I got rid of mine.

[e.bram]

Maybe if I stop paying my MFs, the HOA will sue the guy that I bought the TS from for fraudulent transfer reverse the deed and bill them for the MFs.

 

[wawacito]

back on topic ... asnooper we are waiting to here back from you when you get word from Wyndham that everything is clear.

 

[asnooper]

Website account closed

back on topic ... asnooper we are waiting to here back from you when you get word from Wyndham that everything is clear.

I still have not received an official notification from Wyndham, but they have closed my web account, so I take that as a positive sign. And no bill for May maintenance. When I get the official notification from them, I will add another post.

 

[Carolinian]

I tried to get another ebay seller to sell something for me. They said no..They dont deal with one or two weeks from the general public. I think if I had several hundred to sell they would have taken on the project...I bet Sumday is the same

Sumday, and most of the eBay sellers are outlets for the PCC's. Here they referred the OP to a PCC, which is obviously one of their inventory sources. Why sell it for them directly, when you can help an allied company make a few bucks on the deal? That is exactly what they did.

 

[Carolinian]

Sounds like the HOA would be in violation of the contract if they denied Association membership to an owner! It wouldn't be the first time an HOA has openly broken laws or contracts though...Sorta like how they approve deedbacks for some people and not others is also in violation

Still on your tirade against HOA's, I see! Yet you think that RCI and PCC's are Boy Scouts. If you hate HOA's so much, why do you own timeshare? By owning timeshare, you have to deal with HOA's.

 

[vckempson]

I still have not received an official notification from Wyndham, but they have closed my web account, so I take that as a positive sign. And no bill for May maintenance. When I get the official notification from them, I will add another post.

I'm not sure you will ever receive confirmation unless you make a special request for such. Don't ownership confirmations only go out to the new owner?

 

[Ridewithme38]

Still on your tirade against HOA's, I see! Yet you think that RCI and PCC's are Boy Scouts. If you hate HOA's so much, why do you own timeshare? By owning timeshare, you have to deal with HOA's.

I'm hoping that will someday change, the worst thing thats ever happened to Timeshares is the HOA/BOD/POA's, thank God we have the PCC and RCI to help minimize those problems!

 

[timeos2]

I'm hoping that will someday change, the worst thing thats ever happened to Timeshares is the HOA/BOD/POA's, thank God we have the PCC and RCI to help minimize those problems!

There are no condo's or timeshares without HOA's as they are the governing bodies and chartered to create the very project they then watch over. This "worst that ever happened" is total nonsense and detracts from whatever your "goal" is. You sure won't win supporters with this type of wild statement.

 

[Ridewithme38]

There are no condo's or timeshares without HOA's as they are the governing bodies and chartered to create the very project they then watch over. This "worst that ever happened" is total nonsense and detracts from whatever your "goal" is. You sure won't win supporters with this type of wild statement.

I've always been a fan of a true democracy over a republic, that's just me and based on decades of experience...sure there are small things that would only be hindered by waiting on the votes of the owners, but that's what management companies are for

You're right, i don't expect to win many supporters in this belief, most people would rather be spoon fed what the 'representatives' want them to know with no accountability by them and complain after things have been done about whats happening...But i believe the people of this country are starting towards a change...I for one, see a limited number of my generation taking steps towards wanting to be more active in running and controlling their own lives...I hope this movement grows

 

[DeniseM]

I've always been a fan of a true democracy over a republic, that's just me and based on decades of experience...sure there are small things that would only be hindered by waiting on the votes of the owners, but that's what management companies are for

You're right, i don't expect to win many supporters in this belief, most people would rather be spoon fed what the 'representatives' want them to know with no accountability by them and complain after things have been done about whats happening...But i believe the people of this country are starting towards a change...I for one, see a limited number of my generation taking steps towards wanting to be more active in running and controlling their own lives...I hope this movement grows

:rofl: :hysterical: :rofl: :hysterical: :rofl: :hysterical:

 

[rrlongwell]

Right, it seems as some have mentioned that they do deny membership to some, which is shady at best....But the big point is, If the deed is transferred legally, it doesn't really matter if they reject the New owners membership, they are unable to invalidate a legal deed...with so many TS Doc's listing fees being owed by the 'owner'...By legally transferring the deed to a new owner, you are unaccountable for the future fees...They can bill the old owner all they want, but those bills are NOT your responsibility, i wouldn't even open the letters, just 'return to sender'...And since they have denied membership to the new owner, i'm NOT SURE if they are responsible for the fees either, but that's not the problem/responsibility of the previous owners either....

You may be heading in the right direction on this issue with a few bumps in the road in the theory. First, if you are the legal owner of record, the fees are probably your ultimate responsabilty, or so the deeded ownership indicates on the deed. If it is Club Wyndham Access, you may have a point. In any case, it is a legal hassel that just costs the new owner money and Wyndham gets the use of the property, if they want it at varying points on the timeline towards a reservation. Not a bad deal for the for profit Wyndham.

 

[Ridewithme38]

You may be heading in the right direction on this issue with a few bumps in the road in the theory. First, if you are the legal owner of record, the fees are probably your ultimate responsabilty, or so the deeded ownership indicates on the deed.

Interesting, when the deed is moved over to a new name, would you still be considered the 'owner of record', I thought in most cases the 'deed' IS the 'record of ownership'? Would the deeded conditions still apply to you if you are not legally the holder of that deed?

 

[csxjohn]

You may be heading in the right direction on this issue with a few bumps in the road in the theory. First, if you are the legal owner of record, the fees are probably your ultimate responsibility, or so the deeded ownership indicates on the deed. If it is Club Wyndham Access, you may have a point. In any case, it is a legal hassel that just costs the new owner money and Wyndham gets the use of the property, if they want it at varying points on the timeline towards a reservation. Not a bad deal for the for profit Wyndham.

I read somewhere that one HOA or mgt co. does a credit check before transferring ownership records to a new owner.

So, I suspect that somewhere in the bylaws or whatever they are called, this issue is addressed.

I'm thinking this would be a good idea for HOAs to adopt to avoid having to transfer records to an entity that is never going to pay MFs.

I think it's a good idea because I am one of those that believes the HOAs are supposed to try to retain value for all the owners as a whole and not just a few disgruntled owners.

 

[Ridewithme38]

I read somewhere that one HOA or mgt co. does a credit check before transferring ownership records to a new owner.

So, I suspect that somewhere in the bylaws or whatever they are called, this issue is addressed.

I'm thinking this would be a good idea for HOAs to adopt to avoid having to transfer records to an entity that is never going to pay MFs.

I think it's a good idea because I am one of those that believes the HOAs are supposed to try to retain value for all the owners as a whole and not just a few disgruntled owners.

It would be interesting to note if any of the bylaws allow someone to hold deed to a TS but not be a member of the Association....I'd be surprised if that were true...If not, that HOA would be in violation of the bylaws by refusing membership to an owner

 

[csxjohn]

It would be interesting to note if any of the bylaws allow someone to hold deed to a TS but not be a member of the Association....I'd be surprised if that were true...If not, that HOA would be in violation of the bylaws by refusing membership to an owner

Unless the bylaws tell the owners the conditions under which and to whom they are allowed to sell.

If those are in place then if you sold to an entity or person who could not pass that test then you did not have the right to sell to that person in the first place.

This is all speculation of course, unless these kinds of things are written into the bylaws and if they could be enforced. I doubt even the lawyers on here would be able to give us a short answer on that.

 

[rrlongwell]

Unless the bylaws tell the owners the conditions under which and to whom they are allowed to sell.

If those are in place then if you sold to an entity or person who could not pass that test then you did not have the right to sell to that person in the first place.

This is all speculation of course, unless these kinds of things are written into the bylaws and if they could be enforced. I doubt even the lawyers on here would be able to give us a short answer on that.

I think you are right, that becomes a function of what the written deed states along with what all documents referenced in the deed state. This would not necessarily be the same across different Property Owner's Associations.

 

[rrlongwell]

Interesting, when the deed is moved over to a new name, would you still be considered the 'owner of record', I thought in most cases the 'deed' IS the 'record of ownership'? Would the deeded conditions still apply to you if you are not legally the holder of that deed?

Have not got a clue, that is where a attorny or Title Company comes into play. There can be cases where the "Owner of Record" being shown on a court house deed is not the Legal Owner of Record. This could be true in cases of defective deeds, as indicated in one of the above posts, i.e., the Owner of Record did not have the legal authority to sell the timeshare or sell the timeshare without following proscribed proceedues.

If the above happens, I am aware that quite claim deeds can be used to clear up the title portion.

 

[Ridewithme38]

Have not got a clue, that is where a attorny or Title Company comes into play. There can be cases where the "Owner of Record" being shown on a court house deed is not the Legal Owner of Record. This could be true in cases of defective deeds, as indicated in one of the above posts, i.e., the Owner of Record did not have the legal authority to sell the timeshare or sell the timeshare without following proscribed proceedues.

If the above happens, I am aware that quite claim deeds can be used to clear up the title portion.

So if its a legally transfered deed, the previous owner is no longer responsible for MF's and the HOA MAY be in violation of the Bylaws if they don't accept the new owner into the Association...

 

[GreenThumb]

Yikes

So management insists that the owner did not have the legal right to sell it, because they were in arrears on their MF, they won't record it in my name, they won't let me pay the past maintenance fees, and they won't even tell me how much it is - because I don't own the timeshare.

What's my next move?

I'm not an attny, but i do know many. I was in real estate for about five years, and was in work in technology and business that involved writing contracts and complying with them.

I think you are probably a careful record keeper, from your posts here. My recommendation is to get out any contracts...anything you signed... And read closely. If you dont see it in something you signed, request/demand the written papers that alllowed them to take the deed back.

It is very very strange that a deed recorded is now not valid. It does happen, esp in foreclosure situations.

I think that it would have to have been in foreclosure proceedings BEFORE you signed the title for them to try taking it back.

The timeline here is critical. You will want to get notarized copies of their proceedings against the old owner, i think, to confirn the real, true times of events. Versus emails and their word.

To clarify, the timeline matters because a court would look at who had the strongest claim, you or the HOA. You don't have to accept HOAs word for this. It is definitely a conflict in claim.

Right now, you own it if the county has it recorded. However, the HOA is trying to tell you you cannot use it. Yup, you own it. You are the owner of record. But they object, and are saying they have a prior claim or lien.

You could perhaps fight this. It might require hiring an attny, might not.

Don't sign the give back forms until you fully investigate.

They cannot do this based on policies though, definitely this is a tricky area of law. Usually would occur with people who havent paid taxes, i think, but also foreclosures by banks. Dont know about HOAs being so aggressive, but it's conceivable.

Finally, if you have any loss from this at all, not punitive damages, then the title insurance pays for it.

 

[DeniseM]

This was a $1 timeshare and it happened a few years ago. Definitely not worth hiring an attorney. That was just an example of how resorts can and do refuse to transfer ownership. It was Wyndham by the way...

 

[Ridewithme38]

This was a $1 timeshare and it happened a few years ago. Definitely not worth hiring an attorney. That was just an example of how resorts can and do refuse to transfer ownership. It was Wyndham by the way...

Sounds like a case where you had legal ownership, but they were denying membership because of past due MF's...I wouldn't have gotten lawyers involved, i just would have ignored any letters i received from Wyndham, i *think* that the past due MF's do transfer with ownership with Wyndham though

 

[GreenThumb]

Yeah... Interesting situation though.

This was a $1 timeshare and it happened a few years ago. Definitely not worth hiring an attorney. That was just an example of how resorts can and do refuse to transfer ownership. It was Wyndham by the way...

I think it also comes up with auctions, but in those cases the deed is not final for 30 days up to even a year. The buyer has full disclosures that thye might be buying a not-cleared title and ther might be layers and layers of creditors lurking aroung with valid claims.

I hate typing on ipad and i apologize rather than teying to fix the typos.

 

[bogey21]

I think you are right, that becomes a function of what the written deed states along with what all documents referenced in the deed state.

Isn't this the bottom line. Otherwise we are all whistling in the dark.

George

 

[DeniseM]

Sounds like a case where you had legal ownership, but they were denying membership because of past due MF's...I wouldn't have gotten lawyers involved, i just would have ignored any letters i received from Wyndham, i *think* that the past due MF's do transfer with ownership with Wyndham though

They would not permit me to make a reservation, so that wouldn't do much good. Not much point in owning something you can't use....

 

[Ridewithme38]

They would not permit me to make a reservation, so that wouldn't do much good. Not much point in owning something you can't use....

I think a good comparison would be those that buy a penny stock in an up and coming company, or even a classic car, sure you don't want to put the miles on the car and reduce its value or sell the stock before it appreciates, but you still want to own it for when it does have value

Thats my thoughts on owning a TS you can't use, sure it has no value now, but your gambling that when that TS sells the land and distributes the proceeds to the owners, you will get more money back then you put in, without use or MF's you are putting significantly less money into it and have a higher chance at a profit when they do sell then the other owners