# Another special assessment for Polynesian Isles!?



## Nova57 (Feb 28, 2011)

I just received a letter from Polynesian isles stating that the board is considering a special assessment for Phase IV.  Does anyone know the real reason why?  The last special assessment was for the hurricane but what is this one for?


----------



## sallan513 (Mar 5, 2011)

*How I read it*

I believe that this Special Assessment is due to the fact that we have to pay for two management companies instead of one. We are paying for managing the resort to SPM Resorts and we are paying Diamond International to manage the common ground areas.  It is BS and I cannot believe we as owners have no control over these rising Maint Fees at this resort and now another special assessment.  It is really too bad because I love this resort and it's location but it has become a real financial burdon that i wish I could get rid of.  Owners should not be punished by poor management.


----------



## Nova57 (Mar 6, 2011)

Agreed 100%.  Why can't Diamond see that the ownership wants them out?
This is going to be a nasty court battle and I can't help but wonder if this is what some of the assessment is going towards.


----------



## mcrigid (Mar 25, 2011)

*Special Assessment Letter Arrived Today*

Well, it is now official.  Our illustrious BOD has passed a special assessment of $586.00 payable in two installments, 2/3 due in May and remaining 1/3 in January of 2012.  Add that to the ever increasing maintenance fees and it is fast approaching the 2K a year range.  Pretty sure I could stay at a luxury hotel for that kind of money.
And it may not be over.  There is a weasel statement at the end of Q/A opening the door for future special assessments.  The flood gate has been opened and owners are downstream.
Personally I don't give a toot as to who manages the resort.  Our board and SPM are only looking out for themselves and perpetuating their existence.  
I say give it up, let Diamond run the entire complex and stop stealing money from us.


----------



## timeos2 (Mar 25, 2011)

mcrigid said:


> Well, it is now official.  Our illustrious BOD has passed a special assessment of $586.00 payable in two installments, 2/3 due in May and remaining 1/3 in January of 2012.  Add that to the ever increasing maintenance fees and it is fast approaching the 2K a year range.  Pretty sure I could stay at a luxury hotel for that kind of money.
> And it may not be over.  There is a weasel statement at the end of Q/A opening the door for future special assessments.  The flood gate has been opened and owners are downstream.
> Personally I don't give a toot as to who manages the resort.  Our board and SPM are only looking out for themselves and perpetuating their existence.
> I say give it up, let Diamond run the entire complex and stop stealing money from us.



Can you post or give a link to the information from the BOD regarding this assessment?  Thanks in advance.


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Mar 25, 2011)

How does one figure $2K per year?  The fees aren't that high to start with.  Diamond needs to cut their losses and get out.


----------



## mcrigid (Mar 27, 2011)

*No link available*



timeos2 said:


> Can you post or give a link to the information from the BOD regarding this assessment?  Thanks in advance.



Sorry, I there isn't a link to the special assessmetn.  I recieved a letter via snail mail from BOD


----------



## mcrigid (Mar 27, 2011)

rickandcindy23 said:


> How does one figure $2K per year?  The fees aren't that high to start with.  Diamond needs to cut their losses and get out.



A slight exageration about approaching 2K a year.
But the fact remains the special assessment is a burden.
As I said in original post. I don't really care who manages the resort.  The legal battle between Diamond and SPM shouldn't be grounds for the levy.


----------



## timeos2 (Mar 27, 2011)

mcrigid said:


> A slight exageration about approaching 2K a year.
> But the fact remains the special assessment is a burden.
> As I said in original post. I don't really care who manages the resort.  The legal battle between Diamond and SPM shouldn't be grounds for the levy.



Anytime an Association - you the owners - get involved with any lawsuit be it with another owner, a contractor, a guest or the developer the cost falls to YOU.  If one or both sides of an issue want to take it to the level of a lawsuit / legal showdown then the owners will pay.  It isn't always a bad thing if there is reason to make a change that is being blocked by the actions of the other side. That is the very definition of lawsuit.  But it is not free - not to either side. Thats why reasonable people need to come to a workable agreement and move on - cutting the cost of litigation.  

Hopefully the sides will come to some type of agreement and stop throwing money at lawyers.  Until one or the other decides it is costing more than it is worth that won't happen.  Hopefully the BOD is looking out for the owners and not some personal goals and Diamond isn't just after income.  Time will tell.  Meanwhile it will cost both sides to continue the fight.


----------



## Nova57 (Mar 28, 2011)

I agree with you on this lawsuit timeos.  This disagreement is not between SPM and Diamond but between the BOD and Diamond.  The BOD chose to change management and was passed by the owners.  SPM is just the new management in this situation.  And may I say compared to Diamond, they are managing the resort way better.  That's why Poly got their RCI Gold rating back.  Diamond in their negligence lost it.  
Currently, the Master Association has to pay both Diamond, who runs the front desk and SPM who manages the facilities.  The association has run out of money and now needs it for the lawsuit as well.  Just a side note, Diamond has bought time during their legal proceedings not once but twice, through stay motions.


----------



## timeos2 (Mar 28, 2011)

I fully support any action taken on behalf of owners even if it requires a SA. I just hope the costs are kept to a minimum and that no personal agenda's become the focus rather than what may be best for the resort.  Not saying the current issues are good or bad, right or wrong but that both sides need to keep in mind the owners will pay and it needs to be handled as quickly and inexpensively as possible but with a reasonable outcome for all.  Not easy to do & I wish you all the best in resolving this.  Fight the good fight!


----------



## lv_maui (Apr 25, 2011)

Isn't this second special assessment exactly what DRI was predicting from Phase IV if SPM was taken over?  As I see it, it is not DRI's fault but it is the BOD who did not believe the impact that would occur if DRI was no longer the management company.  DRI was directly helping the Association with disposition of non paying MF owner's weeks.


----------



## sallan513 (Apr 26, 2011)

*My Opinion*

I agree that one management firm needs to take this over once and for all but how can we as owners control this?  We have no power to push Diamond out of the picture.

As for the yearly cost of this Timeshare it's been pretty consistant at around $800 over the last 2 years and you will not stay at a luxury resort for that $$.  Even with the SA I thought it was worth it but not if it would be every year!

BTW, I think the final SA cost turned out to be around $466 payable in 2 installments.

Steve


----------



## goldman (Apr 28, 2011)

sallan513 said:


> I agree that one management firm needs to take this over once and for all but how can we as owners control this?  We have no power to push Diamond out of the picture.
> 
> As for the yearly cost of this Timeshare it's been pretty consistant at around $800 over the last 2 years and you will not stay at a luxury resort for that $$.  Even with the SA I thought it was worth it but not if it would be every year!
> 
> ...



With Diamond owning 17% of the inventory at the resort and with them having the attorney who wrote the document which are being used against the owners in court we have to wait for the courts to make a decision. The board has secured the best legal firm they can find all of this adds up to additional cost for the resort. SPM is doing everything they are asked to do to try to help, but their hands are tied legally. The lawyers are beginning to win some small battles, it isn't the time to give up.


----------



## goldman (Apr 28, 2011)

lv_maui said:


> Isn't this second special assessment exactly what DRI was predicting from Phase IV if SPM was taken over?  As I see it, it is not DRI's fault but it is the BOD who did not believe the impact that would occur if DRI was no longer the management company.  DRI was directly helping the Association with disposition of non paying MF owner's weeks.



Had Diamond been allowed to continue securing weeks, they would have very soon owned 51% control of the resort and the fees would have most likely been $1,500.00 to $2,000.00 per week. At least we as owner still control our own resort. Check with the owner of other Diamond properties, they have some stories to tell!


----------



## lv_maui (May 1, 2011)

goldman said:


> Had Diamond been allowed to continue securing weeks, they would have very soon owned 51% control of the resort and the fees would have most likely been $1,500.00 to $2,000.00 per week. At least we as owner still control our own resort. Check with the owner of other Diamond properties, they have some stories to tell!



If this is accurate, then the owners are saying that this is the price that they are willing to pay to have Diamond not be the management company.  And from what I am hearing, this is only #1 of the special assessments and that they are already looking at the need for another.

The bottomline is that no matter what, when DRI was no longer the management company, then the need for a special assessment comes up.  This is economic reality.  If you do not want DRI as the management company, then you will lose an important source of income for the Association that normally is not available.


----------



## timeos2 (May 1, 2011)

lv_maui said:


> If you do not want DRI as the management company, then you will lose an important source of income for the Association that normally is not available.



And what exactly is that source of income?


----------



## lv_maui (May 1, 2011)

timeos2 said:


> And what exactly is that source of income?



DRI was paying the fees in order to recover these weeks.  So, having them pay saves the Association money.

Then, because DRI recovered the weeks, they pay the maintenance fees that the Association would never have recovered. However, the Association no longer has this week to rent, but considering the rental market, I think it is safe to say that the week would go vacant.  

All I am saying is that Association lost someone that was helping them out, albeit as the management company.  You lose DRI, you have to pay special assessments, but you do have control of the management now.  For some, that special assessment may be worth it.  

My original point is that this was only Special Assessment #1.  I was told that more is to come very soon.


----------



## timeos2 (May 1, 2011)

lv_maui said:


> DRI was paying the fees in order to recover these weeks.  So, having them pay saves the Association money.
> 
> Then, because DRI recovered the weeks, they pay the maintenance fees that the Association would never have recovered. However, the Association no longer has this week to rent, but considering the rental market, I think it is safe to say that the week would go vacant.
> 
> ...



That income, from recovered weeks, can come from any source willing to buy the recovered / foreclosed weeks. There is nothing unique about DRI doing that as it gives them inventory for their Club and other groups are willing to do the same. If the new management doesn't have a buyer for those weeks then that is a bad move but not one they can't overcome.  From an owner stand point not having a large amount of inventory (and thus votes) in the hands and control of a single group can be a very mixed blessing. On one hand its good to get the fees but on the other it creates a risk that should the group falter (remember DRI grew overnight by buying out the bankrupt Sunterra) there can suddenly be a BIG shortfall in fees. This has occurred to some resorts and at least one had to close largely due to a failure of a "club" system (NOT DRI in that case) to pay the fees due. As they represented over 25% of the total fees when combined with other delinquents the resort could not survive.  It is in the process of closing down now.


----------



## glypnirsgirl (May 2, 2011)

timeos2 said:


> This has occurred to some resorts and at least one had to close largely due to a failure of a "club" system (NOT DRI in that case) to pay the fees due. As they represented over 25% of the total fees when combined with other delinquents the resort could not survive.  It is in the process of closing down now.



What timeshare is this?

elaine


----------



## timeos2 (May 2, 2011)

glypnirsgirl said:


> What timeshare is this?
> 
> elaine



The Club at Cape Cod. See this thread for more details.


----------



## iloveflorida (Dec 11, 2011)

lv_maui said:


> DRI was paying the fees in order to recover these weeks.  So, having them pay saves the Association money.
> 
> Then, because DRI recovered the weeks, they pay the maintenance fees that the Association would never have recovered. However, the Association no longer has this week to rent, but considering the rental market, I think it is safe to say that the week would go vacant.
> 
> ...



Who told you that "more is to come very soon?"  Did this come from someone on the Board of Directors, or is this just speculation?


----------



## lv_maui (Dec 13, 2011)

iloveflorida said:


> Who told you that "more is to come very soon?"  Did this come from someone on the Board of Directors, or is this just speculation?



I heard it from a employee at SPM.


----------

