# [2009] Westin Kaanapali Maintenance Fee complaints -- see here [+contact info.]



## LisaRex

If you'd like to contact your HOA board to complain about the maintenance fee increases, here is the contact information: 

Westin Kaanapali North 

Johnathan Ho, President
Bruce McNish, Secretary
Steven Ward, Vice President
Teri Castleberry, Vice President
Craig McFarland, Treasurer

I've asked for their snail mail addresses and will post that as soon as I receive it.  

If you'd like to complain to SVO's parent company, here is the address for the Starwood CEO: 

Frits Van Paasschen
Starwood Hotels
1111 Westchester Avenue
White Plains, NY 10604
Phone (914) 640-8100
Fax (914) 640-8310

If you'd like to comment on the real estate tax increase: 

Maui County
COUNTY OF MAUI
Real Property Tax Division
70 E. Kaahumanu Avenue, Ste. A16
Kahului, Hawaii 96732

Members of Real Property Tax Review Board:

Patrice Matsumoto (Kahului) 3/31/2010 
Dean Frampton (Makawao) 3/31/2011 
Matthew Driggers (Wailuku) 3/31/2012 
Susanna Soto (Lahaina) 3/31/2013 
Joshua Lindsey (Wailuku) 3/31/2014

***
Westin Kaanapali Maintenance fee complaints
Westin Kaanapali MFs
Westin Maui Maintenance fee complaints
Westin Timeshare complaints
Starwood complaints
Starwood timeshare complaints
Starwood maintenance fees
KOR maintenance fees
KOR-N maintenance fees

(I'm trying to spell out everything so that people who search it on Google can find this thread.)


----------



## DeniseM

Excellent work, Lisa!    

I have requested the WKORV BOD info. and will post it as soon as I get it.

Here is the standard email format to send Starwood email:
[B]firstname.lastname@starwoodvo.com[/B]

Here are a couple more contact points:

*Maui County Real Property Website - http://www.co.maui.hi.us/index.aspx?NID=576*

*Mr Sergio Rivera, President
Starwood Vacation Ownership
8803 Vistana Centre Dr
Orlando, FL 32821*

****Does anyone want to volunteer to formulate a simple "template" that includes the key points one would want to include in a letter?*


----------



## ciscogizmo1

Thank you!  I will be writing my own letter today.  I'm so MAD I'm still steaming after receiving my bill yesterday...


----------



## pharmgirl

copied from the hawaii thread -seems this TS won using overvaluation??  good to know if true

The generic Maui Schooner rates hardly moved up for 2010 in part because the board of directors sued the county, and won, for overvaluation of the property. We are facing a potential special assessment on the order of 2K/wk for upgrades if the owners approve.

$1300 is a fair price.


----------



## spuppy

*[It's not your fault, but this info. from ARDA is out of date - I have edited it. - DeniseM]*

Email/Contact for SVO executives from the following link:

http://www.arda.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Starwood

[Raymond L. "Rip" Gellein, Jr., was President, Global Development Group of Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide, Inc. prior to his resignation in March of 2008.]

[Matt Avril transferred to the hotel side in 2008.]

Sergio Rivera, President [see address above}
Starwood Vacation Ownership
sergio.rivera@starwoodvo.com

Thorp Thomas
Senior Vice President,
Associations
thorp.thomas@starwoodvo.com


----------



## post-it

Our friends havent received their increase MF statement.  What is the increase?


----------



## DeniseM

post-it said:


> Our friends havent received their increase MF statement.  What is the increase?



Westin Ka'anapali Ocean Resort Villas (2 bdm.) - $ 2,346.36
Westin Ka'anapali Ocean Resort Villas (2 bdm. Dlx) - $3,076.69

If that is not their unit size, they can get their actual fees at www.mystarcentral.com


----------



## DeniseM

*WKORV Board of Directors Contact Info.*

_Courtesy of Tugger, j4sharks - thanks!_

Ocean Resort Master Association BOD

Reg Billups Pres.
9002 San Marco Ct.
Orlando, FL  32189

Gerald Bodzy, VP
P.O. Box 980097
Houston, TX  77098-0097
or
1702 Cullen Blvd.
Houston, TX  77023

Johnathan Ho, Treas.
9002 San Marco Ct.
Orlando, FL 32189

Bruce McNish, Sec.
2155 Kalakaua Ave. Suite 300
Honolulu, Hi  96815

Ocean Resort Villas Owners Assoc. BOD

Gerald Bodzy, Sec.
P.O. Box 980097
Houston, TX  77098-0097
or
1702 Cullen Blvd.
Houston, TX  77023

William Logan, Pres.
6519 Kitsap Dr.
Spokane, [WA]  99208

Mark Watford, VP
8054 Eagle Trail
Dallas, TX  75238

Celia Kupersmith, VP
14 Burdell Ct.
Novato, CA  94949

Jonathan Ho, Treas.
9002 San Marco Ct.
Orlando, FL  32819


----------



## SDKath

DeniseM said:


> Westin Ka'anapali Ocean Resort Villas (2 bdm.) - $ 2,346.36
> Westin Ka'anapali Ocean Resort Villas (2 bdm. Dlx) - $3,076.69
> 
> If that is not their unit size, they can get their actual fees at www.mystarcentral.com



Oh my gosh!  $3000 for OFD????      

Katherine


----------



## LisaRex

Here is the 2010 WKORV-N budget, broken down into categories.  Note that the numbers on the budget they included don't add up, which explains why my numbers aren't exactly what was billed:  

The first colum in the Ocean Resort Master Association Fee.
The second column is the Ocean Resorts Villas North Vacation Owner's Assn
The third column is the Association of Apartment Owners of Ocean Resorts Villas North
The fourth column is for SVN/ARDA fees.
The fifth column is the total.

(My first question to the board is why all the different associations!)

I categorized them as: 

(M) - Management fees - directly billed management fees or expenses that a normal business (including the Westin hotel down the street) would INCLUDE in a management fee. 
(R) - "Running the Place" - fees directly associated with running the place
(T) - Taxes
(X) - Extraordinary expenses which in a good economy we hopefully wouldn't see. 

 M - Admin      	$51.03	$80.54	$12.21	$0.00	*$143.78*
M - Annual Audit 	$0.28	$0.62	$0.61	$0.00	*$1.51*
M - ARDA	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$5.00	*$5.00*
M - Financial Services	$0.35	$23.68	$0.36	$0.00	*$24.39*
M - Kaanapali North Beach Master Assn 	$0.00	$0.00	$5.29	$0.00	*$5.29*
M - Management Fee	$15.08	$113.75	$52.89	$0.00	*$181.72*
M - Owner Services	$0.00	$35.79	$0.00	$0.00	*$35.79*
M - SVN Fee	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$113.53	*$113.53
*M - Technology Services	$0.00	$3.91	$0.00	$0.00	*$3.91*
*Total Management Fees*	$66.74	$258.29	$71.36	$118.53	*$514.92* 

R - Activities 	$0.51	$0.00	$38.72	$0.00	*$39.23*
R - Cable Television	$0.00	$0.00	$6.43	$0.00	*$6.43*
R - Housekeeping & Rooms 	$0.00	$411.27	$35.90	$0.00	*$447.17*
R - Insurance	$11.81	$32.84	$93.52	$0.00	*$138.17*
R - Internet	$0.00	$0.00	$3.31	$0.00	*$3.31*
R - Licenses & Permits	$0.00	$0.00	$0.08	$0.00	*$0.08*
R - Repairs 	$51.43	$121.61	$22.59	$0.00	*$195.63*
R - Utilities	$35.06	$0.00	$174.33	$0.00	*$209.39*
*Total to Run the Place	*$98.81	$565.72	$374.88	$0.00	*$1,039.41*

T - AV (Real Estate) tax	$0.08	$480.81	$0.00	$0.00	*$480.89*
T - Excise Tax 	$0.47	$68.38	$0.00	$0.00	*$68.85*
T - West Maui Benefit Fund 	$0.00	$10.30	$0.00	$0.00	*$10.30*
*Total Taxes*	$0.55	$559.49	$0.00	$0.00	*$560.04*

X - Uncollectible Accounts	$6.52	$149.29	$80.42	$0.00	*$236.23*
X- Prior Year Deficit	$17.29	$62.84	$19.34	$0.00	*$99.47*
X - Total Extraordinary         $23.81	$212.13	$99.76	$0.00	*$335.70*

*Total Regular Expenses	$189.91	$1,595.63	$546.00	$118.53	$2,450.07*

Replacement Reserves	$5.50	$153.30	$35.87	$0.00	*$194.67*


Grand Total	$195.41	$1,748.93	$581.87	$118.53	*$2,644.74*
Amount Billed	165.83	1732	581.77	118.53	2598.13
Difference	$29.58	$16.93	$0.10	$0.00	-$46.61


----------



## LisaRex

A few things strike me as things we should demand answers from our board on: 

1) Housekeeping: We're paying $450 per owner for housekeeping.  We get housekeeping 1 time a week, plus a change of towels once a week.  By comparison, when I rented a larger 2 bdrm condo from a private owner at Kaanapali Shores, he charged me $190 for a one-time cleaning fee.  And he contracted a housekeeper privately instead of using a service!   

I realize that this amount may include upkeep of the property, including trimming the trees, leaf-blowing the pool, etc.  Once again, looking around at other places, you can rent a room at the Westin for $225/night, which includes daily housekeeping AND upkeep of the grounds.  And they are a FOR PROFIT organization.  

2) Management fees - Too many associations, too many salaries, too little to show for it.   We need to pare down the number of hands in our pocket. 

Taxes - Maui County says in their literature that they needed to increase timeshare owners' taxes because we weren't paying our fair share.  I wonder if they think $80/day is fair enough.

Basically, we're paying $1000 in management fees and taxes before we ever set foot on Maui. 

3) Financial services - We're forking out (collectively) $327,216 for "Financial Services."  What services does that firm or entity provide that is costing us 1/3 of a million bucks? 

4) I note that our "interest revenue" for all units annually is $181k.  By my account, we have $6M in our collective reserve funds.  Please tell me that we're not paying some firm $327k in order to advise us to put our $6M reserve fund in a 3% interest bearing CD...


----------



## LisaRex

I'm going to contact SVO Board Relations and request information on how to get a topic on the next board meeting. 

With MFs doubling in 5 years, I think "How do you intend to contain these double digit increases" might be a good topic.  

Our HOA Board has a legal responsibility to represent us.  They have a fiduciary responsbility as well.  I realize that they probably took on the role only as a figurehead, but I think it's time we owners forced them to do their jobs.


----------



## gregb

LisaRex,

As I understand it, they really do need the three associations.  From my WKORVN owners manual I see that:

The Ocean Resort Master Association is responsible for the pools, water falls, etc. of both WKORV and WKORVN. It is setup this way so that owners of both resorts can use any of the pools and share the costs of operating them all.

The Assoc. of Appt. Owners is responsible for the common elements and overall operation of the condominium.  

The Vacation Ownership Plan is responsible for running the TimeShare.  It pays the taxes, pays for housekeeping for most of the resort and many other costs. 

 I believe the housekeeping costs are for more than just the room.  I believe they also include the expenses to keep up the rest of the resort, like mowing the lawn, raking the leaves and keeping the public areas clean.  $446 seems  high, but costs in Maui are high.

Greg


----------



## DanCali

gregb said:


> $446 seems  high, but costs in Maui are high.



Even if costs on maui are high relative to the mainland, most of the costs associated with upkeep should be pretty stable over time at a given resort. The argument that $446 is reasonable would be strengthened if the housekeeping costs were similar 5 years ago. Given that total MFs were less than $1500 then, I am not sure that is the case... 

Does anone have the 2005 housekeeping costs for WKORV? Can anyone add any information on how the housekeeping budget line changed at other Maui resorts over time (e.g. Marriott, Maui Schooner)


----------



## DanCali

LisaRex - that's great work!


----------



## DavidnRobin

I generally store these records - they are buried right now as we do a home remodeled, but I will ask Robin if they are accessable.


----------



## DanCali

LisaRex said:


> Westin Kaanapali Maintenance fee complaints
> Westin Kaanapali MFs
> Westin Maui Maintenance fee complaints
> Westin Timeshare complaints
> Starwood complaints
> Starwood timeshare complaints
> Starwood maintenance fees
> KOR maintenance fees
> KOR-N maintenance fees
> 
> (I'm trying to spell out everything so that people who search it on Google can find this thread.)



It works! I just Googled "starwood maintenance fees" and this thread was the third hit


----------



## Troopers

Another route that may be more successful is to file a complaint with Hawaii’s Department of Consumer Affairs Regulated Industries Complaints Office (RICO).  Please note that RICO’s jurisdiction is limited to Hawaii’s Revised Statutes Chapter 514E and Hawaii’s Administration Rules Chapter 106.  I skimmed over the two chapters and found there are possibily several items that Starwood may be in violation of.

See here for past and current filed complaints against Starwood.

Also interesting is past and current filed complaints against Marriott.  See here.


----------



## ciscogizmo1

DeniseM said:


> _Courtesy of Tugger, j4sharks - thanks!_
> 
> Ocean Resort Master Association BOD
> 
> Reg Billups Pres.
> 9002 San Marco Ct.
> Orlando, FL  32189
> 
> Gerald Bodzy, VP
> P.O. Box 980097
> Houston, TX  77098-0097
> or
> 1702 Cullen Blvd.
> Houston, TX  77023
> 
> Johnathan Ho, Treas.
> 9002 San Marco Ct.
> Orlando, FL 32189
> 
> Bruce McNish, Sec.
> 2155 Kalakaua Ave. Suite 300
> Honolulu, Hi  96815
> 
> Ocean Resort Villas Owners Assoc. BOD
> 
> Gerald Bodzy, Sec.
> P.O. Box 980097
> Houston, TX  77098-0097
> or
> 1702 Cullen Blvd.
> Houston, TX  77023
> 
> William Logan, Pres.
> 6519 Kitsap Dr.
> Spokane, [WA]  99208
> 
> Mark Watford, VP
> 8054 Eagle Trail
> Dallas, TX  75238
> 
> Celia Kupersmith, VP
> 14 Burdell Ct.
> Novato, CA  94949
> 
> Jonathan Ho, Treas.
> 9002 San Marco Ct.
> Orlando, FL  32819


  Do any of these people have e-mail addresses?


----------



## LisaRex

ciscogizmo1 said:


> Do any of these people have e-mail addresses?



I'm sure they do.  Starwood will not divulge them.


----------



## K2Quick

DeniseM said:


> _Courtesy of Tugger, j4sharks - thanks!_
> William Logan, Pres.
> 6519 Kitsap Dr.
> Spokane, CA  99208



As an originally native Spokanite, I should probably point out that Spokane is in Washington, not California (though I did hear someone once refer to Spokane as Spokangeles).


----------



## DeniseM

K2Quick said:


> As an originally native Spokanite, I should probably point out that Spokane is in Washington, not California (though I did hear someone once refer to Spokane as Spokangeles).



Sorry - my fingers apparently type "CA" automatically!  

Is Washington "WA"?


----------



## K2Quick

DeniseM said:


> Sorry - my fingers apparently type "CA" automatically!
> 
> Is Washington "WA"?



Yep.  No worries on the typo.  With 14,000+ posts, you're bound to make at least one.


----------



## smitty328

With these high maintenance fees you would think every thing would be mantained. We have been here, Maui, since the 14th. In our first Building, #2 South, One elevator didn't work the entire week. It was finaly fixed this Tue. In Building #8 North, one of the elevators hasn't worked since Saturday. I also noticed an elevator out in the main building yesterday. I'm tired of waiting for the one working elevator and sharing it with cleaning or maintenance carts.


----------



## ginja

*Sick over this SVO mess*

I feel so stupid for having bought into the SVO program since just about everything they told us at the time of the sale was a lie. I just sent a bunch of registered / certified letters to all the top brass and then some. I don't expect that they will do anything but send a standard letter in return. What are owner supposed to do? If Starwood decides tomorrow that MF will be $10,000 a week are we just supposed to pay it. I understand what the Madoff victims must feel like - the SVO system is a fraud. Bought Maui in 2006 and a big selling point was knowing that we could trade and stay at St. John 3 bdrm, I called to make the trade and they told me they raised the SVO point needed and I can no longer go there in the winter! Additionally from reading this board it appears that even if they hadn't raised the points there wouldn't be a chance in hell that I would get a trade. So maybe one lucky person gets a trade they want for WSJ so that Starwood can turn around as say "see it is possible" but really it's like those crooked games at a carnival they make you think you have a chance but your just end up being a sucker for their con.


----------



## LisaRex

Ginja, I think a lot of us feel like we've been taken by Starwood.  I can only tell you this:  When people are backed into a corner, they have two responses: flee or fight.  Because Starwood, Maui County, and the economy have combined to depreciate the value of our Maui timeshare to the point where we couldn't hope to recover even close to our purchase price, let alone find another sucker willing to take on these exorbitant MFs, then we couldn't even flee if we wanted to.  That leaves us one option: to fight. 

The angrier people get, the more they will be willing to put their money where their mouth is and write letters of complaint and contact the Attorney Generals of their state. 

Courts hate one-side agreements.  By taking control of the HOA they have rendered the homeowners powerless.  We can't even vote our HOA board out of office because Starwood handpicks who sits on the board.  

I appreciate the letters you have sent.  If more people would be motivated to do so, then what little power we have would be magnified.  I work for a Fortune 50 company.  Do not underestimate the power of the consumer.


----------



## Bobby_Fletcher

LisaRex said:


> I appreciate the letters you have sent.  If more people would be motivated to do so, then what little power we have would be magnified.  I work for a Fortune 50 company.  Do not underestimate the power of the consumer.



Thanks Lisa. I'm doing okay but the increase in dues have started to make SVO not worth it.

Please let us know what we need to do. People can you post sample letters?


----------



## DeniseM

Bobby_Fletcher said:


> Thanks Lisa. I'm doing okay but the increase in dues have started to make SVO not worth it.
> 
> Please let us know what we need to do. People can you post sample letters?



Hi and welcome to TUG - Tugger gmarine (George) is spearheading the letter writing campaign, and you can send a private message to him for all the details.


----------



## ciscogizmo1

I got a reply from Starwood regarding an e-mail address.  They replied to me on 12/3... I didn't see it as we had a death in the family so, I hadn't gone back to mystarcentral account since I requested the info.

e-mail associationmgmt@starwoodvo.com


----------



## Phillydan

I think that our only recourse may be to file a class-action lawsuit against Starwood.  I agree that there were misrepresentations made by the Sales Staff selling the Westin Maui timeshares.  In addition the double digit increases in the MFs represents a material change in the contracts that we signed.  A number of people that bought into the timeshares did not pay the full cost up front and financed their purchase via Starwood or another financial entity.  According to a response that I got back to my complaints about the MF increase, the person indicated that several owners have defaulted on these loans and obviously are not paying the MFs.  

Along with Maui Counties' increase of the real estate taxes, the maintenance burden is now spread among fewer owners.  In my opinion in order to stand up against SVO, we need a collective voice not singular voices because otherwise, all we get in response is horse manure.  The single most important topic at the next HOA meeting needs to be about MFs.  They need to give us a five or even seven year plan for estimates of MF increases with their objective to keep the increases in line with inflation or cost of living increases.  As stated above, all expenditures should be questioned and validated as reasonable.

A class action lawsuit should be considered as an option, unless we get assurances that the MFs will be kept under control.  Somebody above mentioned about not being able to get a week in St. John's.  We tried getting a week in Palm Springs for Thanksgiving week and were turned down, but there were several Villas available if you wanted to book and pay for the week.  BTW, I requested the week with plenty of advance notice.  In my opinion, that is another misrepresentation of what SVO told us buyers.

Hopefully, we can get more traction and action on this in 2010.  A good first step would be to get an organized petition and letter to SVO and the HOA from as many owners as we can to sign it and send to them.  There is anyone with organizing experience and setting up a electronic petition online?


----------



## orimv

Another unhappy owner checking in...


----------



## LisaRex

Welcome to Tug, Orimv and PhillyDan.  If you haven't already, I strongly urge you to write a letter of complaint to Starwood.  Let them know that we're not going to just sit quiety and allow them to raise our MFs, while destroying the equity in the villas that we paid top dollar for. Silent acceptance is the worst possible message to send them as I really do believe that they will continue along this path until it we push back.  Now is the time to push back.

While you're at it, also write Maui county and remind them that we are middle class families here, just like them.  We bought with good intentions -- to visit Maui once a year and then to go home.  Why they feel the need to punish us for buying a timeshare is beyond my comprehension.  If they intended to punish Starwood, let them know that Starwood deflected the hit and aimed it squarely at the owners. 

Once again, thanks for coming on board.  The more united we stand, the more power we wield.


----------



## Fredm

LisaRex said:


> ..write Maui county and remind them that we are middle class families here, just like them.  We bought with good intentions -- to visit Maui once a year and then to go home.  Why they feel the need to punish us for buying a timeshare is beyond my comprehension.  If they intended to punish Starwood, let them know that Starwood deflected the hit and aimed it squarely at the owners.



Lisa, Maui County has perpetrated the the most outrageous abuse of taxing authority I have ever seen. 
Its elected officials are gutless and shameless.

Hawaii's tourist based economy is on the ropes. 
Schools have canceled 17 Friday sessions for lack of funding.
Yet, the tax assessor proudly boasts that  resident tax rates remain unchanged. Tax collections actually increased by 2%. The *entire *shortfall and then some has been absorbed by increases in timeshare tax assessments.

The State of Hawaii and Maui County could care less about what a timeshare owner has to say. They laid the tax on timeshare owners precisely because they do not vote in the jurisdiction.

As for punishing Starwood, where did you get that?


----------



## LisaRex

Fredm said:


> As for punishing Starwood, where did you get that?



It is pure speculation on my part, but I believe that Maui County is trying to bully Starwood from pursuing phase 3 (aka WKORV-NN) by steeply increasing the property taxes for timeshares.  And, of course, there's nothing to stop them from doubling it again, except their consciences, which is why I still think letters are essential.  It's easy to pass taxes against faceless, nameless people.  Not so easy when you hear from them personally.

If that doesn't work, they'll certainly start to care if/when the TSs go belly up and the tourism dollars dry up. IIRC, the #1 delinquent property tax payer this year was the group that owns the former Embassy Suites (Kaanapali Beach Club?).  Not a good sign.


----------



## Fredm

LisaRex said:


> It is pure speculation on my part, but I believe that Maui County is trying to bully Starwood from pursuing phase 3 (aka WKORV-NN) by steeply increasing the property taxes for timeshares.  And, of course, there's nothing to stop them from doubling it again, except their consciences, which is why I still think letters are essential.  It's easy to pass taxes against faceless, nameless people.  Not so easy when you hear from them personally.
> 
> If that doesn't work, they'll certainly start to care if/when the TSs go belly up and the tourism dollars dry up. IIRC, the #1 delinquent property tax payer this year was the group that owns the former Embassy Suites (Kaanapali Beach Club?).  Not a good sign.



Its easy to tax folks who cannot vote.  Nameless, faceless, or otherwise.

As for tax delinquencies, they will be paid with penalties sooner or later.

Maui did not impose this tax island-wide to stop NN. Maui approved the project. It's a separate issue having to do with the process itself. They would love to have the tax base it will bring.

The real problem is longer term for Hawaii, and timeshare owners. 
The more the traveling public rejects Hawaii, the less revenue the state and county governments will receive. 
So, they will do more of what they have already done. Tax those who do not vote. Timeshare owners and hotel transients. The worse the Hawaii economy becomes, the more burden on those who have no alternative but to pay.

Sure, an owner can sell. But the buyer is the new payee. What suffers is the equity in the timeshare. Maui could care less. Just so long as resident property taxes are subsidized to the point of absurdity.

This has nothing to do with Starwood.


----------



## johntb

We have been owners at Westin Kaanapali since the beginning and based on our enjoyment of our time in Hawaii purchased a condo pre construction at Honua Kai (the large twin towers just up the road next to WEstins phase 3 location).  The plan was to sell the weeks at Westin when we closed on the new condo, but of course now you really can't unload them at any price given the outrageous carrying costs, and in fact have been working to try and release our interest in the Honua Kai condo presale.  In looking at that situation we learned that a number of buyers (about 50) were successful in a class action suit against the developer (Intrawest) at Honua Kai based on various fraudulent claims in their initial offering.  The lawyer that represented them is Richard Rost of Wailuku.  Has anyone contacted him, or another attorney to see if there is basis for a class action suit against Westin?  A letter writing campaign isn't going to cut it with Starwood or the HOA Board, the only thing that is going to get their attention is a suit they have to respond to in court.   I'm willing to take this on but wanted to see if others have explored this first.


----------



## DeniseM

Hi PhillyDan, orimv, and John and welcome to TUG!

I also bought pre-construction at WKORV.  Various owners have send out feelers about a class action suite, but at this point, we don't have a definite plan, that I am aware of.  Many of us are frustrated with the taxes, maintenance fees, and management in general.


----------



## pointsjunkie

DeniseM said:


> Hi PhillyDan, orimv, and John and welcome to TUG!
> 
> I also bought pre-construction at WKORV.  Various owners have send out feelers about a class action suite, but at this point, we don't have a definite plan, that I am aware of.  Many of us are frustrated with the taxes, maintenance fees, and management in general.



thought i was the only one up at this hour.

happy new year denise and thanks for all that you do here on TUG>

barbra


----------



## DeniseM

HI Barbra and Happy New Year to you, too!  I'm on the West Coast so it was only 11:10 when I posted (my time.)


----------



## Sherlock

*Very Upset*

 We bought our WKORVN pre-construction.  When we arrived at the Villas North for our first visit we were sorely disappointed with the "Ocean Front" room that we paid for, that was actually 7 units back from the front of the ocean.  We were showed the ocean front rooms at the Villas South and told we could expect the same views, finishes, etc.  The views were grossly different and the finishes, too were a little lower-end then the South units.  Needless to say this was the first of our disappointment with Starwood, Westin and this whole debacle of a group we have mistakenly gotten ourselves involved with.  We are on board with a class action suit for the MF's being increased sooooo much that we cannot even afford to get to Hawaii.  We own two units and are very close to just bailing on the whole thing.  Please let us know if a class suit will be pursued.  I can spearhead this suit if someone has not taken this action. I can also play a supporting role.  Is there anyway to get a list of owners?  I know at least 5 friend/associates of mine, but there must be thousands more......I want what I was sold or I want out!


----------



## Lawlar

*OMG!!!*

We came so very close to buying at this resort.  At the last minute we decided to walk over to Marriott and buy there.  But I suspect Marriott will soon catch up to Westin in the fees they charge us.

An interesting exercise is to multiply the number of units in your complex by 50 weeks by the MF. [Unit # X 50 X MF = Rediculous]  Then you get a good idea of how outrageous the fees are.  [I would do the math for you but I don't know how many units exist in your complex.]

I did the math last year for MOC and the result was you could use the MFs to rebuild the entire complex every two years or so.

I was on the board of a condo complex in Los Angeles for a few years.  We charged each owner $225 a month for fees. [99 units] That included the maintenance of two pools, two jacuzzis, a recreation room, elaborate landscaping, ponds, streams and waterfalls (the complex was high-end), insurance, a reserve for future repairs (the roofs, common areas, painting, etc.) and whatever else was needed to keep the place in top shape.

The MOC fees for ONE WEEK almost equal what was charged for a very nice condo for ONE YEAR!!!.  

I know that a hotel has additional expenses (including the inside of the units and a bigger staff) - but the fees are totally rediculous.

I was at Marriott Tahoe several weeks ago for $300 for the entire week (an II GetaWay) and I stayed at Desert Springs for about $500 for the week.  That is substantially less than the yearly MFs charged by Marriott.

The whole concept is really upsetting.


----------



## LisaRex

Lawlar said:


> An interesting exercise is to multiply the number of units in your complex by 50 weeks by the MF. [Unit # X 50 X MF = Rediculous]



Believe me, I've been there, done that.  Our MFs, _excluding property taxes _are now $100k PER APARTMENT per year.  That's the equivalent of a similar sized condo community charging over $8,000 per month to each owner in HOA fees.  To anyone with a half a lick of sense, that is an obscene amount of money.   

To add insult to injury, the horrific MFs have helped diminish what little equity we have left in our villas.  With the highest MFs on the island, and a track record of double digit increases and record delinquencies, who in the world would buy there now? And yet Starwood is still trying to push Phase III off the ground.   

Personally, I believe they are in their final stages of a desperate campaign to keep SVO afloat.  With delinquencies rising rapidly and sales falling, Starwood has little incentive left to keep SVO on its books.  It was great when it was the cash cow.  They have to realize that they can only milk us owners for so much for so long before we all simply abandon the place.  

Oh, it's a great time to be a Starwood sucker!


----------



## thomasro3

On the bright side this is not as bad as WSJ.  On the negative side I have 4 2bdrm lockoff units here and one of them is a deluxe so I am really hurting on with the fees.  Starwood did offer to let me break it up into 3 installment payments for with the last one due in April.  

Seriously, I just spent 10k in maintenance fees for my SVO properties. I could think of many other ways that money coulda' shoulda' been spent.  I'll sign whatever lets get this thing going.  

Oh one more thing the rep did say that the association was disputing the fees and that next year they may be lower. (sounds like empty promises to me though).  

-Thomas


----------



## DeniseM

thomasro3 said:


> On the bright side this is not as bad as WSJ.  On the negative side I have 4 2bdrm lockoff units here and one of them is a deluxe so I am really hurting on with the fees.  Starwood did offer to let me break it up into 3 installment payments for with the last one due in April.



You can make installment paments on your 2010 maintenance fees if you want to - you don't have to set it up with Starwood.  Just divide your payment by 12 and make a payment every month at mystarcentral.com.



> Oh one more thing the rep did say that the association was disputing the fees and that next year they may be lower. (sounds like empty promises to me though).



We don't know if this will happen, but it is true that the majority of this year's increase was taxes, and that it is being disputed with Maui County.  If Starwood doesn't increase maintenance fees next year, and if they win the dispute, it is _possible_ that maintenance fees could go down.


----------



## Ken555

DeniseM said:


> You can make installment paments on your 2010 maintenance fees if you want to - you don't have to set it up with Starwood.  Just divide your payment by 12 and make a payment every month at mystarcentral.com.



I didn't know this was an option. Is this available on every SVN MF bill? 

I paid mine in full, but would much prefer a regular (and hopefully automatic) AMEX charge on a monthly basis for MF.


----------



## DeniseM

Ken555 said:


> I didn't know this was an option. Is this available on every SVN MF bill?
> 
> I paid mine in full, but would much prefer a regular (and hopefully automatic) AMEX charge on a monthly basis for MF.



Yep - you can make payments on mystarcentral when ever it is convenient for you.  I don't see a way to set up an automatic payment, though.  You'd probably have to call SW about that.


----------



## DavidnRobin

thomasro3 said:


> On the bright side this is not as bad as WSJ.  On the negative side I have 4 2bdrm lockoff units here and one of them is a deluxe so I am really hurting on with the fees.  Starwood did offer to let me break it up into 3 installment payments for with the last one due in April.
> 
> Seriously, I just spent 10k in maintenance fees for my SVO properties. I could think of many other ways that money coulda' shoulda' been spent.  I'll sign whatever lets get this thing going.
> 
> Oh one more thing the rep did say that the association was disputing the fees and that next year they may be lower. (sounds like empty promises to me though).
> 
> -Thomas



I do not think it is worse for WSJ - a big part of the MFs for WSJ is the 3 year special assessment (1 more year left) - w/o the SA - our MFs are around $2K (still too much...), but a WKORV Dlx has MFs of ~$2800.

The way I look at it (likely skewed) is the MFs for WKORV are in 3 buckets

1) The regular MFs for upkeep (too high and should be managed better and transparent, but what we signed up for...)

2) The increase due to deliquent owners - the most controversial since lack of transparency has no record on how those VOIs are being used and how that money comes back to the HOA (if at all...)

3) The increase in taxes - which we may (or may not) get back, but at least it is transparent

I worry most about #2 - since I believe adequate money/compenstation is not coming back to the HOA (if at all) for the deliquent VOIs and are being used by SVO, and the money is ending up in SVO's pocket (and not the HOA where it should be).  IMO - THIS is where an Owner lawsuit is needed (at least to force transparancy and accountability of these monies).


----------



## thomasro3

DavidnRobin said:


> I do not think it is worse for WSJ - a big part of the MFs for WSJ is the 3 year special assessment (1 more year left) - w/o the SA - our MFs are around $2K (still too much...), but a WKORV Dlx has MFs of ~$2800.....



Yes, I was lumping your "special" assessment along with the MFs.  
RE: 1. I do agree with you there needs to be more transparency.
2. Those delinquent rentals should go back into our association pot.
3.  Yup taxes and fees are what they are but tranparency would appreciated with regard to these as well.  

Don't get me wrong.. I love vacationing to these resorts I'm headed to Princeville this Feb.  and finally got WSJ for this april, I just HATE throwing money away or in this case watching someone else possibly squandering what I have worked so hard to earn.


----------



## DavidnRobin

thomasro3 said:


> Yes, I was lumping your "special" assessment along with the MFs.
> RE: 1. I do agree with you there needs to be more transparency.
> 2. Those delinquent rentals should go back into our association pot.
> 3.  Yup taxes and fees are what they are but tranparency would appreciated with regard to these as well.
> 
> Don't get me wrong.. I love vacationing to these resorts I'm headed to Princeville this Feb.  and finally got WSJ for this april, I just HATE throwing money away or in this case watching someone else possibly squandering what I have worked so hard to earn.



The problem with #2 - is that no one knows (outside of SVO) - to my knowledge - what happens to these VOIs.  I am not sure (in fact I doubt) that these monies goes back to the HOA - I think the money is being funneled back to SVO thru a variety of methods.  I was dealing with this back in November before life went crazy for me - maybe now I will find some time. I was going back thru threads and it appears that no one still has an answer for what happens to these VOIs.

Hopefully - if we can get a Tugger on the HOA BOD - we can get a real answer.


----------



## ocdb8r

DavidnRobin said:


> I do not think it is worse for WSJ - a big part of the MFs for WSJ is the 3 year special assessment (1 more year left) - w/o the SA - our MFs are around $2K (still too much...), but a WKORV Dlx has MFs of ~$2800.



The only thing you have to keep in mind is that the WSJ maint fees don't include the large tax bill likely to come due at some point in the near future.  While there is a court case in the USVI that has seen some succes, at some point SOME sort of property tax is going to be levied and after not being paid for 3-4 years, it's not giong to be pretty.  

The bottom line is that the fees being charged at MANY of the resorts are totally untenable in this economy.  I have no idea HOW SVO can continue to sell weeks at some of these places.  How does anyone justify $2800/week in addition to the huge initial outlay?  The resorts are NOT that nice and the level of upkeep is nowhere near what it should be for what they are bringing in.


----------



## DavidnRobin

I am certainly aware of the USVI tax situation - and amazed that the USVI Gov't can even function w/o these taxes. Luckily I was on the ball enough to have the taxes accounted for our last purchase there (I had owners compensate me for the back taxes due - 3 years worth), and I remind all that listen to take these taxes into account.  I dread the day these taxes become due - I owe ~$2400 as it stands now.


----------



## EGSchwartz

Phillydan said:


> I think that our only recourse may be to file a class-action lawsuit against Starwood.  I agree that there were misrepresentations made by the Sales Staff selling the Westin Maui timeshares.  In addition the double digit increases in the MFs represents a material change in the contracts that we signed.  A number of people that bought into the timeshares did not pay the full cost up front and financed their purchase via Starwood or another financial entity.  According to a response that I got back to my complaints about the MF increase, the person indicated that several owners have defaulted on these loans and obviously are not paying the MFs.
> 
> Along with Maui Counties' increase of the real estate taxes, the maintenance burden is now spread among fewer owners.  In my opinion in order to stand up against SVO, we need a collective voice not singular voices because otherwise, all we get in response is horse manure.  The single most important topic at the next HOA meeting needs to be about MFs.  They need to give us a five or even seven year plan for estimates of MF increases with their objective to keep the increases in line with inflation or cost of living increases.  As stated above, all expenditures should be questioned and validated as reasonable.
> 
> A class action lawsuit should be considered as an option, unless we get assurances that the MFs will be kept under control.  Somebody above mentioned about not being able to get a week in St. John's.  We tried getting a week in Palm Springs for Thanksgiving week and were turned down, but there were several Villas available if you wanted to book and pay for the week.  BTW, I requested the week with plenty of advance notice.  In my opinion, that is another misrepresentation of what SVO told us buyers.
> 
> Hopefully, we can get more traction and action on this in 2010.  A good first step would be to get an organized petition and letter to SVO and the HOA from as many owners as we can to sign it and send to them.  There is anyone with organizing experience and setting up a electronic petition online?


If anyone gets a class-action suit going, letter writing campaign (I've done mine), or online petition, count me in.  I am sick of this crap with these increases.

If this were a real for profit company, versus one in which SVO can keep coming back to the owners for more money, the Rivera, Lundberg, the management team, and others would have been fired already.


----------



## LisaRex

EGSchwartz said:


> If anyone gets a class-action suit going, letter writing campaign (I've done mine), or online petition, count me in.  I am sick of this crap with these increases.
> 
> If this were a real for profit company, versus one in which SVO can keep coming back to the owners for more money, the Rivera, Lundberg, the management team, and others would have been fired already.



I agree 100%.  We're being taken for a ride and we're not enjoying it.  

Welcome to TUG. The more people we can unite, the more power we'll have.


----------



## wannagotoo

I wrote the County of Maui, Real Property Tax Division. Information from LA Times 1/2/10:
-number of visitors in Nov fell 17% from 2007 and total spending decreased 1.3 billion for the first 11 months of '09 from same period in '08
-Occupancy on the big island was at 40%
-Estimate $1 billion drop in hotel revenue across state, etc.

The point of my letters was: For the tourists that are left, the "tax restructuring" on Maui will make it the least desireable island as lodging will become more expensive. If they want to compete for what is left of the tourist dollar, they need to reconsider the tax increase. 

This is just one small piece of the problem. Starwood is responsible for the rest.


----------



## clsmit

*Another article on Maui Time Share taxes*

Nevermind -- it's posted on the other timeshare thread by nodge. His Starwood Google Alert is faster than mine.


----------



## schesman

*Thanks for hosting this thread*

Like most everyone else, I feel the salesman who sold me my properties criminally mislead me. The sales pitch focused on how the economics of the deal made sense - that it would cost much more to get a comparable hotel room. Even forgetting my initial expense, it is no longer true that the timeshare is a better deal than a hotel and it was never disclosed (other than perhaps in fine print?) that maintenance fees could increase unchecked to the point where the model no longer worked.

The sales pitch also focused on how oceanfront land was extremely scarce in Maui and there could be no more developments, preserving our property value. He even pointed to the empty lot next door as an example of land that Maui was not going to allow to be developed.  Well, since I bought phase I they expanded into that lot next door (phase II) and now plan for phase III.

They did oversell the opportunities to travel to other SVO properties.  In reality it is virtually impossible - especially at St. Johns. The fact that St. Johns is even listed in their literature should be illegal misrepresentation.

I am trying to decide if I want to walk away and deal with the credit ramifications or continue down this path of unrestricted annual MF increases. If anyone ever comes up with an idea on how to proceed please post it.


----------



## DeniseM

Hi schesman and welcome to TUG!  

If you decide to get rid of your timeshare, you can sell it or give it away, and avoid the credit ding.  You won't get anywhere near what you paid, but you can certainly get something out of it, and avoid damaging your credit.


----------



## DavidnRobin

In then contract you signed there is a clause that anything a salesperson stated to you verbally is not valid unless specifically contained in the contract.  (aka the 'nodge' clause)
http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=305445&postcount=56
{sorry nodge - i mistakenly thought this came from negma - and decided to find the specific post...}


Instead of walking away - unite with other Owners to fight the lack of transparency by the WKORV HOA BOD, and SVO questionable practices of grabbing money from Owners instead of putting back into the HOA.

The fight is only beginning - you would be amazed on how many Owners have finally/recently found TUG (lurking and directly) due to the escalating increase in MFs.

Tell all who will listen and join the ranks of Owners who are motivated to do something... it is up to us and no one else.  The momentum is building...


----------



## DanCali

... and if you do choose to part ways with your timeshare, you can still get quite a bit for a Westin Maui timeshare, even at this level of MFs. Here are a couple of eBay auctions that ended very recently:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270508230707
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=150404897047

And this one ends later today...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=120518657901

You don't have to literally "walk away" and suffer the credit consequences associated with that.


----------



## BurnedBySVO

*Do You Want to Purchase My Unit(s)*



DeniseM said:


> Hi schesman and welcome to TUG!
> 
> If you decide to get rid of your timeshare, you can sell it or give it away, and avoid the credit ding.  You won't get anywhere near what you paid, but you can certainly get something out of it, and avoid damaging your credit.



Denise -
I have been trying to sell my timeshare units at the Westin Ka'anapali Resort Villas for nearly a year, and have placed ads on several websites. I have not takers. Are you aware of a place where buyers are actually interested in acquiring timeshares. If so, please let me know. If not, I may have an out that may be of interest to the group.


----------



## DeniseM

BurnedBySVO said:


> Denise -
> I have been trying to sell my timeshare units at the Westin Ka'anapali Resort Villas for nearly a year, and have placed ads on several websites. I have not takers. Are you aware of a place where buyers are actually interested in acquiring timeshares. If so, please let me know. If not, I may have an out that may be of interest to the group.



Hi and welcome to TUG!  

You can sell it, but you will need to lower your price to about 40% of original retail - or less - that's where the market is today.


----------



## DavidnRobin

BurnedBySVO said:


> Denise -
> I have been trying to sell my timeshare units at the Westin Ka'anapali Resort Villas for nearly a year, and have placed ads on several websites. I have not takers. Are you aware of a place where buyers are actually interested in acquiring timeshares. If so, please let me know. If not, I may have an out that may be of interest to the group.




Check out the thread on eBay sales - that will give you a sense of what the bottom price is.  However, based on your last sentence and title of your post - I would caution you about trying this 'out' with educated Tuggers (not to mention TUG's policy for solicitation).


----------



## Ågent99

Yes, if MFs continue to increase, some of us will have little recourse but to give away (i.e. sell at a huge discount) our TS.  Starwood must know that this is a HORRIBLE long-term plan and that they will NOT attract new (suckers) clients....


----------



## LisaRex

DeniseM said:


> You can sell it, but you will need to lower your price to about 40% of original retail - or less - that's where the market is today.



I think that's optimistic.  From what I've been seeing, prices are far less than that. I bought my OF unit for $52 when they were selling them for $80k.  I'd be very lucky to get $25k now.


----------



## naka4

*Owner List - Law Suit*



johntb said:


> We have been owners at Westin Kaanapali since the beginning and based on our enjoyment of our time in Hawaii purchased a condo pre construction at Honua Kai (the large twin towers just up the road next to WEstins phase 3 location).  The plan was to sell the weeks at Westin when we closed on the new condo, but of course now you really can't unload them at any price given the outrageous carrying costs, and in fact have been working to try and release our interest in the Honua Kai condo presale.  In looking at that situation we learned that a number of buyers (about 50) were successful in a class action suit against the developer (Intrawest) at Honua Kai based on various fraudulent claims in their initial offering.  The lawyer that represented them is Richard Rost of Wailuku.  Has anyone contacted him, or another attorney to see if there is basis for a class action suit against Westin?  A letter writing campaign isn't going to cut it with Starwood or the HOA Board, the only thing that is going to get their attention is a suit they have to respond to in court.   I'm willing to take this on but wanted to see if others have explored this first.




I totally agree with you! We are ready to get involved as well. I know some of the St. Johns owner have started an owner list etc. We need to unite and not sit still for this!


----------



## RThompson

*Maint. Fees Westin Kaanapali*

I have read many of the post on the site complaining about the high fees, but have not seen anything that compares the fees at similar programs like the Marriott  in Maui for example. I happened to be passing by a Time Share resale office here in Maui a few days back and they had a listing of units available and the fees for each one. The Marroitt fees for a comparable Westin unit looked to be around $1600, not the $2348 that we pay. I have seen lots of post saying this cost is too high or that cost is too high, but if we don't compare the figures to something real, they these are just hollow comments. Certainly looking at that list, if I was a time share buyer, why would I want to pay such high fees for a Westin property when I could get the same deal from Marriott for so much less. I think that is the area we should be focusing on - the fees charged by other  competitiveproperties......

A very disappointed owner,
Richard


----------



## Quick Carl

*Could it be a matter of how many people are paying the fees?*

Excuse me for not reading the whole thread before posting this because it is a lot to read and I need to get to bed. This can be deleted if it is erroneous.
I think what might be happening here is that because of the bad economic times, is that there is now a smaller group of time share owners paying the same if not higher operating budget. So the net result is that every remaining owner must now pay a higher share. 
There undoubtedly have been a lot of defaults in addition to not all of the rooms ever being sold. If Starwood held the paper on many of these and they defaulted, then who owns them or is holding them now? Were they immediately resold so new owners can pay their fees or is starwood sitting on them? So who is paying the maintenance fees and taxes on them now? Is Starwood paying or are as I have a hunch, the remaining owners now having to foot the bill for them.  How else can they now rent rooms for less than what it costs us for our maintenance fees alone. How can that be? To me it would seems like those rooms are being rented out and that money is being pocketed without proper reimbursement to those who are being saddled with all of the operating expenses. I would imagine Starwood is using these on the spot room rentals to cover the bad paper they lent out, but if they are using maids and grounds keepers and taxes in these rooms then they need to pay for that. If Starwood wrote bad paper then they have to cover it, not us the ones who paid for our units.


----------



## LisaRex

Quick Carl said:


> I think what might be happening here is that because of the bad economic times, is that there is now a smaller group of time share owners paying the same if not higher operating budget. So the net result is that every remaining owner must now pay a higher share.



This is true and was explained in our MF letter when they increased our MFs from $1900 to $2600. I believe in 2010 we're paying $250-300 at WKORV for delinquencies. 



			
				Quick Carl said:
			
		

> There undoubtedly have been a lot of defaults in addition to not all of the rooms ever being sold. If Starwood held the paper on many of these and they defaulted, then who owns them or is holding them now?



By "held the paper" do you mean who wrote the loan? If so, then it depended on how the owner paid for their TSs.  Some paid cash out of their savings; some opened up HELOCs; some put it on their credit cards; some financed them through Starwood.  If you're speaking only about the last group, then Starwood owned the loan though it may been then sold off. In any event, this is one of the "conflict of interest" areas because part of the reason that they are stalling on foreclosures may well be because they don't want to write off that note. 



			
				Quick Carl said:
			
		

> Were they immediately resold so new owners can pay their fees or is starwood sitting on them?



Starwood has yet to foreclose on any of these units, to the best of my knowledge.  However, they have said that they will BEGIN foreclosing "soon."  And when they DO foreclose, they have indicated that they will auction them off at a price that includes past due MFs so that the HOA will be made whole.  We shall see. 



			
				Quick Carl said:
			
		

> So who is paying the maintenance fees and taxes on them now? Is Starwood paying or are as I have a hunch, the remaining owners now having to foot the bill for them.



Remaining owners are being forced to foot the delinquencies. 



			
				Quick Carl said:
			
		

> How else can they now rent rooms for less than what it costs us for our maintenance fees alone. How can that be? To me it would seems like those rooms are being rented out and that money is being pocketed without proper reimbursement to those who are being saddled with all of the operating expenses.



Bingo! They get all the upside and we get all the downside. Great contract, no?



			
				Quick Carl said:
			
		

> I would imagine Starwood is using these on the spot room rentals to cover the bad paper they lent out, but if they are using maids and grounds keepers and taxes in these rooms then they need to pay for that. If Starwood wrote bad paper then they have to cover it, not us the ones who paid for our units.



It is written in the Owner's Agreement that any unbooked inventory becomes Starwood's property to dispose of as they wish at 90 days out.  They pay the HOA nothing for this except perhaps a "housekeeping fee" and even then they only pay it if they deem that extra help was needed to cover the rentals.  Since the housekeepers are undoubtedly paid hourly, and renters are entitled to daily maid service, you'd think the HOA would be getting a housekeeping fee reimbursement from every rental.  You'd think.


----------



## gregb

I think it is important to distinguish between delinquencies on MF to the HOA and delinquencies on a purchase loan to Starwood.  

If an owner financed a unit purchase with a loan from Starwood and they are now delinquent on the loan, it is up to Starwood to decide when to foreclose on the loan.  But this has no direct impact on the HOA maintenance fees.

Now it is likely that an owner that is delinquent on their loan is also delinquent on their MF, (but that is not a given).  So if they are delinquent on their MF, then the HOA has the right to start foreclosure on the unit, independent of any loan that Starwood may have outstanding on the unit.  

I expect that the Starwood loan would be a first mortgage and I don't know where the MF lien would fall, either before the first mortgage, or subordinate to the first mortgage.

If Starwood were to foreclose on a purchase loan, then Starwood would become the owner of record, and responsible for any past due MFs, if any.  If the HOA does the foreclosure, then we all become owners of the unit, and we all responsible for the MFs.  

So there is a big difference between who starts a foreclosure on a unit, the HOA or Starwood.

Greg


----------



## gregb

LisaRex said:


> It is written in the Owner's Agreement that any unbooked inventory becomes Starwood's property to dispose of as they wish at 90 days out.  They pay the HOA nothing for this except perhaps a "housekeeping fee" and even then they only pay it if they deem that extra help was needed to cover the rentals.  Since the housekeepers are undoubtedly paid hourly, and renters are entitled to daily maid service, you'd think the HOA would be getting a housekeeping fee reimbursement from every rental.  You'd think.



Two items I want to address here.  

First, LisaRex assumes that the HOA is responsible for the cleaning fees for the room.  I am not sure where this idea comes from.  If I ask Starwood to rent out my unit (not a good deal, I know), they do not charge me a cleaning fee.  Rather, they pay the cleaning fee from the 50% of the rental income that they keep.  I believe this is the same for the HOA.

Second, you have to remember that hotel rooms are like airplane seats.  Once the plane has taken off, you can no longer sell the seat and any revenue from that seat is lost.  I believe the 90 day (or whatever it is) time frame that Starwood has to rent units is to allow time for them to market and rent units so that they do not sit vacant. 

Greg


----------



## DanCali

gregb said:


> Second, you have to remember that hotel rooms are like airplane seats.  Once the plane has taken off, you can no longer sell the seat and any revenue from that seat is lost.  I believe the 90 day (or whatever it is) time frame that Starwood has to rent units is to allow time for them to market and rent units so that they do not sit vacant.



But Starwood doesn't own the place and they don't give the rental income to the HOA...

90 days is also the window where (i) owners can book short stays and (ii) owners can borrow SOs from the following year to book stays in current year. Wouldn't it be better to see how this plays out? If Starwood grabs the best inventory at 90 days out that doesn't help those owners.


----------



## jarta

"I believe the 90 day (*or whatever it is*) time frame that Starwood has to rent units is to allow time for them to market and rent units so that they do not sit vacant."

I think since the debate centers around the provisions of the "90 day rule" and how it works, it would be useful if someone posted the rule or a link to where it is earlier posted on TUG.  I do not remember anyone posting the provisions in the last few years.  Thanks in advance to whoever comes up with the rule.

Perhaps the provision could then be placed in one of the Starwood stickys so that it could be easily referred to.   ...   eom


----------



## Fredm

LisaRex said:


> I think that's optimistic.  From what I've been seeing, prices are far less than that. I bought my OF unit for $52 when they were selling them for $80k.  I'd be very lucky to get $25k now.



Yep. 25k is about right.


----------



## LisaRex

jarta said:


> I think since the debate centers around the provisions of the "90 day rule" and how it works, it would be useful if someone posted the rule or a link to where it is earlier posted on TUG.  I do not remember anyone posting the provisions in the last few years.  Thanks in advance to whoever comes up with the rule.



You're killing me!  (furiously paging through the OA).


----------



## jarta

Lisa,   ...   I'm not implying there is no provision for 90 day rentals.  I'm more interested in what it says.

No hurry is necessary.  Enjoy your Sunday morning coffee.  lol!   ...   eom


----------



## timeos2

*There is a conflict it seems*



gregb said:


> I expect that the Starwood loan would be a first mortgage and I don't know where the MF lien would fall, either before the first mortgage, or subordinate to the first mortgage.
> 
> If Starwood were to foreclose on a purchase loan, then Starwood would become the owner of record, and responsible for any past due MFs, if any.  If the HOA does the foreclosure, then we all become owners of the unit, and we all responsible for the MFs.
> 
> So there is a big difference between who starts a foreclosure on a unit, the HOA or Starwood.
> 
> Greg



The HOA claim always falls second to any outstanding mortgage. So if the HOA forecloses on a unit that has a mortgage they get nothing (no right to resell) until that mortgage is satisfied. Thus there is no value, only more cost, to an Association foreclosure in that situation. 

If Starwood or a subsidiary holds the mortgage then there is indeed a big appearance of conflict of interest as the management side should be pushing for foreclosure thus pushing responsibility for the annual fees over to Starwood as the owner after foreclosure. But the mortgage holder may not want that cost so they don't take action leaving the other owners to cover the fees uncollected. 

Not a good situation and one far too many developer managed resorts find themselves in. Add in an automatic and guaranteed percentage for the management on every dollar collected, rather than a fixed management fee, and the possibility for abuse is obvious. The rapidly rising fees seem to be proof that the system works for the developer but not the individual owners. It is not a pretty picture and unlikely to change given the horrible thresholds for management change that have been written into the documents. Those might not hold up in a legal challenge (in fact they most likely wouldn't) BUT the cost to make that challenge would be prohibitive and tough for the owners to come up with. I wouldn't want to be an owner caught in this costly mess.


----------



## jarta

"If Starwood or a subsidiary holds the mortgage then there is indeed a big appearance of conflict of interest as the management side should be pushing for foreclosure thus pushing responsibility for the annual fees over to Starwood as the owner after foreclosure. But the mortgage holder may not want that cost so they don't take action leaving the other owners to cover the fees uncollected."

I doubt any association would be pushing a bank to foreclose if the mortgage was in default on a home.

In these days of securitized mortgages, wouldn't the lender to Starwood be the one that should be more concerned?  An "appearance of a conflict of interest" may be in the eye of the beholder.  There may be no actual conflict of interest in having a unit in default on the mortgage and not foreclosing and still being the property manager.

The association interest is being paid the MF.  There would, IMO, only be an actual conflict of interest if the MF was unpaid and the the property manager says do not file the lien.

The association lien for MF and late fees must be cleared when the property is sold.  No payment, no good title.  The "enforcer" at Starwood for the association lien is Jose Pagan.  If the MF remain unpaid, he will not change the official list of association members from the seller to the buyer and the week cannot be used by the new owner.  That's why an estoppel letter should be a requirement before the buyer sends any money to the transfer company.

So, for any Starwood resort's association, it's mainly a timing of collection problem for the MF.  But, it can be a big problem.   ...   eom


----------



## kylo77

*count us in....*

My wife and I bought into the hype while vacationing in Maui back in 2005.  We have not been back there for various reason but use our points elsewhere.  The recent increase in the MF is cost prohibitive at this point.  If there is a class action in the works here please contact us.

Does anyone know what the resale is for 1 week, annual, 2 bedroom lockouts?


----------



## DeniseM

Hi and welcome to TUG!  

Are you saying you own a fixed week 1, or that you own a floating week, deeded week 1?

What is your deeded view?

Someone saw a 2 bdm. ocean front unit on eBay for $15K recently.


----------



## gregb

I am not a lawyer, so my thoughts may be out of line.  But I believe that a second or subordinate lien on a property can start foreclosure on the property.  What the first lien holder does at that point is up to the first lien holder.  My guess is that they would also start foreclosure to protect their interests.  But I do believe that the HOA could force the first lien holder's hand if they wanted to start foreclosure for delinquent MF.

I understand some of the financial ramifications that can affect the first lien holders desire to start foreclosure.  I know that many banks that have delinquent loans on regular Condos have delayed starting foreclosure because they don't want to be responsible for the HOA fees.  I guess I don't see why Starwood and/or the folks they sold the paper to, should react any different from the banks?

Greg


----------



## gregb

timeos2 said:


> If Starwood or a subsidiary holds the mortgage then there is indeed a big appearance of conflict of interest as the management side should be pushing for foreclosure thus pushing responsibility for the annual fees over to Starwood as the owner after foreclosure. But the mortgage holder may not want that cost so they don't take action leaving the other owners to cover the fees uncollected.



I think there is a mixing of who is responsible for running the resort.  Yes, Starwood manages the resort, but it is under the agreement from the HOA.  So it would not be up to Starwood management to decide about foreclosure on delinquent MF's.  It is up to the HOA.  So I don't see a conflict of interest here.

Greg


----------



## timeos2

*They can't have it both ways*



gregb said:


> I think there is a mixing of who is responsible for running the resort.  Yes, Starwood manages the resort, but it is under the agreement from the HOA.  So it would not be up to Starwood management to decide about foreclosure on delinquent MF's.  It is up to the HOA.  So I don't see a conflict of interest here.
> 
> Greg



Operation of the HOA and resort IS management. Has the management recommended to the Board that whatever action makes sense regarding delinquent accounts be taken or have they held off as that would impact another of the Starwood controlled companies?  A key to running any resort is the timely collection of the fees. Ignoring that critical function is not good management and not in the best interest of the owners. If (and it is an "if") that is happening then it would be a conflict of interest for Starwood to have a stake on both sides.  Careful looks at other similar situations at other resorts has come to the conclusion that the management was in fact playing both sides and had failed to meet its responsibilities. That could be happening here as well.


----------



## gregb

timeos2 said:


> Operation of the HOA and resort IS management. Has the management recommended to the Board that whatever action makes sense regarding delinquent accounts be taken or have they held off as that would impact another of the Starwood controlled companies?  A key to running any resort is the timely collection of the fees. Ignoring that critical function is not good management and not in the best interest of the owners. If (and it is an "if") that is happening then it would be a conflict of interest for Starwood to have a stake on both sides.  Careful looks at other similar situations at other resorts has come to the conclusion that the management was in fact playing both sides and had failed to meet its responsibilities. That could be happening here as well.



It depends on how much influence you believe Starwood has on the HOA.  I really believe that if the HOA wanted to start foreclosure for delinquent MF, they can and would do it.  Starwood management might not like it, but they would have to play along if the HOA says to.

Greg


----------



## timeos2

gregb said:


> I am not a lawyer, so my thoughts may be out of line.  But I believe that a second or subordinate lien on a property can start foreclosure on the property.  What the first lien holder does at that point is up to the first lien holder.  My guess is that they would also start foreclosure to protect their interests.  But I do believe that the HOA could force the first lien holder's hand if they wanted to start foreclosure for delinquent MF.
> 
> Greg



No, they can't "force the lien holders hand" since it is clear in the law that the mortgage holder takes precedence over any claim by the HOA for fees. It would be money thrown away if the HOA acted to foreclose when they know there is an outstanding mortgage.  



gregb said:


> I understand some of the financial ramifications that can affect the first lien holders desire to start foreclosure. I know that many banks that have delinquent loans on regular Condos have delayed starting foreclosure because they don't want to be responsible for the HOA fees. I guess I don't see why Starwood and/or the folks they sold the paper to, should react any different from the banks?



And there is the problem. The same company that should be protecting the owners by taking action to collect or foreclose on delinquent accounts may be instead holding off on foreclosure to prevent having the fee obligation fall to another branch of their own company.  It is easy to see how this can be a serious conflict of interest.  Yes they may be acting just as a bank would but a bank isn't asking to be paid to operate the resort at the same time. It is a can of worms and clearly not good for the owners.


----------



## gregb

timeos2 said:


> And there is the problem. The same company that should be protecting the owners by taking action to collect or foreclose on delinquent accounts may be instead holding off on foreclosure to prevent having the fee obligation fall to another branch of their own company.  It is easy to see how this can be a serious conflict of interest.  Yes they may be acting just as a bank would but a bank isn't asking to be paid to operate the resort at the same time. It is a can of worms and clearly not good for the owners.



OK, I guess I finally get your point.  That is, that Starwood has little incentive to start foreclosure on a delinquent mortgage and because they would be responsible for the MF.  And that the HOA is not really able to start foreclosure on a unit that has an outstanding mortgage.  Is that it?

Greg


----------



## timeos2

gregb said:


> OK, I guess I finally get your point.  That is, that Starwood has little incentive to start foreclosure on a delinquent mortgage and because they would be responsible for the MF.  And that the HOA is not really able to start foreclosure on a unit that has an outstanding mortgage.  Is that it?
> 
> Greg



Yes. That's it in a nutshell.


----------



## jarta

timeos2,   ...   "Yes they may be acting just as a bank would but a bank isn't asking to be paid to operate the resort at the same time. It is a can of worms and clearly not good for the owners."

Then, would you have *all* the branded timeshares kicked out of management of the resorts they developed?  All SVO resorts should fire Starwood.  All Marriott resorts should fire Marriott?  All Disney resorts should fire Disney?

And wouldn't the branded resorts take their brand with them and cause all developer resorts to be rebranded?

Or, would you have all the mortgages sold off in this environment?  

But, this is essentially what happens now when a mortgage is securitized.  The value of a future mortgage income stream is sold as bonds with the mortgage stream guaranteeing repayment of the bonds.  The mortgage payments end up being held by a trustee for the benefit of the bondholders - to redeem the bonds when they become due.

In doing this, mortgages generating perhaps 117 percent of the mortgage stream necessary to pay off 100% of the bonds and interest are securitized.  But, if the secured mortgages default in large enough numbers, the bonds drop in value because the 17% cushion might not be enough to pay off the bonds and interest.  The bonds become more risky and they will sell for less than par on any resale market.  

It's the trustee of the paid mortgage payments and/or the bondholders who should scream about a failure to take steps to foreclose a delinquent mortgage.

The HOA members should scream about the defaults on MF.

I still don't see the conflict of interest in running a resort and holding paper that has mostly been securitized.  There is a difference between conflict of interest and bad advice.  Telling the board not to at least record the lien for MF against the property to ensure eventual payment is bad advice whether or not there is any mortgage.

Of course, there is no evidence whatsoever that SVO resorts are not filing those liens.  To the contrary, I've seen county records showing that the liens are being filed.

And, every branded resort has a Jose Pagan acting as enforcer to see that the MFs are brought current when the property is transferred.  No MFs; no transfer of ownership on the association records.  And, the association controls who gets to make a reservation.    ...   eom


----------



## kylo77

DeniseM said:


> Hi and welcome to TUG!
> 
> Are you saying you own a fixed week 1, or that you own a floating week, deeded week 1?
> 
> What is your deeded view?
> 
> Someone saw a 2 bdm. ocean front unit on eBay for $15K recently.



Thanks Denise, we have a floating week with an island view.  $15k ouch!


----------



## DeniseM

kylo77 said:


> Thanks Denise, we have a floating week with an island view.  $15k ouch!




Thn I would say it would probably go for less then $10K.


----------



## DavidnRobin

DeniseM said:


> Thn I would say it would probably go for less then $10K.



Having tracked Westin VOIs on eBay - I have not seen an OF villa WKORV/N for $15K - please supply link (did it not have 'Westin' in auction Title?) - I have seen a VOI that uses the term OF resort (but the villa is not OF) - that is common in eBay auctions.


----------



## DeniseM

David - it was posted here within the last 10 days - I didn't go back and look it up though, so it's possible that I am incorrect.  (For the first time ever! )


----------



## Fredm

Our most recent ( past 30 days) KOR-N sold prices:

 Annual OF  $24,500
 Biennial OF $13,000

 Annual OF Ultra Premium - week 10  $25,900

Annual IV    $14,000
Biennial IV   $8,000


----------



## DanCali

DavidnRobin said:


> Having tracked Westin VOIs on eBay - I have not seen an OF villa WKORV/N for $15K - please supply link (did it not have 'Westin' in auction Title?) - I have seen a VOI that uses the term OF resort (but the villa is not OF) - that is common in eBay auctions.



I haven't seen WKORV OF but have seen WKORVN OF pretty recently:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=350307161885 ($16800 on 1/26/10). I also posted it on the eBay thread. It's more than $15K, but certainly in the neighborhood...

That is not much more than what recent OV units at WKORV sold for. I looked at the resort map, and this is "borderline" OF (unit 5608). Since you don't get your deeded unit but just a deeded view when you make a reservation, if SVO classifies this as OF then FWIW you will get that type of OF view when you book (maybe a bit better or worse).

I imagine OF at WKORV would sell for more - but at this level of MFs I don't know if the premium would be much higher, especially on eBay.


EDIT: P.S.  I just called owner services and confirmed that 5608 is "Ocean Front"...


----------



## Fredm

DanCali said:


> I haven't seen WKORV OF but have seen WKORVN OF pretty recently:
> 
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=350307161885 ($16800 on 1/26/10). I also posted it on the eBay thread. It's more than $15K, but certainly in the neighborhood...
> 
> That is not much more than what recent OV units at WKORV sold for. I looked at the resort map, and this is "borderline" OF (unit 5608). Since you don't get your deeded unit but just a deeded view when you make a reservation, if SVO classifies this as OF then FWIW you will get that type of OF view when you book (maybe a bit better or worse).
> 
> I imagine OF at WKORV would sell for more - but at this level of MFs I don't know if the premium would be much higher, especially on eBay.
> 
> 
> EDIT: P.S.  I just called owner services and confirmed that 5608 is "Ocean Front"...



The seller is redweek4less. 
Be careful.
http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=114340

.


----------



## DavidnRobin

Fredm said:


> The seller is redweek4less.
> Be careful.
> http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=114340
> 
> .



I agree with FredM - redweek4less is a very poor eBay seller.  They are an eBay seller that seems to have a successful auction - only to have an identical property pop-up again on eBay at some point later.  I often do not track redweek4less auctions because of issues like these - or ridiculous values being put on the TS in the first place.

We love our OF WKORV Dlx villa - however, the ridiculous MFs are getting very difficult to swallow.


----------



## DanCali

Fredm said:


> The seller is redweek4less.
> Be careful.
> http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=114340
> 
> .



Oh - I'm not loking to buy...

Are you saying the price may be depressed because it's this particular seller? It could be - I'm aware of their reputation on TUG but have also seen people who said it worked out for them. It's hard to give them negative feedback if deals take longer than 60 days to close. The reality is that they have 97% positive feedback which doesn't look bad. All it takes is 2 bidders to drive the price up to a competitive eBay price. This auction had 15 different bidders. Generally speaking, I haven't seen much evidence that this eBay seller gets lower resale prices than other more reputable ones.

Overall, I'm pretty sure purchasing from this seller is accompanied with worries and headaches. On the other hand, if this is indeed unit 5608 (and I see no reason why it would have been mislisted given that the unit and view are consistent), the buyer got a good deal...


----------



## Fredm

There are many TUG threads about redweek4less.

Here's another that sums it up:
http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89675


----------



## Fredm

DanCali said:


> Oh - I'm not loking to buy...
> 
> Are you saying the price may be depressed because it's this particular seller? It could be - I'm aware of their reputation on TUG but have also seen people who said it worked out for them. It's hard to give them negative feedback if deals take longer than 60 days to close. The reality is that they have 97% positive feedback which doesn't look bad. All it takes is 2 bidders to drive the price up to a competitive eBay price. This auction had 15 different bidders. Generally speaking, I haven't seen much evidence that this eBay seller gets lower resale prices than other more reputable ones.
> 
> Overall, I'm pretty sure purchasing from this seller is accompanied with worries and headaches. On the other hand, if this is indeed unit 5608 (and I see no reason why it would have been mislisted given that the unit and view are consistent), the buyer got a good deal...



Dan, most of the positive feedback is on the buying end of small ebay items.

 If past reports here are accurate what is likely occurring is that the seller does not really control the inventory. That is why closed auctions often reappear. The real owner will not agree to sell at the "closed" price.
Of course, that is also the reason these ebay sellers insist on their own unlicensed closing company. A reputable, independent, and licensed escrow agent will not touch the transaction.

If in fact true, the activity is illegal on several fronts. 
Then again, this kind of stuff  is typical for ebay timeshares.


----------



## DanCali

Fredm said:


> There are many TUG threads about redweek4less.
> 
> Here's another that sums it up:
> http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89675



I've seen the negative TUG feedback. I've also seen how they inflate their positive feedback by selling baseball cards...

On the other hand, here are a couple of posts from someone we trust attesting to their experience regarding purchasing actual timeshares from this seller:

http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=613463
http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showpost.php?p=552054

The tuggers with bad experiences (and there are quite a few) tend to be the more vocal ones, but there are also tuggers who say it was ok.

Personally, I would think twice before using them but if it saved me thousands of dollars on an item that is pretty rare on eBay (like an OF unit or WKV Platinum) and I could see the estoppel before bidding I might risk it...


----------



## Fredm

DanCali said:


> Personally, I would think twice before using them but if it saved me thousands of dollars on an item that is pretty rare on eBay (like an OF unit or WKV Platinum) and I could see the estoppel before bidding I might risk it...



Fine. Informed risk is everyone's choice.

Several points to be made:

 - Just because the auction is closed does not mean the sale will happen. In fact, probably won't. 
It is a grossly inaccurate representation of  the timeshares value in the marketplace.

 - Of course some transactions will happen successfully. If they were not getting away with it, they would not do it. That's not a good reason to do do business with them. 

 - The estopple offers you no protection. Neither does a title insurance policy in certain circumstances that may be applicable to this, or other similarly represented ebay auctions.
This may come as a surprise to you. 

 - What we here on TUG should *not* be doing is encouraging others to do business with those engaged in illegal activity.

What's illegal? 
 - Transacting (brokering) real estate without a license.
 - Obtaining a power of attorney to represent a sale, under duress (what most PC's do).
 - Licensed or otherwise, representing the sale of a property without a written agreement from the owner to do so.

Now, I am not making a blanket accusation against any specific ebay "reseller". But, many engage in one or more of the above. 

Pragmatically, the problem for the ebay buyer who transacts with such "resellers" is that the real owner can have the sale invalidated at any time (if a poa was signed).  Title insurance will not protect the buyer in such circumstances. Admittedly, not likely in most cases, but possible.

The overriding issue is what should "informed" buyers do?
Most will turn a blind eye in the name of a "good deal".
Well, that makes them part of the problem, IMO.


----------



## DanCali

Fredm said:


> Pragmatically, the problem for the ebay buyer who transacts with such "resellers" is that the real owner can have the sale invalidated at any time (if a poa was signed).  Title insurance will not protect the buyer in such circumstances. Admittedly, not likely in most cases, but possible.



Interesting... I actually have only bought direct (tug or redweek ads) so haven't dealt with eBay sellers. However, I have paid for title insurance and have seen title policies. I'm curious to learn more about the point you raise.

A title policy covers "any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the title" and "unmarketability of the title". Then you have a bunch of exclusions in "Schedule B" (typically in complex legalese) which say what is not covered... 

If an owner signs a poa and takes the proceeds from the sale, how can they then invalidate the sale? Even if they do, why would title insurance not cover this? Is there a specific clause in Schedule B that relates to cases like this? My understanding is that anything not in Schedule B is covered...


----------



## Stefa

DanCali said:


> If an owner signs a poa and takes the proceeds from the sale, how can they then invalidate the sale?



Many (most) of the high-volume ebay sellers get their inventory from postcard companies (PCCS).  The owner pays the PCC (often thousands of dollars) to "take the timeshare off their hands" and signs a POA which allows the PCC to then sell the timeshare.   The owner does not get any proceeds from the sale and doesn't even know how or when the sale took place.


----------



## DanCali

Stefa said:


> Many (most) of the high-volume ebay sellers get their inventory from postcard companies (PCCS).  The owner pays the PCC (often thousands of dollars) to "take the timeshare off their hands" and signs a POA which allows the PCC to then sell the timeshare.   The owner does not get any proceeds from the sale and doesn't even know how or when the sale took place.



Ok - but if the owner pays money to get the timeshare off their hands what legal recourse do they have to invalidate a sale? And why wouldn't title insurance cover this?

Also, would listings like WKORV classify as such? As much value as these VOIs have lost they are still worth five figures. Would some owners be SO misinformed to just pay money to get them off their hands without doing a bit of research? Seems odd that ebay sellers' WKORV listings are these types of listings.


----------



## Fredm

DanCali said:


> Interesting... I actually have only bought direct (tug or redweek ads) so haven't dealt with eBay sellers. However, I have paid for title insurance and have seen title policies. I'm curious to learn more about the point you raise.
> 
> A title policy covers "any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the title" and "unmarketability of the title". Then you have a bunch of exclusions in "Schedule B" (typically in complex legalese) which say what is not covered...
> 
> If an owner signs a poa and takes the proceeds from the sale, how can they then invalidate the sale? Even if they do, why would title insurance not cover this? Is there a specific clause in Schedule B that relates to cases like this? My understanding is that anything not in Schedule B is covered...



Well, there are a number of scenarios, but I will explain the most prevalent.

A PCC usually does not actually take title to a timeshare. 
They have the owner sign a limited POA. The owner thinks they are signing over the timeshare, but they are not.

The PCC then auctions the timeshare on ebay.
The PCC uses the POA to close the transaction.

The owner gets no money. In fact, they likely paid the PCC for what they thought was getting the timeshare out of their name.

The owner was lied to on several fronts. Including the misrepresentation of the legal ramifications of keeping the timeshare.
These amount to obtaining the owners POA "under duress", which invalidates the POA.

Should the owner later claim that the POA was obtained under duress (which every one of them can) the POA which was used to close the transaction is invalid.

The PCC has the money. The deed reverts back to the previous owner. The ebay buyer is holding the bag.
Title insurance will not cover the buyer in such a circumstance.

Now, this is exactly how most timeshares wind up on ebay at dramatically reduced prices. 

Others are represented illegally, but are more difficult to reverse because the owner was actually involved in the final sale and deed transfer. This does not make the "reseller" activity legal, but does protect the buyer if title insurance is obtained.

What usually happens is an ebay reseller will "auction" a unit they do not have a legal right to represent. One bidding has ended, they present an "offer " to the owner. Those that do not bring a high enough price to actually induce an owner to sell, are tried again.

One can argue that the ebay bidding nonetheless reflects what the spot market for the timeshare really is. But, that is a false premise IMO, for several reasons. 

PCC's have no equity in the timeshare, so any price is good enough. 

Other illegal and unlicensed activity has none of the expense associated with conducting a legit business. Nor, does it proceed from the prospective of an owners equity interest. So, closed auctions such as the one you referred to are assumed to be the "market", which influences what bidders are willing to pay.
It becomes a self-fulfilling exercise.
The buyer may not care, but it is nonetheless, overall, illegal activity which has the effect of damaging the equity value of the market at large.

Car sellers can't get away with it, nor would they try.
Those that sell pens for $1 are dealing in a cheap commodity, so they have no incentive to sell what they do not own.

Only timeshares are at once a commodity, and high priced enough to encourage this type of activity.


----------



## DanCali

Thanks for taking the time to explain.


----------



## jarta

LisaRex,   ...   "Quote:
Originally Posted by jarta  
I think since the debate centers around the provisions of the "90 day rule" and how it works, it would be useful if someone posted the rule or a link to where it is earlier posted on TUG. I do not remember anyone posting the provisions in the last few years. Thanks in advance to whoever comes up with the rule. 

You're killing me! (furiously paging through the OA)."

Any luck yet finding them?  Anyone else?  TIA.   ...   eom


----------



## gregb

Fredm,  Thanks for the detailed explanation of how an Ebay auction can go bad.  It took me some time to figure out that PCC was Post Card Company and POA was limited Power of Attorney.  For us uninitiated to the acronyms used, it helps if the acronyms are spelled out the first time they are used in a post.

So one can avoid these problems if the owner on the deed is actually the seller?  
And if they are not, determine if the listing agent is registered as a real estate broker?  
And if the seller only has a POA, require some form of legal acknowledgment from the actual owner?

BTW, even if the selling agent is licensed, and they are using a POA, is it still possible for the owner to later renege on the deal as you described?

Greg


----------



## Fredm

gregb said:


> Fredm,  Thanks for the detailed explanation of how an Ebay auction can go bad.  It took me some time to figure out that PCC was Post Card Company and POA was limited Power of Attorney.  For us uninitiated to the acronyms used, it helps if the acronyms are spelled out the first time they are used in a post.
> 
> So one can avoid these problems if the owner on the deed is actually the seller?
> And if they are not, determine if the listing agent is registered as a real estate broker?
> And if the seller only has a POA, require some form of legal acknowledgment from the actual owner?
> 
> BTW, even if the selling agent is licensed, and they are using a POA, is it still possible for the owner to later renege on the deal as you described?
> 
> Greg



Sorry about the acronyms.

You have summarized perfectly.

In response to your last question, yes it is possible for the seller to claim that the POA was obtained under duress. In fact, some PCC's have affiliated themselves with a broker to avoid the law as it relates to non-licensed activity. The manner in which the POA is obtained remains sleazy.

If one asked the owner for legal acknowledgment of the POA, most would not know what you are talking about. They mostly think that they were rid of the timeshare when they paid the PCC. That's part of the scam.

Of course, the next logical question is why would a licensed broker not simply enter into a list agreement with the owner, and represent the sale honestly? 
The answer is that there is much more money in taking several thousand dollars from the owner up-front, and keeping 100% of the sale proceeds. 

If everyone approached an ebay purchase as you have accurately summarized, most ebay auctions would disappear. It would put the PCC's out of business. Owners would no longer be victimized by these crooks, and quality tier timeshares would not suffer the deep erosion of value we have witnessed.
The relatively few auctions conducted by the owners themselves would then reflect an honest spot market valuation. 

I do not delude myself into believing this will happen. Most buyers could care less about the ill-begotten nature of the goods being purchased. So, they feed the problem. 

I apologize for this dialog going off topic.
It is better pursued in a separate thread. There is much to discuss.


----------



## DavidnRobin

While FredM and I do not see eye-to-eye on the value of the eBay sales thread - and caveat emptor for eBay sales.  Many folks have had successful TS transfers from eBay (including myself) - just make sure you protect yourself, and be aware of the pitfalls.  DO NOT send $ to the seller - and be wary of Title/ESCROW Companies. Do your due diligence - if you do not have the time or inclination - do not use eBay - use a reputable broker/title/escrow (like represented here on TUG).


----------



## GregGH

LisaRex said:


> Here is the 2010 WKORV-N budget, broken down into categories.  Note that the numbers on the budget they included don't add up, which explains why my numbers aren't exactly what was billed:
> 
> The first column in the Ocean Resort Master Association Fee.
> The second column is the Ocean Resorts Villas North Vacation Owner's Assn
> The third column is the Association of Apartment Owners of Ocean Resorts Villas North
> The fourth column is for SVN/ARDA fees.
> The fifth column is the total.
> 
> (My first question to the board is why all the different associations!)
> 
> I categorized them as:
> 
> (M) - Management fees - directly billed management fees or expenses that a normal business (including the Westin hotel down the street) would INCLUDE in a management fee.
> (R) - "Running the Place" - fees directly associated with running the place
> (T) - Taxes
> (X) - Extraordinary expenses which in a good economy we hopefully wouldn't see.
> 
> M - Admin............$51.03.....$80.54....$12.21....$0.00....*$143.78*
> M - Annual Audit 	.........................$0.28......$0.62......$0.61....$0.00.....*$1.51*
> M - ARDA....................................$0.00......$0.00......$0.00....$5.00.....*$5.00*
> M - Financial Services...................$0.35	......$23.68.....$0.36....$0.00.....*$24.39*
> M - Kaanapali North Beach Master Assn 	$0.00	$0.00.....$5.29....$0.00.....*$5.29*
> M - Management Fee...................$15.08.....$113.75....$52.89....$0.00....*$181.72*
> M - Owner Services.....................$0.00......$35.79.......$0.00....$0.00....*$35.79*
> M - SVN Fee..............................$0.00.......$0.00........$0.00..$113.53...*$113.53*
> M - Technology Services..............$0.00.......$3.91........$0.00....$0.00	....*$3.91*
> *Total Management Fees*.....$66.74.....$258.29.....$71.36...$118.53..*$514.92*
> 
> R - Activities 	$0.51.....$0.00.......$38.72.....$0.00.....*$39.23*
> R - Cable Television.....................$0.00.....$0.00........$6.43.....$0.00......*$6.43*
> R - Housekeeping & Rooms...........$0.00..$411.27.......$35.90.....$0.00	.....*$447.17*
> R - Insurance.............................$11.81..$32.84........$93.52....$0.00......*$138.17*
> R - Internet................................$0.00....$0.00...........$3.31...$0.00........*$3.31*
> R - Licenses & Permits..................$0.00....$0.00..........$0.08....$0.00	........*$0.08*
> R - Repairs................................$51.43..$121.61.......$22.59....$0.00.......*$195.63*
> R - Utilities................................$35.06....$0.00.......$174.33...$0.00........*$209.39*
> *Total to Run the
> ..........................Place..........*$98.81...$565.72....$374.88...$0.00.....*$1,039.41*
> 
> 
> T - AV (Real Estate) tax..............$0.08......$480.81......$0.00.....$0.00	......*$480.89*
> T - Excise Tax...........................$0.47.......$68.38.......$0.00....$0.00........*$68.85*
> T - West Maui Benefit Fund..........$0.00.......$10.30.......$0.00....$0.00........*$10.30*
> *Total
> ..............Taxes*.....................$0.55.......$559.49......$0.00....$0.00.....*$560.04*
> 
> 
> X - Uncollectible Accounts............$6.52......$149.29......$80.42....$0.00.......*$236.23*
> X- Prior Year Deficit..................$17.29........$62.84......$19.34....$0.00.......*$99.47*
> X - Total Extraordinary
> ...........................................$23.81......$212.13	.....$99.76....$0.00.....*$335.70*
> 
> *Total Regular Expenses.......$189.91...$1,595.63......$546.00....$118.53.....$2,450.07*
> 
> 
> Replacement Reserves.............$5.50......$153.30........$35.87.......$0.00......*$194.67*
> 
> 
> Grand Total============$195.41==$1,748.93==$581.87===$118.53=*$2,644.74*
> Amount Billed	165.83	1732	581.77	118.53	2598.13
> Difference	$29.58	$16.93	$0.10	$0.00	-$46.61


Hi
I try to read a fair # of posts - I do not remember seeing  details on many ( any?) TS budgets before ... could be interesting to see some more comparisons.   I had to find my Aviara 2010 stmts ... we don't seem ( I  could be wrong) to have any Un-collectable costs  - but there is always a page details the steps on delinquent accounts and that prompt action will be taken ( implied or stated ) - vs - yours --and I wonder how much worse your can get ??  This could really be  a big issue the more your owner's bail??

   Our reserve replacement fund of $383 is higher than your 'repairs' of $195 If I am matching correctly ( and one assumes that would be as Aviara is forever changing and fixing things well before they show much if any wear)

I do realize this is comparing apples to pears - but with enough data -  you will see patterns emerge. Our overall fees are $2151 for 2010 and a LOT of costs are incurred keeping that 'extra service' whereas you seem to have  a ton of overhead costs.  Our Total Operating are $1619 and 'Other' ( including reserve funds/mgmt/misc ) is $531 = $2151.

This data is presented to help in any comparisons.  You seem to have a few problems ( taxes included ) but others like multiple organizations and default of payments are all issues maybe  better sepearated and dealt with.

What is the quality of the member of your HOA board ??

Greg

p s- this thread was linked to the http://www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=118037&page=3  ARDA thread ---wow --an equally interesting thread ... sure shows how much more I have to learn 'before I know it all '


----------



## DeniseM

> What is the quality of the member of your HOA board ??



All of the candidates on the current board were hand picked by the BOD to run.  There is an application process and Starwood picks the candidates.

A Tugger ran this year (and was able to circumvent the BOD selection process by quoting the local election statutes to them) but the board didn't receive enough Proxy ballots for a quorum, and they selected one of their hand picked candidates for the position.


----------



## jarta

GregGH,   ...   "but the board didn't receive enough Proxy ballots for a quorum, and they selected one of their hand picked candidates for the position."

There were 2 tries at an election.  The 1st one failed because of a lack of a quorum (the proxies were mailed late).  The 2nd try had a quorum.

The TUG member candidate had his name on the ballot and his statement of candidacy circulated with the ballot.

The TUG member candidate did not have enough votes to outvote the HOA board controlled proxies (the ballots returned in blank which give the board the right to vote them as they see fit).  

The person who won the election (a woman from Pebble Beach, CA) owned with her husband about 12 weeks at the Maui resort.

But, yes, the sitting board - after interviewing both candidates - cast the majority of votes for the person it wanted on the board.  And, yes, the TUG member who lost was very qualified.   ...   eom


----------



## oneohana

jarta is correct that they did have a quorm. I don't know where the idea that there wasn't enough for a quorm came from.


----------



## Tenorsinging

I have gone from $12-1300 a year to this year  $3000 and change!!!  It is absolutely crazy!!!

If there is a more current thread, someone let me know.  I as probably many of you received something about protesting taxes and how they have "won" and there will be some sort of refunds,....anyone guess my next question?   UMMMMM...so WHERE IS OUR REFUND FOR THIS CRAZY AMOUNT???

Seriously, there has to be something that we can do.  What about truth in advertising..what about how they misrepresented the maintenance fees when they sold us the unit?  I don't know about you guys, but I was told they mostly held steady, with only small incremental increases.  OK...stop laughing, I know I should not have bought it.

I just can't believe that there is absolutely nothing that we can do other than not pay the maintenance fee and be in default.  I am happy to sign a petition or something like that if there is another more updated thread for this years complaints, but it's hard to wade through all the Maui threads to find it.

Thanks for any feedback.


----------



## Westin5Star

We could vote Starwood out and try to hire someone like Hyatt, Hilton, or Royal to brand and manage the property.  Oh wait, many have argued that losing the Westin brand could negatively affect our resale values; we wouldn't want for that to happen :rofl:


----------



## Tenorsinging

Resale???.....what is this make believe word Resale Value?

Well, they are right in prices going up in one way.  The price to buy into time shares is going up, the maintenance fees are going up....but reselling them for what a higher price than what you paid???  Have not heard of this so far.


----------



## DavidnRobin

W5* may mean the resale value we have left.


----------



## skpark701

I was offered to change my ownership from WKORV to Westin Princeville  (Sept. 2010) and I took it..  Although I did purchase one more week at Kauai but it is somewhat less MF two combined... I wanted to change to different property such as Cancun but the exchange only offered to Westin Princeville...

I was wondering did anybody else took this offer???


----------



## LisaRex

skpark701 said:


> I was wondering did anybody else took this offer???



I explained in the other thread why I didn't think this was a good deal.  Honestly, I wish you'd have found Tug before you made that decision.


----------



## pharner7

*WKORV Class Action Lawsuit*

Hi everyone, my wife & I own 2 timeshares at the Westin KaAnapali (South & North) Villas in Maui. We spoke with a Westin representative when we were there in december 2011, and he was aware of the fact that the WKORV recieved a favorable ruling and refund of a substatial amount of money based on the property tax re-evaluation. However, even though ALL the homeowners were forced to pay higher maintenance fees the past 3 years, we are not getting the money back, but instead STILL paying the higher annual man
intenance fees. Anyway, during our meeting in December with the Westin representative it became apparent without him admitting it that something bad is happening with various Board Members and we should file a Class action Lawsuit, force a full audit of the books and try to get our money back (the refund belongs to the owners, NOT the Board members) and also get the annual dues reduced back to where they should be. Has anyone started this process/ If not, we need to get something started!


----------



## DeniseM

I am the last person to defend Starwood, but the maintenance fees have gone down since taxes were reduced, so I'm not sure what you are referring to?

Also - I wouldn't give a nickle for any info. from a Sales Rep.

What refund do you think the Board Members got, that other owners didn't get?  

Can you tell us a little more about what is happening with some board members that's "bad"?

*2012*
Westin Ka'anapali Ocean Resort Villas - South
2 Bd. L/O Deluxe (corner) - $2,825.51
2 Bd. L/O - $2,180.74

Westin Ka'anapali Ocean Resort Villas - North
2 bd. L/O - $2,344.56
2 bd. L/O EOY - $1,192.28 

*2011*
Westin Ka'anapali Ocean Resort Villas (South)
2 Bdm. L/O Dlx (Large) - $ 2,825.97
2 Bdm. L/O - $2,050.86

Westin Ka'anapali Ocean Resort Villas North
2 Bdm. L/O EOY $1,177.22
2 Bdm. L/O Ocean Front - $2314.43

*2010*
Westin Ka'anapali Ocean Resort Villas (2 bdm.) - $ 2,346.36
Westin Ka'anapali Ocean Resort Villas (2 bdm. Dlx) - $3,076.69

Westin Ka'anapali Ocean Resort Villas North (2 bdm.) - $2479.60


----------



## larryallen

Fredm said:


> Well, there are a number of scenarios, but I will explain the most prevalent.
> 
> A PCC usually does not actually take title to a timeshare.
> They have the owner sign a limited POA. The owner thinks they are signing over the timeshare, but they are not.
> 
> The PCC then auctions the timeshare on ebay.
> The PCC uses the POA to close the transaction.
> 
> The owner gets no money. In fact, they likely paid the PCC for what they thought was getting the timeshare out of their name.
> 
> The owner was lied to on several fronts. Including the misrepresentation of the legal ramifications of keeping the timeshare.
> These amount to obtaining the owners POA "under duress", which invalidates the POA.
> 
> Should the owner later claim that the POA was obtained under duress (which every one of them can) the POA which was used to close the transaction is invalid.
> 
> The PCC has the money. The deed reverts back to the previous owner. The ebay buyer is holding the bag.
> Title insurance will not cover the buyer in such a circumstance.
> 
> Now, this is exactly how most timeshares wind up on ebay at dramatically reduced prices.
> 
> Others are represented illegally, but are more difficult to reverse because the owner was actually involved in the final sale and deed transfer. This does not make the "reseller" activity legal, but does protect the buyer if title insurance is obtained.
> 
> What usually happens is an ebay reseller will "auction" a unit they do not have a legal right to represent. One bidding has ended, they present an "offer " to the owner. Those that do not bring a high enough price to actually induce an owner to sell, are tried again.
> 
> One can argue that the ebay bidding nonetheless reflects what the spot market for the timeshare really is. But, that is a false premise IMO, for several reasons.
> 
> PCC's have no equity in the timeshare, so any price is good enough.
> 
> Other illegal and unlicensed activity has none of the expense associated with conducting a legit business. Nor, does it proceed from the prospective of an owners equity interest. So, closed auctions such as the one you referred to are assumed to be the "market", which influences what bidders are willing to pay.
> It becomes a self-fulfilling exercise.
> The buyer may not care, but it is nonetheless, overall, illegal activity which has the effect of damaging the equity value of the market at large.
> 
> Car sellers can't get away with it, nor would they try.
> Those that sell pens for $1 are dealing in a cheap commodity, so they have no incentive to sell what they do not own.
> 
> Only timeshares are at once a commodity, and high priced enough to encourage this type of activity.



I am no real estate lawyer but I would think the Ebay buyer is a BFP, or bona fida purchaser. I think they would be totally protected.


----------



## DeniseM

Please note that this thread is from 2009, and Fred's post is from 2010, and it was brought out of mothballs by a newbie.


----------



## DavidnRobin

I am sure SVO would like to keep this thread buried as well...


----------

