# 1 in 4 rule



## tedk (Sep 12, 2005)

if i go to a resort that is 1 in 4 rule, then my account number is changed can you go back earlier. i am thinking of selling the week that my rci account is under so i would have to use a different resort as my account leader. by that change would that alter the rule on 1 in 4.  
                     thanks in advance
                         ted


----------



## JEFF H (Sep 13, 2005)

1 in 4 rule is based against your RCI account Membership ID. You could have a friend reserve a week for you with there account and get  a guest certificate in your name and you won't be blocked.

your RCI membership ID #  is based on the resort you owned when you first joined RCI and will not change even if you sell that resort.
IF you cancelled your current RCI membership and then opened a new account using a different ownership week that should get you a New membership ID #


----------



## tedk (Sep 13, 2005)

thanks for reply jeff, thought there would be a block somewhere.


----------



## Floridaski (Sep 13, 2005)

*1-4*

I have found RCI and most resorts work on a don't ask - don't tell polciy.  We have stayed at 1 in 4 resorts more then once within the four years.  Everytime I get a confirmation, I wonder why - but I was told that if the resort will allow it - RCI does not have a problem.  So, if you get a confirmation - go for it!  Most of the time it is a newer resort and if we agree to take a tour they are more then willing to let us come back.  We actually purchased a Hyatt week like this.  They broke their rule since we were willing to tour the proptery and we ended purchasing a week.  Granted we canceled and repurchased a resale.  But - we did purchase and they got a new owner due to letting us come back one more time.  We liked it to much to not have the chance to go back.


----------



## geekette (Sep 13, 2005)

I wonder if part of it is that the info provided by RCI is sometimes horribly out of date?   Not necessarily their problem, as they can only put in what a resort tells them and I can't imagine them chasing after thousands of resorts for updates.  I've learned not to blindly trust what that extra info says.


----------



## JACKC (Sep 13, 2005)

Memory tells me this was discussed a while back on TUG and there were examples, or at least warnings given, not to take a chance showing up at a resort assuming they won't bump you. I think someone mentioned reserving but later being told they couldn't exchange after all and having their reservation cancelled. 

I don't remember any details, and maybe it was just a bad dream, which I am having more often now that I'm getting older.   

This concern has kept me from trying to return to Sheraton Vistana and Hilton-Sea World before 1-in-4. I'd be delighted to learn from someone that these resorts don't enforce 1-in-4. I hope Floridaski is right. We love both resorts.

Jack


----------



## Marge007 (Sep 13, 2005)

Hmmm.. now you have me wondering. We used a RCI last call at Vistana last week. Will that count as 1 in 4, or only when actually exchanging in??
Anyone know?
Marge


----------



## Floridaski (Sep 13, 2005)

*1-4*

I have stayed at 2 different Orlando resorts that had 1 in 4 rule (high end) but will leave them unnamed at this point.  I think you might have a problem if you show up the next year.  But, I think if you can get the RCI confirmation  2 or 3 years later - you may be just fine.  Most of these resorts do not keep their data bases for much longer then 2 years.  If sombody knows differently let me know.  I have been to both Hyatt and Sheraton properties that had 1-4, we were fine.  I would think if anybody had long term data bases it would be these guys.  I do not know about Hilton, but you should be fine with Sheraton.  We have been at a specifc Sheraton in the past and I have another reservation for 2006, we are returning 3 years later.  I have even called the reservation dept with questions, not relating to the 1-4 rule.  But they deifintely know we are coming.  It would seem that do not ask-do not tell regarding the 1-4 and all is well in many situations.


----------



## JLB (Sep 13, 2005)

No personal offense intended, but in my however many years here, this is the worst advice I have ever seen:

*"I have found RCI and most resorts work on a don't ask - don't tell polciy."*


----------



## Jimster (Sep 13, 2005)

*vistana*

I may be wrong but on the last call for Vistana I believe they said they did not enforce 1-4 on last call exchanges.   I seem to remember that because I was thinking of going there too and I exchanged there just last year.


----------



## Floridaski (Sep 13, 2005)

*Do not misunderstand*

I deposit a Gold Crown resort that also has the 1-4 rule.  I know for a fact that they let people come more often then ever four years.  So, perhaps since I am making a deposit every single year with a high demand resort that list 1-4 and does not enforce it, I have a different view.  It is up to each person and it is a personal choice as to what risks to take regarding the 1-4 resort rules.  I personally would never lie, but if I get the confirmation from the resort - I think it is fair to make my plans to follow through on my vacation.  The prior poster was asking about a speicific chain that I know does not always enforce the 1-4 rule.  He will have to make his own choice about trying to go back to the resort.  If I offended you it was not by intent.


----------



## Topeka Tom (Sep 13, 2005)

*Was it me?*

I had a thread on this subject a few months ago.  After reading a lot of posting on the subject, I concluded that there are no rules.  RCI will say it's the resort, the resort will say it's RCI, and neither will respond, even in the face of violations of what few rules they have.  For example, a group of resorts decided to have a 1 in 4 cover the entire group.  A TUGger had asked all the questions and was given an exchange into one of the group (not the one he had visited) before the new policy was put in place.  RCI has a policy that an exchange that is "legal" when it is made will stand.  The exchange was cancelled a very few weeks before the travel, with no discussion allowed.  The resort was tickled that RCI finally had begun to enforce their new rule, RCI blamed the resort, the resort didn't have to say anything.  

In discussing the rules with a knowledgable VC, she brought up that particular group of resorts and trade, as she was still upset that RCI had revoked a legal exchange  in violation of its own rules.

In my case, I had been assured by resort staff that if RCI made the exchange then the resort would honor it.  I decided to have RCI cancel it and found another.  What could have come of it?  I could have been out in the street with no recourse.  The good egg at the resort could have been dragged into a situation that could have gotten her reprimanded or fired, and some slick sales weasel would have had a scalp (mine!)to hang in his cubicle.

Orange Lake and Vistana come up all the time for trades.  It's enough to make you want to buy a quarter of an every-other year studio, or anything, just to get around that da*ned 1 in 4.  Yes, I know that Orange Lake is one in three.  That's a distinction without a difference, IMHO.

Those rules are put in by the sales weasels.  Don't trust what anybody is telling you, the sales weasels or Cendant's RCI.  They will put on blank looks faster than you can get your blood pressure up.


----------



## JLB (Sep 14, 2005)

Sure, in our 80 exchanges we have gone back to 1-in-4 resorts within the restricted period and they did not mind.  In fact, they did not know they even had the rule!  One has even removed the reference to it when I contacted them.

But . . . My guess is that those who make light of this rule have never had a confirmed exchange cancelled, weeks after receiving it, or had a confirmed exchange cancelled on Tuesday of check-in week.  There are various levels of _*confirmed*_ with RCI.     

Here is what Inside Guy has said about it, 

*"Without even looking at your file I can assume this was probably 1999 or 2000. My friend was the account executive for (resort deleted) at RCI. Out of nowhere they chose to enforce this rule. I can not remember if it was sales driven or not. However this particular resort chose to enforce the rule vehemently. 

"As a company we don’t necessarily like the ¼ year rule as it somewhat restricts our ability to serve members but, it is also something that the resorts use in their sales pitches. In reality only about 1 or 2% of our members go back to the same resort within another 4 years. Sorry to hear about your experience.*

*"Bootleg is wrong (that) the ¼ year rule it is not supported technologically. It is supported via various warning signals and prompts for the counselors to look for a violation and then for the resort to catch.  Unfortunately most resorts don’t update their reservations until weeks prior to check-in which can cause them to notice violations at the last minute."*


----------



## JLB (Sep 14, 2005)

Judging from a private message I just received, there appears to be a bit of confusion from a more recent TUG member.

_*Bootleg*_ is an actual person.  He is an RCI Guide working in Canada who posts anonymously on TUG.

None of the comments in my last post, where I quoted _*Inside Guy*_, are directed at anyone in this thread.  No personal criticism was intended.

I did try to warn that taking this rule lightly is not a good idea.

Interestingly, it was a 1-in-4 discussion similar to this one that prompted Inside Guy to contact me in November, 2003.

I have been saying what he said ever since.


----------



## tedk (Sep 14, 2005)

in view of all the comments i dont think i would want to risk it. the only thing that made me wonder was if i sold the week my account was on, then sneeked in again with a different account. if nothing else got it got a bit of a response.


----------



## Bootleg (Sep 14, 2005)

The 1 in 4 year rule is routinely violated in many Orlando resorts. There are just too many resorts with too many weeks being deposited each year to be tracked acurately. I see accounts with multiple confirmations to Vistana, for eaxmple, almost every year. 

The one that *does* seem to enforce the 1 in 4 is the Hilton; This is probably because they deposit fewer units each year, and they are one of the most-requested, so the occasional violation would be easier to track and cancel. 

As far as rentals, extra vacations, bonus weeks and Last Call are concerned, these programs aren't based on exchange, so the 1 in 4 doesn't apply for many resorts.

Bottom line: The rule is there. It's written in the notes for each resort that has it. These rules were sent to RCI by the resorts, so there is no confusion: They are the *resort's* rules, not RCI's. Even though enforcement is not consistent, there's always the chance that a confirmation _might_ be cancelled for this reason. It's best not to take the chance!

Hope this helps!


----------



## tedk (Sep 15, 2005)

thanks for all your comments, i am sure ill find somewhere else to go.


----------



## jbiza (Sep 15, 2005)

Bootleg said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> As far as rentals, extra vacations, bonus weeks and Last Call are concerned, these programs aren't based on exchange, so the 1 in 4 doesn't apply for many resorts.



That's helpful info re: those different categories. 

Question??
If one confirms an exchange using RCI Points, would the 1-4 NOT apply??


----------



## CaliDave (Sep 15, 2005)

I know the Grand Pacfic Resort group takes it pretty seriously. They have an on-site RCI office, so maybe that has something to do with it.


----------



## Bootleg (Sep 15, 2005)

jbiza said:
			
		

> That's helpful info re: those different categories.
> 
> Question??
> If one confirms an exchange using RCI Points, would the 1-4 NOT apply??




The 1 in 4 does not apply for points transactions.


----------



## brucecz (Sep 15, 2005)

This past Easter we traded into the Coronado Beach Resort  using RCI Points. I uderstand this is a 1 in 4 resort and I think it is part of the Grand Pacfic Resort group that CaliDave was referring to.

If I corrrectly understand you post below the 1 in 4 rule will not apply when if we used RCI Points?

If so what is the reason given for this seemingly added benifit given to RCI Points owners?  

Bruce



			
				Bootleg said:
			
		

> The 1 in 4 does not apply for points transactions.


----------



## timeos2 (Sep 15, 2005)

brucecz said:
			
		

> If I corrrectly understand you post below the 1 in 4 rule will not apply when if we used RCI Points?
> 
> If so what is the reason given for this seemingly added benifit given to RCI Points owners?
> 
> Bruce



As with most points based systems RCI Points aren't resort based but system based. You spend your points where you wish even the same resort over and over again if you want.  The resort simply uses the available time allotted to points for whoever chooses to reserve it.  With weeks it was set up that resorts could limit incoming guests (mostly for sales reasons) in the original agreement that isn't included in the points system.  It is best described as an improvement to one of many flaws in the weeks system.


----------



## Mel (Sep 15, 2005)

It doesn't apply for points reservations, but I would assume it DOES apply for a points member doing a crossover trade into a WEEKS resort.


----------



## jbiza (Sep 18, 2005)

Bootleg said:
			
		

> The 1 in 4 does not apply for points transactions.



This is consistent w/the answer to a similiar question to Madge on the Ask RCI board, BUT, I spoke to several VC's today who ALL said 1-4 applies EVEN to transactions made using RCI Points. Same answer several VC's gave me before even though I told them I believe they are incorrect (the VC's informed me their RCI experience ranged from 4-8 yrs.).

I gave them a specific resort that I previously booked w/RCI pts. (Westin Club Regina PV) in '04 & told them I saw this resort available recently & was considering it again, but was told after asking, I would be subject to the 1-4 policy (well I guess I could go to Cabo though...   ).

Today at least, ONE of the VC's agreed that the 1-4 rule DOES NOT apply to Last Call, Extra Vacations etc. even though the other VC"s said it DOES apply.             

Go figure


----------

