# RCI Settlement! [merged]



## Talent312 (May 18, 2012)

*RCI Points Class-Action Settlement?*

Not a Points-Member, but just received this e-mail -- Look who's making out like a bandit...

*You May be Entitled to a Payment from a Class Action Settlement 
About the RCI Points® Exchange Program *

A Settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit that claims that RCI, LLC violated certain consumer protection and other laws by renting timeshare inventory deposited by members of the RCI Points Exchange Program. RCI denies it did anything wrong.

Am I included? You are included if you (1) Are a resident of the U.S. or its territories, and (2) Were a member of the RCI Points Exchange Program on or before April 25, 2012. If this postcard is addressed to you, you are included in the Settlement unless you exclude yourself.

What can I get? If the Settlement is approved, Settlement Class Members who submit Claim Forms may receive a payment. Current members may get $12 and former members may get $10. Claim Forms are due by August 24, 2012.

... The Court will hold a hearing on November 1, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. to consider whether to approve the Settlement and a request for attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses in the amount of $835,000.00 .... 

This Notice is Only a Summary. For Detailed Information and a Claim Form:
Visit: www.pointsprogramsettlement.com, Call: 1-866-647-5645
 or Write: Settlement Administrator, P.O. Box 2662, Faribault, MN 55021-9662


----------



## Arnie (May 18, 2012)

I just got this e-mail concerning the RCI settlement.
I looked for any other postings, but none yet. 
I will paste the details below.
Feel Free to comment!!

You May be Entitled to a Payment from a Class Action Settlement
About the RCI Points® Exchange Program
A Settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit that claims that RCI, LLC violated certain consumer protection and other laws by renting timeshare inventory deposited by members of the RCI Points Exchange Program. RCI denies it did anything wrong.
Am I included? You are included if you (1) Are a resident of the U.S. or its territories, and (2) Were a member of the RCI Points Exchange Program on or before April 25, 2012. If this postcard is addressed to you, you are included in the Settlement unless you exclude yourself.
What can I get? If the Settlement is approved, Settlement Class Members who submit Claim Forms may receive a payment. Current members may get $12 and former members may get $10. Claim Forms are due by August 24, 2012.
What are my other rights? If you do not want to be legally bound by the Settlement, you must exclude yourself in writing. The exclusion deadline is October 2, 2012. If you stay in the Settlement you will not be able to sue RCI for any claim relating to the issues in this lawsuit. If you stay in the Settlement, you may object to all or any part of it by October 2, 2012. The Court will hold a hearing on November 1, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. to consider whether to approve the Settlement and a request for attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses in the amount of $835,000.00. The Court has appointed attorneys to represent the Class. You may hire your own attorney at your own expense.
This Notice is Only a Summary. For Detailed Information and a Claim Form:
Visit: www.pointsprogramsettlement.com, Call: 1-866-647-5645
or Write: Settlement Administrator, P.O. Box 2662, Faribault, MN 55021-9662


----------



## jebloomquist (May 18, 2012)

*RCI Class Action Settlement???*

I received a long email. The first part is as follows:

"You May be Entitled to a Payment from a Class Action Settlement 
About the RCI Points® Exchange Program 
A Settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit that claims that RCI, LLC violated certain consumer protection and other laws by renting timeshare inventory deposited by members of the RCI Points Exchange Program. RCI denies it did anything wrong....."

Has anyone else received this type of email? If so, is there anything to it?


----------



## siesta (May 18, 2012)

A whole $12!


----------



## Ridewithme38 (May 18, 2012)

> Current members may get $12 and former members may get $10.



Wow, i'm retiring~!


----------



## Arnie (May 18, 2012)

*Also!!*

Note!!
You can submit online, that will save postage.
Why do I think i should have posted this in the Lounge under Humor. :hysterical:


----------



## rrlongwell (May 18, 2012)

siesta said:


> A whole $12!



Hopefully this will end the RCI practice of renting the deposited weeks.  If Wyndham Vacation Resort does rent out non-Wyndham owned weeks, hopefull this will end that practice to.


----------



## rrlongwell (May 18, 2012)

Ridewithme38 said:


> Wow, i'm retiring~!



There you go, trying to spend it all in one place, please advise where you can retire for $12 dollars.


----------



## rrlongwell (May 18, 2012)

not needed threads merged


----------



## Passepartout (May 18, 2012)

Maybe only $12 to each of us, but $835,000 to Wyndham/RCI. Maybe it is enough to get their attention that exchange deposits are not to be rented while all that members get is leftover blue/white/mud weeks.

Jim


----------



## Ridewithme38 (May 18, 2012)

The Problem is...



> RCI denies it did anything wrong. The Court did not decide that RCI did anything illegal or wrong. The Settlement does not mean that RCI admits that it did anything illegal or wrong. The Settlement avoids the cost and burden of continuing the case.



This was the prosecution giving up...


----------



## gnorth16 (May 18, 2012)

Ridewithme38 said:


> Wow, i'm retiring~!



And renting 12 premium weeks with that 12 dollars?


----------



## Larry (May 18, 2012)

I received the same email which I found in my spam folder with the rest of my JUNK EMAIL


----------



## bogey21 (May 18, 2012)

When I hit the link it asked me for an ID and PW.  It kept rejecting everyone I used.

George


----------



## siesta (May 18, 2012)

Ridewithme38 said:


> The Problem is...
> 
> 
> 
> This was the prosecution giving up...


this isnt a criminal case, so there is no prosecution. It is a lawsuit, therefore a defendent and a plaintiff. When two sides agree outside of court it is called a settlement, when they don't it eventually becomes a judgement. When two sides settle, often no judgement of fault/wrongdoing is issued. Many lawsuits end in settlements. If you opt out of this class action, you still retain the right to sue because you are no longer part of the plaintiffs and their agreement can not be binded to you.


----------



## chriskre (May 18, 2012)

Pretty pathetic. Why bother?


----------



## ambrosij (May 18, 2012)

*Class Action Lawsuit Against RCI Points*

Here is the reason why these class action lawsuits are frivolous and provide no results for the people they are trying to represent.  I just received this in my email: (I can assure you that members want things to change, not for a bunch of lawyers to get rich off of a settlement and get a check for $10 in the mail).

You May be Entitled to a Payment from a Class Action Settlement 
About the RCI Points® Exchange Program
A Settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit that claims that RCI, LLC violated certain consumer protection and other laws by renting timeshare inventory deposited by members of the RCI Points Exchange Program. RCI denies it did anything wrong.
Am I included? You are included if you (1) Are a resident of the U.S. or its territories, and (2) Were a member of the RCI Points Exchange Program on or before April 25, 2012. If this postcard is addressed to you, you are included in the Settlement unless you exclude yourself.
What can I get? If the Settlement is approved, Settlement Class Members who submit Claim Forms may receive a payment. Current members may get $12 and former members may get $10. Claim Forms are due by August 24, 2012.
What are my other rights? If you do not want to be legally bound by the Settlement, you must exclude yourself in writing. The exclusion deadline is October 2, 2012. If you stay in the Settlement you will not be able to sue RCI for any claim relating to the issues in this lawsuit. If you stay in the Settlement, you may object to all or any part of it by October 2, 2012. The Court will hold a hearing on November 1, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. to consider whether to approve the Settlement and a request for attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses in the amount of $835,000.00. The Court has appointed attorneys to represent the Class. You may hire your own attorney at your own expense.
This Notice is Only a Summary. For Detailed Information and a Claim Form:
Visit: www.pointsprogramsettlement.com, Call: 1-866-647-5645
or Write: Settlement Administrator, P.O. Box 2662, Faribault, MN 55021-9662


----------



## Arnie (May 18, 2012)

*ID & Password?*



bogey21 said:


> When I hit the link it asked me for an ID and PW.  It kept rejecting everyone I used.
> 
> George



Well George, you are clicking on my link and would need my ID and Pass.
I would guess you have to find a common link. I can access the form if I care to.
Try this one:
www.pointsprogramsettlement.com


----------



## bogey21 (May 18, 2012)

Thanks.  I finally was able to electronically file a claim form.  Why bother?  Because $12 will buy me enough gas to drive 50 or 60 miles.

George


----------



## stonebroke (May 18, 2012)

*This is NOT justice*

This is an aweful outcome (and I am not saying RCI was even in the wrong)  First RCI admits no wrong doing.  They pay $800,000 plus thousand to the plaintaif legal team and pay 100s of thousands of points owners $12.   Where will that money come from?  I can see exchange fees going up.

Secondly,  This is not going to be change anything and this type of case can't or won't come up again...because it's settled.  RCI can just keep on keeping on.

This is not justice nor how our legal system should work...
What happened is a couple sharp lawyers found a couple willing RCI points members with the sole intent of making a quick buck.    THe law firm walks away with a hefty legal fee.  The named plantif's get A LOT more than $12 and nothing was made right.

I will be writing and opting out of my settlement they can keep their $12 dollars.


----------



## bogey21 (May 18, 2012)

stonebroke said:


> This is an aweful outcome (and I am not saying RCI was even in the wrong)...........This is not justice nor how our legal system should work........I will be writing and opting out of my settlement they can keep their $12 dollars.



I agree with everything you say except (in my mind) passing on the $12 is like giving $12 to RCI.  I feel like I have given them enough over the years.

George


----------



## Kozman (May 19, 2012)

Passepartout said:


> Maybe only $12 to each of us, but $835,000 to Wyndham/RCI. Maybe it is enough to get their attention that exchange deposits are not to be rented while all that members get is leftover blue/white/mud weeks.
> 
> Jim



Did the settlement say they couldn't do that any longer?  I would hope so, but doubt it!


----------



## Susan2 (May 19, 2012)

*Has anyone actually read the settlement?*

I printed out a copy of the settlement proposal.  After printing all 77 pages, of course, i realized that what I really wanted was pages 10 to 15 of the packet (pages numbered 9 - 14 of the settlement agreement).   That seems to have the gist of the settlement terms I want to review.  

I don't think I'd care that much if class members got $100, instead of $12.  Personally, I'd rather have meaningful change than a cash award.  

What interests me now are the paragraphs labeled things like "Program Changes" and "Disclosure of Rental Activity."  Then there's the "reasonable confirmation discovery" allowed to ensure RCI keeps to its promises.  

I'll be reading these paragraphs carefully, when I have the time, but I'm wondering whether anyone else has done this, and what they think.


----------



## vacationhopeful (May 19, 2012)

Susan,
It is good for the rest of us that RCI is your windmill.  Be sure you have a beverage at hand to help you read those pages.

Looking forward to your understanding of this settlement.

Thanks,


----------



## ace2000 (May 19, 2012)

siesta said:


> A whole $12!


 


Ridewithme38 said:


> Wow, i'm retiring~!


 
I'm with you guys.  Think about it... I can buy 12 timeshares on ebay for that $12.  I'm going shopping baby!


----------



## rrlongwell (May 19, 2012)

Susan2 said:


> I printed out a copy of the settlement proposal.  After printing all 77 pages, of course, i realized that what I really wanted was pages 10 to 15 of the packet (pages numbered 9 - 14 of the settlement agreement).   That seems to have the gist of the settlement terms I want to review.
> 
> I don't think I'd care that much if class members got $100, instead of $12.  Personally, I'd rather have meaningful change than a cash award.
> 
> ...



Can you post the link?


----------



## Ridewithme38 (May 19, 2012)

rrlongwell said:


> Can you post the link?



https://pointsprogramsettlement.com/Portals/0/Documents/Glenz_SA.pdf


----------



## pacodemountainside (May 19, 2012)

The tragic part of this is RCI Weeks Program got nailed for the same thing 4-5 years ago.  No cash was offered just  some trinkets. 


When parent company, Wyndham Worldwide has "F"   BBB rating and Main Man  says this is pushing the envelope  it is  "Ipso Facto" one needs to keep vaseoline jar handy!


----------



## pacodemountainside (May 19, 2012)

vacationhopeful said:


> Susan,
> It is good for the rest of us that RCI is your windmill.  Be sure you have a beverage at hand to help you read those pages.
> 
> Looking forward to your understanding of this settlement.
> ...



Is Don who you were referring to? 


Check out the following adventures of Don Quixote especially   Second  Sally from Wikepia


>Don Quixote ( /ˌdɒn kiːˈhoʊtiː/; Spanish: [ˈdoŋ kiˈxote] ( listen)), fully titled The Ingenious Gentleman Don Quixote of La Mancha (Spanish: El ingenioso hidalgo don Quijote de la Mancha), is a novel written by Miguel de Cervantes. The novel follows the adventures of Alonso Quijano, who reads too many chivalric novels, and sets out to revive chivalry under the name of Don Quixote. He recruits a simple farmer, Sancho Panza as his squire, who frequently deals with Don Quixote's rhetorical orations on antiquated knighthood with a unique Earthy wit. He is met by the world as it is, initiating themes like Intertextuality, Realism, Metatheatre and Literary Representation.
> 
>Published in two volumes a decade apart, in 1605 and 1615, Don Quixote is considered the most influential work of literature from the Spanish Golden Age and the entire Spanish literary canon. As a founding work of modern Western literature, and one of the earliest canonical novels, it regularly appears high on lists of the greatest works of fiction ever published. In one such list, Don Quixote was cited as the "best literary work ever written".
> 
> 
>The First Sally
> 
>Alonso Quijano, the protagonist of the novel, is a retired country gentleman nearing fifty years of age, living in an unnamed section of La Mancha with his niece and housekeeper. While mostly a rational man of sound reason, his reading of books of chivalry in excess has had a profound effect on him, leading to the distortion of his perception and the wavering of his mental faculties. In essence, he believes every word of these books of chivalry to be true though, for the most part, the content of these books is clearly fiction. Otherwise, his wits, in regards to everything other than chivalry, are intact. He decides to go out as a knight-errant in search of adventure. He dons an old suit of armour, renames himself "Don Quixote de la Mancha," and names his skinny horse "Rocinante". He designates a neighboring farm girl, as his lady love, renaming her Dulcinea del Toboso, while she knows nothing about this.
> 
>He sets out in the early morning and ends up at an inn, which he believes to be a castle. He asks the innkeeper, whom he thinks to be the lord of the castle, to dub him a knight. He spends the night holding vigil over his armor, where he becomes involved in a fight with muleteers who try to remove his armor from the horse trough so that they can water their mules. The innkeeper then dubs him a knight to be rid of him, and sends him on his way. Don Quixote next "frees" a young boy who is tied to a tree and beaten by his master by making his master swear on the chivalric code treat the boy fairly. The boy's beating is continued as soon as Quixote leaves. Don Quixote has a run-in with traders from Toledo, who "insult" the imaginary Dulcinea, one of whom severely beats Don Quixote and leaves him on the side of the road. Don Quixote is found and returned to his home by a neighboring peasant.
> 
>
> 
>The Second Sally
> 
>While Don Quixote is unconscious in his bed, his niece, the housekeeper, the parish curate, and the local barber secretly burn most of the books of chivalry, and seal up his library pretending that a magician has carried it off. After a short period of feigning health, Don Quixote approaches his neighbor, Sancho Panza, and asks him to be his squire, promising him governorship of an island. The uneducated Sancho agrees, and the pair sneak off in the early dawn. It is here that their series of famous adventures begin, starting with Don Quixote's attack on windmills that he believes to be ferocious giants. The two next encounter a group of friars accompanying a lady in a carriage. They are heavily cloaked, as is the lady, to protect themselves from the hot climate and dust on the road. Don Quixote takes the friars to be enchanters who hold the lady captive. He knocks a friar from his horse, and is immediately challenged by an armed Basque travelling with the company. As he has no shield, the Basque uses a pillow to protect himself, which saves him when Don Quixote strikes him. The combat ends with the lady leaving her carriage and demanding those travel with her to "surrender".


----------



## rrlongwell (May 19, 2012)

Ridewithme38 said:


> https://pointsprogramsettlement.com/Portals/0/Documents/Glenz_SA.pdf



Thanks for the info.


----------



## VacationForever (May 20, 2012)

Received the mail and conclude that it is not worth my trouble of filling out the form.


----------



## Susan2 (May 20, 2012)

*Way too much work for $12!*

I don't know how many people will be filling in the claim form, but I'm definitely not one of them.  WAY too much work!

I just reviewed the claim form and, were I to request the $12, I would have to recite in which year or years I was unable to obtain vacation time, whether or not I searched three or more resorts for the time mentioned above, and specifically naming the resorts I unsuccessfully searched at that time.    

Having as many timeshare weeks as I do, I keep copious records of my travel plans.  I just got back from a three-week trip, for which I had four pages of travel notes (where I was staying, when the flights left and arrived, where I was getting the rental car, etc.).  I also keep a long list of my future travel plans, so that I know whether I need to reserve airfare (since the airlines don't always have the flights available at the time I book the resort), rent a car, or firm up other plans.  It also helps me not to double-book.   

I even keep some of the paperwork for past trips and canceled trips, just in case I need it some day.  

What I DON'T keep track of is vacations that never happened because I couldn't find a resort to trade into, and in what years they never happened!  I'm not sure anyone could do that.    

So, suppose I was able to think of just one vacation I looked for and couldn't find.  Would RCI then turn around and take that as a statistic, and claim that EVERY OTHER TIME I searched, I found what I wanted, since I didn't specifically name another time and place?  I wouldn't put it past them, and I certainly don't think that $12 would be enough for RCI to "buy" a false statistic like that from me!  

If the claim form said something like, "I hereby certify that on at least one occasion I was unable to obtain the Points exchange vacation in the geographical area I wanted to exchange to," I might fill it out.  

As it is, I can't imagine anyone being able to truthfully fill out this form unless they have only one week of timeshare, and take one vacation per year.  And in that case, if they can't get a place they want in the area they want, $12 is positivley pitiful compensation, and a real slap in the face!  Is that all RCI is willing to concede a missed vacation opportunity is worth?!  HEL-lo!

I'm not liking what I'm seeing.  I'm not sure yet what I'm going to do, but filling out the claim form to get $12 is definitely NOT what I'm going to do!


----------



## bogey21 (May 20, 2012)

Susan2 said:


> I don't know how many people will be filling in the claim form, but I'm definitely not one of them.  WAY too much work!
> 
> I just reviewed the claim form and, were I to request the $12, I would have to recite.........



Took me about 30 seconds which equates into a nice hourly rate.  Where I didn't know with specificity I made "educated" guesses.  I doubt they check in any great detail.  IMO a shot at $12 was worth the 30 seconds or so of my time.  Kind of like paying $0 for a scratch-off lottery ticket.

George


----------



## pacodemountainside (May 27, 2012)

Passepartout said:


> Maybe only $12 to each of us, but $835,000 to Wyndham/RCI. Maybe it is enough to get their attention that exchange deposits are not to be rented while all that members get is leftover blue/white/mud weeks.
> 
> Jim



After weeks settlement, RCI weeks simply increased exchange fee by about $30.00.

Formerly competetive with II but I think II is now $149 and RCI $179 for on line exchanges. 

With some 500K Wyndham owners forced to pay membership fee no worry about cancellations.


----------



## kagnew64 (May 29, 2012)

*RCI Twelve dollars*

I received a post card rather than E-mail.  Went to web site and downloaded doc.  Fine print on last page says you must have requested a room and been denied.  Since I have never been denied on any of my requests I am not entitled to the twelve dollars.


----------



## catcher24 (May 29, 2012)

I got rather involved in the last RCI lawsuit, taking the time to type up a letter and send my comments to the court. In the settlement that ensued, I basically got kicked in the teeth by the court - along with the rest of the settlement group. Thus, when I saw what this was for, I simply threw away the post card that I had received. Even if it had taken only five minutes, it wasn't worth the effort. I haven't read - and most likely never will - the entire settlement agreement, but I suspect this is simply another case of RCI getting a very light slap on the wrist; the plaintiff attorneys walk off with bulging wallets; and the RCI members get the messy end of the stick once again.


----------



## DH1 (Dec 17, 2012)

*RCI Points Class Action Settlement Approval Denied on 12/7/12*

Wow! - Looks like the Judge Sheridan Court isn’t ready to buy into the proposed “Settlement Cool-Aid” and wants to hear more testimony.  

Perhaps attorney Stephan Willett’s efforts on behalf of his client, Biendara, will not be in vain as he appears to be fighting the good fight in Objecting to this proposed Settlement.  As of 12/7/12, Judge Sheridan has DENIED the proposed settlement in Glenz v. RCI, No. 09-cv-378 and he has set January 14th to hear additional testimony. 

Can’t help but notice the passion being displayed in this cause as it also appears that Willett has filed another RCI Points Class Action - Biendara v. RCI, No. 11-cv-536 in 2010 in his continuing effort to expose and curtail the perceived RCI rental abuses of owners points.  

If nothing else, he appears dedicated to fighting the good cause – readers may remember that Willett also took on the WorldMark/Wyndham “goliath” in attempting an Objection to their recent Settlement, which was considered so flawed that well over 11,000 owners simply chose to Opt-Out in response to the urgings of owner Robin Miller.  Unfortunately, that Court chose not to listen to the protest of 4.4% of the WorldMark membership – even though that protest set  a new Class Action Opt Out record!

But here it looks like the Sheridan Court wants to hear from owners.  This is a great opportunity to voice your concerns & experiences so as to be heard!

With time so short, Willett has apparently offered to collect individual comments & experiences concerning RCI via an email address created just for this purpose - RCIPointsProgramProblems@yahoo.com.   The deadline to submit comments is 1/5/13 so that responses can be suitably analyzed and summarized in time to meet the court’s deadline for the hearing.  

Sure can’t lose anything by supporting his efforts – and there’s a lot to gain if Willett succeeds!  Sure seems worthwhile to me – maybe the members will make a difference this time!

DH1


----------



## Carolinian (Dec 18, 2012)

Good for Willets!  He is clearly not the ''official'' class action attorney, as those seem to always take a case only to the point they can collect a big fee for themselves and leave their clients twisting in the breeze with either stupid trinkets or a tiny amount of cash but no real relief.  That is what happened in the Weeks class action, and it is what the class action scumbag attorneys are trying to do in the Points class action.  They, like virtually all class action attorneys, are only interested in their own huge fees and not in the interests of their clients, and they are totally unethical.

It would also be appropriate to file ethics complaints against the class action attorneys for striking this scandalous sell-out of a settlement against their clients interests.

One tort reform I would love to see is to base attorrney fees in class actions solely on the real relief obtained from the actions complained of, where trinkets or small cash payments obtained would NOT be considered at all in awarding attroney fees.


----------



## Jennie (Dec 24, 2012)

One has to wonder who this brand new TUG "guest" is.

For those of you who followed the long discussions during the RCI Weeks class action in 2010, you may remember that Steve Willett posted a lot of information that was not accurate. It was therefore deleted.  And Willett, who was caught posting under multiple false identities, was eventually banned from TUG. 

I am wondering if this new member might be Willett himself.


----------



## pedro47 (Dec 24, 2012)

Now is the time for owners to speak up to the judge and come to the plate.


----------



## Carolinian (Dec 24, 2012)

pedro47 said:


> Now is the time for owners to speak up to the judge and come to the plate.



While that did not work in the other lawsuit, this is a different judge, so it is well worth a try.

There have been rumblings of a possible lawsuit against RCI in the UK on this same subject.


----------



## DH1 (Dec 26, 2012)

Jennie said:


> One has to wonder who this brand new TUG "guest" is.
> 
> For those of you who followed the long discussions during the RCI Weeks class action in 2010, you may remember that Steve Willett posted a lot of information that was not accurate. It was therefore deleted.  And Willett, who was caught posting under multiple false identities, was eventually banned from TUG.
> 
> I am wondering if this new member might be Willett himself.



Not sure who the "*brand new TUG 'guest'*" is in reference to....but I signed up here some 4 years ago I guess and readily admit that I was not very attentive to the RCI class action matter at the time owing to my preoccupation as a member of the WorldMark class action struggle.

Not here to speak for Willett...nor is it my burden to defend him - I'm content to let those who make assertions of his wrongdoing defend their claims.

From my perspective the public record speaks for itself and it is quite apparent to me that Mr. Willett has spent a great deal of time and effort on his clients' behalf attempting to prevent the imposition of Settlements which are preceived as being inadequate, unfair and unreasonable.  From what I've read, that was made abundantly clear (though he did not prevail) in the Wyndham/WorldMark case,  and it now appears that he is back at it (fighting the same Goliath) in this RCI Points case.

Seems to me that, as in all these class action cases, if the affected members do not rise up and voice their opinions - *well then...*the outcome will be just as predicted by past results.

DH1


----------



## Jennie (Dec 27, 2012)

A very knowledgeable person, who owns many timeshares, provided the following opinion about the proposed settlement scheduled to be decided in Federal Court in New Jersey on January 14, 2013 by Judge Sheridan, the same judge who handled the RCI Weeks class action lawsuit.

"As far as the actual proposed settlement goes, my problem is with the terms of the disclosure. Starting on page 11 of the proposed settlement agreement, it says that RCI must disclose “(i) the total number of Points attributable to Inventory Deposited by or on behalf of RCI Points Members that was, more than ninety (90) days in advance of the start date of the Inventory, rented by RCI for consideration, or used by RCI for any other purpose.” 

IMO, this is a JOKE. It does not put any limits on RCI’s use of the Points deposited for exchange, the way the Weeks settlement did. It does not require RCI to disclose WHICH resorts it took the inventory from! For example, RCI can take the entire, or virtually the entire, inventory from Disney’s Animal Kingdom Villas (which it has rented for over $3000 per week), or Disney’s Bay Lake Tower, or skim off all the best inventory from the New York City properties, and rent them, too. NO DISCLOSURE about them, for example, taking all the best weeks from Montauk, and leaving only off-season. Also, since RCI is the sole arbiter of how many points each deposit is worth, RCI is the only check on itself. 

The Weeks lawsuit settlement requires that RCI keep  deposited inventory available in the spacebank for exchange by members, for a month, provided that the deposit was made at least 9 months in advance of the check-in date. And if there is an outstanding Weeks search for that property (Points accounts are not allowed to put searches in place), RCI has to fulfill the Weeks search request before renting it, even if the deposit is made less than 9 months in advance. RCI also has to disclose other specific information. 

But for Points, there is virtually no accounting whatsoever! There are no benefits to the class. The named Plaintiffs get $500, other class members get up to $12, and no real changes are made. The only people who benefit are the Plaintiffs’ attorneys (who get paid over $800,000) and RCI (who gets approval of its abominable practices).'


----------



## Carolinian (Dec 28, 2012)

We really need to get proactive through our HOA's to educate our fellow timesharers about what RCI is doing and about the availibility of alternatives like SFX, DAE, HTSE, Platinum, and TPI.

While the Weeks lawsuit did only a very little to apply the brakes to RCI, this one does absolutely nothing.




Jennie said:


> A very knowledgeable person, who owns many timeshares, provided the following opinion about the proposed settlement scheduled to be decided in Federal Court in New Jersey on January 14, 2013 by Judge Sheridan, the same judge who handled the RCI Weeks class action lawsuit.
> 
> "As far as the actual proposed settlement goes, my problem is with the terms of the disclosure. Starting on page 11 of the proposed settlement agreement, it says that RCI must disclose “(i) the total number of Points attributable to Inventory Deposited by or on behalf of RCI Points Members that was, more than ninety (90) days in advance of the start date of the Inventory, rented by RCI for consideration, or used by RCI for any other purpose.”
> 
> ...


----------



## DH1 (Dec 31, 2012)

Jennie said:


> A very knowledgeable person, who owns many timeshares, provided the following opinion about the proposed settlement scheduled to be decided in Federal Court in New Jersey on January 14, 2013 by Judge Sheridan, the same judge who handled the RCI Weeks class action lawsuit.
> 
> "As far as the actual proposed settlement goes, my problem is with the terms of the disclosure. Starting on page 11 of the proposed settlement agreement, it says that RCI must disclose “(i) the total number of Points attributable to Inventory Deposited by or on behalf of RCI Points Members that was, more than ninety (90) days in advance of the start date of the Inventory, rented by RCI for consideration, or used by RCI for any other purpose.”
> 
> ...




Seems to me this 'very knowledgeable' person is repeating exactly the nature of Mr. Willett's OBJECTION!  

What better reason is there for ALL points members to become PRO-ACTIVE and send a LOUD message to the court!  If enough members rise up and provide a written description of their experiences, the Court will at least be alerted to the blatant fallacies represented by this proposed Settlement. 

It will be ACTION that speaks to the Court - not hand-wringing and wishing it weren't so!

DH1


----------



## tschwa2 (Jan 10, 2013)

*RCI points settlement hearing postponed!*

RCI Points Settlement- the hearing on January 14, 2013 has been POSTPONED.  No new date has yet been set. 

Just in case anyone wants to appear, the procedure would be to write to the judge and ask permission to come. 
The address is

*Hon. Peter G. Sheridan, U. S. D. J.
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
402 East State Street
Trenton, NJ 08608*

The case caption (“regarding” line) is Civil Action No. 09-378 (PGS), Glenz v. RCI, LLC.  The whole name of the case is “Anton Glenz, et al, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated.”


----------



## DH1 (Jan 16, 2013)

*There's still hope - Don’t give up!*

Reading from Judge Sheridan’s 1/11/13 Order (Dkt 109). . .

It is apparent that the Court has declined to enter its Final Approval in the Points Class Action “because it was not satisfied that the settlement would resolve the allegations raised in the Complaint”.  

The Complaint alleges “that RCI defrauded the Program by engaging in an unconscionable commercial practice of skimming a large percentage of the timeshares from the system, including many prime timeshares, and renting them to the general public at a profit to RCI, or selling them to vendors who then rent them to the general public, or using them for promotional purposes and as benefits for its employees”

Having acknowledged that “the proposed settlement requires RCI to amend its corporate internal controls so that it clearly discloses to it members the operation of the Program, including, _*but not limited to, the availability of statistical data concerning the Program*_”; Judge Sheridan proclaims that “the Court lacks sufficient certitude that the modification of corporate controls in Lawsuit No. 1 _*or in this matter *_have remedied or will remedy the complaints.” (emphasis inserted by DH1)

Hmmm…. Judge Sheridan must be getting a “whiff” of something odd in the proposed Settlement “cool-aid” after all?  Could it be that he has detected an odd odor emanating from the statistical analysis presented to his Court?  

It was observed & argued by objecting attorney Willett, that the presented statistical analysis was based on an statistically insufficient sample set (a mere 200 selected points vacation week samples out of a total in excess of 1.6 million points vacation weeks being controlled by RCI).  

Having read somewhere that “Willett” holds an engineering degree from UCLA with an emphasis in stochastic processes, my hat’s off to Willett for his perseverance and to Judge Sheridan for taking steps to “clear the air”.

Reading further, it appears that the Judge is now requiring review by an independent expert to be identified by the parties’ attorneys; and he has ordered the “Adjournment” of the January 14, 2013 hearing, “until such time when the Court can interview any proposed expert as to his or her qualifications.”

This Should Be Good News to all Members – There's still hope - Don’t give up!

DH1


----------



## Susan2 (Jan 20, 2013)

DH1 said:


> If enough members rise up and provide a written description of their experiences, the Court will at least be alerted to the blatant fallacies represented by this proposed Settlement.
> 
> DH1




While I do not disagree that the Points settlement utterly fails to address the problems we timeshare owners experience in the current (and proposed continued) RCI exchange setup, I am curious to know what "blatant fallacies" DH1 believes the settlement "represents."     

Susan


----------



## DeniseM (Jan 21, 2013)

DH1

Where can we find this order? Would you please post the link?


----------



## Carolinian (Jan 21, 2013)

It seems to me that there is another solution out there to the disclosure problem.  Current state law in most if not all states requires timeshare developers (in some states like NC including HOA resales) to provide a disclosure booklet to buyers on various statistics about exchanges.  These laws were written before RCI launched its massive rental to the public operation.  It seems to me that these disclosure laws should be rewritten to include lots of required statistics on exchange company rental programs.


----------



## Susan2 (Jan 21, 2013)

Carolinian said:


> It seems to me that there is another solution out there to the disclosure problem.  Current state law in most if not all states requires timeshare developers (in some states like NC including HOA resales) to provide a disclosure booklet to buyers on various statistics about exchanges.  These laws were written before RCI launched its massive rental to the public operation.  It seems to me that these disclosure laws should be rewritten to include lots of required statistics on exchange company rental programs.



I like the suggestion, but I don't know how practical it is.  On the one hand,  if even one state required exchange companies to post rental information it might work.  

On the other hand, getting legislation passed can be fantastically difficult and time-consuming.  Besides, if RCI does it usual thing of disposing of its rental inventory to another corporation, does that constitute "renting"?


----------



## DH1 (Jan 26, 2013)

DeniseM said:


> DH1
> 
> Where can we find this order? Would you please post the link?



Public Court Record

Case 3:09-cv-00378-PGS-DEA Document 109 Filed 01/11/13

U.S. District Court (New Jersey)

requires PACER account

DH1


----------



## DeniseM (Jan 27, 2013)

Since you have a Pacer Acct, are you an attorney involved in this lawsuite?  Full disclosure would be appropriate since you seem to be posting your interpretation of events on TUG and we can't access Pacer.


----------



## DH1 (Jan 27, 2013)

DeniseM said:


> Since you have a Pacer Acct, are you an attorney involved in this lawsuite?  Full disclosure would be appropriate since you seem to be posting your interpretation of events on tug and we can't access Pacer.





Don't know quite how to respond here...except to clarify that a PACER account is not restricted to attorneys, as you seem to suggest, and is available to you or any other reader of this forum merely by taking the initiative to fill out the on-line registration.  Your statement - "we can't access Pacer" is simply not accurate.

As to your first question... I am not involved in this "lawsuite" nor am I an attorney. 

DH1


----------



## DH1 (Jan 28, 2013)

*Mea Culpa/Apology - Jennie, Susan, Denise*



Jennie said:


> One has to wonder who this brand new TUG "guest" is.
> 
> For those of you who followed the long discussions during the RCI Weeks class action in 2010, you may remember that Steve Willett posted a lot of information that was not accurate. It was therefore deleted.  And Willett, who was caught posting under multiple false identities, was eventually banned from TUG.
> 
> I am wondering if this new member might be Willett himself.




My apologies to Jennie, Susan & Denise for my admitedly defensive attitude while responding in this thread.  I finally did what I should have done much earlier and spent some time reading historical posts concerning the RCI Weeks proceedings.  I now understand & appreciate why there might be suspicions cast in my direction from attorney members of this forum and others who were so intimatey involved with those proceedings.

For the record...

I am not Stephan Willett
I am not an attorney
I am not involved in (i.e. in any way a party to) this case. 

But I am very much interested in this case as it involves the same top level defendant player as was involved in the WorldMark matter - namely Wyndham -a case whose outcome appears remarkably similar to what seems to be coming down in this RCI Points case. Indeed my observation is that it shares many of the same "tactics" in terms of the litigation strategies being employed.

As one of the 11,000 plus members of WorldMark who chose to Opt Out of that WorldMark Settlement, I have a keen interest in staying current on Wyndham's tactics in this Points case.  In the interest of more complete disclosure, I'll even confess that somehow I missed the "fat lady's" aria. 

Again, you all have my apology...



DH1


----------

