# Contact the Speaker of the Massachusetts House



## Sou13 (Jun 3, 2010)

From RCI to Massachusetts residents:

A law is pending in the Massachusetts legislature that affects all timeshare ownership and will allow your homeowner association to better operate your property going forward, helping to ensure great vacations and ownership for you now, and into the future. It is critical that you contact Speaker of the House, Robert A. DeLeo right now to urge him and the House of Representatives to *vote for House Bill 4496*.

*Passing H.4496 is good for the Commonwealth as it will:*

 √ Streamline the current overly-burdensome judicial foreclosure process for timeshares while protecting an owner’s property rights by providing them the choice to pursue either a judicial or non-judicial forfeiture (NJF) process. 
 √ Generate approximately $11 million in new revenue for the Commonwealth.  
 √ Provide timeshare home owners associations (HOAs) the tools they need to pursue critical resort repair and improvements (delinquent and/or abandoned deeded timeshare weeks are an ever increasing financial burden to HOAs hampering the ability to fund critical resort repair and improvements).  

*Tell Speaker DeLeo to vote YES on House Bill 4496—it is beneficial to all residents of Massachusetts. Passing it will be a good thing for many local economies and the commonwealth in general. Please click here to view a letter which you may want to consider sending to him – email is the fastest way to get your message to him or you can pick up the phone to call him.*

Here is the Speaker’s contact information:

*SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE
ROBERT A. DeLEO*

State House
Room 356
State House
Boston, MA 02133

Telephone: 617-722-2500
Facsimile: 617-722-2008
E-Mail: Robert.DeLeo@state.ma.us

Please contact him today!

Sincerely,


Gordon Gurnik
President
RCI North America


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jun 3, 2010)

What states have laws that allow people to forfeit their timeshares in that way?  I wonder if Florida has such a thing.


----------



## Sou13 (Jun 3, 2010)

It's called the "Helping Small Business Compete Act of 2010":
http://www.overcriminalized.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?id=563


----------



## djs (Jun 5, 2010)

Got the same thing from II:

Dear Interval International Member,
As you may be aware, the American Resort Development Association has been working with the Massachusetts legislature to enact a law authorizing non-judicial foreclosure of timeshare located in Massachusetts. This legislation, if passed, would among other things streamline the process to allow homeowner associations to reclaim defaulted timeshare interests and resell them. The result would be a faster resale and therefore fewer defaults in the payment of maintenance fees. Fewer defaults mean fewer increases in the fees paid by you and other owners.

Now we need your help. We need you to contact the House Speaker, Robert DeLeo either by e-mail or by regular mail at the addresses below, and urge him to support and pass this bill, H4496.  Your voice is important.  Please act soon.  Again, tell the Speaker you need him to pass H4496, the Timeshare Non-Judicial Foreclosure bill.
Thank you for your help.

Interval International


Contact info for DeLeo was also provided but there's no need to duplicate it as its provided in the OP.


----------



## e.bram (Jun 5, 2010)

this would help the bailers(walkers)since it would stop the accrual of MFs and SAs that they owe.


----------



## Sou13 (Jun 5, 2010)

I don't know enough about what's in the bill to advocate for its passage, nor do I understand why II and RCI are in support of it, but I've received this from a *Sandcastle owner* who suggests that we use the form letter above to urge the representatives to vote *against* it:

Hi all -- *We all need to write to Mass legislators to stop them from passing House Bill 4496 in its present form.* 

For those of you at the annual meeting, Cliff talked in glowing terms about this bill which would make it easier for him to obtain timeshare properties from delinquent owners and auction them off -- probably to Festiva. While we know that it is no good for any of us to have delinquent owners, Cliff is now threatening foreclosure for people who have not paid the special assessment which was  imposed in an illegal manner. Therefore, we need to write to the Mass legislators and ask them to refuse to support the bill unless it includes additional protection for timeshare owners.

Attached is a letter that you can cut and paste to an email to House Speaker Robert DeLeo and to Representative Theodore Speliotis who is sponsoring the bill and your own representative if you are living in Massachusetts. (If you don't live in Mass, you can still send an email to Reps DeLeo and Speliotis.)

Email addresses are:

Robert.DeLeo@state.ma.us

Rep.TheodoreSpeliotis@hou.state.ma.us

Include your name, address and telephone number.

Please take a minute and do this....and it will only take a minute but it might pay off. For people who are tired of the emails that result in no action, this is an opportunity to take action! Persistence is everything, so please do this even if you are feeling frustrated.

I also received this from a *Southcape Resort* owner:

*As I mentioned last October, after my conversation with Cliff Hafberg when he told me that he and his other "Cape Owners" would be working to change present time share legislation because he felt it was "outdated",  that we should be contacting our own State Reps and Senators to counter their lobbying efforts!   Well, now it appears that they have successfully accomplished their lobbying goals!! The State's Atty. General (AG) is still on hold with our letters of complaints and phone calls! Before any action comes from the AG, the current legislation re furnishing us owners the list of all resort owners, as stated in the law, Cliff and company will have lobbyed amendments, favorable to themselves, to that legislation as well!!  It appears very obvious that "they" are getting action and are on the offensive because they are organized, in agreement, have the numbers and know exactly who to lobby and where to go and who to "see"! While we, the minority, await the State Bureaucracy to come "riding in on a white horse", to our aid!! Who thinks that's going to happen!!*

I also received this from the *Sandcastle owner* whose original message is above:

If you live in any of the following towns and would be willing to contact your rep, please email me. These towns have reps on the Consumer Protection Committee that is considering House Bill  4496 that would make it easier for developers to take back times share units from delinquent owners but also from those who are not paying the special assessment because it was illegally imposed. We need ask our reps for protection from these unscrupulous businesses.

I talked to someone on the Committee staff today and he seemed to actually understand what I was talking about. He said, "You mean they can just decide to make any changes they want and send you the bill!" So maybe if we get other reps interested we could get some wording in the law that would offer timeshare owners more protection. 

The towns are:

Attleboro, Berlin, Billerica, Boston (5th Suffolk District - Marie La Fleur), Danvers, East Longmeadow, Holden, hubbardston, Lexington, Marlborough, Norton, Oakham, Peabody, Princetwon, Rehoboth, Rutland, Seekonk, Southborough, Springfield, Sterling, Swansea, Topsfield, Waltham, West Boylston, Westfield, Westminster, Wilbraham, Worcester

Reps are: Ted Speliotis, Marie St.Fleur, William Greene, Thomas Stanley, Steven D'Amica, Angelo Puppulo, James O'Day, Bill Bowles, Danielle Gregoire, Donald Humason, and Lewis Evangelidis

*Here's what you need to change in the form letter:*

I am alarmed to learn that the House is considering House Bill 4496 which makes it easier for Timeshare companies to obtain possession of units from delinquent owners through a less complicated forfeiture procedure. I agree that it is important to the viability of timeshare properties to be able to collect assessments, but I also know that there are unscrupulous companies who are trying to get control of valuable properties that were converted to timeshares in the 1970’s and 80’s by a variety of means including imposition of burdensome special assessments in an effort to drive owners out so I feel it is important that consumers be given strong protection to prevent them from losing their property.

I am asking that you refuse to support this bill unless consumer protection is strengthened by addition of provisions stating that:
•	all special assessment bills include detailed information about the extent and costs of proposed repairs;
•	that managers be required to obtain at least three bids for the repairs to be made and that  there be a process and timeframes for owners to examine the bids prior to the special assessment being imposed; and
•	that information about how the special assessment was calculated be included in the bill and that the management company be required to cite clauses in the timeshare document to verify that the formula used is valid.

I hope that you will truly use this bill to support consumers instead of the interests of big business in the form of realty, mortgage and financial companies. 

*Finally, a message to all owners of timeshares in Massachusetts:*

People should be urged to write emails to House Speaker Robert DeLeo (Robert.DeLeo@state.ma.us) and Rep Ted Spelioits (Rep.TheodoreSpeliotis@hou.state.ma.us)  and tell them not to pass the bill unless there is strong protection for timeshare owners related to special assessments. 

People should be urged to get the message out to all owners of timeshares in Mass, not only Southcape and Sandcastle.


----------



## djs (Jun 5, 2010)

Sou13,

Thank you for your post.  I too haven't looked into the bill but it is always good to have more than one view on potential legislation.

One thing that is too bad is that I imagine a majority of the timeshare owners in MA may not be MA residents.  Yes, some of the advice given here is to have people buy somewhere they might be able to drive to, but I'm not entirely certain that's the case.  If the majority are not MA residents, then the legislators may very well vote in a way that is contrary to TS owners' interests as they don't actually represent them.


----------



## ChrisH (Jun 6, 2010)

*OPPOSE THIS BILL as WRITTEN House Bill 4496*

This bill will allow auctioning of units in 'BULK' and does NOT protect the Owner's Associations as it is currently written.

I find it appalling that the blanket form letter promotes this language as stated, as it allows takeover by developers as currently written.  I wish it wasn't even posted here as it encourages people to send it without the facts.

At our Sandcastle Annual Meeting, when asked if existing owners would get first option at buying reclaimed units we were blatantly told that 'sure, if you want to *buy them in bulk units of 100 or so*.' 

This auction method allows a developer, like Festiva in our case, to purchase prime weeks for minimal cost, granting them additional votes while forcing out the existing owners association.   If 50 or 100 units are for example at $1000/unit in bulk, the average person cannot come up with $50,000 or $100,000 so all units go to a conglomerate with a hefty bankroll.  

If those same units were sold individually, prime weeks in MA could pull in 4$4,000-$10,000 or more.  Just look at prime beach and ski weeks on the internet.  Sale of units should be attempted individually, for a specified time frame prior to auction, in my opinion. 

Further, individual owners, with a stake in the association could buy one or two units within their own resort, prior to this type of auction, keeping the OA intact and strong.  

The Bill should state :
That the OA consisting of all owners not currently in default will have final say in the method of disposal of such units.
That any type of auction or sale would be at the discretion of the OA and that an OA ballot VOTE would be required with 51% (or 66%; or 75%;or a majority) or more approve prior to such as decision for an auction to be held. 
That any owner may submit a statement to be included in the ballot.
That management may also submit a statement to be included in the ballot.
That all owners be notified by USPS mail of the opportunity to submit such as statement for a ballot. 
That said ballot be mailed by USPS mail to all owners not in default.
That this mailing be a separate mailing containing only information discussing the ballot and the sale of units and not general resort issues, updates etc.
That the ballots are to be returned within a certain time frame, but not less than 30  (60) days from the date of mailing. 
That the OA has the right to choose the method of auction.
That the OA has the right to choose the Auction firm.
That the OA may request bids in choosing the Auction firm. 
That management can only proceed with the balloted approval of the OA.

This allows resorts in serious financial trouble to allow bulk auctions IF THEY SO CHOOSE 
and those resorts NOT in financial straits to choose an ALTERNATE SALES method.

Further, as this House Bill 4496 relates to other areas of the Massachusetts General Laws section on Timeshares (MGL 183B)

It would also be important to ask your legislator to rescind the contract cancelation section (MGL 183B:38:14 (i)  as shown below) and replace it with a more appropriate timeframe such as 10 days or seven business days, allowing for the purchaser to review of all documents and for consultation with one's own attorney or bank, or loan company prior to the completion of the purchase. 

Chapter 183B: Section 38. Public offering statements; furnishing to purchaser; contents 

Current law: http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/183b-38.htm
(14) a statement that: 

(i) within three business days after the date of receipt of a public offering statement, a purchaser may cancel any contract for purchase of a time-share from a developer; 


House Bill 4496  
http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/house/186/ht04pdf/ht04496.pdf

*This is my private opinion and should not be posted anywhere or  distributed by any means without my express permission.*


----------



## ChrisH (Jun 6, 2010)

*If you OWN a MA timeshare then you ARE A RESIDENT*



> One thing that is too bad is that I imagine a majority of the timeshare owners in MA may not be MA residents.  Yes, some of the advice given here is to have people buy somewhere they might be able to drive to, but I'm not entirely certain that's the case.  If the majority are not MA residents, then the legislators may very well vote in a way that is contrary to TS owners' interests as they don't actually represent them.



Anyone who owns a timeshare within the state of MA, pays property taxes on that timeshare and therefore should contact the legislators that cover the district in which their timeshare is located.  Those owners are constituents of those districts.  It doesn't matter where one resides.

If you live in MA and own a MA Timeshare, you should contact both your local reps for your town and the local reps in the timeshare district.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 6, 2010)

*Support the bill - support your Association*

IMO this is a law that needs to be supported. The onerous expenses to do full judicial foreclosure for timeshares is one of many reasons delinquencies are so hard to properly handle for Associations. It will help to streamline the process while at the same time protecting the rights of owners. It is a win win. 

Other states (including Florida) are also studying implementing this type of option for foreclosure but, to date, none have it that I know of.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 6, 2010)

*Yes, lower fees are good*



e.bram said:


> this would help the bailers(walkers)since it would stop the accrual of MFs and SAs that they owe.



Not really meant to do that but in a way you are correct. It would help stop the long, drawn out and costly process to foreclose on delinquent ownerships which would cut down on the total fees past due. This is a positive for everyone involved in the picture.


----------



## e.bram (Jun 6, 2010)

Timeos2:
Make it simpler yet. force the HOA accept return by the owner of the weeks owned(with all MFs up to date).


----------



## djs (Jun 6, 2010)

ChrisH said:


> Anyone who owns a timeshare within the state of MA, pays property taxes on that timeshare and therefore should contact the legislators that cover the district in which their timeshare is located.  Those owners are constituents of those districts.  It doesn't matter where one resides.
> 
> If you live in MA and own a MA Timeshare, you should contact both your local reps for your town and the local reps in the timeshare district.



Yes, but...if one owns a week in MA and perhaps lives in NY then chances are they are registered to vote in NY and not MA.  Ideally the legislators would listen to all who are affected by a bill, but it's more likely that they give more weight to those who actually vote in their district and can either vote them out of office or help to keep them in office.


----------



## ChrisH (Jun 6, 2010)

*Will legislators listen to out of state owners*



djs said:


> Yes, but...if one owns a week in MA and perhaps lives in NY then chances are they are registered to vote in NY and not MA.  Ideally the legislators would listen to all who are affected by a bill, but it's more likely that they give more weight to those who actually vote in their district and can either vote them out of office or help to keep them in office.



Most of the TS industry in MA is located on Cape Cod or in the Berkshires -both areas that depend highly on income generated by vacationers for survival.  If a TS owner is from out of state, but spends their vacation $$$$ in a specific MA district on an annual basis, this would help the local economy and should be mentioned in letters to reps who represent these areas.

More letters, no matter where they are from, may make those reps step back and listen.


----------



## Sou13 (Jun 7, 2010)

ChrisH said:


> *This is my private opinion and should not be posted anywhere or  distributed by any means without my express permission.*


So you have a problem with discussing it here or elsewhere?  How else are we to get the word out?

I posted it because it was forwarded to me by a former Southcape Resort owner who is still a member of RCI.  I was unable to find or even understand the facts because it's an "accompanying bill" and all I could find was "Helping Small Business Compete Act of 2010":
http://www.overcriminalized.com/Legi...il.aspx?id=563


----------



## Sou13 (Jun 7, 2010)

That wasn't even the right bill!  No wonder I couldn't find it!   In fact, it was originally HOUSE No. 1287: http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/house/186/ht01/ht01287.htm


----------



## Sou13 (Jun 9, 2010)

*Message from Janet*

Hi Ele -- Would you consider sending this out to your group...you may also post on TUG if you want.

Hi Southcape and Sandcastle owners,

This is another reminder to please contact Rep. Ted Speliotis (bill sponsor), Robert DeLeo (House speaker) and your own representative and tell them NOT to support this bill until additional protection for timeshare owners is included. We all want delinquent owners to pay their fair share....but once this horse is out of the barn, it will be too late to protect the rest of us. This bill will give timeshare developers a tool to confiscate units by the tactics we have witnessed in the Sandcastle and Southcape debacles -- imposition of high special assessments, no questions allowed, pay up or get out! 

Email addresses are: Rep.TheodoreSpeliotis@hou.state.ma.us   and   Robert.DeLeo@state.ma.us

At Sandcastle we have had our first person refused the use of her unit unless she paid the full special assessment that she had been protesting. She paid under duress, but there will be others who can't and if this bill passes they will lose their units. We need to hold Hagberg et. al accountable to send a detailed information about any proposed renovations, get bids that we can view, get owner authorization for improvements and use the formula in the contracts when calculating bills, not formulas he made up to fit his needs. This bill should not be passed without those protections in place.

This is an easy way to take action and stop the abuses. Don't let the opportunity pass while we have the legislator's ears.

Janet Watson, Sandcastle owner


----------



## Sou13 (Jun 10, 2010)

*So what's in the proposed bill?*

I've created a file of the proposed changes to the existing timeshare law (http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/gl-183b-toc.htm) and after adding "Forfeiture" and "Forfeiture proceedings" to the definitions in Section 2, the definition of "Timeshare license" gets changed from 
“Time-share license”, a right to the occupancy of a unit or any of several units during five or more separated time periods not coupled with a freehold estate or an estate for years.
to “Time-share license”, a right to occupancy of a unit or any of several units during 5 or more separated time periods not coupled with a freehold estate or an estate for years *and shall include an interest in timeshare property created through the conveyance of all or a portion of time-share property to an association or a third party, in trust, for the benefit of time-share owners.*

Does the addition of this line legalize the "points" which may not be legal in Massachusetts?


----------



## w.bob (Jun 11, 2010)

timeos2 said:


> IMO this is a law that needs to be supported. The onerous expenses to do full judicial foreclosure for timeshares is one of many reasons delinquencies are so hard to properly handle for Associations. It will help to streamline the process while at the same time protecting the rights of owners. It is a win win.
> 
> Other states (including Florida) are also studying implementing this type of option for foreclosure but, to date, none have it that I know of.



I agree that the process has to be changed but my concern is as to why an owner may have been put in the position of foreclosure. Obviously there are many reasons why an owner cannot keep up with payments especially with this economy. I believe some timeshare maint fees and special assessments are able to go unchecked and are increased on a whim. High fees could easily be assessed resulting with the owner being put in a bad financial position. It's compounded by the fact that those responsible for the increases do not always have to verify and substantiate  why increases are needed or where the money is actually spent. I believe this is one of the problems at a number of the Cape Cod timeshares with owners questioning why maint fees were increased, why they were also levied a special assessment and at the same time charged a fee to increase the reserves fund. Granted, a lot of these increases may be justified but when questions are not answered as to exactly where monies were spent etc. it can have the appearance of improprieties. 

I guess what I am trying to say is that I would feel more comfortable if this law had a provision in place so if you reached the foreclosure process it was not because of unwarranted increases that were not justified and out in the open. If the owner cannot financially afford the timeshare and did not make their payments  they would have to face the consequences. It seems like the way it is set up now if fees are raised without justification it may have been done for the sole purpose of squeezing owners out to gain access to their units. If an owner is in financial trouble and can no longer afford the timeshare that is one thing but they should also be protected from an unscrupulous developer who contributed to their being put in the position. 

I have no clue as to how it can be tied into this legislation.


----------



## timeos2 (Jun 11, 2010)

*Give it support. The resort you help save may be yours*



w.bob said:


> I agree that the process has to be changed but my concern is as to why an owner may have been put in the position of foreclosure. Obviously there are many reasons why an owner cannot keep up with payments especially with this economy. I believe some timeshare maint fees and special assessments are able to go unchecked and are increased on a whim. High fees could easily be assessed resulting with the owner being put in a bad financial position. It's compounded by the fact that those responsible for the increases do not always have to verify and substantiate  why increases are needed or where the money is actually spent. I believe this is one of the problems at a number of the Cape Cod timeshares with owners questioning why maint fees were increased, why they were also levied a special assessment and at the same time charged a fee to increase the reserves fund. Granted, a lot of these increases may be justified but when questions are not answered as to exactly where monies were spent etc. it can have the appearance of improprieties.
> 
> I guess what I am trying to say is that I would feel more comfortable if this law had a provision in place so if you reached the foreclosure process it was not because of unwarranted increases that were not justified and out in the open. If the owner cannot financially afford the timeshare and did not make their payments  they would have to face the consequences. It seems like the way it is set up now if fees are raised without justification it may have been done for the sole purpose of squeezing owners out to gain access to their units. If an owner is in financial trouble and can no longer afford the timeshare that is one thing but they should also be protected from an unscrupulous developer who contributed to their being put in the position.
> 
> I have no clue as to how it can be tied into this legislation.



The protections of ownership you speak to are a legitimate concern but already well covered by the voluminous disclosure and prchase statements, resort guidelines, rules, regulations and much more totaling  hundreds of pages. They are ultimately protected by the voting rights granted  every owner to elect the governing HOA / Condo /Timeshare Board that operates the Association and resort for them. The type of issues you discuss are handled within that framework and with plenty of legal options to challenge any or all of it. 

This bill deals with just one little part of the puzzle. What can/does an Association do when an owner fails to live within those guidelines/rules/regulations/documents and now faces the ultimate penalty - foreclosure. To make the Association go through thousands of dollars of process to collect is onerous and needs to be streamlined while still protecting the resort & owner. The current bill proposed does just that and isn't intended to deal with how the owner got to that point but simply how it is handled now that they are. It is a fair answer to an ever growing problem. I urge owners and resorts to support the bill.


----------



## Sou13 (Jun 12, 2010)

*Message from Janet*

I've been asked to pass this info along to Massachusetts residents:

*I am the person who is urging a legislative email campaign. I agree with (Southcape owner) and you will see in the sample letter that I am suggesting that writers state their support for forfeiture of units with delinquent payments.

My concern is , just as you said, the current law does not protect owners from receiving bills with little or no explanation of where the money will go. At Sandcaslte we received a bill for a total of $2.9 million that a third grader could have sent. No detail, when we asked about bids there was no answer, when we asked to see financial records we were denied. When we asked to see the bids, we were denied. Hagberg hired his own relatives to do the renovations. Hagberg et. al. also calculated the bill in a manner that did not conform to the contract. I personally was billed double what I should have been according to my contract but got no response from two complaint letters. The message is pay what we say you owe or we will take back your unit. When I asked again at the annual meeting about the way the bill was calcualted, Hagberg snidely retorted, "Get a lawyer."

We are asking that the bill be passed, but with much stronger protections for consumers so that there is some control over the special assessment process. The current law leaves it up to the trustees and they are lining their own pockets. In addition, we know from reading TUG posts and viewing our own situation over the last year, that the intent is for Festiva to get this prime waterfront property at firesale prices and charge owners for any renovations they feel are necessary.

In addition, Cliff told us at the Sandcastle annual meeting that he intends to auction any units he gets through forfeiture in large blocks. He blatantly said that individual owners would not be able to afford them. Who do you think will buy them? My guess is they will go straight to Festiva. They will pay very little for them...probably not even the cost of back payments that responsible owners have shouldered. One person who wrote to the legislators suggested adding a clause to the bill stating that units could only be auctioned as units rather than being auctioned in blocks. 

I am in agreement with (Southcape owner) on the issues and  personally I feel that this bill will sell owners down the river.

Janet Watson
*


----------



## Sou13 (Jun 15, 2010)

*Update*

Received today:

*Hi -- I am writing to the people who indicated that they wrote to the legislators.

I spoke today with (name withheld) who is the counsel for the committee. He was not completely forthcoming, but he said there was considerable "buzz' going around the statehouse in regard to this bill as a result of people contacting their legislators, so our emails have had the desired effect.

The bill is in the "third reading" which means that it can be brought to the floor for a vote, but according to (name withheld) this is the point when it could be amended if the chairman was agreeable. I think at this juncture we should send more emails to Speliotis, House Speaker DeLeo and your own legislator if you live in Mass and tell them the bill will harm consumer in its present form and we want Representaive Speliotis as chairman of the Consumer Protection Committee to amend the bill to include more consumer protection.

Email addresses are:

Rep.TheodoreSpeliotis@hou.state.ma.us

Robert.DeLeo@state.ma.us

If anyone could contact their own reps and get their advise about how we can proceed that would be helpful. (My rep is non-responsive so if anyone has a good rep, please let me know what they have to say.)

It's a critical time to be persistent and follow through. Let's do it!

Janet Watson

*


----------



## Sou13 (Jul 27, 2010)

*Message from Janet*

House Bill 4496 was passed by the House and is now in the Senate. The number of the bill has been changed to H4803...but the substance of the bill has not changed and the passage of the bill will only mean more power for the unscrupulous companies we are dealing with.

Senator Fred Berry seems to the key person at this point. Please take the time to send an email to your state senator and also to Senator Fred Berry .

Let them know the following: 

*As an owner of a timeshare in Massachusetts, I am asking you to refuse to pass Timeshare legislation H4803 until additional consumer protection is added. The current bill will allow big out of state companies to take over valuable Massachusetts properties as they have done at Southcape Resort in Mashpee by driving owners out through big special assessments and repossessing their property. Please protect consumers... don't bow to the timeshare lobbyists.*

Add your name, address and telephone number. Follow up with a call.

If you live out of state, just write to Senator Berry.


You can find your Senator at this site: http://www.wheredoi votema.com/ bal/myelectionin fo.php (put in your address and when the voting information comes up, scroll down to find your state senator.

Senator Berry's email is: Frederick.Berry@ state.ma. us

Senator Berry covers the towns of Beverly, Danvers, Peabody, Salem and Topsfield. If you live in any of these towns, please email and call Senator Berry. 

It looks like the timeshare lobbyists are winning this one. Let's try one more time to get our legislators to work for consumer protection.. .not big business. PS: The State Email system seems to be having problems today. If your email comes back undeliverable, try again. It is not the address...its the system.


----------



## ChrisH (Jul 27, 2010)

*This Quoted Post is INCORRECT*



Sou13 said:


> House Bill 4496 was passed by the House and is now in the Senate. The number of the bill has been changed to H4803...but the substance of the bill has not changed and the passage of the bill will only mean more power for the unscrupulous companies we are dealing with.
> 
> Senator Fred Berry seems to the key person at this point. Please take the time to send an email to your state senator and also to Senator Fred Berry .
> 
> ...



This bill has already passed both the House and the Senate as of 7/20/2010 and is now on the Governor's desk for final action.

House, No. 4803

Presented by: Vincent A. Pedone

Relative to timeshare ownership

6/23/2010
 H
 Substituted for H4496

6/23/2010
 H
 Passed to be engrossed

6/24/2010
 S
 Read; and referred to the Senate Committee on Ethics and Rules

7/19/2010
 S
 Committee reported that the matter be placed in the Orders of the Day for the next session

7/19/2010
 S
 Rules suspended

7/19/2010
 S
 Read second, ordered to a third reading, read third and passed to be engrossed

7/20/2010
 H
 Enacted

7/20/2010
 S
 Enacted and laid before the Governor

Source:http://www.mass.gov

_The statements and opinions in this message are mine and mine alone and should not be distributed nor reproduced via email, regular mail, internet posting or other means without my written consent._
Chris


----------



## Sou13 (Jul 28, 2010)

*Thanks for the update*

Wow!  Rules suspended!  What was the rush?  Whose palms got greased?


----------

