New florida bill SB932: non-consumer friendly Timeshare law changes

[Talent312]

"Lines 427 – 430 empower the developer to make unilateral substitutions or deletions of inventory without a quorum vote or a consultation of owners.
Lines 430-437 remove the court’s supervision of such activity...
Lines 665 – 669 removes voting requirement and court oversight for substitution or deletion of accommodations or facilities."

As I read this, you could could show up for your ocean-view and find yourself with a parking lot view, with no recourse. Eggsactly, how would that be good for both owners and developers?
.

 

[BobSc]

The senate summary of the bill seems to provide a good explanation of the current law and the proposed changes.

http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2015/0453/Analyses/h0453.CJS.PDF

 

[TUGBrian]

great find!

 

[BocaBoy]

As I read this, you could could show up for your ocean-view and find yourself with a parking lot view, with no recourse. Eggsactly, how would that be good for both owners and developers?
.

How can you possibly read this language to mean that? It deals with substitutions or deletions of developer inventory, not units that have already been sold.

 

[Talent312]

How can you possibly read this language to mean that?

Some have floating weeks/points wherein use of a unit depends on management/assignment.
I did not see the provision as being restricted to unsold units.
<Just becuz I'm paranoid, does not mean no one is following me.>
.

 

[BocaBoy]

I did not see the provision as being restricted to unsold units.

Because units cease to be developer controlled units once they are sold.

 

[TUGBrian]

was an attendee at a meeting today that discussed this bill at length, it was pointed out that many of the arguments against this bill were based on the original release of it...and not its current form.

As it was explained, the original version of this bill was written based on what house staffers (the people who actually attempt to take what is discussed, and write the actual law down on paper) interpreted what was presented to them...after the first draft came out it was heavily edited.

While I still question how many of these changes benefit owners directly, in its current form there are a good number of the original "objections" that simply no longer seem to apply.

 

[richardm]

There is new legislation proposed in FL to address this...

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Secti...ntType=Analysis&CommitteeId=2828&Session=2015

Note - that it also includes a provision to limit developer liability for failing to deliver the required disclosures, and having that failure to disclose be an action that would allow a buyer to cancel..

 

[theo]

Different versions exist...

There is new legislation proposed in FL to address this...

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Secti...ntType=Analysis&CommitteeId=2828&Session=2015

Note - that it also includes a provision to limit developer liability for failing to deliver the required disclosures, and having that failure to disclose be an action that would allow a buyer to cancel..

TUGBrian has specifically mentioned here that the original proposed legislation prepared by "staffers" has undergone some very significant changes in later iterations.

Do you happen to know whether the cite you have provided is pre-revision or post-revision? (I'm betting that your cite is actually the first cut, pre-revision).

 

[sutwin607]

I think that who owns Timeshare must read this important article related to this Legislation and the Bills.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/opin...re-tactics-scott-maxwell-20150411-column.html

 

[TUGBrian]

was finally able to log in with facebook to read the article, its not a very descriptive or useful piece of journalism.

cites no specific parts of the proposed changes, just a blanket statement that the bill is designed to make it harder for consumers to cancel.

I dont quite see in what I have read how that is the case at all, as nothing in the bill references the current 10 day cancellation period available in florida (although id love to see that jump to 15 or 30 days personally)...and one can cancel for ANY reason during that period.

 

[richardm]

You can track bills on that site to find the latest version as well as committee decisions.

 

[theo]

What's that foul aroma I smell here?

You can track bills on that site to find the latest version as well as committee decisions.

I'll have to poke around more on that site to see if I can indeed track subsequent revisions to this dubious (IMnsHO) proposed legislation.

Meanwhile, I believe that it's safe to say that the "staffer summary" provided in your link was actually the first mention of this proposed legislation, said "staffer summary" having been made exactly two months ago today. It will be interesting (and hopefully revealing) to examine more current status and language content after this sneaky attempt gets exposed to considerably more (and much needed) sunlight and much closer examination of exactly who benefits (...and who gets hurt) in this (IMnsHO) underhanded, back door attempt at changing the rules of the game and trying to move the goalposts while the game is actively in progress.

Clearly, this proposed legislation is not an altruistic act of benevolence by the sneaky ba$t@rd$ lurking silently and invisibly behind the scenes on this matter.

More specifically, it is quite apparent (at least to me) that someone, somewhere behind the scenes in Florida is unhappy with the irrefutable legal fact that recorded underlying governing timeshare documents are crystal clear, legally binding and prevail over all else; very "inconvenient" for someone with a different, hidden agenda.

Since the fact of clear, legally binding governing documents is plainly irrefutable (and ultimately unavoidable in their application), it seems obvious (to me, anyhow) that the real "play" here is to try to push through dubious "legislation" that creates a brand new "end run" to circumvent and / or nullify long standing, legally binding and officially recorded underlying governing documents. I truly cannot see (or even imagine) any other credible explanation for this unnecessary, sneaky, back door attempt at legislative "maneuvering" to try to change the fixed rules of a game already long in progress --- the rules of which are officially recorded and legally binding.

 

[theo]

Off with his head!

was finally able to log in with facebook to read the article, its not a very descriptive or useful piece of journalism.

cites no specific parts of the proposed changes, just a blanket statement that the bill is designed to make it harder for consumers to cancel.

I dont quite see in what I have read how that is the case at all, as nothing in the bill references the current 10 day cancellation period available in florida (although id love to see that jump to 15 or 30 days personally)...and one can cancel for ANY reason during that period.

Be careful, Brian --- Queen SueDonJ might raise her mighty moderator scepter and unilaterally determine and proclaim that you are "attacking the poster" by merely noting that the media report cited is just weak, factually deficient and uninformative "journalism".

 

[TUGBrian]

I still reiterate that there are indeed parts of this law modification that I simply dont believe are in the best interests of the consumer...(the substitution section for example).

I would certianly agree with opposing the passing of the bill in its entirety without those items significantly altered or flat out removed.

 

[theo]

Foul odor in the air remains...

I still reiterate that there are indeed parts of this law modification that I simply dont believe are in the best interests of the consumer... <snip>

That's putting it mildly and much too charitably.

 

[TUGBrian]

I just dont think the complaints focus on what they should, and instead just say "its all bad!!!!!"

 

[TUGBrian]

from an email I was copied on from the office of Rep. Steube...this is the most current (and proposed) copy of the bill

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=53409&SessionId=76

although unless im blind (or just dumb) I dont see any major changes to the document since 3/11/2015


also this is on the agenda for discussion tomorrow starting at 10:30am in the house, and can apparently be watched live online here:

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/HouseCalendar/broadcast.aspx

 

[TUGBrian]

This is the current and most recent analysis provided by the Florida senate subcommittee...which basically explains what the bill is SUPPOSED to do as a summary.

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Secti...entType=Analysis&BillNumber=0453&Session=2015

 

[TSToday]

FL Legilation

TimeSharing Today Radio
Sent out a Podcast on the legislation. Here's the link:
http://66.242.134.60/express-05-2015.mp3

 

[richardm]

Here is a link to new timeshare legislation being discussed in California.. This one looks to simply authorize the "electronic" delivery of required documents and disclosures- which is a common practice in other areas.. It may be interesting to watch and see if new parts are added which relate to the same changes being pushed in Florida..

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/15-16/bill/asm/ab_0901-0950/ab_905_cfa_20150413_090335_asm_comm.html

 

[nkldavy]

Petition to the Governor To Veto

https://www.change.org/p/florida-governor-veto-senate-bill-932-florida-timeshare-act

 

[theo]

https://www.change.org/p/florida-governor-veto-senate-bill-932-florida-timeshare-act

Thank you for posting this link.

Voicing opposition to the bill's enactment might not ultimately prevail, but it's important to at least provide some input and perspective other than the subjective and carefully massaged position of profit-minded developers who are silently (but quite plainly) behind all this proposed (...ahem) "improvement" in the first place. :annoyed:

 

[SueDonJ]

Nevermind.

 

[TUGBrian]

This is the statement that the Florida Timeshare Owners Group is submitting to the Governors office in opposition of this bill:

Dear Governor Rick Scott,

On behalf of all Florida timeshare owners, and future buyers, we respectfully urge you to veto SB932, a developer-sponsored bill that was drafted without input from owners and consumer protection groups.

While perhaps well intentioned, the bill contains many flaws that erode owner legal rights and, worst of all, includes and expands vague language that will simply have to be litigated down the line. The bill, in short, needs to be amended to provide clarity and equity for both owners and developers on several key issues: public disclosure, contract litigation, timeshare trusts, legacy resorts and maintenance fees.

As it stands, the bill before you is a one-sided effort by the development community to rewrite state law to match their current marketing efforts. Example: The bill allows developers to unilaterally decide what constitutes “compliance” and “materiality” with regard to mistakes and omissions in contracts. The bill also restricts owners’ ability to challenge the legality of their contract after the 10-day rescission period required by current law. As you know, developers already hold all of the cards in timeshare transactions; Potential buyers are subjected to verbal high-pressure sales tactics that, under current law, are not actionable. Developers provide buyers with long and complicated contracts that are very difficult to read much less understand, and which are written to protect the developer. Beyond that, most timeshare developers don’t even offer, to this day, programs that will allow longtime Florida owners with medical or financial hardship to get OUT of their timeshare contracts while their mandatory maintenance fees continue to increase.

SB 932, if enacted, would give developers even more leverage over the owner community --- and the fact is, they don’t need it. There is no emergency that requires passage of this bill.

Action: Please send it back to the Legislature with a veto message that says, “Give me a fair and straightforward bill that balances the needs of owners and developers.”

Thank you,

Frank Debar, Chairman, Florida Timeshare Owners Group.

for those that wish to write their own letter, the address for the Governors office is:

Executive Office of Governor Rick Scott
400 So. Munroe St.
Tallahassee, FL. 32399