# [2008] Exchangers charged fees that owners are NOT charged/MERGED



## Sandy VDH (Aug 12, 2008)

There is something that really bothers me, and I would like to understand HOW, in general, as a community we can comment about it anc perhaps speak with our actions.

I hate it when there are resorts that charge EXTRA FEE for exchanges that do not charge for their own owners.

If there are fees to run the resort then those fees are paid via MFs.  So the member who deposits their week in an exchange service, has paid for the usage that comes with their ownership.  Why is it that the usage paid for by the owner is NOT bestowed upon the exchanger using their week.

If the owner must pay for an activity than I think the exchanger also pays for it.  Fair. 

If the owner gets the activity at NO additional charge than the exchanger should get the same treatment.  UNFAIR. 

There seems to be a long list of resorts who have started this double standard practice as they can make extra money for their operations.

So what as a community do we do to comment on this practice.  I have heard about slamming them on their eval cards, which can continue, but is there any other way we can communicate this unfairness.

I know people some will pay EXTRA for the priviledge for staying at a Disney or a Manhattan Club, and I know that some exchangers will still pay for using onsite waterparks etc.  I have done so in the past, but it annoys the heck out of me.

I really don't understand the few posts that I have read by some that say because we own at this resort, we don't care how much extra the exchangers are charged.

It really makes me mad that this double dipping occurs.  Can we start a list of resorts that do this and post it on TUG?  What can we do to communicate our dislike for this?

Any ideas?


----------



## lprstn (Aug 12, 2008)

That's a good point. We should have a list of resorts that do this, just so we know what to expect when visiting the place.  Sometimes you are not forewarned of the additional charges.


----------



## JMAESD84 (Aug 12, 2008)

*Manhattan Club*

"Please be advised that there is a hospitality fee charged per day, $25 for full one-bedroom suites and $15 for junior executive and metro suites, which does not include gratuities."

Now you would think that they would be "hospitable" for free.

I guess I should be happy, the "angry inhospitable fee" is probably 3 times as much.


----------



## summervaca (Aug 12, 2008)

I agree that once you are a guest of the resort, you should receive the same benefits as owners staying there.  However, I am sure someone who disagrees with that will make a point that I hadn't thought of that will make sense as to why owners should have certain priviliges.  I can be so wishy-washy sometimes...


----------



## dougp26364 (Aug 12, 2008)

On some points I can agree and on others not so much. I do not believe exchangers should be charged fee's that owners are not charged. When I exchange one of my units, I expect that the exchangers will be treated with the same respect that I am.

The only time I feel that, as an owner at a resort, I should be treated differently would be when it comes to unit location. As an owner, I feel that I should recieve preference in unit assigments. That's why I own at a particular resort and why I pay a premium for a particular view. Essentially, I feel that if I ask for the high floor I should receive the high floor in preference to exchangers. Likewise when I exchange I expect to be in line behind owners of that resort staying on their time. There are also owner meetings/get togethers that I can understand being exclusive to owners.

But when it comes to money I don't believe an exchanger should have to pay for parking if, as an owner, I'm not charged that fee. If owners don't pay an activity fee I don't feel that exchangers should pay an activity fee either. I'm also against paying energy charges (one resort read the meter before and after our stay, then charged us for the utilities we used) since I pay the utilities in my MF's for other exchangers. 

Some developers and HOA's try to keep MF's low by passing the buck on to exchangers. If they make everyone that stays or uses a unit pay for electricity, then owners who only exchange reap a benefit of lower MF's and the benefit of my paying for utilities at the resorts I own. I think it's rather short sighted for an HOA to charge exchangers a fee to park a car to supplement their budgets if they're not charging owners that fee, either out of pocket or as an expense item in their MF's. Personally, I try to avoid resorts as an exchange that do not make their owners pay for the same amenities that the resorts I own at provide without a supplemental fee. I'm also against any resort I own at charging exchangers additional fee's I don't have to pay as it could diminish the exchange value of that resort.


----------



## Zib (Aug 12, 2008)

The Cliffs in Hawaii charge $50 to non owners, not specified what it is for.  I guess just for not being an owner.  I think this is very unfair.  There was a resort in Pinetop, Az. that charged us $100 as exchangers two years ago.  When we questioned, she said because all II users left the unit so dirty!!!  We complained to II and last year went back and were not charged any fee.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Aug 12, 2008)

As long as it is disclosed before an exchange, I think it's fine.  If you don't like the policy, don't exchange there.


----------



## gmarine (Aug 12, 2008)

BocaBum99 said:


> As long as it is disclosed before an exchange, I think it's fine.  If you don't like the policy, don't exchange there.



I agree. While I dont like being charged extra as an exchanger, I'm free to go somewhere else if I dont want to pay the fee.


----------



## barndweller (Aug 12, 2008)

Boca is right. If you don't like it don't exchange there. That is why I no longer will go to any Marriott. All my resorts provide a mid-week tidy service free and free parking and free internet.  I pay for that in my MF so exchangers get it, too. Marriott tries to keep MF down by charging for tidy service and for parking and for internet service at many of their resorts. So I will avoid any Marriott in the future as it is an unequal exchange. DVC has a stupid added on fee for exchangers. I stayed at DVC once and the accomodations were nothing special. So the fee got me free parking. Big deal. The Caribbean resorts don't include electricity in order to keep MF artificially lower. Owners that exchange out to mainland resorts get the electricity charges included, having been paid by the unit owner already. This is unfair. Same goes for European timeshares that add electricity on at check-out.

These different ways of basing MF will continue to exist. I will just avoid exchanges that I judge to be unequal in value for the MF I have paid. I also rate any resorts with added fees low and say why on my critique turned into the exchange company. I've even sent letters to managers to complain. Never have received a reply.


----------



## e.bram (Aug 12, 2008)

As an owner,who doesn't exchange, sounds good to me.


----------



## bnoble (Aug 12, 2008)

> What can we do to communicate our dislike for this?


The answer is simple:


> If you don't like the policy, don't exchange there.


If folks stopped accepting those exchanges en masse, then the resorts would either have to stop charging the fee, or allow their own owners to suffer from reduced trading power.  For better or worse, though, that isn't happening---and it's not because these fees are undisclosed.  Enough people are willing to pay them, supporting the practice.

While in principle I completely agree with you, in practice I judge each exchagne based on the value to me relative to the costs.  As long as I'm getting sufficient value for the costs, I consider the exchange acceptable.


----------



## Dori (Aug 12, 2008)

We did an exchange to Hiawatha Manor at Lake Tansi several years ago and they charged exchangers to use the pool!  There were 6 of us (2 adults and 4 children) and it was going to cost us over $100 to use the pool for the week!! I couldn't believe it!  When I took the matter up with the resort manager, his response was that they charged exchangers so the community residents could keep their on-site golf fees lower.  If we didn't like the fee for the pool, we could use the lake for free. 

Dori


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 13, 2008)

*This Is The Correct, The Honest, The Ethical, & The Moral View.*




Sandy Lovell said:


> There is something that really bothers me, and I would like to understand HOW, in general, as a community we can comment about it anc perhaps speak with our actions.
> 
> I hate it when there are resorts that charge EXTRA FEE for exchanges that do not charge for their own owners.
> 
> ...


No ideas here -- other than not playing their game, not taking exchanges like that, staying away from resorts & timeshare trade organizations which countenance that sort of thing, etc. 

Timeshare renters & timeshare exchange guests are the owners' surrogates.  Whatever the owner was entitled to (by paying for it), the owner rented out or put up for exchange.  Whoever pays rent to the owner & whoever accepts the exchange that is offered is entitled to exactly what the owner would have got if the owner had showed up & checked in himself or herself -- i.e., what the owner paid for. 

If an exchange guest is subjected to added charges that the owners don't pay, given lesser privileges than the owners receive, etc., then it's not really an exchange. 

Timeshare renters & exchange guests are not 2nd class citz.  Treating them as such is a gross distortion of what it means to exchange timeshares. 

Renters & exchange guests are stand-ins for the timeshare owners & as such are entitled to exactly what the owners would have got if the owners had not deposited or rented out their timeshares.  Period.  No exceptions. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## davesdog (Aug 13, 2008)

*Complain with their wallet.*

Any resort that charges me an extra BOGUS profit fee, better get ready to pass that money on to the electric and water company. My normal wear and tear would be on the higher side also!


----------



## Happytravels (Aug 13, 2008)

*extra fees*

I agree with same treatments for owners as exchangers.  One of my last exchanges had a fee that I was willing to pay.  It was supposed to be $5.00 per day, that is when I made the exchange turned out to almost $60.00 for the week. When we got there they asked us about the COMPLIMENTARY NEWSPAPER.  They asked us to choose one for the week.  Everyday I received a different paper.  I was the last to be delivered , so I received what was left on there route, a different paper everyday.  To top things off the pool and hot tub was not usable and constuction with a jackhammer everyday about 8:30 am. We where only about 100 ft from this. I spoke with another exchanger and they had received there week back due to the construction (they where away from the noise).  When I called RCI due to all this they said it was too late cause I was already back home. :annoyed: 

Now ANYTIME there is something I don't like or something unexpected I call right way.  DON'T WAIT.


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 13, 2008)

AwayWeGo said:


> Renters & exchange guests are stand-ins for the timeshare owners & as such are entitled to exactly what the owners would have got if the owners had not deposited or rented out their timeshares. Period. No exceptions.
> 
> 
> -- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


I feel the same way as you. You pay these fees at your own resort already so why have to pay it again? Some resorts are charging for parking fees to owners so an exchanger would have to pay this fee too even though he already paid this fee at his own resort where parking is included in the maintenance fees.

Paying an extra fee for electricy for an exchanger at some resorts sounds a total rip-off to me but I have seen an extra charge for using the A/C at a resort where I stayed at not too long ago but owners there seem to pay it too. This is the only time I noticed this and I hope it will not become a trend. When I read all these annoying little discrepancies, I am glad we bought for use mainly.


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada (Aug 13, 2008)

I wonder if contacting the exchange companies to let them know how we feel about this would have any effect. Exchange should mean equal, no extra fees, no extra owner benefits, except that I do understand about owners paying for better views etc when they purchased their units. Maybe if the exchange companies felt they had to include additional fees for exchangers in their listings they would get more negative feedback. 
Liz


----------



## Dave*H (Aug 13, 2008)

BocaBum99 said:


> As long as it is disclosed before an exchange, I think it's fine.  If you don't like the policy, don't exchange there.


The fees are not always easy to find out about.  II sometimes mentions the existence of fees in the resort information but doesn't have the amount.  In another instance, II only mentioned the fee in the confirmation.  You shouldn't have to read resort reviews and/or call the resort to find out about fees.  They should be readily available so that you can take them into account when setting up an exchange request.


----------



## Pit (Aug 13, 2008)

Dave*H said:


> The fees are not always easy to find out about.  II sometimes mentions the existence of fees in the resort information but doesn't have the amount.  In another instance, II only mentioned the fee in the confirmation.  You shouldn't have to read resort reviews and/or call the resort to find out about fees.  They should be readily available so that you can take them into account when setting up an exchange request.



You don't have to pay for anything that you didn't agree to pay. If it's not disclosed and agreed to up front, then it doesn't exist. Now, resorts may still try to charge you, but you don't have to pay. No business has the right to charge you for something you didn't agree to pay.


----------



## Danette (Aug 13, 2008)

*Ouch*



davesdog said:


> Any resort that charges me an extra BOGUS profit fee, better get ready to pass that money on to the electric and water company. My normal wear and tear would be on the higher side also!



That's harsh and probably gives exchangers a bad reputation.  Whenever I arrive to find a surprise fee that cannot be avoided I ask for a manager and assure him/her that although they are getting their "fee" I will not spend another dime at the resort and then I don't.  Nobody seems to be too terribly concerned with my little pocketbook, but I don't feel the need to reward the resort with additional money when I feel I have been blindsighted.

Danette


----------



## Sandy VDH (Aug 13, 2008)

Dave*H said:


> The fees are not always easy to find out about.  II sometimes mentions the existence of fees in the resort information but doesn't have the amount.  In another instance, II only mentioned the fee in the confirmation.  You shouldn't have to read resort reviews and/or call the resort to find out about fees.  They should be readily available so that you can take them into account when setting up an exchange request.



This is the very reason why I would like to compile a list of resorts that have extra charges.  I too have been surprised by fees that I had not been made aware of.  Especially things that are less obvious, like water park, parking etc.  These are NOT always listed in the notes prior to booking the resort.

The comment about fees of $100 to use the pool especially since those funds are going towards the community to keep their golf fees down goes beyond unfair.  A pool is a basic expectation at a property.  Not water park, but pool.

You can't always avoid these costs. They have your CC at check in and they are just going to charge your credit card.  There is little chance you can just refuse to pay them.

I would like for use just start a stickly posting that contains a list of resorts.  I will even volunteer to keep the stickly first post up to date that provides a summary of all the posted known fees.

The information we could keep would be:

Resort ID, 
Resort name, 
Fee $$ 
Fee description, 
Owner Exempt Indicator (does the owner have to pay the fee)
Date of Exchange.

I guess we will have to see if a moderator will let us create a sticky?  If the answer is yes, the I propose starting a new thread Call "Resorts that Charge Exchangers Extra Fees" and begin posting resort information there.

Well what do you say moderator?  Well I guess not sice they merged the threads.


----------



## Sandy VDH (Aug 13, 2008)

*Resorts that Charge Exchangers Extra Fees*

Please post the following infomation about the resorts that charge exchanges fees.

Resort ID, 
Resort Name, 
Fee $$ 
Fee Description, 
Owner Exempt Indicator (does the owner have to pay the fee)
Date of Exchange.


----------



## Sandy VDH (Aug 13, 2008)

BCV,DBW,DVO,DSS,DWL,DAK
Disney's Beach Club Villas, Boardwalk Villas, Old Key West, Saratoga Springs, Wilderness Lodge, Animal Kingdom
$95
Transportation Fee
Owners Exempt
2008

6390
Residences at the Crane
Varies
AC usage
Owners NOT Exempt (as far as I know)
2008

4064
Manhattan Club
$15 or $25 per day
Studio and 1 BR, Hospitality Charge
Owners Exempt
2008


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 13, 2008)

*I Feel The Same Way -- But I Try To Stifle Myself.*




davesdog said:


> Any resort that charges me an extra BOGUS profit fee, better get ready to pass that money on to the electric and water company. My normal wear and tear would be on the higher side also!


Unfortunately, the extra costs generated that way would most likely get passed on to the regular walking-around timeshare owners in the form of higher maintenance fees, without making much of an impression on the timeshare company responsible for the unacceptable policy. 

Maybe an equally effective but less wasteful & destructive way of fighting back is sending in low ratings on those exchange feedback cards -- downgrade the timeshares bigtime for treating exchange guests as 2nd class citz. & see how they like it. 

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax Count, Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Transit (Aug 13, 2008)

Here's a link for some Marriot parking fees.I wouldn't exchange into a resort that has additional fees for exchangers.Some of these resorts are very popular and for the few who wont pay the extra fee it dosen't matter because there are so many that will.If they doubled the $95 exchange fee at Disney people will still be 10 deep in line for an exchange.


----------



## djs (Aug 13, 2008)

Dori said:


> We did an exchange to Hiawatha Manor at Lake Tansi several years ago and they charged exchangers to use the pool!  There were 6 of us (2 adults and 4 children) and it was going to cost us over $100 to use the pool for the week!! I couldn't believe it!  When I took the matter up with the resort manager, his response was that they charged exchangers so the community residents could keep their on-site golf fees lower.  If we didn't like the fee for the pool, we could use the lake for free.
> 
> Dori



This is when you could fill out the review form that II asks for (and presumably RCI does too) and give them a low rating.  If enough people do that, they'll soon see their "golden pinapple" turn into a gray one, or their gray one turn into a whole lot of nothing.  

Besides I thought the developers charged 20X the resale price so that they could keep MF down low


----------



## davesdog (Aug 13, 2008)

Danette said:


> That's harsh and probably gives exchangers a bad reputation.
> 
> Danette



 I'm not saying I trash the room.  I just do stuff like take, longer, hotter, and more often showers. Wash cloths and towels more often, and in warmer water. The dishwasher gets run every evening, even if half full. I'll use the regular oven, rather than the microwave. And I keep the room warmer, or cooler than I would at home.

    Let's just say less green.  There is nothing that would give exchangers a bad reputation.


----------



## AwayWeGo (Aug 13, 2008)

*Shux, I Do All That Stuff Anyway.*




davesdog said:


> I'm not saying I trash the room.  I just do stuff like take, longer, hotter, and more often showers. Wash cloths and towels more often, and in warmer water. The dishwasher gets run every evening, even if half full. I'll use the regular oven, rather than the microwave.


I mean, it's my vacation home away from home, so why not ?

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​


----------



## Mel (Aug 13, 2008)

Perhaps we need to ask the exchange companies to make it clear what is included in an exchange, and what is not.  If there is an onsite pool, ut there is a charge to use it, don't count it as a resort amenity.  It is a commercial amenity that happens to be onsite.

I see it as three different types of fees:

1 - pass along fees.  The resort thinks the maintenance fees are too high, and to keep them low removes certain items from the fees.  They then charge those that use those services.  Of these fees, the ones I have the least issue with are those for services that truly are optional.  This would include mid-week maid service (not just tidy), certain activities & materials for those activities, A/C if there is a reasonable alternative.

2 - mandatory pass along fees.  These a fees you can't avoid, but are charged to anyone who uses the unit.  This would include certain utility fees, Access to amenities like the onsite pool or fitness center.  These should be included in the maintenance fees, but are not.  I prefer to avoid these resorts, but at least they don't treat exchangers a second class citizens.   Some resorts may do this because their structure doesn't allow them to differentiate different fees among their owners - but in that case they should include a base fee in the maintenance and a surcharge only for those weeks that actually cost more.  Owners who use their week should be against this system, because it actually costs them more - weeks that go unused don't result in a fee paid at all!

3 - exchange only fees - like what DVC charges.  These fees are, in effect, paid twice.  Since owners are not charged extra it is assumed the expense is included in their maintenance fees, so has already been paid before the exchange.  Some would argue that the services are provided as part of a membership that is distinct from the ownership.  If that is true, I would expect the owner to get the benefit whether they use their week or not.  In such a case, I could go to my home resort and use the fitness facility whenever I want while the person using my unit can't without paying a weekly membership fee.

But this goes against the basic premise of TS exchange - the exchanger is not getting full benefit of the use of my week.  This is particularly true if my guest isn't charged but the exchanger is - because by not charging a guest the resort management is acknowledging that the benefit IS part of my ownership.  Do you suppose DVC would allow you to sell your membership but retain the right to use some of the benefits?

RCI took a stand several years ago, and told DVC they could not charge the $95 fee, and DVC moved to II.  That's where we find Marriott now too.  If RCI had not taken a stand, who knows where we would be now.  Perhaps some day we will get to a point where the only thing we exchange is the right to "rent" a week at a discounted price.  I will pay $10 membership fee each year to my home resort.  If I use my week, I will pay the cost of maintaining it for that week.  If I exchange it, whoever uses it will pay that fee.


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 13, 2008)

djs said:


> This is when you could fill out the review form that II asks for (and presumably RCI does too) and give them a low rating. If enough people do that, they'll soon see their "golden pinapple" turn into a gray one, or their gray one turn into a whole lot of nothing.
> 
> Besides I thought the developers charged 20X the resale price so that they could keep MF down low


That's about all you can do today but all these extra charges that used to be included in the past should be spelled out in the exchange wish book or online and also how much exactly it would cost so there are no surprises. 

Exchanging is getting more expensive as time goes on because so many resorts or HOAs of the resorts are trying to make extra money one way or the other from the exchanger.

Also, in the past, the exchanger would get the view that the owner gave up but that too was changed but who knows who get these views really? It may be the resort for renting out so they can fetch more money. With floating weeks they have full control of everything. 

I remember the time when exchanging was uncomplicated but not for everyone as it depended on what season you bought. A point system, especially for exchanging, is so much fairer because everyone can trade into the best resorts but it will take longer but then they paid less for the unit when they bought.


----------



## dougp26364 (Aug 13, 2008)

BocaBum99 said:


> As long as it is disclosed before an exchange, I think it's fine.  If you don't like the policy, don't exchange there.



Good point. This is something I look for before making an exchange. It's one thing that will make me look at other resorts that are more exchanger friendly.


----------



## gmarine (Aug 13, 2008)

davesdog said:


> I'm not saying I trash the room.  I just do stuff like take, longer, hotter, and more often showers. Wash cloths and towels more often, and in warmer water. The dishwasher gets run every evening, even if half full. I'll use the regular oven, rather than the microwave. And I keep the room warmer, or cooler than I would at home.
> 
> Let's just say less green.  There is nothing that would give exchangers a bad reputation.



Why not do something much more simple? Just dont exchange into a resort where you dont agree with the extra fee.


----------



## Danette (Aug 13, 2008)

*Thanks Sandy!*

Thank you Sandy for the info.  I have started a spreadsheet with this info and will add to it as I come across others.


----------



## ctyatty (Aug 13, 2008)

*sounds like class action lawsuit time*



BocaBum99 said:


> As long as it is disclosed before an exchange, I think it's fine.  If you don't like the policy, don't exchange there.



I could not disagree more, these fees lessen the value for those who wish to trade what they OWN. Unless these fees are allowed in the by-laws, I don't see how a resort can charge any extra fees. Who is actually getting these fees? Sometimes the management is getting this revenue so it does not even benefit the HOA. 

A TS is a bundle of rights, privileges and immunities established in the original documents. The management company and/or HOA don't get to just make it up as they go along. For example these so-called transfer fees - I objected twice with two different resorts - asked for a copy of the by-law allowing a fee for changing a name on a TS on the HOA books - they "waived" the fee but I suppose they are still collecting from the ignorant. 

In mortgage lending these are called junk fees - as well they should be.


----------



## caribbean (Aug 13, 2008)

Gee Sandy, sounds like we have already had this conversation one night!!

Althought I do not like paying for things that should be included in the MF, like electricity, I don't bitch as long as I know in advance and exchangers and owner BOTH pay the same amount.

When I get mad is when I don't know in advance and/or when I find out that only exchangers pay. OK to give a small discount to owners on optional items like a 10% discoount at the restaurant.

These two really pissed me off and I will not go back:

6390
Residences at the Crane
$4/hr
AC usage
Owners NOT Exempt 2007
WAS NOT MENTIONED ON RCI EXCHANGE - DIDN'T KNOW UNTIL WE CHECKED IN. PLUS THE AC UNIT DIDN'T WORK PROPERLY, SO WE WERE PAYING FOR AC WE DID NOT RECEIVE. COMPLAINTS TO MANAGEMENT RIGHT IN FRONT OF CUSTOMERS CHECKING IN DID NO GOOD.

3025
Windjammer Landing
$180/ week for a 1BR, more for a 2BR
electricity
OWNERS ALREADY PAID FOR IN MF ( PER TWO CONTACTS )
2005
KNEW ABOUT CHARGE IN ADVANCE, BUT WAS NOT AWARE THAT IT WAS NOT CHARGED TO OWNERS

Sandy-which building did you end up in at Crane? Did the AC work?


----------



## ctyatty (Aug 14, 2008)

*ask for the bylaws or other LEGAL basis for junk fees*

time to say no to being charged extra for something that is already paid for with MF, lets get a clearinghouse of these actions.

This is just what class action lawsuits are designed to remedy - getting ripped off for small amounts - a class can make this practical to go to court - individuals won't bother for a few dollars here and there.

The exchanger stands in the shoes of the owner - unless the bylaws say otherwise - just like those phony ROFR asserted by some cheating lying outfits.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Aug 14, 2008)

ctyatty said:


> I could not disagree more, these fees lessen the value for those who wish to trade what they OWN. Unless these fees are allowed in the by-laws, I don't see how a resort can charge any extra fees. Who is actually getting these fees? Sometimes the management is getting this revenue so it does not even benefit the HOA.
> 
> A TS is a bundle of rights, privileges and immunities established in the original documents. The management company and/or HOA don't get to just make it up as they go along. For example these so-called transfer fees - I objected twice with two different resorts - asked for a copy of the by-law allowing a fee for changing a name on a TS on the HOA books - they "waived" the fee but I suppose they are still collecting from the ignorant.
> 
> In mortgage lending these are called junk fees - as well they should be.



And exchange privileges are expressly NOT included in that bundle of rights.  In ANY appraisal system for a timeshare, the exchange company affilation plays no factor in its value.

If you bought the timeshare to exchange, then that is a risk you took.  If you didn't know that the exchange company is an independent product from what you purchased, then you didn't do your due diligence.  

You can disagree, but you are not right.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Aug 14, 2008)

ctyatty said:


> time to say no to being charged extra for something that is already paid for with MF, lets get a clearinghouse of these actions.
> 
> This is just what class action lawsuits are designed to remedy - getting ripped off for small amounts - a class can make this practical to go to court - individuals won't bother for a few dollars here and there.
> 
> The exchanger stands in the shoes of the owner - unless the bylaws say otherwise - just like those phony ROFR asserted by some cheating lying outfits.



You are wrong again.  Class action lawsuits for misinformed complaints such as yours are only for making attorneys rich.

The bottom line remains, if you don't like the exchange policies for a resort or exchange company, then you do not need to exchange.

If you bought to exchange and you don't like the policies, you bought unwisely.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Aug 14, 2008)

gmarine said:


> Why not do something much more simple? Just dont exchange into a resort where you dont agree with the extra fee.



It's because some foolhardy owners BELIEVE that they are somehow partial owners of the exchange system and all the other resorts, too.  So, they feel entitled to determine the rules that everyone should play by.

If they want to have such an exchange company, they should start one and try to enforce those rules.  Their business acumen will then come into play and they will quickly learn that they have absolutely no say over this issue and resorts and their HOAs can do anything they want.


----------



## Sandy VDH (Aug 14, 2008)

caribbean said:


> Gee Sandy, sounds like we have already had this conversation one night!!
> 
> Sandy-which building did you end up in at Crane? Did the AC work?



I have not gone to the Crane yet, we are scheduled for a 1 BR in either building 3 or 4according to your point table.  We will be there in March 2009.


----------



## littlestar (Aug 14, 2008)

BocaBum99 said:


> It's because some foolhardy owners BELIEVE that they are somehow partial owners of the exchange system and all the other resorts, too.  So, they feel entitled to determine the rules that everyone should play by.
> 
> If they want to have such an exchange company, they should start one and try to enforce those rules.  Their business acumen will then come into play and they will quickly learn that they have absolutely no say over this issue and resorts and their HOAs can do anything they want.



Well said, Boca.


----------



## Lisa P (Aug 14, 2008)

Mel said:


> Perhaps we need to ask the exchange companies to make it clear what is included in an exchange, and what is not.


I agree.  II's Terms and Conditions, last section ("Fees"), paragraph 8 says:





> Fees, if any, charged by Member Resorts for the use of amenities are determined and levied by each resort.  Should the Member desire to use these amenities, such fees are the responsibility of the Member.  These fees vary from resort to resort.


Use of the word "desire" indicates these are optional.  If basic things, normally included in a simple motel room stay (ex., electricity, local telephone, pool use where a pool exists) are not optional, but rather incur a fee, it ought to be noted in advance.  If a fee is not optional for one to stay there, it ought to be noted in advance as well.  The only way to make an informed decision is if you know ahead.  All-inclusive fees are disclosed.  So should these "exchanger only" fees or excessive surcharges for basic "resort" amenities.


djs said:


> This is when you could fill out the review form that II asks for (and presumably RCI does too) and give them a low rating.  If enough people do that, they'll soon see their "golden pinapple" turn into a gray one, or their gray one turn into a whole lot of nothing.


I've not been been inclined to do this in the past, if the resort experience was good overall.  But I do understand it and we may start to do this.   

My evaluation of a hotel room stay or a restaurant dinner, for example, is definitely affected if I've paid more.  I do expect better surroundings, better amenities, better service, a much better experience.  Things that are cheerfully accepted at a diner will cause one to give a very poor review at the more expensive place.  And if I'm paying nearly double the exchange fee expense (incl added fees) or more, to trade into one resort than another across town, I can see how that may legitimately impact the review, particularly where the fees are not the industry norm or the regional standard.


----------



## ctyatty (Aug 14, 2008)

*I can let anyone use my TS w/o junk fees*



BocaBum99 said:


> You are wrong again.  Class action lawsuits for misinformed complaints such as yours are only for making attorneys ric




The only way they get "rich" is by winning.

I can let Joe Smith use MY TS through an exchange company or I can let my Aunt Suzie use it just by showing up - management (unless the bylaws say otherwise) has no legal right to charge my guest extra fees to use MY TS. 

My TS includes all of my rights, including the property right to sue.

Time and again developers, management and even some HOA try to snow people with junk fees and junk policies - don't fall for it regardless of what some regular board apologist types put out.


----------



## bnoble (Aug 14, 2008)

> RCI took a stand several years ago, and told DVC they could not charge the $95 fee, and DVC moved to II.


I suspect it isn't quite so simple, as the Manhattan Club has its little "hospitality fee" in RCI, which is mandatory.


----------



## gmarine (Aug 14, 2008)

ctyatty said:


> The only way they get "rich" is by winning.
> 
> I can let Joe Smith use MY TS through an exchange company or I can let my Aunt Suzie use it just by showing up - management (unless the bylaws say otherwise) has no legal right to charge my guest extra fees to use MY TS.
> 
> ...



When you use your timeshare to obtain an exchange you are no longer using YOUR timeshare. I think thats where you are confused. You gave all rights to your week to the exchange company and you now have to follow all the rules and pay the fees of the resort you have exchanged into. 

You have to realize you dont own the exchange, and you have no rights as an owner when you do exchange. Your just another renter subject to any fees the resort imposes. Any additional fees should be disclosed at the time of exchange and at that time you are free to decline the exchange.


----------



## davesdog (Aug 14, 2008)

gmarine said:


> Why not do something much more simple? Just dont exchange into a resort where you dont agree with the extra fee.



  Sometimes you don't get to pick between several locations, so you take what is available.  

   If the owners of resorts are OK with the extra fees their resorts are charging exchangers to keep the fees they pay lower. I have no problems running their costs up, to get more enjoyment out of my now more expensive exchange.  

   Filling out comment cards they probably wipe their butts with will not help much.  What companies, and owners understand is dollars.  If nobody takes an exchange, and the room just sets there empty, they make out even better!

   Like a mobster shakedown, if they win by robbing you, they will only get worse!  If their bottom like starts to sink, and they see their own expenses start to sky rocket.  They may figure it out?


----------



## barndweller (Aug 14, 2008)

> Any additional fees should be disclosed at the time of exchange and at that time you are free to decline the exchange.



I think this is the whole point of the original post. Extra fees imposed to an exchanger that an owner is exempt from is just plain crap. Additional fees charged to owners *and *exchangers are a crock as well because the MF should be covering expenses for the resort and not kept artificially low by leaving things like electricity and parking and pool maintenence out of the yearly fees. (And those damn occupancy taxes tacked on in Hawaii!)

This may be a trend and personally, I think it stinks. HOA should be setting the MF to maintain the resort for everyone to use, owners or their "stand-ins" alike. It certainly has nothing to do with any exchange company and only contributes to the ridiculous ratings that RCI and II assign. Those stars & crowns & golden pineapples really don't give you the whole story. It may be rated a Golden Starry Pineapple Fancy Shmancey Resort but if you end up spending a wad of money to exchange there you are getting the shaft. 

I'd really appreciate a TUG list of any & all resorts that add on fees. I want and expect a ZERO balance when I check out.


----------



## gmarine (Aug 14, 2008)

barndweller said:


> I think this is the whole point of the original post. Extra fees imposed to an exchanger that an owner is exempt from is just plain crap. Additional fees charged to owners *and *exchangers are a crock as well because the MF should be covering expenses for the resort and not kept artificially low by leaving things like electricity and parking and pool maintenence out of the yearly fees. (And those damn occupancy taxes tacked on in Hawaii!)
> 
> This may be a trend and personally, I think it stinks. HOA should be setting the MF to maintain the resort for everyone to use, owners or their "stand-ins" alike. It certainly has nothing to do with any exchange company and only contributes to the ridiculous ratings that RCI and II assign. Those stars & crowns & golden pineapples really don't give you the whole story. It may be rated a Golden Starry Pineapple Fancy Shmancey Resort but if you end up spending a wad of money to exchange there you are getting the shaft.
> 
> I'd really appreciate a TUG list of any & all resorts that add on fees. I want and expect a ZERO balance when I check out.



Unfortunately extra fees are everywhere and anywhere, especially with regards to travel. They are not limited to timeshares. 

Airlines, hotels and car rental agencies have all sorts of extra fees. Entire cities have extra fees only charged to hotel guests. 

Everyone is free to avoid them. Dont use that airline,that hotel or visit that city.


----------



## taffy19 (Aug 14, 2008)

barndweller said:


> (And those damn occupancy taxes tacked on in Hawaii!).


Not only Maui but other Islands are starting to charge these taxes too and also in some parts of CA. I know we have this in Laguna Beach for renters and exchangers at our timeshare and it goes to the City but not for the owners yet. Owners as well as renters or exchangers pay this tax in Maui even after timeshare owners have already paid their RE taxes in their maintenance fee.

There is nothing we can do but pay it or not own or go to these places. It will only get worse as Government always wants more money and now the airlines are starting too but they have a valid excuse or they would go under. 

I still feel that exchangers should be treated as owners. Are friends or family of the owners charged these extra fees? I don't believe so as I have never heard this mentioned from our family or friends who used our timeshare in Maui.


----------



## barndweller (Aug 14, 2008)

None of the resorts I own charge extra fees. To owners or exchangers. All fees involved with a timeshare exchange should be covered by the MF the owner pays. Period.

I'm not talking about airline tickets or hotel rooms here. We are discussing the trading of time between an owner in one resort with the owner of another resort. Simple concept. And *the HOA are making it less simple *in order to avoid raising costs to the owners and making their resort less desirable to own. The exchange companies are totally avoiding the issue since it really is not their problem. They can continue to give ratings that are based on handshakes in the back-room with developers and ignore the cards sent in by exchangers.


----------



## gmarine (Aug 14, 2008)

barndweller said:


> None of the resorts I own charge extra fees. To owners or exchangers. All fees involved with a timeshare exchange should be covered by the MF the owner pays. Period.
> 
> I'm not talking about airline tickets or hotel rooms here. We are discussing the trading of time between an owner in one resort with the owner of another resort. Simple concept. And *the HOA are making it less simple *in order to avoid raising costs to the owners and making their resort less desirable to own. The exchange companies are totally avoiding the issue since it really is not their problem. They can continue to give ratings that are based on handshakes in the back-room with developers and ignore the cards sent in by exchangers.



I agree that there should be no additional fees for exchangers. But if there are and you dont like it, as I've said before, the solution is very simple. Dont visit that resort.

I make my decision based on whether I feel the exchange is worth any extra fee that a resort has imposed. For example, while I dont like paying $95 to DVC,I pay it because an exchange to DVC is worth far more to me than an exchange to any other Orlando resort. Others may not feel the same and they are free to not take an exchange to a DVC resort.

On the flip side I would never exchange into The Reef in Grand Cayman because of the energy surcharge imposed to exchangers. Others feel different and love to get an exchange there. It a personal opinion.


----------



## timeos2 (Aug 14, 2008)

*Thank II for this one*



djs said:


> This is when you could fill out the review form that II asks for (and presumably RCI does too) and give them a low rating.  If enough people do that, they'll soon see their "golden pinapple" turn into a gray one, or their gray one turn into a whole lot of nothing.
> 
> Besides I thought the developers charged 20X the resale price so that they could keep MF down low



Thanks to II and DVC the idea of "exchange penalty fees" came into vogue. RCI refused to let DVC impose an unfair fee and, at least in part due to that member friendly move, had II steal that account by making the deal to allow DVC to charge a fee strictly prohibited in their standard resort affiliation agreement. Of course II apparently changed it for DVC and in their usual disdain for paying members. 

By all means give bad scores across the board to any resort that pulls that unfair trick. Enough rating cards of all "1'S" will make them consider a change to a fair week for week exchange as owners not 3rd rate intruders.


----------



## bnoble (Aug 14, 2008)

> RCI refused to let DVC impose an unfair fee


Again, perhaps not so simple.  Again, see Manhattan Club as to why.


----------



## timeos2 (Aug 14, 2008)

bnoble said:


> Again, perhaps not so simple.  Again, see Manhattan Club as to why.



While 10 years later RCI does appear to have also broken the deal it was II & DVC that started it. And the cost at DVC is far higher than MC (who's reputation & ranking are taking a big hit in part due to the unfair fees).


----------



## bnoble (Aug 14, 2008)

> And the cost at DVC is far higher than MC


No, it's not.  MC 1BRs are $25 _per night._  Even the studios are more: $15 per night is $105 per week, more than DVC's $95.


> who's reputation & ranking are taking a big hit in part due to the unfair fees


Surprising then that there are so many people who want to exchange in on the sightings boards here and TS4M, and so few with weeks that can actually pull it.

Again, not so simple.


----------



## ctyatty (Aug 15, 2008)

*time to shake up a few for these junk fees*

DVC has the fees covered in the original docs with the owners - don't know about MC. Most of the go along get along crowd are missing the point: it is the owner who has the claim against the HOA and/or management company - these fees lessen the value of the owner's property. Exchange firms can make any deal they want with their customers - HOA are bound by the by-laws - by charging junk fees they make what you own worth less for exchanging. The fee structure in the by-laws where I own are very specific about what and how fees are set. There is no provision for fabricating fees for whatever suits their fancy. In my state the attorney general has been pretty good about going after timeshare fraud having taken one resort to court, for those without good consumer protection agencies check out the local trial lawyers association for a referral to a class action type firm. Again it is Owner vs Resort - no need to sue the exchange companies. Resort's HOA board of directors have a fiduciary duty which means in many respects they will be having to prove what they do is legal.


----------



## e.bram (Aug 15, 2008)

I own a condo in NJ which I had rented out. The BOD decided to rent the parking spaces directly to the tenants, instead of adding it to the MF billedto the owner. The tenant was billed at a higher rate than the owner occupied parking spaces. On owner(a top notch lawyer) sued and it went all the way to the NJ Supreme Court and the HOA was overuled. I got all  money back(and a chuckle), even though the tenant(no longer renting) paid the difference. The court ruled that their couldn't be two classes of owners, those thst lived their and those that didn't and that In had I right to rent and rerent the space even thiough I didn't directly own it.


----------



## bnoble (Aug 15, 2008)

> Most of the go along get along crowd are missing the point: it is the owner who has the claim against the HOA and/or management company


No, I agree with you---these units are worth less in exchange, because they are less attractive to inbounds.  But, so what?  Disney isn't a _particularly_ hard exchange, but it is the toughest thing to get in Orlando through II.  Manhattan Club is practically the holy grail in RCI.  It's not as though these don't trade well already.

What's more, they are both already so expensive to own that most owners at these resorts, exchanging out, are "losing"---they'd be better off renting out their time, and using the proceeds to rent what they exchanged for, and they'd have cash left over.  Removing these fees from exchangers and putting them back on the owners where they belong only makes exchange less attractive financially.

So, if an owner already has good trade power, and the fees make exchange more attractive not less, how will you find one willing to be the plaintiff?


----------



## Carolinian (Aug 15, 2008)

This really is a deplorable practice.  When I encounter it, I respond by giving the resort a 1 on the resort report card to RCI in the Resort Hospitality and Check-In/out categories.  Once they see these malpractices impacting their VEP ratings, they may reconsider.  I always put the reason in the comments section as well.


----------



## e.bram (Aug 15, 2008)

Yeah, but if the fees decrease the MFs, then one could argue the units are worth more.


----------



## ctyatty (Aug 15, 2008)

*great story*



e.bram said:


> The court ruled that there couldn't be two classes of owners, those that lived there and those that didn't had the right to rent and rerent the space even thiough I didn't directly own it.



thanks for sharing a happy story where the individual triumphed over misuse of power type leadership - the type who will try anthing so long as they can make up some baloney story and buffalo people into not challenging it.

A HOA should first and foremost stand for mutuality not junk fees.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Aug 15, 2008)

Sandy, owners are not exempt when the exchange into a Disney resort; they still have to pay the fee we all pay.


----------



## JimJ (Aug 15, 2008)

We exchanged into Palm Beach Shores a few years ago.  They charged exchangers a paking fee.  We signed up for the sales tour and made it very clear from minute #1 that the only reason we were there was to recoup our parking fee and we would in no way consider a purchase at a resort that treated exchangers differently than owners.  It was a short tour!


----------



## Transit (Aug 15, 2008)

DVC also has a $10 a day internet fee for non-members (internet 70)+(Disney 95) + (II exchange 139) = $304 plus you week before you walk in the door. Anything else $$$ ?  Anyway you look at it thats hard to justify. .Thats a powerfull demand timeshare!


----------



## Sandy VDH (Aug 15, 2008)

rickandcindy23 said:


> Sandy, owners are not exempt when the exchange into a Disney resort; they still have to pay the fee we all pay.



True

But if they went on the own week or rented out their week directly to someone else they would not be required to pay the fee.  If they exchange they are NOW treated as exchangers.

Some places do see this differently, I agree.  If you are a member/owner you get those perks regardless of how you got the unit there, direct usage or exchange.


----------



## ctyatty (Aug 16, 2008)

*is there more than a little irony in junk fees?*

The developer sales staffs big push always used to be the ability to trade into fabulous resorts across the world. Now after purchasing a white or blue week that would become next to worthless and such a liability that people pay to get rid of them, some resorts add on junk fees to exchangers. The original scheme plays out with equal maintenance fees being charged those with prime weeks as well as the no value weeks, with many of the prime weeks actually used by those lucky few. If by af stroke of good fortune the person with the next to worthless week gets an exchange - now come the junk fees. Wow what a deal!


----------



## Sandy VDH (Aug 17, 2008)

My brother just returned from Massenutten.  They stayed at Summit.

Do owners have to pay the same fees that exchanges pay?  He said putt putt golf was $7 per person.  Fees for everything.  

We are used to Wyndham where it is free or a nominal charge, like a $1 per person.


----------



## Transit (Jun 21, 2009)

Club Land'or 
/Paradise Island.RCI #0021 There is a US$25 per person per day resort levy for guests 12 years of age and older.This was an additional charge to a "getaway"


----------



## dioxide45 (Jun 21, 2009)

I don't have a problem with per use fees charged to exchangers vs owners. Put Put or tennis is an example. I can see offering this to owners for free but non owners get charged. Many if not most Marriotts offer owners a discount at the Marketplace, this I think is fine. These are optional services and if you don't want to pay then don't play.

I don't have an issue if mandatory fees are disclosed up front. All this does is deminish the trade value of the resort. The only exception may be DVC. I wouldn't trade in to a resort that charged me a daily or any other mandatory fee.

For Marriott's and the tidy service. Owners don't even get this for free. Both exchangers and owners have to pay if they want a mid week or even daily cleaning. I am okay with that.


----------

