President Donald Trump’s golf development company is facing a significant pay-out after a judicial ruling.
U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra ruled on Wednesday in favour of former members who filed suit against Trump National Golf Club Jupiter, ordering the club to pay the former members $5.77 million.
This development is the latest in a legal battle that stems back four years. In 2013, a class action lawsuit was brought against Trump National Golf Club Jupiter, with around 65 members claiming they’d been wronged.
Trump acquired the club from the Ritz-Carlton in 2012, and according to the Palm Beach Post, did so for a bargain $5 million price with the understanding that he was responsible for the $41 million owed to members in refundable deposits.
But when the Trump ownership came in, the rules abruptly changed. Members who had asked to resign from the club had been allowed to retain use of the club until they received refunds for membership deposits – refunds that would come into play once new members joined.
But, according to the Post, Trump ownership rules forbid members from using the club once they announce they’ll resign.
In turn, the former members claimed that, after the Trump purchase, refunds on their deposits were refused and that they were barred from the club yet still billed $8,000 to $20,000 a year for dues as well as an $1,800 annual fee for food and beverages.
The class action suit was filed, alleging Trump was in breach of contract for illegally changing these club rules.
The former members are seeking some $4.85 million in deposits. Judge Marra ordered that amount plus some $925,000 in interest be awarded to the former members.
In his ruling, Marra agreed with the former members that Trump breached the contract. Marra stated that barring members from the clubs meant club membership was revoked, at which, under the contract, Trump had 30 days thereafter to refund the deposits.
Not doing so meant Trump “committed a material breach of the Membership Agreement.”
Alan Garten, the Trump organisation’s chief legal officer, told Bloomberg that the company respectfully disagrees with the decision and intends to appeal.
Seth Lehrman, the attorney for the plaintiffs, was overjoyed by Wednesday’s ruling.
“We obtained full relief and full justice,” Lehrman said.