Pictured: Attorney Joe Solseng, Clients Jay & Carmen Seda, Attorneys Andy Milz & Dave Ricci
ATLANTIC CITY, N.J., Oct. 6, 2022 /PRNewswire/ — A Superior Court jury in New Jersey decided in favor of consumers deceived by timeshare seller FantaSea Resorts, awarding the plaintiffs a $1,069,285 verdict for the Atlantic City resort’s intentionally deceptive sales practices. The victory for consumers was championed by Schroeter Goldmark & Bender along with partners, Flitter Milz, PC and the Law Office of David Ricci.
The jury verdict will compensate a group of 19 plaintiffs whose consumer protection rights were violated by repeated misrepresentations throughout FantaSea Resort’s routine, deceptive sales practices. The jury agreed that FantaSea’s tactics left consumers with timeshare purchases they couldn’t use as described, with payments and rising maintenance fees they couldn’t escape.
“FantaSea stacked the deck against these families from the start,” said Joe Solseng, attorney with Schroeter Goldmark & Bender. “We’re grateful for the jury’s hard work and their willingness to hold FantaSea accountable for its systemic lies and deception, which turned a promised fantasy into a nightmare.”
In trial, FantaSea Resorts admitted to making knowingly false statements to lure potential buyers into binding timeshare sales agreements through a sales process that violated the New Jersey Real Estate Timeshare Act (RETA). According to court documents, FantaSea intentionally withheld important sales documents from the buyers until after they had completed the transaction, contrary to what they are legally required to do.
FantaSea, a participant in the Resort Owner’s Coalition (ROC) of the American Resort Development Association (ARDA) whose properties include its Flagship, Atlantic Palace and La Sammana resorts, also misled consumer plaintiffs into believing that their purchase was a real estate investment that would increase in value over time. Instead, plaintiffs in the suit found that they were not only unable to sell their timeshare purchase but that it had effectively no resale value.
“FantaSea Resorts had every opportunity to change its deceptive practices and comply with consumer protection laws before these plaintiffs were forced to bring this lawsuit against them. These families simply wanted out of these oppressive contracts, but FantaSea doubled down on their deception and made these families bring their case to trial. We hope this verdict sends a message that fraud of this nature won’t be tolerated,” said attorney Andrew Milz with Cherry Hill, New Jersey-based law firm Flitter Milz, PC.
FantaSea Resorts admitted to committing multiple violations throughout the sales process by failing to inform buyers of required legal disclosures and withholding important documents that revealed details about the timeshare until after the buyer had signed a purchase and sale agreement.
What’s more, FantaSea’s timeshare sales were rigged so that timeshare owners would routinely pay more for a vacation stay than non-owners, according to court documents. In one case, over the length of the plaintiff’s 10-year mortgage, she would pay more than $17,000 for five one-week stays throughout the decade. A non-owner would pay just $3,965 for those same five stays. Even if the plaintiff continued to use her timeshare after her 10-year mortgage was paid off, it would take more than 150 years to break even with the non-owner. Another plaintiff testified at trial that it would take him 168 years to break even with a non-owner. Pictured above: Attorneys Joe Solseng (l), Andy Milz (r), & Clients Brian & Jenny Roward
“What’s concerning for consumers is that business models like these, that are intentionally built to take advantage of good people, are not unique to FantaSea – and in fact, there are many resorts in the timeshare space that are even more egregious in their deceptive practices,” Solseng said. “I don’t recommend that anyone attend a timeshare presentation, no matter how much they entice you with gifts.”
Solseng added, “FantaSea and certain other ARDA timeshare outfits often use the word ‘Vacation Ownership’ so as to not call it a timeshare. But it’s a timeshare through and through, and the so-called vacation ownership can quickly turn into a vacation nightmare. We hope that the jury’s verdict and nullification of these FantaSea contracts will help other FantaSea timeshare owners and their lawyers. We hope this verdict is a way forward for plaintiff’s lawyers across the country to help timeshare consumers who are in the same position our clients were.”
About Plaintiffs Counsel
Flitter Milz, P.C.
Flitter Milz, PC, with offices in PA, NJ, and NY, is a nationally recognized leader in consumer protection law, with over 30 years’ experience in the field. The firm represents victims of finance fraud, illegal vehicle repossessions, unfair debt collection practices, credit report errors, civil rights abuses, and other consumer protection matters in individual and class action cases. Pictured: Cary Flitter (center), Andy Milz (left), Jody López-Jacobs (right).
Founded in 1969, Schroeter Goldmark & Bender (SGB) is a nationally recognized law firm based in Seattle that holds the most powerful companies, government agencies, and people accountable for their wrongdoing. SGB focuses on representing individuals in consumer protection cases, along with injured persons in aviation, asbestos and mesothelioma, catastrophic injury, brain/spinal cord injury, medical malpractice, unsafe products, wrongful death, sexual assault and harassment, as well as individual and class action employment cases. The firm believes the law is a force of good and is committed to achieving justice for people who have been harmed.
All it takes is someone with the same or similar name, birthdate, address, or other matching identifying information to have a stranger’s record inaccurately mixed with yours. Their DUI, their theft conviction, or their sex offence can then show up on YOUR report. It’s no surprise then that bad background checks for employment, rent, or security clearance can ruin someone’s livelihood and reputation in an instant.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) recently published an advisory warning that 
More than 90% of prospective employers, landlords, insurance companies and banks use background check data as part of their application process. These companies must have a legally permissible purpose to obtain a copy of a consumer’s background report when evaluating the consumer for credit, insurance, housing, or employment decisions. The consumer is entitled to a copy of the background check report used to evaluate his or her application.
Background reports include information such as, employment history, credit information and legal problems. In some cases, social media accounts may show up. The more data listed in a background check could mean a greater possibility for error. As a result, the consumer could be denied a job, housing, insurance or credit. Just one error on a background report can cause significant harm. Procedures for maintaining and dispensing accurate information are critical. Background reports must ensure proper identification of the applicant, plus accurate data related to the applicant. Disclaimers by background reporting companies do not cure permissible violations. Instead, they could violate a person’s privacy, which is strictly prohibited under the FCRA.
When a background check is required, the prospective employer or landlord must obtain written permission from the applicant to request a report. A Disclosure Notice and Authorization form must be filled out and signed by the applicant, then submitted to the background check company. Most authorization forms require the applicant’s full name, date of birth, social security number, current zip code, phone number and email address. Screening for some types of employment may require additional information, such as motor vehicle reports, employment verifications or international criminal checks.
Credit reports must be kept accurate.
The website, annualcreditreport.com, is the quickest way to access reports. By writing to the three main credit bureaus – Transunion, Experian and Equifax — to 
After reviewing your credit report for accuracy, if there are errors listed you may need to write to the lender, creditor, collection agency or other type of data furnisher to request updated information on your account. Obtaining verification of your account status from these companies can provide useful evidence when your dispute is investigated by the credit bureau and evaluated for accuracy.
Although the credit bureaus accept disputes online and by phone, consumers must be cautious. These methods of disputing could present problems.
Dispute letters should be sent to the credit bureaus by Certified Mail, Return Receipt. Be sure to keep a copy of the dispute letter and all supporting documents enclosed with your letter, along with all mailing receipts from the post office.
The Fair Credit Reporting Act 
Flitter Milz is a consumer protection law firm that addresses accuracy and privacy violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. If there are uncorrected errors on a consumer’s credit reports, the consumer’s legal rights may have been violated. The attorneys at Flitter Milz evaluate consumer’s credit reports for errors and identify steps to correct them. If a consumer’s credit has been damaged, there could be a violation of the law. 
Consumer credit is when credit is advanced to a consumer for the purchase of personal or household goods or services. The system for extension of credit allows consumers to borrow money, or incur debt, and to defer repayment of that money over time.
Having 
Consumers may explore options to finance the purchase by contacting banks, credit unions and financial institutions. The terms for borrowing money may vary from one lender to another. After submission of a credit application, lenders take steps to evaluate the borrower’s creditworthiness. Typically, a credit application triggers a 
Borrowers must be prepared for the lender to approve or 
A credit reference is one of the methods lenders and service providers use to determine a borrower’s creditworthiness. Credit references can include your bank, previous landlords, employers, or companies whose bills you’ve paid regularly. Depending on the type of application, it is best to submit the best reference for the situation. Typically, this person or company would improve the borrower’s chances for approval for the type of loan that is sought. 
A car purchase is one of the most exciting purchases a consumer makes. But let’s face it, cars are expensive and you have to figure out how to pay for them.
Before visiting the dealership, consumers must review their finances and evaluate payment options. Informed buyers allow for making the best car buying decisions. Car salespeople are known to pressure potential buyers in to selecting vehicles from their lot — often ones the consumer may not want or be able to afford.
the consumer’s credit accounts, including balances and payment history. When reports reflect incorrect information, lenders may deny applications for credit.
institutions review the consumer’s credit reports and scores in the process of determining whether to extend credit or not. Various factors are considered in the evaluation process:
Shop for the Financing
In online complaints, Titan Solar has been accused of engaging in predatory marketing and of misrepresenting facts. Sometimes, Titan Solar is accused of not informing the customer that installation is conditioned upon agreeing to a decades-long loan or power purchase agreement, and the contract might be hidden from the consumer. Titan Solar’s finance company partner may also pull your 
some other legitimate business purpose for pulling your credit. Often, during the process of applying for new credit or utilities, or interviewing with a prospective employer or landlord, there may be a request to access the consumer’s credit file. The consumer must provide written permission for his or her credit file to be accessed.
Lenders evaluate the number of hard inquiries that appear on a consumer’s credit reports during the credit application review process. Although hard inquiries represent one factor in the calculation of credit scores, too many hard inquiries in a short time could impact scores negatively and jeopardize the approval of a new credit application.
Andy Milz is a contributing author to REPOSSESSION, National Consumer Law Center (10th ed. 2022) Carolyn Carter, Andrew Milz, et. al., considered the leading 
Flitter Milz was presented with the Equal Justice Award in recognition of support to legal aid programs that allow low-income consumers to seek economic justice.
Cary Flitter was honored in May 2022 at the Fête 4 Justice hosted by Legal Aid of Southeastern Pennsylvania for his continued support of their mission to provide free civil legal aid to low-income consumers in Bucks, Chester, Delaware and Montgomery counties which surround Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Philadelphia Legal Assistance — Jubilee for Justice
Flitter Milz represents people in individual and class action lawsuits with legal problems involving consumer credit transactions. Our attorneys evaluate whether a consumer’s rights have been violated — at no cost to the consumer — in matters related to credit reporting accuracy and privacy violations, wrongful vehicle repossessions, abuse from debt collectors, and consumer frauds, such as solar panel sales fraud. 
The three main national credit bureaus — Trans Union, Equifax, and Experian — have agreed to make changes in the reporting of medical debt. As of July 1, 2022, settled medical debt that would normally remain on credit reports for up to 7 1/2 years should come off the report. As a result, consumers may see an increase in their credit score, a benefit which can open doors to borrowing at more favorable rates for housing, loans and credit cards.
Let’s face it. Most medical debt is incurred unexpectedly. Patients visit doctors or seek medical treatment because they are sick or have had an injury. Due to the high cost of healthcare, many Americans have difficulty paying expensive medical bills to hospitals, physicians, labs and other medical providers.
Unfortunately, unpaid medical debt may be forwarded to a collection agency or law firm collector. Once in collection, negative tradelines appear on credit reports and credit scores may drop. Consumers then begin to feel the effects of a negative credit rating.
Attorney Andy Milz states, “Here at Flitter Milz, PC, we strongly believe medical debt should not be reported at all. Unlike a mortgage, credit card, or car loan, medical debt does not represent a financial choice, but is often a result of an emergency or hardship. And, even for the majority of consumers with some form of health insurance, getting the insurance company to pay the bill in its entirety is always a challenge. Inability to pay medical debts should not weigh down a person’s creditworthiness. Unfortunately, until now, health care providers, medical debt collectors, and the credit bureaus have been allowed to report this negative information.”
However, there is a complicated intersection between auto finance law and bankruptcy. Before taking any action, borrowers must understand the implications of bankruptcy and be able to determine the most prudent steps to take before and after a vehicle has been repossessed. In general, merely having your car or truck repossessed is not enough to warrant filing for bankruptcy. Let’s try to simplify it.
If your car was already repossessed, you have other rights as a consumer borrower, separate from any bankruptcy proceeding. Bankruptcy is only one tool or avenue if your car or truck has been repossessed – and it might, or might not, be right for your specific situation. Consult with an experienced consumer lawyer to understand your options outside of a bankruptcy.
If you’re concerned that the lender my repossess your vehicle, or perhaps thinking of filing bankruptcy to get your car back after repossession, 
