The Newton Group lawsuits are a set of civil cases in which Diamond Resorts and Wyndham Vacation Ownership accused the Michigan-based timeshare exit company, along with an affiliated law firm and marketing partners, of charging owners thousands of dollars for “exit” services that allegedly amounted to instructing them to stop paying and let their timeshares fall into default.
What Diamond Resorts Alleged
Diamond Resorts sued Newton Group in two courts. The case that produced the sharpest ruling was filed in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia against Newton Group and DC Capital Law Firm, alleging fraud, conspiracy to defraud, and tortious interference with Diamond’s customer relationships.1PR Newswire. Diamond Resorts Lawsuit Alleging Fraudulent Business Practices Against Newton Group and DC Capital Law Firm Will Proceed
The complaint used one couple’s experience to illustrate the alleged pattern. Paul and Diane Reeves paid more than $6,000 in upfront fees after Newton Group marketed a “safe and legal” exit with a “money-back guarantee.” Diamond alleged the defendants told the Reeves to stop communicating with Diamond and to stop making their timeshare payments, while DC Capital sent letters demanding Diamond cease contact with the couple, concealing that their account had already gone into default. The “exit” the Reeves received, according to the complaint, was a foreclosure. No refund was issued.2PR Newswire. Diamond Resorts and Timeshare Owners Warn of Newton Group and DC Capital Law’s Timeshare Exit Scams
On December 9, 2020, Judge Robert R. Rigsby cleared the case to proceed, writing that Diamond had provided “sufficient facts to ultimately support a finding of wanton, malicious, and/or grossly fraudulent conduct by DC Capital” to justify punitive damages.1PR Newswire. Diamond Resorts Lawsuit Alleging Fraudulent Business Practices Against Newton Group and DC Capital Law Firm Will Proceed A separate Diamond case in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida named Newton Group alongside US Consumer Attorneys and produced a stipulated permanent injunction against USCA, though the specific terms were not publicly detailed.3Timeshare Law Library. Wyn v. US Consumer Attys
What Wyndham Alleged, and How It Ended
Wyndham Vacation Ownership filed suit on September 14, 2018, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. It named Newton Group and its affiliated entities (Newton Group Transfers, Newton Group ESA LLC, Newton Group Exit LLC), DC Capital Law Firm, US Consumer Attorneys, Henry Portner, Robert Sussman, and several marketing companies. Wyndham alleged violations of the federal Lanham Act and the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, along with intentional interference with contractual relations and civil conspiracy. The core accusation: the defendants sold “illusory” cancellation services, took fees, and told consumers to default rather than use Wyndham’s existing voluntary surrender programs.3Timeshare Law Library. Wyn v. US Consumer Attys
On August 23, 2019, Wyndham voluntarily dismissed its claims against Newton Group, the three Newton affiliates, and DC Capital Law Firm without prejudice, meaning those claims could theoretically be refiled. The case continued against the remaining defendants. A June 2021 update listed the overall status as “purported settlement,” with USCA reported as “effectively out of business” and defaults entered against marketing defendants 1PlanetMedia and Pluto Marketing.3Timeshare Law Library. Wyn v. US Consumer Attys
The DC Capital Law Firm Connection
Both lawsuits center on the same structural question: how Newton Group’s “exit” service works together with a law firm the company helped launch. According to Newton Group, partners at Newton Group co-founded DC Capital Law in 2017 to give timeshare owners individual legal representation, and the two entities operate under a “dual service approach” where a single flat fee covers both.4Newton Group Transfers. Our Law Firm
Wyndham alleged that the attorney arrangement was used to shield the underlying business practice of inducing clients to breach their timeshare contracts, rather than to provide genuine individualized legal work or pursue equitable rescission.3Timeshare Law Library. Wyn v. US Consumer Attys Diamond made a similar claim, alleging DC Capital’s role was mainly to redirect resort communications away from consumers so they wouldn’t learn their accounts were falling into default.
What Happened to the Co-Defendants
US Consumer Attorneys, sued alongside Newton Group in both cases, went out of business. Its principal Henry Portner faced serious discipline. The Supreme Court of Florida granted Portner’s petition for permanent disciplinary revocation on December 21, 2023, based on client complaints and his failure to comply with the terms of several injunctions. South Carolina disbarred him on March 19, 2025,5FindLaw. In the Matter of Portner and Pennsylvania followed on September 25, 2025, effective October 25, 2025.6PA Disciplinary Board. Attorney Henry N. Portner Disbarred Wyndham also alleged in a proposed amended complaint that USCA’s operators had shifted their business to successor entities called “Timeshare Attorneys of America” and “Attorney Advocates of America.”3Timeshare Law Library. Wyn v. US Consumer Attys Newton Group itself was not the subject of any of these disciplinary actions.
Consumer Complaints and the Timely Acquisitions Bankruptcy
Alongside the resort-company lawsuits, Newton Group has drawn a steady stream of consumer complaints. As of mid-2026, the Better Business Bureau lists 31 complaints over the preceding three years, with 12 closed in the most recent 12 months. The company keeps an A+ BBB rating and has been accredited since 2011.7Better Business Bureau. Newton Group Complaints
The recurring grievances: long delays, poor communication after upfront payments (reported at $3,500 to $13,000), and disappointment when the “exit” turned out to involve defaulting on maintenance fees or mortgage obligations. Several complainants alleged that Newton Group deliberately delayed follow-up calls until after the three-day contractual rescission period had expired, preventing cancellation.7Better Business Bureau. Newton Group Complaints
A more recent problem involves Timely Acquisitions, a third-party entity to which Newton Group allegedly referred client cases for deed transfers. Consumer reviews from 2025 and 2026 report that Timely Acquisitions filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in 2025 without completing promised services, leaving customers with no resolution, no refund, and continuing responsibility for their timeshare obligations and maintenance fees.8ConsumerAffairs. Newton Group Transfers Some complainants said they believed Newton Group knew about the bankruptcy but failed to notify them or offer an alternative.7Better Business Bureau. Newton Group Complaints
Newton Group’s Response
Newton Group denied the Wyndham allegations in its court filings and countered that Wyndham was aware of the company’s services and had previously “voluntarily and willingly worked with Newton Defendants on consumer timeshare exits or transfers.” The company also filed a cross-claim against USCA for indemnification and breach of contract.3Timeshare Law Library. Wyn v. US Consumer Attys Newton Group maintains that each client has an independent legal engagement with DC Capital and that the firm’s attorneys owe a fiduciary duty to the client.4Newton Group Transfers. Our Law Firm The company markets a “100% money-back guarantee” and a pledge to beat competitors’ quotes by 20 percent, though the resort-company complaints and consumer reviews cited above question whether those promises are honored in practice.9Newton Group Transfers. Timeshare Exit