchers have suffered. “NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement) killed cattle ranching in this area. Today nobody in this area can make a living ranching. For us it’s now more of a hobby.” Randy’s “hobby” consists of some 10 African long-horned grass-fed cattle known as “Ankole-Watusi”. “We figured if we were going to have them, these are the most fun to look at,” Randy says. He also gets quite a bit of money for the horns.DSC_0524

Randy works in construction. He says he’s fortunate because it is not far and he can go to Orem and Provo to find jobs. But he says that the state of Utah is, “terrible to farmers. It’s one of the worst places to try to make your living doing this. The state agencies have no respect for farmers, and are doing nothing to preserve the traditions.” Randy adds, “We come to rely on food in their grocery stores and water out of the faucet. If the government keeps this up, someday there will be neither.” Randy’s son is a rancher in Colorado, where he says the state and local governments treat farmers much better than they do in Utah.

Trademark Wars: Small Businesses Fight Back Against Abusive Intellectual Property Lawsuits

by

bgAfter years of dreaming, saving and planning, you did it!  You opened your own small business best online payday loans! A few weeks into operation, however, you receive a cease and desist order in the mail because you are being accused of violating the intellectual property rights of another business – either a patent violation or a trade dress (trademark) violation.

You are convinced that this lawsuit is meant to intimidate and drive you out of the market.  But what do you do next?

Some businesses are choosing to fight back, and this winter their cases have gone all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In the first case, Octane Fitness, LLC (Octane) v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. (ICON), ICON accused Octane of infringing on their elliptical design patent. Octane fought back, accusing ICON of filing a frivolous lawsuit that was only meant to harass and hamper an upstart company with an expensive, frivolous lawsuit. As part of the countersuit, Octane asked the court to order ICON to pay for all attorney fees in defending against the suit.  Because this case has been appealed many times, the amount being requested is substantial.

In the second case, Highmark, Inc. v. Allcare Health Management System, Inc., (Allcare), Allcare accused Highmark of infringing on their patent which covered a computer-based method of generating treatment options based on symptom data entered by a physician. The lower district court found that Allcare had willfully pursued frivolous infringement claims and ordered it to pay Highmark’s attorney’s fees and costs. The decision was appealed and is also being reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Both cases show that some small businesses are choosing to fight back against frivolous suits.

“There are certainly people out there that threaten a lawsuit hoping that they will be granted a royalty or the business will shut down rather than defending against a lawsuit,” said Steven Rinehart, a patent attorney practicing in Salt Lake City.  “It is too easy to use the courts to force competitors out.”

Rinehart recommends that small business owners take immediate action when threatened.

“Do not ignore it.  The best thing to do is to try to respond to a demand letter or a cease and desist order before the lawsuit is filed.  You can hire a lawyer to respond in an assertive matter that creates the impression that you will fight, and it would only cost a few hundred dollars.  This aggressive response may dissuade them from suing,” said Rinehart.

Above all, Rinehart recommends that a small business owner not respond to any communication personally.

“If a small business owner responds themselves, it shows fear and a lack of money to fight the claim.  It almost galvanizes the person that is threatening to sue.  And since it is a legal matter, you cannot respond to it yourself because you are not supposed to practice law on behalf or your business.”

If the lawsuit does proceed, Rinehart says that there are still steps a small business owner can take.

“If you respond aggressively in the discovery phase of the suit, it could dissuade them from proceeding.  They are trying to scare you.  They are trying to extort money from you.  But they may give up,” said Rinehart.

If the lawsuit continues, a small business owner can file a countersuit and ask for attorney fees and other court costs, like Octane and Highmark.

“In the case of an unjustified suit, the judge may make the plaintiff pay attorney fees and court fees as a way to sanction the plaintiff.  Judges are more inclined to grant these fees because they may realize that the patent system is broken.  It seems like it is happening more and more.” said Rinehart.

Small businesses can also file a countersuit claiming an antitrust violation.  Because the lawsuit was brought to drive competition from the market, Rinehart believes that this is a violation of antitrust law and is one of many ways to fight back against a harassing suit.

Justice for Geist: The Backyard Dog Killed By SLC Officer

by

weimaraner at slc rallyAn estimated 2,000 people attended the rally at the Public Safety building in downtown Salt Lake City holding signs reading “Justice For Geist!” “Put a leash on killer cops” “My dogs are my children.” “Pets R Family.” Chants ranged from “Hold Him Accountable” to “Fire Officer Olsen!” The latter refers to Officer Brett Olsen, who shot and killed Sean Kendall’s Weimaraner, Geist in the dog’s backyard on June 18th, when the officer was looking for a missing child.

The philosophical argument of the protest held on June 28th 2014 is that because “dogs are family members or at the very least an extension of the family, “ as Sean Kendall put it, they deserve to be treated as such and we should have laws in place that protect their rights, and procedures in place which prevent the dogs from being harmed by law enforcement. “Dogs are much more than property…They killed my best friend,” Kendall said at a press conference at the event.

On June 27th Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank held a taped press conference where he revealed Officer Olsen’s identity, and added ”Olsen was one of three police officers who shot and killed 18-year-old Sulejman Talovic at Trolley Square on Feb. 12th, 2007.

Burbank added, “This is a seasoned officer who has tremendous experience and, in fact, has been under fire and performed very well.”

Another question is why Burbank would use this fact to persuade the public to give Olsen a pass? If any completely law abiding citizen decides to kill a neighbor’s dog, that person, independent of all good deeds done previously, would face felony charges. Burbank’s points during the press conference indicate that termination seems an unlikely scenario.

“The officer indicated in his police report that he felt there were no other options,” Burbank added,“We will explore what other options were available to you. What could have you done?” Burbank kept the conference focused on the protocol that the department uses in finding missing children, which is not the subject of this debate.

He stressed that, “Most missingchildren who are killed, are killed within the first half hour after they are abducted.” However, Burbank does not mention that Geist was killed 20 minutes before the missing child was found in her own house. Burbank said that in this instance,“You have a very seasoned officer who is not prone to panic,and the distances were extremely close.”

Chief Burbank’s response when a reporter asks for his reaction to the public outcry that the officer should lose his job over this? “Every year there are officers who are asked to no longer work here. Most involve misconduct, because they have lost the trust of the police department and the community in which they serve. In this particular circumstance a review will take place. If the officer acted appropriately under the policies and guidelines that are in place—then he should absolutely not lose his job. Why should he?”

What do the “policies and guidelines”state regarding an incident when an officer feels threatened by a dog? We could not get an answer to this question in time for press.

Later, Burbank was asked why Officer Olsen wasn’t placed on administrative leave as an officer would be who discharged his firearm to kill a human, pending an investigation. “Shouldn’t they treat this as the same when an officer shoots and kills a dog?”

Burbank’s response: “I think you need to ask yourself that question. An officer utilized a firearm for an animal who he believed was attacking him. I think there is a different standard and should always be, for an officer who takes the life of a human being.”

Burbank added, “I’m not minimizing,but a review should takeplace. But that is in fact a felonyunder state law when you take ahuman being’s life.”

It is also now a felony to take the life of a dog, and felony charges are filed regularly for animal abuse when a citizen commits these crimes. Certainly there are two standards,but what the protesters are arguing for is a much higher level of accountability when officers interact with pets who are believe by their owners to be, “family members or best friends.”

Chief Burbank asked membersof the media attending his press conference to not speculate on the facts and details of what happened.

This is convenient for the SLCPD, so things will die down before the results of the investigation and decisions are made. Thirty to fifty days from now, public awareness of this story will weaken and the national spotlight this story has received will have moved on. This seems to be at least very convenient and helpful for the SLCPD PR to not allow the media to analyze this series events until all of the facts are in, but we can assume that if Geist had made any physical contact with Officer Olsen, this would have been said in the press conference.

It’s difficult to believe that Officer Olsen did not have any other options available to him when he interacted with Geist. Anytime searches are conducted, officers have their partners at close hand, Officer Olsen’s partner might not have been directly behind him, but he might have been close enough to come help. He could have come to assist Olsen if he felt Geist was threatening him. Officer Olsen had his taser on hand, he had a baton,he had pepper spray. As Kendall stated, “Why couldn’t he just back out of the yard.”

We can speculate that Geist was growling and perhaps running toward Officer Olsen. Could have Officer Olsen gotten scratched or mauled by Geist? Perhaps. Could have Officer Olsen lost his life to Geist? Readers can make their own determination.

Had Olsen made contact with his partner, had he discharged peppe rspray, or even discharged his Taser could have prevented a threatening situation. As protesters stated, mailcarriers and UPS delivery people handle situations with agitated dogs all the time in non-violent ways.

At least four Weimaraners were in attendance at the Salt Lake City rally receiving affection from strangers, along with dozens of other dogs. Dogs with heads hanging out of windows of honking cars passed by. Even a Salt Lake City Fire Department truck rolled by, honking its booming horn to the cheer of hundreds of protesters.

Facebook indicates that some rally-goers flew in from other states to attend. This is a serious issue for dog owners who view their pets as family members. Burbank nor does the law believe that the killing of a dog by a police officer is similar tokilling a child. For those of us who don’t yet have children, it is thesame thing. My dogs are my best friends and if someone, anyone, did them harm, in almost any scenario, like Kendall felt, it would be much more than the loss of property–it would be the loss of family member.

Sean Kendall does not want to see Officer Olsen reprimanded. He doesn’t want to see him resign. Kendall also spoke strongly against those who were threatening the life of Officer Olsen. Kendall wants to see Officer Olsen fired and lose his pension benefits. If indeed Burbank goes by the standard set for misconduct, despite any past achievements or honors, Officer Olsen should be fired.

View our photos taken at the June 28th, 2014 rally at the Salt Lake City Public Safety Building

What are your thoughts on the issue?  Let us know in the comments below.  

Get Some Guns and Ammo (and Fear)

by

Will President Obama really take your guns away?

by Jacob Hodgen

Van Wagenen gun shop in Orem, UtahWhile the residents of some states are flocking to Starbucks to pledge community service in preparation for Tuesday’s inauguration ceremony, Utahns are turning out in droves at a much different local hangout: gun stores.

The mood is cheery, yet hectic as I walk through the door of the Van Wagenen Finance Company in Orem, Utah. Smiling pictures of both George W. and Laura Bush greet me as I shuffle past busy customers while the Fox News Channel offers commentary from a television hanging on the wall. Above me, mounted elk heads peer down contemplatively on the rows of rifles below them, and a colorful promotional flyer for the NRA solicits my aid in the fight for what it assures me is a desperate struggle for my Second Amendment rights.

If quintessential Utah exists, surely this scene is as likely a candidate as any.

However, there is something odd that immediately catches my eye. It is a strange phenomenon that has only occurred a few times in Van Wagenen’s thirty-year history: one of the immense gun display racks is empty.

As one of largest gun sellers in the state, business has boomed in the last few months. In fact, Van Wagenen’s has sold out its entire stock of assault rifles and nearly all of its ammunition. This trend has echoed across Utah as gun dealers post record sales and continue to struggle to keep their shelves stocked. The owner of this establishment, Norman Van Wagenen, explains to me that the spike in demand for guns is not related to an increase in interest for shooting sports, but is direct result of a growing fear of President Obama.

The perceived threat of future restrictions and, possibly even more terrifying, the prospect of new taxes on weapons and ammunition has resulted in record-breaking demand for guns in Utah. Both gun sales and attendance at the latest Utah gun show have recently doubled.

Empty Rack for Guns

A few months ago this rack had a gun for every slot

Aside from fear, Norman thinks that many Utahns also view guns as a relatively liquid asset in times of financial instability. Though this strategy might not find its way into the national financial stimulus package, Norman bets that many enthusiasts are currently interested in buying a new gun or two so they can, “put it under their bed and love it.”

Guns and ammo are not the only things in high demand as a result of widespread fear. Applications for concealed weapons permits have recently quadrupled, and, if current trends continue, one in every twenty-five Utahns over the age of twenty-one could soon legally carry a concealed weapon.

Norman laughs as he tells me about a conversation he recently had with a representative from the Centurion corporation, which manufactures the AK-47 assault rifle, who claimed that they did not want any new orders, because they currently had enough “for sixty-seven years of production.”

The gun craze has seeped onto local airwaves as well. You may have already heard the latest aggressive radio campaign from “Get Some Guns and Ammo,” a major gun dealer in Murray, which seeks to capitalize on extant fear. The menacing ad encourages potential customers to stock up on weapons, “before some of the rights and privileges we have now are gone!”

Join the NRA. Fight the Man.

But is this is a legitimate threat? Should Utah residents really be worried about losing gun rights once Obama enters office on the 20th? The answer is. . . maybe, but it seems very unlikely.

In the past, Obama has earned the NRA’s ire for voting in favor of a ban on semi-automatic weapons and supporting legislation that would leave both weapon manufacturers and distributors open to potential lawsuits. However, Obama has also publicly claimed that he respects the right for Americans to have guns. He has said, “I will not take your rifle away. I won’t take your handgun away.” Instead, he favors what he calls “common sense” laws that control the sale of firearms. Exactly what this means has yet to be determined, but based on the heavy focus towards bipartisan, conciliatory politics Obama has already shown, it seems extremely unlikely that he will press for dramatic legislation regarding guns any time soon.

Not all Utahns are worried, though. One of the directors for the Gun Violence Prevention Center of Utah, Gary Sackett, thinks that gun store owners are merely fear mongering to boost sales: “They are trying to get people to panic or, if not panic, at least to think this is the last chance to buy these weapons.”

What does all this mean for you? If you are a gun enthusiast, then between the fear of legislation, lack of supply, and rising gun prices, you might have a lot to be nervous about. However, if you are already opposed to guns, then you probably have the most to fear, because there is currently a tidal wave of lead and iron washing over every corner of your town.

For further information regarding President Obama’s positions on gun control, see the following sites:

Fact Check
On the Issues
Wikipedia

Photos by Jacob Hodgen

Timeshare Rip-off Protection Laws

by

Did you buy a timeshare then find out it was a rip-off? If you bought it within the past five days Nevada state allows you to request a full refund. Timeshare laws they hope you don’t discover.

-By Mindy Nielson

It was going to be a great Las Vegas vacation – my husband and I were off to the Planet Hollywood for the first trip without our son. As we walked through the casino we were literally accosted by some used car salesman (gum and all) trying to “give” us our free vacation goodies. I knew what the deal was, timeshare. I thought we were strong enough to get through the presentation, so we opted to go for the free $200 of gambling chips. WRONG CHOICE.

We got suckered in. It was the demo room that did it. I am telling you, if you can manage not going into the example suite, you might be able to make it through and get your free prizes. We got through that, loved the suite {what was it about the suite that got you?} and then was escalated to the manager, who made us this “great” deal. Then we got whisked into our closing agent who was there as an “unbiased” third-party to help us navigate this large purchase. We trusted our closing agent and handed over our credit card and $1480 for a down payment. WRONG CHOICE. {why was this the wrong choice?}

We went through piles of documents and signed and signed. When we asked about what happens if we get home and want to cancel, he said very vaguely that we wouldn’t want to do that. That it would be very costly and basically impossible. At the end of everything, he gave us two free tickets to breakfast, a huge brief case with all our exciting docs and handed us this “Public Offering Statement” that was required by law. He told us how boring it was and that we would never want to open it. He even flipped to a page and sarcastically read from some lame legal jargon. He gave us his personal cell phone and congratulated us on our investment. (The investment they say would go up in value 10-30%).

Of course we stewed about it for a full day and then it hit us. WHAT THE $(@*# were we thinking??? We got off our flight and ran to the internet to do some research. We realized quickly that we made a bad decision…there were hundreds of people that were stuck in these $15k – $100k timeshare purchases. We called our loan agents cell and asked how we could cancel, he said he had no idea, that there has never been anyone that has wanted to cancel.

BEST DECISION: I decided to open up the “lame” Public Offering Statement. Right on the first page in BRIGHT CAP RED LETTER: Consumer Should Read This Report Before Signing Any Paper. In on page 17 was our salvation: The Revocation Form. There is a Nevada law that protects people like us — people who make made decisions on our trip to vegas. Nevada Statute 199A states: “person may cancel this agreement without any cancellation fee or other penalty by hand delivering or sending by certified mail written notice of cancellation to your location…by midnight of the fifth calendar day following the day on which the agreement was signed.”. By law they have to refund your monies (minus any free stuff they gave you (breakfast, shows, brief case) by the 15th day. It works, we got our refund! Here is what we did:

1. Made purchase Sat

2. Mailed via overnight and certified mail, a letter written and signed by both of us stating our desire to cancel. We also coped page 17 out of public statement and signed and dated that as well. I followed mail and got email confirmation of them signing for it. They sent the refund to my credit card on day 10 minus $80. $30 for two breakfasts and $50 for that stupid briefcase. THey tell you to mail back briefcase for the refund of $50.

Now — we wanted to cover our behind during all of this and we decided to scour the Public Offering Statement to find falsehoods in our purchase. So that if we had to go to court we were prepared (the document states that if you have to go to court and you are found in favor of, Westgate pays you back what they owe you PLUS legal expenses. Here is what we found they misrepresented to us:

the Fine Print of a Westgate Contract- (that they don’t want you to read)

Page 17: Statute 119A: that Nevada law allows us to cancel (they didn’t want us to know about 5 days and tried to confuse us and spin around the facts until after 5th day)

Page 9.3d (after table of contents): Accural and carryover of timeshare weeks. You CANNOT carryover your timeshare weeks. We were told that if we didn’t use one week, we could move it over to the next year up to three years. THIS WAS A LIE

Page 10.8. It again states there is no carryover from one year to another. Like many timeshare victims, buyers often don’t use their week or days year-after-year, resulting in paying maintenance fees even without any usage.

Page 11 10.f: We bought a 2 bedroom suite every other year, which could be broken up into two separate weeks. One week in the one bedroom suite and one in the studio. We ONLY bought this because they said we could break it up and use the studio in one year and the one bedroom in the other year. This states that you MUST use both studio and one bedroom in that year. You can’t split in your off year.

Page 11 10i: We were told we could book up to a year in advance for our every other year timeshare. This says only book up to 120 days in advance.

Page 16 6: We were told that if the place was rented out and it became damaged by the renters we would not be responsible. That there would be HOAs (Home Ownership Association fees) to cover. This states that we would be solely liable for any damage incurred. Therefore their promise of the ease of switching weeks with someone in Miami for ours in Las Vegas was also a lie)

Page 2 of Exhibit 8: We were not told that the I.I program (the travel exchange) was voluntary. They told us it was part of the westgate program and that all dues were required each year.

Hopefully this helps you guys. We learned our lesson and will NEVER go to another timeshare presentation again. We only lost most of our vacation (worrying and sitting through this stupid stuff) and about $100 in postage and fees. But, we found through research that many timeshare purchasers are losing $20k plus. This can be prevented as long as you come to your sense within five days of your purchase.Take it from me, you can stay at the Westgate Planet Hollywood for much cheaper buy purchasing nights on the resale market.

This is the fith installment on out timeshare rip-off series. Our past stories have been read by thousands of readers, and with your help (by providing your own stories along with name and e-mail) we are working to coordinate a class-action lawsuite against Westgate Resorts for their predatory sales practices, which often include blatent lying. Share your comments using the form below or by clicking on the submit story button above.