My premise is simple. If the resort is worthless, then the timeshare plan should be terminated. If the owners refuse to terminate the timeshare plan, then they deserve the increased maintenance fees and reserves.
A timeshare ownership should not be a life sentence. If the HOAs won't take action, then PCCs are the right business model to support owners who want out.
It is the fiduciary responsibility of the HOA board to ensure that there is a market for their timeshare units. If there isn't one, they should recommend termination of the timeshare plan. It's really as simple as that. You don't have any argument that trumps this notion. The HOA board is not serving its members well if the timeshare units are worthless and there is another higher and better use of the property on the open market.
So lets talk a hypothetical yet totally realistic possibility.
A purpose built timeshare, maybe 200 units, or about 9,000 individual owners. Fees were relatively low when new but over time, as is often the case, it was discovered that the developer had been undercharging for reserves and failing to keep up maintenance so the owners got new management and fees necessarily rose to reflect true costs. Today they are about 2.3-2.5 times the original amount but still on the low side of average for ranked resorts in the area.
Now the owners of those early years 20 years ago are aging, families grown and "many" say fee's we can't afford anymore. But the resort, which does not have on site resales they can control - the developer, as often the case, holds all sales rights even after all these years - says "Pay or we will collect by any means necessary" and "No deed backs as we have no outlet for them either".
By your scenario this resort should open the flood gates, say anyone wanting out can deed the time back and the other owners will pay. To what "good" result? That the 94%+ that ARE paying now suddenly see fees skyrocket to cover those who decide it's too much because they have tired of the place? So more decide they too can't afford it & they want out until the fees become so high it is self fulfilling that the resort - one that could easily last 50+ years or more, has been well maintained and upgraded - is forced to close it's doors or be turned over to the developer (who, as again is very often the case holds a big chunk of time they have bought back or obtained for points membership they operate)?
How does that benefit the 90%+ that WANT the resort to survive but don't want to be forced to pay for others wanting an easy way out? Not every resort has the same situation. Some are better off - others really are mismanaged, poorly located, outdated and perhaps do deserve to be closed. But that is a decision the majority of owners should make based on the conditions NOT forced on them by decree that they accept weeks they never sold (the developer did) and pay for those costs without every effort required to make those owners pay or sell legally.
Like so many other ideas here it isn't even a possibility as the laws that let condos and timeshares be created don't allow for the Associations to force owners to pay for others (except in the case where the legal steps to foreclosure have been strictly adhered to). That is the purpose of the massive disclosures each and every sale comes included with. You, I, management and even the Legislatures cannot retroactively change that. They can only make it apply to future sales and then only if fully disclosed to buyers prior to them entering into a sales agreement (of course they have to READ it). Only Wastegate and other borderline organizations think they have that type of right to alter real estate deals after the fact. They don't and neither do we.
If that plan (accept all deed backs) is a goal then have laws written to allow it for future buyers. I doubt many would purchase if that was the law but you never know. We as timeshare owners think our little corner of the world is oh so critical but in the larger picture it's small change. Timeshare is an outgrowth of condo law and what effects one often applies to the other. While there is a problem with timeshare glut and a non-existent resale market that will sort itself out over time and without any drastic re-do of the real estate law that helped create the whole segment.
Again, far better we look to solve the problem with a workable resale marketplace, better features for the poor times at resorts and more creative (but legal) ways to make the prime times pay a more proportional share of expenses. That should be tied to rental/trade/seasonal value rather equal costs for all weeks regardless of those values. That is the real culprit to unwanted times. No value for the fees. Fix that and you've fixed the PCC & collection problems IMO.
