Marriott Aruba Ocean Club Owners Being Ripped Off By Marriott - READ IF AN OWNER

SueDonJ said:

But what if the only direct quote ever issued is in the form of press release such as, "Today Marriott Vacation Club International announced plans to sever its developer relationship with the Aruba Ocean Club resort ...?"

The warnings may be moot, but they're certainly worth at least considering.

Click to expand...

With all due respect,I doubt Marriott would do such a thing without prior notifications to all the owners.
At that time,if it does happen that Marriott is considering a breakaway,the majority of owners would probably (me being speculative) stop the movement because I believe that we all bought in because of the Marriott name.

nothing changed

ecwinch said:

I was referring to the statements made by the proponent of this crusade, that he had no desire to see MVCI no longer manage AOC.

Most of the other concerned owners are just extras in a multi-act play. Mark and Allan have all the lines in the script.

Click to expand...

Still insulting people

modoaruba said:

With all due respect,I doubt Marriott would do such a thing without prior notifications to all the owners.
At that time,if it does happen that Marriott is considering a breakaway,the majority of owners would probably (me being speculative) stop the movement because I believe that we all bought in because of the Marriott name.

Click to expand...

I agree that the majority AOC owners would opt to continue with MVCI as the management company. And you could very well be correct about how a separation would be announced, because I have no idea how it would happen if Marriott no longer considers its management agreement with AOC to be beneficial. I guess I'm more leery of pushing MVCI to a point of no return than this "concerned owners" group appears to be.

Earlier in this thread somebody brought up the dissolution between MVCI and certain other resorts - maybe that history is worth looking at.

ecwinch said:

David,

These points were raised early in this discussion. To summarize the responses that were given then:

1) The strategic location of the AOC between the Surf Club and the hotel complex would make it problematic for MVCI to drop AOC

2) Even the "concerned" owners have no desire to leave Marriott

And while I am not a lawyer, I doubt that owners could be successfully sued based on the causative effect of exercising their legal rights.

Click to expand...

While I doubt Marriott and this resort will part, don't believe for a second that Marriott wouldn't walk away if the need arose. Marriott has walked away from other deals including several that some said would never happen. They came very close for Beach Place fairly recently and divided up Vail when some said they couldn't legally do so. I doubt that there are many owners that want to cont to own but leave Marriott but there may be a few. It would seem to be a great time to buy there fairly cheaply. Eric, I would somewhat disagree with you on the civil action options. IMO, any BOD member directly responsible for this action would be at risk and likely not covered by Directors Insurance. Any principle person bringing a complaint would be at risk as well. IMO, the risk comes more from a counter suit by Marriott and/or the resort itself and BOD than from other owners but both are possible. There are 2 $$$ risks to the resort. One is the direct costs of defending this issue plus what they could lose in court and the other is if Marriott walks away from what they agreed to pay already. Certainly from Marriott's standpoint, I'd take the compromise off the table for now and go back to having only the owners fund this until I saw what was going to happen in the legal arena. IMO, the likely outcome is somewhat predictable. Marriott will likely up their ante to about 60-70% but not cover any legal fees for the other side. The resort and owners will still have a net loss and the complainants will still be out more than they take in (my prediction which I also made way back).

Dean said:

Eric, I would somewhat disagree with you on the civil action options. IMO, any BOD member directly responsible for this action would be at risk and likely not covered by Directors Insurance. Any principle person bringing a complaint would be at risk as well. IMO, the risk comes more from a counter suit by Marriott and/or the resort itself and BOD than from other owners but both are possible.

Click to expand...

The comment was made in regard to MarkSue's potential liability to other owners if MVCI dropped AOC due to his efforts to obtain the mailing list and unseat the BoD i.e. the "trouble" he is causing.

Sorry I do not think that Mark is at risk in that regard. What would be the specific legal basis or precedent for that action?

I would agree if you want to extend your speculation to Allan, in particular his actions while a seated member of the BoD.

lovearuba said:

Still insulting people

Click to expand...

I recognize that the truth might be insulting to some.

But in the absence of more detailed information, I stand by my comment. This whole crusade has been driven by the dedication of one individual with the coaching of another. On balance I think my statement is a fair characterization of the situation.

modoaruba said:

With all due respect,I doubt Marriott would do such a thing without prior notifications to all the owners.
At that time,if it does happen that Marriott is considering a breakaway,the majority of owners would probably (me being speculative) stop the movement because I believe that we all bought in because of the Marriott name.

Click to expand...

Marriott has dropped resorts in the past. My resort - HarbourPoint at HHI came very close to that point. It becomes as simple as MVCI not renewing the mgt contract, or the BoD not agreeing to a new contract. If the new contract had not been agreed to by the HP BoD, there would have been little recourse that owners would have had at that point. There is no lifetime commitment by MVCI that they will manage any of the resorts in the system.

By and large I think we are past that point with AOC, but I doubt that MVCI would want to continue to manage a resort where an anti-MVCI BoD is operating.

And I think there was a real danger at one point in time of that happening.

ecwinch said:

Sorry I do not think that Mark is at risk in that regard. What would be the specific legal basis or precedent for that action?

Click to expand...

I do think active participants have some risk but as I said, more from Marriott than the other members though both to a degree. Unfortunately I don't know Dutch law well enough to evaluate the risk from that regard.

ecwinch said:

Marriott has dropped resorts in the past. My resort - HarbourPoint at HHI came very close to that point.

Click to expand...

To be honest, I think HP and possibly SP days are number as is the remainder of Vail. I'd guess HP will make it through one more full contract cycle, maybe 7-8 years or so roughly. I sold my week there accordingly. Marriott has dropped 9 resorts to date total if you count the separate components of Vail individually and the Sea Pines (Saturday Villas) as one.

ecwinch said:

Marriott has dropped resorts in the past. My resort - HarbourPoint at HHI came very close to that point. It becomes as simple as MVCI not renewing the mgt contract, or the BoD not agreeing to a new contract. If the new contract had not been agreed to by the HP BoD, there would have been little recourse that owners would have had at that point. There is no lifetime commitment by MVCI that they will manage any of the resorts in the system.

By and large I think we are past that point with AOC, but I doubt that MVCI would want to continue to manage a resort where an anti-MVCI BoD is operating.

And I think there was a real danger at one point in time of that happening.

Click to expand...

I was not aware of this history.
Thanks for that info.
When I was at the AOC three weeks ago not one person ever mentioned any dissatisfaction with Marriott. It was business as usual.
Do you know off hand if the majority of owners wanted Marriott out of the resorts they were managing?

'

modoaruba said:

I was not aware of this history.
Thanks for that info.
When I was at the AOC three weeks ago not one person ever mentioned any dissatisfaction with Marriott. It was business as usual.
Do you know off hand if the majority of owners wanted Marriott out of the resorts they were managing?

'

Click to expand...

Someone else can chime in here, but I think the Vail resorts were the only ones I am aware of where the BoD decided not to continue their MVCI affiliation. And maybe Longboat Key in FL.

I also do not recall where MVCI has ever dropped a resort that they built from the ground up.

The drops to date have been older resorts that MVCI acquired early in their timeshare business - Longboat Key in FL, Night Heron/Swallowtail/SpiceBush in HHI, Paradise Island Beach Club in the Bahamas and two (?3) Streamside buildings at Vail resorts.

ecwinch said:

I recognize that the truth might be insulting to some.

But in the absence of more detailed information, I stand by my comment...

Click to expand...

Sorry Eric but are you saying that based on a lack of detailed information you able were to find the truth?

Isn't the truth based on all the facts rather then perception?

qlaval said:

Sorry Eric but are you saying that based on a lack of detailed information you able to find the truth?

Isn't the truth based on all the facts rather then perception?

Click to expand...

I have no lack of detailed information.... but nice attempt to try to turn my words around. Very similar to what the crusade has done with every communication from the AOC Board. Mark has taught you well.

Are you representing that Mark and Allan are not the main proponents of this crusade?

Who else has done significantly more then post here, get some signatures, talk to their friends, and send angry letters? And I mean real active steps, not passive activity.

Please step forward....

ecwinch said:

I have no lack of detailed information.... but nice attempt to try to turn my words around. Very similar to what the crusade has done with every communication from the AOC Board. Mark has taught you well.

Are you representing that Mark and Allan are not the main proponents of this crusade?....

Click to expand...

Lol...

No... it's just that I don't think that spectators can pretend to hold the truth...

qlaval said:

Lol...

No... it's just that I don't think that spectators can pretend to hold the truth...

Click to expand...

As usual, the crusaders use rhetoric rather fact to respond.

Your right. Mark is not the leader of this crusade. I have my facts wrong.

lol...

ecwinch said:

As usual, the crusaders use rhetoric rather fact to respond....

Click to expand...

I surrender... you've got me I'm the secret number 3... :hysterical:

ecwinch said:

Your right. Mark is not the leader of this crusade. I have my facts wrong.

lol...

Click to expand...

You do have your facts wrong. I am not the leader. You just made an assumption. I may have started this thread, but as the group grew there were others that had ideas and thoughts and we work together. We discuss ideas and agree on approach to take.

Letter sent to all Concerned Owners

Dear Owner - I have been contacted by numerous Owners today regarding a letter sent out from Marriott and the Board of the AOC regarding a request from an Owner seeking Owner contact information. Do not be fooled by this scare tactic from Marriott.

This request has been made by me on behalf of the concerned Owners group after the Board and Marriott have refused to share information to all Owners about our concerns and the condition of our Building. Our attorney has made it very clear that the only purpose for the information is to contact all Owners regarding serious issues pertaining to the AOC.. It will not be used by "telemarketers" as suggested by the Board. As a matter of fact it seems that the only telemarketer currently who has complete use of our list is that of Marriott who continue to solicit Owners for new purchases etc.

We now have over 1000 Owners supporting our efforts whose names were gathered one by one on the Beach and once we have the ability to contact all Owners (which Marriott and the Board are afraid of) I am confident we will be able to call for a special meeting of Owners to address our concerns.

We are spending over 14 million dollars currently and we hope to have a beautiful resort in the next two years, but after you have the ability to review our own consultants reports, (which the Board has refused to share with Owners and which we have spent over $70,000 for) you might be concerned as to why our building's conditions were never disclosed to us and why we continue to pay to make our building a 1st class resort?. That is what we purchased.

Just ask yourselves why is the Board and Marriott so afraid of what we want to share with all Owners? The Board is using Owner funds to try to stop our legal team who will be seeking a fair and reasonable response from our developer,Marriott for the repair costs incurred by Owners.

I hope that you will allow for your contact information be used to keep all Owners informed. We will soon have our own web site for concerned Owners ready very soon.

If you have any questions, please call me or email me at c20854@aol.com.

Thank You, Allan Cohen
Past President - AOC

ecwinch said:

David,

I agree with you, as I did when I made similar comments early in this thread. I was just trying to provide a recap of the previous discussion as no one else seemed to be answering your post.

And you can be sued for anything in the US. Successfully sued is another thing entirely.

Just because my actions caused you financial hardship is, not solely onto itself, grounds for suit.

Otherwise I would be able to sue any person who exercised their legal rights to the extent that it caused financial hardship to me. So if someone slips and falls at the resort pool, and then sues and causes my m/f to go up, can I sue them then?

Click to expand...

Eric,

Your example likely wouldn’t be successful in court but, it might be if the person was found to be perpetrating insurance fraud; but even then, the insurance company would likely sue the individual.

However, someone’s actions which can be reasonably foreseen to cause someone else a hardship could prevail in court. As reported in this thread, Marriott has dissolved it’s management relationship with at least one other resort and therefore it can be reasonably foreseen that they could decide to do it again. It has also been theorized in this thread that if Marriott did leave the Ocean Club the values of the timeshares would likely be reduced…a reasonable assumption. I’m not claiming it would prevail in court, but it might.

We could debate a million “what ifs” but, it would be a waste of time. My only intent in my original post was to ask for careful consideration of unintended consequences.

Regards, David

marksue said:

Dear Owner - I have been contacted by numerous Owners today regarding a letter sent out from Marriott and the Board of the AOC regarding a request from an Owner seeking Owner contact information. Do not be fooled by this scare tactic from Marriott.

This request has been made by me on behalf of the concerned Owners group after the Board and Marriott have refused to share information to all Owners about our concerns and the condition of our Building. Our attorney has made it very clear that the only purpose for the information is to contact all Owners regarding serious issues pertaining to the AOC.. It will not be used by "telemarketers" as suggested by the Board. As a matter of fact it seems that the only telemarketer currently who has complete use of our list is that of Marriott who continue to solicit Owners for new purchases etc.

We now have over 1000 Owners supporting our efforts whose names were gathered one by one on the Beach and once we have the ability to contact all Owners (which Marriott and the Board are afraid of) I am confident we will be able to call for a special meeting of Owners to address our concerns.

We are spending over 14 million dollars currently and we hope to have a beautiful resort in the next two years, but after you have the ability to review our own consultants reports, (which the Board has refused to share with Owners and which we have spent over $70,000 for) you might be concerned as to why our building's conditions were never disclosed to us and why we continue to pay to make our building a 1st class resort?. That is what we purchased.

Just ask yourselves why is the Board and Marriott so afraid of what we want to share with all Owners? The Board is using Owner funds to try to stop our legal team who will be seeking a fair and reasonable response from our developer,Marriott for the repair costs incurred by Owners.

I hope that you will allow for your contact information be used to keep all Owners informed. We will soon have our own web site for concerned Owners ready very soon.

If you have any questions, please call me or email me at c20854@aol.com.

Thank You, Allan Cohen
Past President - AOC

Click to expand...

And herein is the reason why Allan may be personally at risk legally. As I understand it, the $70,000 report was commissioned by the BOD over which Allan presided. That board initially considered a lawsuit against Marriott because of structural concerns with the property, but that consideration was eventually resolved outside of a court action between Marriott and the BOD. Now that Allan is no longer a member of the BOD that accepted by majority rule that resolution, however, he is revisiting the issue and releasing what may be confidential BOD business, [edit] information that is most certainly in his hands as a result of the privileges he enjoyed as a member of that BOD.

In a previous post Marksue stated, "Nothing wrong with an insider sharing what he knew that impacted the owners and making suggestions on how to approach the issues." It's not exactly the same situation, but I'm sure Martha Stewart could provide some instruction about what doesn't constitute proper legal "insider" actions.

And finally, this message above from Allan Cohen by way of Marksue once again seems to prove that an attorney has not been retained to completely handle these issues for the "concerned owners." Rather, an attorney (probably an AOC owner?) is allowing his/her name to be used for letter-writing purposes, but the related actions still remain in less-than-legally-competent hands. I will never understand that omission, which is directly responsible for the possible risk assumed by Allan and possibly others.

SueDonJ said:

And finally, this message above from Allan Cohen by way of Marksue once again seems to prove that an attorney has not been retained to completely handle these issues for the "concerned owners." Rather, an attorney (probably an AOC owner?) is allowing his/her name to be used for letter-writing purposes, but the related actions still remain in less-than-legally-competent hands. I will never understand that omission, which is directly responsible for the possible risk assumed by Allan and possibly others.

Click to expand...

And herein is the reason I try(not always successfully I must admit) to avoid this thread. We have those who are spectators passing on info that is simply incorrect. There are Aruban attorneys involved for both sides. Simply because the information regarding the attorney isnt being passed on to the cheering squad doesnt mean it isnt happening! As I said before neither Mark, Allan or anyone else is under no obligation to provide non owners with answers to questions .

modoaruba said:

I was not aware of this history.
Thanks for that info.
When I was at the AOC three weeks ago not one person ever mentioned any dissatisfaction with Marriott. It was business as usual.
Do you know off hand if the majority of owners wanted Marriott out of the resorts they were managing?'

Click to expand...

Modo, these old threads about Marriott dissolutions come up with a TUG search of "Spicebush Swallowtail":

How many TS properties has Marriott walked away from?
Streamside: Has The Aspen Board Gone Crazy?
Did Anyone See This?

And about your vacation, I'm glad you had the great time that you were hoping for. But did you not have the same experience as Luckybee posted about friends recently, "... that this is a constant discussion round the pool , beach, and yes towel hut ...?"

SueDonJ said:

Modo, these old threads about Marriott dissolutions come up with a TUG search of "Spicebush Swallowtail":

How many TS properties has Marriott walked away from?
Streamside: Has The Aspen Board Gone Crazy?
Did Anyone See This?

And about your vacation, I'm glad you had the great time that you were hoping for. But did you not have the same experience as Luckybee posted about friends recently, "... that this is a constant discussion round the pool , beach, and yes towel hut ...?"

Click to expand...

As I have said before, not one person on the beach,pool,or at any part of the resort ever approached the subject nor did I overhear anybody discuss the subject.
Good time had by all was more appropriate.

Luckybee said:

And herein is the reason I try(not always successfully I must admit) to avoid this thread. We have those who are spectators passing on info that is simply incorrect. There are Aruban attorneys involved for both sides. Simply because the information regarding the attorney isnt being passed on to the cheering squad doesnt mean it isnt happening! As I said before neither Mark, Allan or anyone else is under no obligation to provide non owners with answers to questions .

Click to expand...

I'm not "passing on" any information, correct or incorrect. Or did you conveniently miss the "seems to prove" that I deliberately placed in order to let the reader know that I'm guessing at something? Of course the guessing is only necessary because once again a post full of innuendo and missing key facts has been placed here, but that's only okay for certain folks and not others.

You and I have discussed already what types of postings here would probably be acceptable to a competent attorney - the types offered by Marksue and Allan do not qualify. By way of deductive reasoning, then, only one of two conclusions can be reached - either a qualified attorney has not been retained, thus Marksue and Allan suffer no posting contraints; or an incompetent attorney has been retained. Neither scenario is ideal.

SueDonJ said:

I'm not "passing on" any information, correct or incorrect. Or did you conveniently miss the "seems to prove" that I deliberately placed in order to let the reader know that I'm guessing at something? Of course the guessing is only necessary because once again a post full of innuendo and missing key facts has been placed here, but that's only okay for certain folks and not others.

You and I have discussed already what types of postings here would probably be acceptable to a competent attorney - the types offered by Marksue and Allan do not qualify. By way of deductive reasoning, then, only one of two conclusions can be reached - either a qualified attorney has not been retained, thus Marksue and Allan suffer no posting contraints; or an incompetent attorney has been retained. Neither scenario is ideal.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you think you are competent to judge the credentials of people you dont know.

lovearuba said:

Sounds like you think you are competent to judge the credentials of people you dont know.

Click to expand...

Oh honestly. Anybody who's had any reason for contact with attorneys is able to judge whether or not they appear to be competent in their field. I've had a fair amount of contact, including employment for ten years, and can say with some certainty what a competent attorney would advise right out of the gate to a client who is considering a lawsuit - first rule, do nothing which could potentially harm or jeopardize your case. We're all certainly capable of realizing that posting innuendo, half-truths, misconceptions and unsubstantiated rumors about your adversary to an internet message board probably falls under that umbrella.

Aside from that, I wasn't alone in the previous discussion about the probable tactics of civil suit attorneys. Did you, or do you plan to, make the same comment above to the others involved?