Recently purchased Ebay week added to DC program for no additional charge

[larryallen]

You assume the employes READ the emails from their managers!

The more I read about other's experiences dealing with Marriott regarding enrollment of "Non eligible" weeks the more convinced I become that they really, really don't know what the heck they are doing. A supposed Marriott employee posts that they are aware of the problem and will unenroll non eligible weeks and yet their own customer reps are still telling people that they can enroll them. Now I am sure that they have a internal E Mail list for all their customer reps which they can and do use to send out important internal E Mails. So while they are saying that this is computer problem which they are going to fix no one has sent a E Mail to the customer service reps which says "Do Not Tell Owners with post deadline enrolled weeks that they can enroll that week in the DC program even though the computer system says they can. This is a computer error and we are working on fixing it" Nope! their customer service reps are still happily telling owners that they can enroll those weeks. I find it impossible to believe that Marriott would allow the continual enrollment of those weeks to occur.

 

[SueDonJ]

Kathy, I think that only you can decide what you want to do today, whether you want to rescind while the window is open or take a chance that things will work out the way you want. But I also think that you have some serious thinking to do, while you have today to do it, about which usage options make the most sense for your future.

Depending on if/how Marriott chooses to correct their error you could be looking at either extreme discussed here - Marriott does nothing to fix any of this and all of your Weeks remain enrolled OR Marriott fixes things in the worst possible way, true to their written statements, and only your ineligible Week will be un-enrolled by them at some point in the future. And the possibility exists that their correction may be something that falls in between the extremes - a happy or not-so-happy medium. None of us can say with any validity what Marriott's solution will or won't be.

If it was me in your shoes I would use the email address contained in MVCI CA's post and lay all my cards on the table, documenting everything for them that you've documented here on TUG for the last few months. I know that's not the route that many would take, but several of us who have enrolled are already familiar with getting answers from that Marriott office which are clear, concise and effective. You may not be given the answer you want to hear (which has happened to me,) but if that contact stays true to form then you will be given an answer you can trust.

You're in a difficult position and I don't blame you, or any of us really, for thinking that Marriott's reputation and service have been lacking since the DC rollout. But I also know that Marriott does make exceptions on an individual basis when extenuating circumstances warrant them, and I truly believe that your circumstances do. Good luck. I hope this gets worked out so that you can continue to enjoy the Marriott vacations that you obviously love so much.

 

[windje2000]

Don't worry Kathy. Will work out. You may have to talk to a few levels of supervisors and may end up writing a letter to Mr. Marriott but I am sure it will eventually work out fine for you. Don't listen to other people here pointing to certain words some low level Marriott employee posted on a message board. It will work out.

It's noteworthy that after seven months MVCI has elected to make its presence known on this board by addressing this issue. They were reluctant even to respond to DaveM's questions just after the roll out of DClub, and took forever to do so.

The OP here was on 1/24 at 6:26PM. MVCI posted about 36 hours later. That's about as fast a response as one can expect from a large corp that heretofore had a policy of lurking.

But why now? My theory - they do not want any enrollees to assume that its silence on a public board was an indication of its acquiescence to these enrollments.

Lastly, that post may well have been made by a low level Marriott employee, but the decision to make an 'official' MVCI post was made at some level higher on the food chain and the writing it contains clearly appears to have been authored and/or blessed by the legal beagles.

 

[SueDonJ]

It's noteworthy that after seven months MVCI has elected to make its presence known on this board by addressing this issue. They were reluctant even to respond to DaveM's questions just after the roll out of DClub, and took forever to do so.

The OP here was on 1/24 at 6:26PM. MVCI posted about 36 hours later. That's about as fast a response as one can expect from a large corp that heretofore had a policy of lurking.

But why now? My theory - they do not want any enrollees to assume that its silence on a public board was an indication of its acquiescence to these enrollments.

Lastly, that post may well have been made by a low level Marriott employee, but the decision to make an 'official' MVCI post was made at some level higher on the food chain and the writing it contains clearly appears to have been authored and/or blessed by the legal beagles.

I completely agree with this entire post, as well as your earlier one where you said that the reason Marriott came out of TUG-lurkdom for this thread is because this is the first where a method to exploit a deficiency in their system is explained and encouraged.

It doesn't hurt Marriott financially if we are confused and that's why they haven't jumped into every thread since the DC rollout. (We've been confused about certain Weeks things on TUG for years; in that way the DC is no different.) It hurts Marriott financially if this loophole is exploited because post-6/20 resales that are incorrectly allowed to be enrolled are direct competition to the only product on which they want to focus, DC Points.

 

[windje2000]

I completely agree with this entire post, as well as your earlier one where you said that the reason Marriott came out of TUG-lurkdom for this thread is because this is the first where a method to exploit a deficiency in their system is explained and encouraged.

It doesn't hurt Marriott financially if we are confused and that's why they haven't jumped into every thread since the DC rollout. (We've been confused about certain Weeks things on TUG for years; in that way the DC is no different.) It hurts Marriott financially if this loophole is exploited because post-6/20 resales that are incorrectly allowed to be enrolled are direct competition to the only product on which they want to focus, DC Points.

If I wanted to be really cynical, I'd postulate that the reason the VOA's are telling people they can enroll post 6/20 resales along with pre 6/20 resales is to get the pre 6/20 weeks in the DClub door by hook or by crook.

They'll de-enroll the post 6/20 weeks later (our bad - sorry)

They'll keep the $ for the pre 6/20 weeks whether you want to stay in or leave. It was an initiation/enrollment fee. You were initiated/enrolled. No refunds.

 

[SueDonJ]

If I wanted to be really cynical, I'd postulate that the reason the VOA's are telling people they can enroll post 6/20 resales along with pre 6/20 resales is to get the pre 6/20 weeks in the DClub door by hook or by crook.

They'll de-enroll the post 6/20 weeks later (our bad - sorry)

They'll keep the $ for the pre 6/20 weeks whether you want to stay in or leave. It was an initiation/enrollment fee. You were initiated/enrolled. No refunds.

You're right, that's REALLY cynical! I think it's simply a matter of the VOA being an almost entry-level position and some of them being robots - if the computer allows it then it must be okay. They don't take the time to think about any of this because they don't have to - the computer does their thinking for them. Their jobs are mundane and repetitive, what they do is take phone calls and do data entry on the computer - their whole thought process is what goes in that field, what goes in that field, what goes in that field ... click click click and done. Nothing more, nothing less.

Now I'm sure there are some VOA's with some limited understanding of the basics, but I also know that the minute you question one of them with something that can't be answered by their computer then you're either given an answer that's wrong or referred to a supervisor (and if you have more knowledge than them, which is entirely possible, on up the chain until you finally find yourself at that Customer Advocacy office and you hear some sanity.) I'm at the point where if I ask a VOA a question and there is the slightest hesitation in the response, I hang up and use a CA contact.

 

[dougp26364]

It's noteworthy that after seven months MVCI has elected to make its presence known on this board by addressing this issue. They were reluctant even to respond to DaveM's questions just after the roll out of DClub, and took forever to do so.

The OP here was on 1/24 at 6:26PM. MVCI posted about 36 hours later. That's about as fast a response as one can expect from a large corp that heretofore had a policy of lurking.

But why now? My theory - they do not want any enrollees to assume that its silence on a public board was an indication of its acquiescence to these enrollments.

Lastly, that post may well have been made by a low level Marriott employee, but the decision to make an 'official' MVCI post was made at some level higher on the food chain and the writing it contains clearly appears to have been authored and/or blessed by the legal beagles.

Or, it may not be a Marriott employee at all.

Let's look at one fact and that is that Marriott has never, at least to my knowledge, adressed any of our concerns on TUG. So why now? It would be just as easy for them not to say anything and take care of business internally. TUGGERS would post soon enough that Marriott had made a mistake.

I've been around discussion forums long enough to understand that there are all sorts of personalities on the Internet. Some who like to just stir the pot and read as everyone jump to conclusions.

I think the only thing we can take from all of this is that one person enrolled a resale week purchased after Marriott's stated deadline. Others have mentioned that weeks that should be excluded are now showing that they can be included online. Is this a mistake? It could be. But if I already owned a week that wasn't eligable and, if I had already enrolled and, if I could enroll that week without additional cost then I'd do it. Right now, it's to early in the game to assume this will continue, that non-eligable weeks won't be unenrolled or that maybe Marriott has changed it's policy.

The program has been rife with problems since day one. We really just need to wait this out and see if Clemsonfans week gets unenrolled somewhere down the line.

 

[SueDonJ]

But Doug, considering Brian's and Denise's contributions to this thread, how do you explain a non-Marriott employee being able to register on TUG with a marriott.com domain email address? Or, if it's a rogue Marriott employee who registered and posted to TUG, how do you explain that Marriott has allowed the post to sit here uncontested? One notice from Marriott's legal department to Brian asking that the post be deleted is all it would take. And that's assuming Marriott doesn't have a tracking mechanism whereby they'd only have to make the demand to the probably-immediately-terminated employee and leave Brian out of it entirely. But if Brian was to get such a notice, do you think he'd ignore it? I wouldn't think so.

We know Marriott reads TUG. Too many TUGgers have said over the years that they've been in contact with Marriott reps and execs about information they've learned/seen on TUG. Marriott knows TUG exists, and like the other Brian (pwrshft) says they'd have to be all shades of stupid to not monitor this site.

 

[KathyPet]

Not rescinding. This is getting to be too much fun. Let's see Clemson Fan called MVCI and got his "illegal" week enrolled over the phone. I was enable to enroll mine on line. I think there was another poster in this thread who said they also had enrolled a "illegal" week and another poster who called yesterday and was told that they could enroll their illegal week although they did not go through with it. I guess the web site would still allow illegal weeks to be enrolled and obviously the reps are positively clueless so I am not believing anything anyone says whether it is the customer advocacy group or some nameless supposed Marriott employee who posted here. As far as I am concerned they have made a unholy mess out of this and I am sitting tight until somebody with real name and title gives me something official in writing.

 

[JanT]

Just my opinion, but anyone who enrolls their non-eligible week in the DC KNOWING it really is not eligible is taking a huge gamble. Sometimes gamblers win and sometimes they lose - it's a crapshoot, so-to-speak. Because it clearly states on the beginning enrollment page that post 6/20 weeks are NOT eligible to enroll, I don't see how anyone that does it has any kind of argument in the matter. Loophole or not, the information is right there for the person to see if they do NOT already know they can't enroll the week. But, TUGGERs KNOW those weeks aren't allowed in. I KNOW it and even though it shows I can enroll my post 6/20 week, I can't convince myself that taking advantage of the loophole is the right thing to do because for me it's not. I'm not casting judgement on anyone else, I'm just saying for ME personally, taking advantage of the loophole is not the right thing to do.

If someone has enrolled their 6/20 weeks KNOWING they weren't eligible they had to know, too that most likely Marriott would eventually catch on and reverse the enrollment.

Perhaps Marriott won't reverse the enrollment. Perhaps they will say, "Oops! Our fault," and will grandfather those weeks in. I can see that happening, honestly. I know many people think Marriott is this terrible, horrible, customer-hating, "It's all about Marriott" company now, but I still think they are a decent company doing what every other company is trying to do - stay alive and make a profit. They have made poor business decisions and that has cost them in the profit department. Some of what is occurring in terms of profit loss is what is occurring with every other company - the economy sucks!!

Did they roll out the DC program correctly? Well, it certainly could have been done much, much better and with adequate notice to owners of the new program. My guess is there are still owners out there that don't have a clue about DC. Did they owe it to their customer base to say, "Hey, don't tell anybody but we're rolling out this new DC and any outside resale weeks closed after 6/20 won't be allowed in?" Well, not in my opinion they didn't. They are in the business of making money, not throwing it away. Are we really all so naive to think they wanted people rushing out and buying outside resale weeks when they had plenty of weeks on the books they needed to sell? We'd have to be living in "La-La Land" to believe or expect that in all reality. They had to take a stand on a cutoff date for outside resales and 6/20 is what they chose, period.

We knew it, we know it, we have to live with it. If Marriott has unwittingly created a loophole they are going to have to figure out the solution. However, the bottom line is if anyone enrolls their post 6/20 weeks KNOWING that it isn't eligible, they are going to have to live with the consequences - whether they like it or not. Lawsuit? Does anyone honestly believe they can beat a team of Marriott attorneys? Who has that kind of money? And if Marriott can't outlast them for some reason, they will prevail in the end if for no other reason than they are holding a piece of paper in their hands that says specifically, "Post 6/20 weeks are not eligible to enroll" and the enrollee clicked the "I agree to these terms" button.

Ok, I'm done now.

 

[taffy19]

But Doug, considering Brian's and Denise's contributions to this thread, how do you explain a non-Marriott employee being able to register on TUG with a marriott.com domain email address? Or, if it's a rogue Marriott employee who registered and posted to TUG, how do you explain that Marriott has allowed the post to sit here uncontested? One notice from Marriott's legal department to Brian asking that the post be deleted is all it would take. And that's assuming Marriott doesn't have a tracking mechanism whereby they'd only have to make the demand to the probably-immediately-terminated employee and leave Brian out of it entirely. But if Brian was to get such a notice, do you think he'd ignore it? I wouldn't think so.

We know Marriott reads TUG. Too many TUGgers have said over the years that they've been in contact with Marriott reps and execs about information they've learned/seen on TUG. Marriott knows TUG exists, and like the other Brian (pwrshft) says they'd have to be all shades of stupid to not monitor this site.

I only hope that Brian will not delete the post of the Marriott employee if the Marriott Legal Department requests this and that he will let us know about it too.

If the email address is a phony email address then it should be reported too so we all know that it didn't come from the Marriott but if you start deleting posts then reading the thread doesn't make any sense and is not helping anyone either.

My respect for the Marriott has gone down the drain already but even more so if KathiePet is not allowed to enroll since all her documents were signed before the deadline date. I hope that it will work out for her and that they will accept others too eventually.

If they don't, the trust will not survive because most people sell one day but it will cost a bundle because it is all about their bottom line but first they will destroy our resale value and our enjoyment too which we have experienced already. I feel this way because of that second exchange program where most of the best inventory will end up and we will no longer be selling a product as desirable as before because of that new program. JMHO.

 

[DeniseM]

I exchanged several PM's with this person when they registered, and I checked out their email address, and I have ZERO doubt that they are a Marriott employee.

Now maybe this is the world's greatest hacker, and they have hacked into Marriott's email system and they are passing themselves off as a Marriott employee, but that's pretty far-fetched. The PM's I exchanged with them were extremely courteous and professional. YMMV

 

[taffy19]

Denise, I have no doubt that it came from a Marriott employee but I would be very surprised if the Marriott would demand Brian to remove the post and he would abide. I hope that he will not let himself be bullied by their Legal Department because of the mess they have made of this new program that STINKS, IMHO.

 

[dougp26364]

But Doug, considering Brian's and Denise's contributions to this thread, how do you explain a non-Marriott employee being able to register on TUG with a marriott.com domain email address? Or, if it's a rogue Marriott employee who registered and posted to TUG, how do you explain that Marriott has allowed the post to sit here uncontested? One notice from Marriott's legal department to Brian asking that the post be deleted is all it would take. And that's assuming Marriott doesn't have a tracking mechanism whereby they'd only have to make the demand to the probably-immediately-terminated employee and leave Brian out of it entirely. But if Brian was to get such a notice, do you think he'd ignore it? I wouldn't think so.

We know Marriott reads TUG. Too many TUGgers have said over the years that they've been in contact with Marriott reps and execs about information they've learned/seen on TUG. Marriott knows TUG exists, and like the other Brian (pwrshft) says they'd have to be all shades of stupid to not monitor this site.

I won't attempt to explain it. Surfice it to say that, when I moderated a forum many years ago, I quickly learned that there are people smart enough to manipulate any system for their own entertainment.

All we really know is that Clemson Fan states he was able to register a week that he wasn't suppose to be able to register. Marriot hasn't changed the rules posted on their website. Others have stated that the online system will allow them to enroll weeks that they aren't suppose to be able to enroll. Past that, all we can do is watch and wait.

Marriott may very well have unintentionally omitted the exclusion when they started allowing resale weeks be enrolled online rather than calling. It won't surprise me if this is simply a glitch in their system. But, I'm not taking some post on a discussion forem by an annonamous source as the final word or, even as a trustworthy word. Marriott's history speaks for itself and that history is Marriott doesn't particpate on TUG. I see no reason to believe they've changed that policy.

If I were a betting man, I'd bet it's nothing more than a member of Marriott's sales team who made the post. That could explain the Marriott domain and, it's been posted here that Marriott sales staff (Fletch comes to mind) read these forums. I have little trouble believing an uninformed sales person would post this information and, as a sales person, they would have a vested interest in making TUG members believe that resales after June 20th can't be enrolled.

I've been sucked in before. Enough to know that it's best to read, contemplate but not make decisions or jump to conclusions when it's a first time poster I can't confirm or one that has no history to go by.

Heck, even "informed" and trusted posters such as Fletch get it wrong from time to time. Fletch had my attention when he stated his manager told him that EOY weeks would NOT be eligable for the new DC. I believe we all know that was more or less a statement that was misunderstood than a fact that EOY weeks weren't eligable. EOY weeks are no longer sold now that the new DC has come along but, legacy EOY weeks are, in fact, eligable.

 

[dougp26364]

I exchanged several PM's with this person when they registered, and I checked out their email address, and I have ZERO doubt that they are a Marriott employee.

Now maybe this is the world's greatest hacker, and they have hacked into Marriott's email system and they are passing themselves off as a Marriott employee, but that's pretty far-fetched. The PM's I exchanged with them were extremely courteous and professional. YMMV

A salesman is a Marriott employee. That does't mean they're an informed employee or speaking officially for the company.

 

[dougp26364]

Just my opinion, but anyone who enrolls their non-eligible week in the DC KNOWING it really is not eligible is taking a huge gamble. Sometimes gamblers win and sometimes they lose - it's a crapshoot, so-to-speak. Because it clearly states on the beginning enrollment page that post 6/20 weeks are NOT eligible to enroll, I don't see how anyone that does it has any kind of argument in the matter. Loophole or not, the information is right there for the person to see if they do NOT already know they can't enroll the week. But, TUGGERs KNOW those weeks aren't allowed in. I KNOW it and even though it shows I can enroll my post 6/20 week, I can't convince myself that taking advantage of the loophole is the right thing to do because for me it's not. I'm not casting judgement on anyone else, I'm just saying for ME personally, taking advantage of the loophole is not the right thing to do.

If someone has enrolled their 6/20 weeks KNOWING they weren't eligible they had to know, too that most likely Marriott would eventually catch on and reverse the enrollment.

Perhaps Marriott won't reverse the enrollment. Perhaps they will say, "Oops! Our fault," and will grandfather those weeks in. I can see that happening, honestly. I know many people think Marriott is this terrible, horrible, customer-hating, "It's all about Marriott" company now, but I still think they are a decent company doing what every other company is trying to do - stay alive and make a profit. They have made poor business decisions and that has cost them in the profit department. Some of what is occurring in terms of profit loss is what is occurring with every other company - the economy sucks!!

Did they roll out the DC program correctly? Well, it certainly could have been done much, much better and with adequate notice to owners of the new program. My guess is there are still owners out there that don't have a clue about DC. Did they owe it to their customer base to say, "Hey, don't tell anybody but we're rolling out this new DC and any outside resale weeks closed after 6/20 won't be allowed in?" Well, not in my opinion they didn't. They are in the business of making money, not throwing it away. Are we really all so naive to think they wanted people rushing out and buying outside resale weeks when they had plenty of weeks on the books they needed to sell? We'd have to be living in "La-La Land" to believe or expect that in all reality. They had to take a stand on a cutoff date for outside resales and 6/20 is what they chose, period.

We knew it, we know it, we have to live with it. If Marriott has unwittingly created a loophole they are going to have to figure out the solution. However, the bottom line is if anyone enrolls their post 6/20 weeks KNOWING that it isn't eligible, they are going to have to live with the consequences - whether they like it or not. Lawsuit? Does anyone honestly believe they can beat a team of Marriott attorneys? Who has that kind of money? And if Marriott can't outlast them for some reason, they will prevail in the end if for no other reason than they are holding a piece of paper in their hands that says specifically, "Post 6/20 weeks are not eligible to enroll" and the enrollee clicked the "I agree to these terms" button.

Ok, I'm done now.

If you already own the week, what have you got to lose? I would be reasonably comfortable believing that Marriott would refund any funds they collected if they cancelled the transaction.

Now, I wouldn't advice going out and buying resale weeks with the sole intention of enrolling them into the new DC. Should this "loophole" be closed, they could be left holding the bag.

 

[DeniseM]

A salesman is a Marriott employee. That does't mean they're an informed employee or speaking officially for the company.

Doug - I agree and I said that in my earlier post.

However, Dave M also communicated with this poster, and some of the info. that Dave posted early on, came from that communication. So I have to believe that Dave thinks they are Legit. Hopefully, Dave will weigh in.

I am just offering what I know - I have no dog in this fight.

 

[dougp26364]

BTW, I don't believe any posts should be removed from this thread unless they are in clear violation of TUG rules. I'm just one of those who prefers facts and has a great deal of sceptisism. Enough TUG members have stated, Marriott is enrolling perviously non-eligable weeks. Enough that I believe it is reasonable to believe. One unknown Marriott employee, or someone possing as a Marriott employee, posted this was an accident and would be reversed. I know Marriott has never participated on TUG. I'll take that post with a grain of salt........for now.

Really, I don't understand what the big deal is. There's a loophole. We know there's a loophole. The big question is, will Marriott unenroll these weeks or let them stand? Is this an unannounced, unadvertised change in policy or will it be reversed/corrected? The only time it would be a big deal is if someone spent thousand of dollars on a resale week just to enroll that week, only to find out it wasn't eligable.

 

[SueDonJ]

Denise, I have no doubt that it came from a Marriott employee but I would be very surprised if the Marriott would demand Brian to remove the post and he would abide. I hope that he will not let himself be bullied by their Legal Department because of the mess they have made of this new program that STINKS, IMHO.

Emmy, I'm not thinking that Marriott will ask for the post to be removed. I LIKE that Marriott has offered a definitive statement here! What I was trying to say is that if the post was a hoax of some kind, whether from a hacker or a rogue Marriott employee etc., then Marriott would not have let the post sit here for as long as it has.

I'm convinced Marriott monitors the site on a regular basis, can't prove it so I can understand that some might not share the conviction. But it doesn't matter if Marriott came across the post on their own or not, because GregT told us in post 130 that he wrote to Customer Advocacy and told them it was here. Now at that point, if the post was a hoax, Marriott would have done something to get it removed. They would have contacted Brian and told him that the domain name was being used illegally and that the text in the post does not constitute an official Marriott statement despite the appearance. And at that point, I would hope that Brian would edit the post to remove the text and say that Marriott's Legal Dept. had contacted him to let him know the post was a hoax. I wouldn't want Brian to do it because he is being bullied by Marriott, though - I'd want him to do it because it makes a difference in the discussion. What good is it to us if it's left sitting there but it can't be believed?

The fact that it's still sitting there, and both Denise and Brian have confirmed the TUG user name and email address, makes me think it's legit. And if it is, it only strengthens Marriott's position that post-6/20 external resales are ineligible for enrollment in the DC.

 

[SueDonJ]

A salesman is a Marriott employee. That does't mean they're an informed employee or speaking officially for the company.

But "Customer Advocacy" is a real department in Marriott's structure, and a salesperson would not have access to the customer.advocacyATvacationclub.com email address. That address isn't new with this suspect post, and a few of us in this thread have confirmed that we've had occasion to use it to contact the Customer Advocacy office.

 

[KathyPet]

If you already own the week, what have you got to lose? I would be reasonably comfortable believing that Marriott would refund any funds they collected if they cancelled the transaction.

EXACTLY!!! The absolute worst that can happen is they catch this, unenroll the week and refund me the extra charge I paid to enroll a re-sale week. I think I could also make a really really good case to have them back out the two Marriott weeks that I enrolled and putting me back to zero in the DC program.

 

[KathyPet]

Just another comment here and that is what is meant by "recorded". When the DC program was originally announced I called MVCI and talked to three different CSR. I posed the question about what "recorded" meant to all 3 of them. None of them knew and had to ask supervisors. So if in fact they did ask a supervisor here are the answers I received:

1. It is the date that you (the purchaser) signed the deed. THis was prior to the cut off date
2. It is the date that the deed transfer was recorded in the local government office that does the recordation of title. This was after the cut off date
3. It is the date that Marriott records the new owner in their records (obviously after the cut off date).


If they can't define their own terminology then how is some poor uneducated consumer supposed to????

 

[wvacations]

But "Customer Advocacy" is a real department in Marriott's structure, and a salesperson would not have access to the customer.advocacyATvacationclub.com email address. That address isn't new with this suspect post, and a few of us in this thread have confirmed that we've had occasion to use it to contact the Customer Advocacy office.

Just note customer.advocacy@Marriott.com is not a personal email. It is the department email. It is the email address that customers use to contact the CA department. This email address was put in the post but may not be the email that was used to register. Peoples' registered email address is not shown on this site.

 

[larryallen]

In my opinion people are going much deeper on this issue than it warrants. There was a glitch, some people took advantage of it, and they will probably be rewarded with their weeks being enrolled. End of story. If not, Marriott will unwind the entire transaction. There is no chance they are going to penalize someone in any way for Marriott's glitch. Also, I can't imagine why Marriott would ask a post to be deleted. Some of you act like this is some major military operation here. These are just some timeshares. All the theories and everything on here make me laugh. I enjoy the Marriott timeshares as a vacation with my family. I save the covert military operations for the fictional books I enjoy reading.

 

[dioxide45]

Just another comment here and that is what is meant by "recorded". When the DC program was originally announced I called MVCI and talked to three different CSR. I posed the question about what "recorded" meant to all 3 of them. None of them knew and had to ask supervisors. So if in fact they did ask a supervisor here are the answers I received:

1. It is the date that you (the purchaser) signed the deed. THis was prior to the cut off date
2. It is the date that the deed transfer was recorded in the local government office that does the recordation of title. This was after the cut off date
3. It is the date that Marriott records the new owner in their records (obviously after the cut off date).


If they can't define their own terminology then how is some poor uneducated consumer supposed to????

In real estate transactions, "recorded" had a defined definition. It isn't up to interpretation. It is the date the county records the deed or security instrument in their county records.