• Welcome to the FREE TUGBBS forums! The absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 32 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 32 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 32nd anniversary: Happy 32nd Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    All subscribers auto-entered to win all free TUG membership giveaways!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $24,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $24 Million dollars
  • Wish you could meet up with other TUG members? Well look no further as this annual event has been going on for years in Orlando! How to Attend the TUG January Get-Together!
  • Now through the end of the year you can join or renew your TUG membership at the lowest price ever offered! Learn More!
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    Tens of thousands of subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

My first SVO on going search/Depositing/Requesting w/II [merged]

Sthack

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
269
Reaction score
0
Location
Michigan
I've been out the loop for some time now. I own at Sheraton Vistana joined the SVO last year when they were waiving the fee for Fountain II owners. I’ve never used this new system and was planning to get started for my 2011 ongoing search but I'm noticing a lot of threads complaining about the ‘new Starwood system’. So from some of the threads that I’ve browsed, is this ‘new’ system not allowing us to search 2 years out? I’ve just reserved my 2010 week (week 9) with Starwood that I planned to deposit in the II system for an ongoing search for 2011. Will I be able to do this, if so what are the procedures? If not, can I get out of the SVO system and go back to depositing my weeks with RCI? I have until tomorrow to change/cancel my Starwood reservations without a fee, so all response are appreciated!

Thanks in advance!
 
Depositing/Requesting w/ II (even/odd yr float)

Just got off the phone w/ II (Starwood desk) This is what he told me - is he right, or does he just want the commission (if they get that...I don't know) from making the reservation online?

I own two properties:

1) odd yr float
2) even yr float

He said II will not always use the unit you click on if you have more than one avbl when you REQUEST FIRST. For instance, I have my 2009 still avbl, but if I click on the EXCHANGE tab for it and input an ongoing request, II might take my 2010 unit instead?

How can they do that? But he said they do - and to avoid it I should call Starwood and relinquish my 2009 week so it will be specifically used for the exchange.

Please help! I want to make the right choice and I've already got an ongoing request in for the wrong year, (because I clicked on my 2010 week not realizing I was doing that since it shows 2009 in "My Units") so I def need to change it, just want to go about it right!

Could they make this more confusing????

Thanks Denise - or any Tugger who has a minute to help!
 
For instance, I have my 2009 still avbl, but if I click on the EXCHANGE tab for it and input an ongoing request, II might take my 2010 unit instead?

How can they do that? But he said they do - and to avoid it I should call Starwood and relinquish my 2009 week so it will be specifically used for the exchange.

Yes, they are doing that now. Under the new system, you must call Starwood and assign the specific week that you want to use first. II just sends the request to Starwood for confirmation. So, Starwood may make a decision for you that wasn't what you intended.

For example, if you have a 2009 reservation that you intended to use for the exchange, Starwood may keep that reservation and use a 2010 week for the exchange. If Starwood made that mistake for me, I would be escalating until the fixed it for the correct week.
 
OK, so I call Starwood and have them deposit my unused 2009 week. BUT - should I specifically request a certain week reservation for them to deposit - or do they choose for me? I'm still confused on how to maximize my trading power w/ this.

My unit is 2 bd lockoff @ WMH. I only want to relinquish the B side. Is there anything I need to tell them when I call (other than B side only) like, request the best week?

Ugh, so sorry to ask all these ??? !!! I hate not being familiar w/ this cuz I know in the long run, it's hurting our ability to take the best vacation we can. I also think just when I get it all figured out, it will change...

Anyway, THANK YOU for the answer l2trade!
 
OK, so I call Starwood and have them deposit my unused 2009 week. BUT - should I specifically request a certain week reservation for them to deposit - or do they choose for me? I'm still confused on how to maximize my trading power w/ this.

My unit is 2 bd lockoff @ WMH. I only want to relinquish the B side. Is there anything I need to tell them when I call (other than B side only) like, request the best week?

Ugh, so sorry to ask all these ??? !!! I hate not being familiar w/ this cuz I know in the long run, it's hurting our ability to take the best vacation we can. I also think just when I get it all figured out, it will change...

Anyway, THANK YOU for the answer l2trade!



You can no longer choose the week that you want deposited with II. This is thanks to a Starwood system change last month that owners still have not been officially notified of. For more info check out the other threads about the Starwood complaints. Email or PM me if you would like to join the group of owners that are complaining to Starwood.
 
I've been out the loop for some time now. I own at Sheraton Vistana joined the SVO last year when they were waiving the fee for Fountain II owners. I’ve never used this new system and was planning to get started for my 2011 ongoing search but I'm noticing a lot of threads complaining about the ‘new Starwood system’. So from some of the threads that I’ve browsed, is this ‘new’ system not allowing us to search 2 years out? I’ve just reserved my 2010 week (week 9) with Starwood that I planned to deposit in the II system for an ongoing search for 2011. Will I be able to do this, if so what are the procedures? If not, can I get out of the SVO system and go back to depositing my weeks with RCI? I have until tomorrow to change/cancel my Starwood reservations without a fee, so all response are appreciated!

You can no longer choose the week that is deposited - Starwood has complete control over that now. You have to call them and they will deposit a generic week for you with "average" trading power for the season you own.

You do not have to deposit it with II, but they will probably insist on choosing the week you deposit with RCI, as well.

Starwood is "reevaluating" the one year search limit.

Please read the other threads, as we are trying to limit the number of threads on the same topic.

[Sorry - I missed the fact that this is a week in the SVN.]
 
Last edited:
Deposited SVN week w/ II shows as week 54

Ummmm...week 54? Does anyone know what this means? Of course, I had no say in picking the week but the Starwood desk @ II assured me it would be the platinum season I bought w/ SVN in. She said this is one of the positive changes to Starwood's new system. I told her all I had heard about this new system was negative...
 
Ummmm...week 54? Does anyone know what this means? Of course, I had no say in picking the week but the Starwood desk @ II assured me it would be the platinum season I bought w/ SVN in. She said this is one of the positive changes to Starwood's new system. I told her all I had heard about this new system was negative...

They are using the week number 54 to represent a "float" ownership.
 
Thank you James; that clears it up. I couldn't find the answer anywhere.
 
Thank you James; that clears it up. I couldn't find the answer anywhere.

I think that's the first time we've heard about that! :eek:
 
So does week 55 mean an Even EOY and Week 56 an Odd EOY and week 57 that the calendar is broken?:rofl:

Greg
 
A generic week is worth less average...

Think about the Priceline business model. The reason you can get a much better price is that while you may choose the day, location and value, you don't know what you are actually getting until after the transaction. I offer to pay much less $$$ per night because I don't know the details of what I may end up with. There are no take backs. I never offer even close to an equal amount of $$$ compared to the cheapest I can find elsewhere. Yet, very often my lowball bids are accepted.

II is now in a very similar situation in dealing with us Starwood owners. II agrees to a pending transaction, but does not know which week will actually be given in return from Starwood. There may be some formula that II and Starwood agreed to. There are many variables outside the control of both parties. Could this formula combined with unknown variables favor heavier distribution of lower than average demand weeks from Starwood?

Common sense dictates that the value of the week we are offering is worth closer to the minimum value than to the average value of all the possible weeks available to reserve in our season. Seriously, what would you be willing to pay for this blind transaction? Our weeks are not lottery tickets. II is not a casino. We should be able to show our hand (actual week reservation). This would allow II to decide what our actual week is worth to them based on the current (i.e. - todays) supply and demand.

Why is it Starwood's business if I decide to rent out or trade my week reservation, rather than stay at my home resort during that time? That was NEVER part of the program we were sold and agreed to.
 
Why is it Starwood's business if I decide to rent out or trade my week reservation, rather than stay at my home resort during that time? That was NEVER part of the program we were sold and agreed to.

My understanding is that we can still rent out the week that we reserve so nothing has changed on that front. Regarding deflated trading value, my POV is that this was a gift from Starwood/II, while it lasted. I learned about this from TUG and took advantage of it. There was nothing in my deed/contract with Starwood that guaranteed this would/should continue. I have a bigger problem with Starwood doing away with the request first trade option.
 
... Regarding deflated trading value, my POV is that this was a gift from Starwood/II, while it lasted. I learned about this from TUG and took advantage of it. There was nothing in my deed/contract with Starwood that guaranteed this would/should continue ....

RoshiGuy -- I have to respectfully disagree. Starwood is trying to force us to "gift back" to them our right to reserve any week within our float period and do with it what we want. They are interfering with our relationship with II.

I've always been a big fan of II, but I'm disgusted at this point. I'm sure the loss of Disney to RCI and Marriott's pending internal trading system has made them "do anything Starwood wants" to keep Starwood's business. Under no circumstances will they get my business if they continue to cowtow (sp?) to Starwood at our expense.

I fully understand that both the owners and the developers are clients of II. But, they're allowing Starwood to bastardize their trading process to the disadvantage of individual owners. It's unacceptable.

As I've stated earlier (or on another thread), it would be different if this had been the process upfront. But, the CCRs for non-SVO weeks do not permit the developer to select the weeks for owner exchange deposits. Starwood is stealing this right, pure and simple. They can't have it both ways -- prohibit certain owners from joining SVN, but then try to force SVN rules upon those owners.
 
As I've stated earlier (or on another thread), it would be different if this had been the process upfront. But, the CCRs for non-SVO weeks do not permit the developer to select the weeks for owner exchange deposits. Starwood is stealing this right, pure and simple. They can't have it both ways -- prohibit certain owners from joining SVN, but then try to force SVN rules upon those owners.

I am not familiar with the CCRs and will try and look into this. What I do know is that I bought a floating 1-52 SDO unit. If my purpose was to exchange I always felt that booking a prime week to get best trading power was "gaming" they system ... and I was thankful to the people on TUG who showed the way! While I am disappointed that this has now been taken away ... I am not outraged about this as others on TUG are.

I bought SDO because I like the Starwood resorts/locations and the II priority suggested that I'd be able to exchange into other Starwood resorts. It now appears that we're not sure about the II priority either. For me, this is an even bigger issue than reduced trading power. With hindsight, I should have probably bought a mandatory unit ... live and learn!
 
They can't have it both ways -- prohibit certain owners from joining SVN, but then try to force SVN rules upon those owners.

This is my main problem with Starwood right now, if they are going to keep this mandatory/voluntary SVN, non-SVN come up with a system that can work for both sets of owners.
 
They can't have it both ways -- prohibit certain owners from joining SVN, but then try to force SVN rules upon those owners.

Why can’t they have it both ways? Why can’t SVO enforce the same rules to all owners and provide additional benefits (SVN) to owners of mandatory resorts or direct purchasers?

I ask because I don’t know the answer…no agenda here.
 
If my purpose was to exchange I always felt that booking a prime week to get best trading power was "gaming" they system ... and I was thankful to the people on TUG who showed the way!

Are you Catholic or Jewish? ;) Just kidding (from a guilt-ridden Catholic!). You were not gaming the system, you were simply doing what each and every owner had the right to do if he/she so wished. I agree about the great people on TUG!

I bought SDO because I like the Starwood resorts/locations and the II priority suggested that I'd be able to exchange into other Starwood resorts. It now appears that we're not sure about the II priority either. For me, this is an even bigger issue than reduced trading power. ..

The priority period was in fact a gift (not in the CCRs but part of a contract negotiated between Starwood and II) and unfortunately Starwood can take it away. I've enjoyed its benefits for many years, but there are so many wonderful non-Starwood resorts available in II. I'll miss it if it's gone, but my vacations won't suffer. I'll just spend my $ at non-Starwood locations! :) Starwood might want to hope that those who trade in under the new rules spend as much money onsite as those who no longer have preference (the Harborside bar and Atlantis casino will suffer if I can no longer trade in!).

With hindsight, I should have probably bought a mandatory unit ... live and learn!

I think that's a toss-up. I did buy mandatory resorts for those I wish to visit every year, but I paid pennies for my voluntary units. If their benefits go away, it's no great loss.

This is my main problem with Starwood right now, if they are going to keep this mandatory/voluntary SVN, non-SVN come up with a system that can work for both sets of owners.

Amen!!! Uh oh, two religious references in one post -- hope I don't get banned.

Why can’t they have it both ways? Why can’t SVO enforce the same rules to all owners and provide additional benefits (SVN) to owners of mandatory resorts or direct purchasers?

I ask because I don’t know the answer…no agenda here.


If there were truly benefits involved, there wouldn't be an issue. But, this new system is not fair to non-SVN owners who previously had the right to book and deposit any week within their seasons. Blended trading power means lower trading power for those who were saavy enough to book and deposit prime weeks. And, it was completely within our legal rights to do so. I've been stuck with lousy trading weeks when I've failed to be the "early bird" and didn't confirm reservations until late in the year. I didn't cry foul -- I knew it was my own fault for not reserving earlier. To attempt to reward those who procrastinate at the expense of those who act early is simply unfair and contrary to the deeded rights.

Okay – off my soapbox and back to work!
 
If there were truly benefits involved, there wouldn't be an issue. But, this new system is not fair to non-SVN owners who previously had the right to book and deposit any week within their seasons. Blended trading power means lower trading power for those who were saavy enough to book and deposit prime weeks. And, it was completely within our legal rights to do so. I've been stuck with lousy trading weeks when I've failed to be the "early bird" and didn't confirm reservations until late in the year. I didn't cry foul -- I knew it was my own fault for not reserving earlier. To attempt to reward those who procrastinate at the expense of those who act early is simply unfair and contrary to the deeded rights.

I can see how it may be unfair.

Let me ask my question this way…what legal right is violated when this new system is implemented? When you say “But, this new system is not fair to non-SVN owners who previously had the right to book and deposit any week within their seasons”, what “right” are you referring to? Or should the sentence read “But, this new system is not fair to non-SVN owners who previously had the ability to book and deposit any week within their seasons.”
 
I can see how it may be unfair.

Let me ask my question this way…what legal right is violated when this new system is implemented? When you say “But, this new system is not fair to non-SVN owners who previously had the right to book and deposit any week within their seasons”, what “right” are you referring to? Or should the sentence read “But, this new system is not fair to non-SVN owners who previously had the ability to book and deposit any week within their seasons.”

I'm beginning to buy into this line of thinking. While I think the spirit of the CC&Rs and the related Rules and Regulations (I'm speaking for SDO) would suggest that you can reserve any week and do with it what you want, I believe this is what kills us (from the SDO CC&Rs under "Specific Powers and Duties of the Association"):

"5.2.O. Exchange Agreements. To enter into, modify, replace and perform its obligations under or concerning exchange company agreements, whereby Owners may exchange use of Interval Weeks in the Interval Property for use rights in other projects."

As best as I can tell, that's the only place in the CC&Rs where exchanging is mentioned. In my opinion, it's vaguely worded enough to allow Starwood to make whatever agreement with II they please and subject us to those rules.
 
I can see how it may be unfair.

Let me ask my question this way…what legal right is violated when this new system is implemented? When you say “But, this new system is not fair to non-SVN owners who previously had the right to book and deposit any week within their seasons”, what “right” are you referring to? Or should the sentence read “But, this new system is not fair to non-SVN owners who previously had the ability to book and deposit any week within their seasons.”

Troopers -- I understand your question and I wish I had all the relevant paperwork to back up the word "right." For now, I can only point to my interpretation of the only non-SVN Declaration of Condominium I have, which is for Vistana Resort in Florida. It pre-dates Starwood's involvement and does not mention exchange privileges, but does discuss guests and "other authorized occupants" which I would argue extend to those authorized via an exchange agreement. Because there was not then, or has never been, a specific exchange-related clause in the agreement, I would then point to Florida's exchange-related statutes here:

http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/in..._Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0721/PART01.HTM

Click on 721.18 to review the statutes related to exchange companies.

It's difficult to apply the laws of today to deeds drawn up almost 20 years ago, but I think it's plain and clear that Starwood cannot force a specific agreement on us. Absent such agreement, I firmly believe the following section applies:

[Unless otherwise stated, a statement that] the purchaser's contract with the exchange company is a contract separate and distinct from the purchaser's contract with the seller of the timeshare plan.

Just because the orginal Vistana developer may not have been required to furnish such a statement at the time, it seems obvious to me that the keys concept is "Absent such agreement, my contract with II cannot be altered by Starwood."

I'm not attorney, nor do I do have the time or patience to research this ad nauseum. Several non-SVN owners have asked Starwood to furnish proof that they had the right to alter our agreements with Interval International (clearly, the fact that we're paying members and, further, paid fees to add specific, non-SVN weeks is evidence that our agreements are with II, not Starwood). Their failure to do so speaks volumes.
 
Last edited:
I'm beginning to buy into this line of thinking. While I think the spirit of the CC&Rs and the related Rules and Regulations (I'm speaking for SDO) would suggest that you can reserve any week and do with it what you want, I believe this is what kills us (from the SDO CC&Rs under "Specific Powers and Duties of the Association"):

"5.2.O. Exchange Agreements. To enter into, modify, replace and perform its obligations under or concerning exchange company agreements, whereby Owners may exchange use of Interval Weeks in the Interval Property for use rights in other projects."

As best as I can tell, that's the only place in the CC&Rs where exchanging is mentioned. In my opinion, it's vaguely worded enough to allow Starwood to make whatever agreement with II they please and subject us to those rules.


I don't think this lets them alter basic rights of individual owners. I'm certain that Arizona has laws similar to the ones in Florida and just because they sign an agreement and administer the program (e.g., perform the deposit function), they don't necessarily have the right to supercede such laws.
 
Here's section 7 from Lakeside Terrace's Rules and Regulations, which any LT owner can get on StarCentral

"If an owner wishes to exchange the use of his Unit pursuant to the procedures established by a reciprocal exchange program affiliated with the LAKESIDE TERRACE RESORT, such owner will be required to obtain a confirmed reservation for a VACATION WEEK within the time period established by the exchange company for the making of such reservations. The Managing Agent and Association are not responsible for the exchange value of any vacation week reserved by and confirmed to an Owner."
 
Mystarcentral used to have similar language for Broadway Plantation buy Starwood has conveniently removed it.
 
Top