# Do time share owners receive financial statements from their resorts?



## hatrick (Apr 9, 2015)

How does one gauge the financial health of the time share resort they are buying into or already own? Have any time share resorts gone bankrupt in the last few years? What protection, if any, do the owners have? I must assume these resorts are feeling the strain of the depressed market with owners walking away from their units. Is the lost revenue being passed onto the existing owners that are paying their MF's? I haven't heard of any resorts folding and truthfully you got to wonder why.


----------



## tschwa2 (Apr 9, 2015)

You get an annual MF's statement that generally breaks down how much you are paying toward noncollectable (non paying) accounts.  I would be worried about anything over 10%.  Ideally you are looking at 5% or less and/or the majority of that amount covered by the revenue of renting the units belonging to non paying accounts.  That isn't always possible.  Special assessments not due to an unforeseeable event like water damage or storm damage above the usual insurance limit.  

Another very bad sign is if prime time owner rentals are at or below MF's.  If the units aren't worth at least the MF's during prime time then imagine the disparity during the low seasons.


----------



## ronparise (Apr 10, 2015)

I own at a resort where the bad debt is something like 17% of the budget, but mf is still reasonable. This place "rents" to owners that do pay their fees and the end result is "other income" that pretty much matches the bad debt.  

We are fortunate that there is year round demand here so the place stays full almost 100% of the time. , but good management and good policies are important too.  My point is that you have to look deeper than just the bad debt line on the annual statement


----------



## theo (Apr 10, 2015)

*Seek and ye shall find...*



hatrick said:


> How does one gauge the financial health of the time share resort they are buying into or already own? Have any time share resorts gone bankrupt in the last few years? What protection, if any, do the owners have? I must assume these resorts are feeling the strain of the depressed market with owners walking away from their units. Is the lost revenue being passed onto the existing owners that are paying their MF's? I haven't heard of any resorts folding and truthfully you got to wonder why.



tschwa2 has provided some worthwhile and astute observations above and review of annual reports (generally sent along with maintenence fee bills or separately with other resort notices or newsletters) provide good insights into overall financial health, reserves on hand, bad debt, etc. 

Timeshare facilities can and do "fold" on occasion. Do a TUG search and you will easily find a thread (started a few weeks ago by site owner TUGBrian) which enumerates specific facilities which have closed. The only one with which I had any direct personal knowledge (...not as an owner there) was Sutherland Crossing in Crystal Beach, Florida, which "hung it up" just a few years ago and which property is going to be redeveloped as single family homes.


----------



## cubigbird (Apr 11, 2015)

tschwa2 said:


> You get an annual MF's statement that generally breaks down how much you are paying toward noncollectable (non paying) accounts.  I would be worried about anything over 10%.  Ideally you are looking at 5% or less and/or the majority of that amount covered by the revenue of renting the units belonging to non paying accounts.  That isn't always possible.  Special assessments not due to an unforeseeable event like water damage or storm damage above the usual insurance limit.
> 
> Another very bad sign is if prime time owner rentals are at or below MF's.  If the units aren't worth at least the MF's during prime time then imagine the disparity during the low seasons.



My WKV and WLR resorts bad debt is listed as less than 2% so I find that healthy.  I haven't seen SVR yet as I just bought that this year off the resale market.  I guess I'll see...... Overall I find Starwood properties pretty well managed as far as MF and bad debt are concerned.


----------



## Cheryl20772 (Apr 11, 2015)

Another thing to look at is special assessment history. We owned a week that had a SA after a hurricane for the insurance deductible and again years later to help make up for defaulted maintenance fees and I'd call that bad management. We owned another interval that had SA for modernization and mold remediation. That was likely bad management too.


----------



## Jason245 (Apr 13, 2015)

hatrick said:


> How does one gauge the financial health of the time share resort they are buying into or already own? Have any time share resorts gone bankrupt in the last few years? What protection, if any, do the owners have? I must assume these resorts are feeling the strain of the depressed market with owners walking away from their units. Is the lost revenue being passed onto the existing owners that are paying their MF's? I haven't heard of any resorts folding and truthfully you got to wonder why.



As an owner you should be receiving annual audited financial statements. 

Things to look at regarding financial health:

Cash flow (is more comming in then going out?)
Reserves (are they adequatly funded?)
Bad Debt (how many owners arn't paying MF)

Also compare it to prior year reports  and results to see if it is a trend. 

Other less quantitative things to look at when on site:

Are the rooms well maintained?
Do things look dated and in need of renovation (and if so is that budgeted)?
Are Common area items in good and working condition?
Is landscaping good?
How busy is the resort when you are there?
If there is a problem in the unit, how long after you report problem before it gets fixed?


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Apr 15, 2015)

cubigbird said:


> My WKV and WLR resorts bad debt is listed as less than 2% so I find that healthy.  I haven't seen SVR yet as I just bought that this year off the resale market.  I guess I'll see...... Overall I find Starwood properties pretty well managed as far as MF and bad debt are concerned.



That number is unbelievable low. I wonder if they are netting their real bad debt number with rental proceeds from the bad debt units.


----------



## theo (Apr 15, 2015)

Saintsfanfl said:


> That number is unbelievably low. I wonder if they are netting their real bad debt number with rental proceeds from the bad debt units.



Agreed. 5% borders on miraculous --- less than half of 5% is almost beyond comprehension IMO, absent other income factors *very* hard at work (...like rentals).


----------



## Jason245 (Apr 15, 2015)

Saintsfanfl said:


> That number is unbelievable low. I wonder if they are netting their real bad debt number with rental proceeds from the bad debt units.




Accounting rules prohibit that. If Financials are audited that is not occurring. That being said ..depending on when mf are billed vs year end it is possible that AR could be very large while the allowance is very low or vice versa. You really need to look at more than just that ratio as the balance sheet is as of a point of time, while the income statement and statement of cash flow and the notes tells the story.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Apr 15, 2015)

Jason245 said:


> Accounting rules prohibit that. If Financials are audited that is not occurring. That being said ..depending on when mf are billed vs year end it is possible that AR could be very large while the allowance is very low or vice versa. You really need to look at more than just that ratio as the balance sheet is as of a point of time, while the income statement and statement of cash flow and the notes tells the story.



I am not referring to the ratio of allowance vs AR balance but if I was then 2% is an impossibility. The ARDA reviewed average is something like 80%. Since maintenance fees are billed and due in advance it creates a very low AR balance at most times of the year. The allowance contains not just the current year's reserve but also any past years that are not yet written off . At most times of the year the *entire* AR balance is past due and therefore partially to near fully doubtful.

I am referring to the actual bad debt expense vs the assessed maintenance fees for the most recent completed year. That is the better % to use when analyzing how much that has been billed goes unpaid.

It's possible that the resort only budgeted 2% but the actual tells a different story. Or the poster is misreading the financials. No way is it really a 2% actual. I realize accounting rules prohibit classifying rental revenue as an offset to bad debt expense instead of revenues but it would still be a plausible explanation. How hard do auditors really work if they are fed the wrong data? They have that disclaimer for a reason. 

Your comment about it not occurring if audited just because it is against accounting rules is humorous. Every big accounting scandal involving a public company involved heavily audited financials by very large and reputable firms.

I don't think there is motive to deceive here but something or other is up with the supposedly reported 2%.


----------



## Jason245 (Apr 15, 2015)

Saintsfanfl said:


> I am not referring to the ratio of allowance vs AR balance but if I was then 2% is an impossibility. The ARDA reviewed average is something like 80%. Since maintenance fees are billed and due in advance it creates a very low AR balance at most times of the year. The allowance contains not just the current year's reserve but also any past years that are not yet written off . At most times of the year the *entire* AR balance is past due and therefore partially to near fully doubtful.
> 
> I am referring to the actual bad debt expense vs the assessed maintenance fees for the most recent completed year. That is the better % to use when analyzing how much that has been billed goes unpaid.
> 
> ...



Having over 10 years of audit, accounting and consulting experience, I can tell you that the audit procedures related to Accounts receivable and the determination of the review of the allowance is actually pretty extensive and is actually reliant on a few very simple procedures which (given the big lag between the year end and when HOA statements are issued) are independent of reliance on data from the HOA. 

Those two procedures are:

1. Confirmations sent directly to customers/home owners requesting that they verify that they owe the money to the HOA (probably not done by these auditors). 

2. A comparison of subsequent cash receipts from owners (remember, these financials are only distributed some time on or after March meaning that the HOA has had over 3 months to attempt collection from december balances) to their outstanding balance as of year end.  (this is probably the procedure they are performing).  

As for the reasonableness of 3%, depending on the resort and how aggressive they are at collection efforts, that may be an appropriate number (I know that the 2013 collections at Bay Club were at 97% as of 12/31/2013 (billed in January 2013, so the resort had over 12 months to collect), As of April 2014, the resort had begun proceedings to forclose on the unit that didn't pay (the owner owned 52 intervals). Whatever they get/got from sales proceeds and/or rentals of the unit would be used to offset the outstanding fees as per forclosure rules. Any 2014 dues would not have been A/R as of 12/31/2014 as the funds would only be due on 1/1/2014. 

So I would say, 2% might be very reasonable and possible depending on the resort.

As for your statement about audit failures, garbage in from management garbage out. Even Anderson had their indictment reversed by the supreme court. In all of those cases, management committed fraud. If you own in a building where you believe that management is commitment fraud, you should complain to the HOA (who hires them) and/or sell/give away  as fast as possible.

I do not believe that an HOA can willy nilly rent a deadbeats unit without forclosure action or a court order (but I could be wrong).


----------



## Jason245 (Apr 15, 2015)

theo said:


> Agreed. 5% borders on miraculous --- less than half of 5% is almost beyond comprehension IMO, absent other income factors *very* hard at work (...like rentals).



So, an HOA and management has over 12 months to collect/foreclose on a unit that doesn't pay and it is an act of god that they do their job and foreclose on deadbeats?

All that being said, if they have forclosed on the unit and gained the right to rent the interval out, they can use those proceeds against MF (but generally the excess would go to the owner).


----------



## theo (Apr 16, 2015)

*Statutory Authority vs. Willy Nilly;  TUG docket number ABC123-4/16...*



Jason245 said:


> <snip>
> 
> I do not believe that an HOA can willy nilly rent a deadbeats unit without forclosure action or a court order...



Your stated belief is factually incorrect. 

Being unfamiliar with the definition and / or details of "willy nilly", indulge me for a moment and allow me to instead quote verbatim (in pertinent part only) from the *Assessment and Biiling Policy and Annual Billing plan (as required and authorized by the state of Florida)* from one of my favorite FL timeshare facilities. The full page document very specifically identifies precise annual dates for lawful, sequential courses of action (each one is authorized and identified by individual statutory reference) regarding required lockout notice, exchange company cancellation authority, rental, later option for initiatiion of default action, foreclosure, etc. The following pertains to *your* particular item of incorrect speculation, which applies *after exactly 60 days of delinquency* btw --- no "willy nilly". ): 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*THIS WILL ALSO BE YOUR FIRST NOTICE OF OUR INTENT TO ATTEMPT TO RENT YOUR WEEK PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 721.13(6)(F)1. 
Proceeds of any rental will be applied to your account, net of any rental commissions, cleaning charges or any other commercially reasonable charges and usually incurred by the management entity*.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fwiw, this exact same underlying document, timetable, dates and language is also utilized and actively practiced at other FL facilities at which we own weeks, each citing the same specific 721.13(6)(X)(Y)# statutory authority for each individually authorized sequential course of action. I certainly can't speak to what every single FL timeshare facility does, but the Florida law certainly seems to speak quite clearly as to what *can* be done and exactly *when* --- there ain't no "willy nilly" here.


----------



## artringwald (Apr 16, 2015)

From our resort's budget:

Maintenance Fee Revenue $14,189,013 
Bad Debt $419,943

which makes it under 3%. Better yet, the developer makes a contribution equal to the bad debt. They're not just being nice, they assume ownership of all the foreclosures.


----------



## theo (Apr 16, 2015)

artringwald said:


> From our resort's budget:
> 
> Maintenance Fee Revenue $14,189,013
> Bad Debt $419,943
> ...



If the facility still has developer presence, there is presumably unsold (i.e., developer-owned) inventory. If so, this would "skew" the figures and the percentages, since unsold developer inventory won't actually be included at all, *unlike* how owned (but delinquent) weeks would *all* be "counted" at a sold out independent facility.


----------



## tschwa2 (Apr 16, 2015)

artringwald said:


> From our resort's budget:
> 
> Maintenance Fee Revenue $14,189,013
> Bad Debt $419,943
> ...



It depends on who forecloses.  If the HOA does for non payment of MF, the HOA is the new owner of unit and the current owners are responsible for paying.  If the note holder forecloses, then it would go to them.  I am not sure which developers don't sell off their loans.  

The reason developer may cover bad debt is not to be nice and not because they are selling the units again, they have their own units to sell and they have a stake in keeping MF;s down while they are selling.  When a resort is close to selling out then the developer doesn't care what the MF's are.  Also relatively new resorts don't have as much bad debt because the unsold inventory doesn't count and most owners are new enough 10 years or less that they aren't ready to walk away from their "investment".  

At SBP (original phase) the bad debt is about twice as high as the Palmetto phase (newer) at SBP.  Most Palmetto owners are in SVN.  Probably less than half of SBP is in SVN.


----------



## Jason245 (Apr 16, 2015)

theo said:


> I am a big fan of fact over speculation and smack talkin', but am admittedly unfamiliar with the definition and details of "willy nilly". That being said, let me quote verbatim (in pertinent part only) from the *Assessment and Biiling Policy and Annual Billing plan (as required and authorized by the state of Florida)* from one of my favorite FL timeshare facilities. The full page document spells out specific annual dates for sequential courses of action (each one authorized by individual statutory reference) regarding required lockout notice, exchange company cancellation authority, initiatiion of default action, etc. Following is what specifically pertains to your particular item of speculation after 60 days (no mention of "willy nilly" anywhere however ) on delinquent maintenance fees:
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *THIS WILL ALSO BE YOUR FIRST NOTICE OF OUR INTENT TO ATTEMPT TO RENT YOUR WEEK PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 721.13(6)(F)1.
> ...



If the law allows it... the procedes from rentals would go against MF collections and that would be in accordance with accounting standards. I am assuming there are timeframes established wherby notification has to be made and some time period allowed for payment before rental occurs. 

But the resort first has to send that notification before renting....


----------



## SMHarman (Apr 16, 2015)

tschwa2 said:


> It depends on who forecloses.  If the HOA does for non payment of MF, the HOA is the new owner of unit and the current owners are responsible for paying.  If the note holder forecloses, then it would go to them.  I am not sure which developers don't sell off their loans.
> 
> The reason developer may cover bad debt is not to be nice and not because they are selling the units again, they have their own units to sell and they have a stake in keeping MF;s down while they are selling.  When a resort is close to selling out then the developer doesn't care what the MF's are.  Also relatively new resorts don't have as much bad debt because the unsold inventory doesn't count and most owners are new enough 10 years or less that they aren't ready to walk away from their "investment".
> 
> At SBP (original phase) the bad debt is about twice as high as the Palmetto phase (newer) at SBP.  Most Palmetto owners are in SVN.  Probably less than half of SBP is in SVN.



Does not really matter if the developer sells off the Mortgage debt. 

That sale usually has a seasoning provision. If the debt goes bad early. Say in the first 4 years then it goes back to the developer. Along with the rights to the underlying asset.


----------



## tschwa2 (Apr 16, 2015)

It doesn't matter but I don't see a third party wanting to foreclose and take a unit as it has not value- no asset.  Depending in the amount of unsold inventory even the developer wouldn't want to foreclose and take it back.  The only one that might have an interest in foreclosing would be the HOA and if that is the case the bad debt goes right to the other owners.

That is why the FL law is especially nice because they don't have to foreclose.


----------



## artringwald (Apr 16, 2015)

theo said:


> If the facility still has developer presence, there is presumably unsold (developer-owned) inventory, no?  If so, would this not "skew" the figures and the percentages, since unsold inventory won't actually be included at all, unlike how a sold / owned but delinquent week would be "counted" at a sold out independent facility?



The developer only owns 2%, so it shouldn't skew it much. What probably does skew it is that 35% are owned by DRI's Hawaii Collection Trust. The trust has it's own budget and might have a much higher rate of bad debt, but it still has to make payments to the HOA. For several years all the developer sales have been points in the trust, and those buyers are the most likely to be unhappy with DRI.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Apr 16, 2015)

artringwald said:


> The developer only owns 2%, so it shouldn't skew it much. What probably does skew it is that 35% are owned by DRI's Hawaii Collection Trust. The trust has it's own budget and might have a much higher rate of bad debt, but it still has to make payments to the HOA. For several years all the developer sales have been points in the trust, and those buyers are the most likely to be unhappy with DRI.



If the developer is still subsidizing they have every motive to under budget bad debt. The actual down the road might be another matter.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Apr 16, 2015)

Jason245 said:


> If the law allows it... the procedes from rentals would go against MF collections and that would be in accordance with accounting standards. I am assuming there are timeframes established wherby notification has to be made and some time period allowed for payment before rental occurs.
> 
> But the resort first has to send that notification before renting....



I'm not so sure the resort actually has to send a notification before renting. Most probably do, but it might depend on what is in the original documents. 

I believe Marriott (Management Company) holds the right to take all remaining inventory at 45 days out and do with it as they wish. The owner may end up with nothing.

At least some if not all VVR property owners are also in a similar boat. Even fixed week owners must notify the resort that they will be occupying the fixed week. If no notification is given at 30 days out then you lose your fixed week. Obviously the management company is then trying to rent it out with nothing given to the owner. The policy is insane, maybe not even legal, but it is what they are doing.


----------



## Jason245 (Apr 16, 2015)

Saintsfanfl said:


> I'm not so sure the resort actually has to send a notification before renting. Most probably do, but it might depend on what is in the original documents.
> 
> I believe Marriott (Management Company) holds the right to take all remaining inventory at 45 days out and do with it as they wish. The owner may end up with nothing.
> 
> At least some if not all VVR property owners are also in a similar boat. Even fixed week owners must notify the resort that they will be occupying the fixed week. If no notification is given at 30 days out then you lose your fixed week. Obviously the management company is then trying to rent it out with nothing given to the owner. The policy is insane, maybe not even legal, but it is what they are doing.



Rentals on units that have already had their MF Paid by the owner... JEZZUZ... I thought it was the right of an owner of a fixed week who paid MF to do what they wished with the unit for that week.


----------



## theo (Apr 16, 2015)

*Not speculation or "smack talk", just a little more "fact walk"...*

The "chains", "trusts", "collections" and other legal creations often have their own fuzzy math and / or internal procedures, about which I claim *no* knowledge. 
For *independent* facilities (in Florida, very specifically) with no such legal sub-entities, a representative and very real example process goes as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*November 15: First assessment notice gets mailed.

February 1: (or 60 days after first assessment notice, whichever is later);  account is delinquent if unpaid. Final assessment gets mailed, with; 
a). Reinstatement fee of $25.00
b). 18% per annum interest beginning February 1
c). Maintenance fee Block (DEPOSIT OR CONFIRMATION) cancellation fee of $15.00 per unit / week or 5% of the the total amount of the delinquency per unit / week, whichever is less.

THIS NOTICE SERVES AS THE LOCK OUT NOTICE AS STIPULATED IN FLORIDA STATUTE 721.13(6)(A) AND ALL DELINQUENT OWNERS WILL BE DENIED ACCESS OR USE. Your reservations are cancelled and you may not make or hold a reservation after this date.

THE EXCHANGE COMPANY WILL BE NOTIFIED OF CANCELLATION PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 721.13(6)(C). Exchange requests of any type will not be confirmed. Confirmed reservations are subject to cancellation. There is no guarantee that you will be able to receive a confirmed exchange after your account is brought current*.

*{Notice of intent to attempt to rent delinquent unit / week not repeated here; it was already quoted verbatim, with statutory reference, in post #14}.*

*After April 1*: another notice, more fees added if not paid within 15 days and if it needs to be sent for formal Legal Notice of default and demand for payment; attorney cost of which will of course be added on to the delinquent owner's account(s).

*After May 1*: BoD *options* (costs of which to be added on to the delinquent owner's account(s) include:
a). Engagement of professional collection agency to collect payment.
b). Foreclosure on the Claim of Assessment Lien.
c). File lawsuit against the delinquent unit / week. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Needless to say, this kind of detail and specificity subtly (...or not) "encourages" interval owners to take care of their contractual responsibilities in a timely manner.
It also paves an efficient road to foreclosure and HOA recovery of the week, if / when that *option* is thought to be best course of action for the delinquency at hand.

I can't speak to the consistency of the *timing* of initiating post-May 1 options cited above. The *timing* of exercising those assorted options surely varies widely from one facility / BoD to another, but the legal authority and the options themselves are firmly in place, clearly identified and with advance notice plainly expressed in writing. 

The entire billing and collection policy document is provided along with each and every maint. fee bill. An additional copy might also be enclosed with a newsletter.
Ain't no "willy nilly" here, no "failures to notify", no "wiggle room", no "excuses". Surely why such places consistently manage to keep their "bad dedt" way down.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Apr 17, 2015)

Jason245 said:


> Rentals on units that have already had their MF Paid by the owner... JEZZUZ... I thought it was the right of an owner of a fixed week who paid MF to do what they wished with the unit for that week.



Your assumption is probably how it should be but not the reality. I know for certain on VVR because I own fixed weeks at two of their properties. They have a hard foot in the sand that you must give them notice of occupation by owner or a renter no later than 30 days out. I think they had some backlash from it but they haven't backed down. Instead they sent mailers with big and bright lettering.


----------



## Jason245 (Apr 17, 2015)

Saintsfanfl said:


> Your assumption is probably how it should be but not the reality. I know for certain on VVR because I own fixed weeks at two of their properties. They have a hard foot in the sand that you must give them notice of occupation by owner or a renter no later than 30 days out. I think they had some backlash from it but they haven't backed down. Instead they sent mailers with big and bright lettering.



I would sell and run for the hills.


----------



## WinniWoman (Apr 17, 2015)

At least some if not all VVR property owners are also in a similar boat. Even fixed week owners must notify the resort that they will be occupying the fixed week. If no notification is given at 30 days out then you lose your fixed week. Obviously the management company is then trying to rent it out with nothing given to the owner. The policy is insane, maybe not even legal, but it is what they are doing. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the resort where I just acquired a week (I am a weeks owner), they require the owner to fill in a "status" form way beforehand to let them know what your intentions are for your week- using it, renting it, exchanging it, etc. I think this is ridiculous. If, as an owner, you have already paid your maintenance fee you should be able to leave it empty that week if you want to. It should be your week to do with what you want. At least I hear that they do also call you about a month out to ask again. I know it is courtesy to let the resort know what you are doing, but I should just be a courtesy in my opinion.

At the other resort I own at (weeks owner), we do "register" online and then just show up. But, if we have exchanged or rented, the resort knows of course, and we do nothing.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Apr 17, 2015)

Jason245 said:


> I would sell and run for the hills.



The rule is meaningless to me. They take exchange deposits 24 months out. I own alot of timeshares and I would never in a million years wait until less than 30 days out to decide what I am doing. Even if I was to owner occupy or rent out my fixed week, it's a quick phone call that can be made at any time. It's not a big deal.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Apr 17, 2015)

mpumilia said:


> At the resort where I just acquired a week (I am a weeks owner), they require the owner to fill in a "status" form way beforehand to let them know what your intentions are for your week- using it, renting it, exchanging it, etc. I think this is ridiculous. If, as an owner, you have already paid your maintenance fee you should be able to leave it empty that week if you want to. It should be your week to do with what you want. At least I hear that they do also call you about a month out to ask again. I know it is courtesy to let the resort know what you are doing, but I should just be a courtesy in my opinion.
> 
> At the other resort I own at (weeks owner), we do "register" online and then just show up. But, if we have exchanged or rented, the resort knows of course, and we do nothing.



I own at a place that sends out this same type of form in the mail and then also has it online. At least in my case it looks like a requirement but it isn't really. I have asked them and if they never get the form they don't do anything and I can still show up unannounced for my fixed week. I wonder if it's the same property? No resort can actually require this info definitively "way beforehand" because renting out happens later, and if you fail to rent it out you might deposit it.

If the place you just acquired really does require this info long before hand then I would do as Jason245 suggests and 



> I would sell and run for the hills.


----------



## hatrick (Apr 23, 2015)

*WOW*

That was certainly more information then I expected and thanks to all that offered their experience and expertise.  It clearly is a highly experienced, intelligent and informative group at TUG.  I'm still getting up to speed but think I'll be in the slow lane for some time compared to the individuals that offered their opinions.  Thanks again: wave:


----------



## WinniWoman (Apr 24, 2015)

mpumilia said:


> At least some if not all VVR property owners are also in a similar boat. Even fixed week owners must notify the resort that they will be occupying the fixed week. If no notification is given at 30 days out then you lose your fixed week. Obviously the management company is then trying to rent it out with nothing given to the owner. The policy is insane, maybe not even legal, but it is what they are doing.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> At the resort where I just acquired a week (I am a weeks owner), they require the owner to fill in a "status" form way beforehand to let them know what your intentions are for your week- using it, renting it, exchanging it, etc. I think this is ridiculous. If, as an owner, you have already paid your maintenance fee you should be able to leave it empty that week if you want to. It should be your week to do with what you want. At least I hear that they do also call you about a month out to ask again. I know it is courtesy to let the resort know what you are doing, but I should just be a courtesy in my opinion.
> ...



I meant to write VRI.


----------



## WinniWoman (Apr 24, 2015)

Saintsfanfl said:


> I own at a place that sends out this same type of form in the mail and then also has it online. At least in my case it looks like a requirement but it isn't really. I have asked them and if they never get the form they don't do anything and I can still show up unannounced for my fixed week. I wonder if it's the same property? No resort can actually require this info definitively "way beforehand" because renting out happens later, and if you fail to rent it out you might deposit it.
> 
> If the place you just acquired really does require this info long before hand then I would do as Jason245 suggests and



It's InnSeason Pollard Brook. They what you to fill in the form. The they supposedly call you about a month before your scheduled arrival date as well to confirm. But I will probably be calling them before they call me!


----------

