• The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 30 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 30 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 30th anniversary: Happy 30th Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    Free memberships for every 50 subscribers!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $21,000,000 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 $21 Million dollars
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    60,000+ 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!

[2016] Aspen Highlands Ritz owners suing

Dean

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
9,909
Reaction score
3,580
Points
648
I do recall reading at one time that there was one in Jupiter, Florida. Does anyone know the exact address as to where it was?

I plan to visit West Palm Beach in the near future and would enjoy driving past it to see what it looked like




.
115 Eagle Tree Ter
Jupiter, FL 33477
 

Fasttr

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
6,259
Reaction score
3,401
Points
498
Location
Connecticut
Resorts Owned
Marriott's Grande Ocean (Enrolled)
MVC Trust Points

Ralph Sir Edward

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
2,873
Reaction score
3,501
Points
448
Location
Plano, Texas
Likewise the buyers knew or should have known what they were getting into including that there could and would be changes over time. Other than having to slum with a different clientele there really isn't any loss that is timeshare related that I can see. They'd have to prove it was the timeshare connection that caused the depreciation I'd think and I don't think any reasonable person thinks that is the case.

I am not concerned with the depreciation portion of the suit. That may not be provable.

But if the governing docs explicitly say that they units cannot be used as timeshare intervals, then Marriott cannot use them as timeshare intervals, even if they bought out Ritz Carlton. What's in the governing docs rule.

Let me give you a non-timeshare example (which really happened).

US Government buys land for a new lake. Some of the land had old "stripper" oil wells on it. The government bought the producing lease. rather than buying the lease and the minerals as well. Their goal was to permanently shut in all oIl and gas production. They thought that by buying the lease, they controlled the production. They did - as long as there was production. When they shut it in, their lease went away, and all the value they had paid for reverted to the mineral owners. Who then sued to get paid the same amount, plus back interest - after the lake filled up. . . (They won.)

The moral? The terms of the contract matter, no matter who you are. . .
 

Dean

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
9,909
Reaction score
3,580
Points
648
I am not concerned with the depreciation portion of the suit. That may not be provable.

But if the governing docs explicitly say that they units cannot be used as timeshare intervals, then Marriott cannot use them as timeshare intervals, even if they bought out Ritz Carlton. What's in the governing docs rule.

Let me give you a non-timeshare example (which really happened).

US Government buys land for a new lake. Some of the land had old "stripper" oil wells on it. The government bought the producing lease. rather than buying the lease and the minerals as well. Their goal was to permanently shut in all oIl and gas production. They thought that by buying the lease, they controlled the production. They did - as long as there was production. When they shut it in, their lease went away, and all the value they had paid for reverted to the mineral owners. Who then sued to get paid the same amount, plus back interest - after the lake filled up. . . (They won.)

The moral? The terms of the contract matter, no matter who you are. . .
Sure but a POS isn’t a contract in a truest sense because it can be changed, often somewhat unilaterally. We’d have to go through the entire POS and state law to formulate a good opinion on what they can and can’t do, there certainly isn’t enough here to do so. Generally the developer retains lots of leeway and rights, esp on unsold inventory or inventory under their control. I’d bet there was an exchange provision in the POS as well. My understanding was the loss of value was at the core of the suite and the issue with allowing timeshare exchanges was a major cause thus the inclusion was based on loss of value. My point is that I don’t think there’s a cause and effect. Certainly when things get into courts you never know what’s going to happen and it’s often not along the lines of what the contract or laws say (or even common sense) but more along activist or emotional lines. Plus sometimes a company will cut their losses from a financial standpoint rather than spending more defending somethings they can likely win. And those 2 points are often the very reason than many lawsuits are filed.
 

rthib

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
1,973
Reaction score
644
Points
473
Location
DFW, TX
For those wondering about the lawsuit, Motions on Motions to dismiss some expert testimony are due by 7/29 so no updates until then
 

dioxide45

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
47,354
Reaction score
18,913
Points
1,299
Location
NE Florida
Resorts Owned
Marriott Grande Vista
Marriott Harbour Lake
Sheraton Vistana Villages
Club Wyndham CWA
The Jupiter property voted to change to a different management company. They are now managed by Timbers.
 

TravelTime

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
8,092
Reaction score
6,460
Points
499
Location
California
Resorts Owned
All Resale: MVC DPs, Marriott Ko Olina, Marriott Marbella, WKOVR-N, Four Seasons Aviara
I am staying at the Ritz St Thomas club now using DPs. It is one of the best timeshares I have visited so far. It seems really empty right now. Maybe bc it is shoulder season or bc the hotel side is not yet open. Everything is really nice, the unit, layout, service, pool area, etc. I guess all I could wish for more would be more restaurants and stores nearby.
 

ontilt

TUG Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
72
Reaction score
16
Points
118
Location
Bay Area
Resorts Owned
HGVC Bay Club
HGVC Valdoro x2
Worldmark
I was looking at this recently and I've heard a rumor that with all of the Marriott / Starwood consolidation, that there's a "rumor" that the developer wants to settle. Let me restate that this is rumor and hearsay. That said, if there was a settlement with a class of owners, where would those funds come from? I would have a concern that somehow the developer would pass that to the rest of the owners in the form of a special assessment. Alternatively, it could be covered via some liability insurance of the HOA. Another possibility is that the developer just settles independently to make it go away, but this last possibility seems the least likely imo.

Wondering if others have insight or thoughts on the above?
 

TravelTime

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
8,092
Reaction score
6,460
Points
499
Location
California
Resorts Owned
All Resale: MVC DPs, Marriott Ko Olina, Marriott Marbella, WKOVR-N, Four Seasons Aviara
I was looking at this recently and I've heard a rumor that with all of the Marriott / Starwood consolidation, that there's a "rumor" that the developer wants to settle. Let me restate that this is rumor and hearsay. That said, if there was a settlement with a class of owners, where would those funds come from? I would have a concern that somehow the developer would pass that to the rest of the owners in the form of a special assessment. Alternatively, it could be covered via some liability insurance of the HOA. Another possibility is that the developer just settles independently to make it go away, but this last possibility seems the least likely imo.

Wondering if others have insight or thoughts on the above?

I would hate to see the developer settle in the case. It seems unfair to punish all the other owners bc one class made a bad investment. All fractionals lose value the moment we sign the dotted line. The Four Seasons has seen terrible depreciation too whereas now you can bu an EOY week for a couple thousand and still get full owner privileges. Frankly, Ritz fractional owners get 3 weeks and several weeks in high season. Let's say they paid $200K for their fractional. To buy enough DPs to stay 3 weeks at the Ritz including high season weeks, you would need to be at least Chairman's level. Maybe higher. So assume we bought 15,000 DPs at $11 per point, that is $165K retail. So what on earth are the Ritz owners whining about? Did they pay more than $200K for 3 weeks? Plus I assume they get extra perks as a Ritz fractional owner that we know nothing about such as exchanging on elite networks as well as first opportunity to book high season weeks and other weeks. Not to mention the allure and self esteem that being a Ritz fractional owner probably gives them.
 

ontilt

TUG Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
72
Reaction score
16
Points
118
Location
Bay Area
Resorts Owned
HGVC Bay Club
HGVC Valdoro x2
Worldmark
I would hate to see the developer settle in the case. It seems unfair to punish all the other owners bc one class made a bad investment. All fractionals lose value the moment we sign the dotted line. The Four Seasons has seen terrible depreciation too whereas now you can bu an EOY week for a couple thousand and still get full owner privileges. Frankly, Ritz fractional owners get 3 weeks and several weeks in high season. Let's say they paid $200K for their fractional. To buy enough DPs to stay 3 weeks at the Ritz including high season weeks, you would need to be at least Chairman's level. Maybe higher. So assume we bought 15,000 DPs at $11 per point, that is $165K retail. So what on earth are the Ritz owners whining about? Did they pay more than $200K for 3 weeks? Plus I assume they get extra perks as a Ritz fractional owner that we know nothing about such as exchanging on elite networks as well as first opportunity to book high season weeks and other weeks. Not to mention the allure and self esteem that being a Ritz fractional owner probably gives them.

I agree we could qualify it as a "bad investment". But when the developer/seller is stating that the property will hold value during sale, that's a mis-characterization that many of the folks here are aware of, but to the average buyer, that may not be very clear. Further, "fairness" seems to be something that falls to the wayside as it relates to owners vs. developers.

I also agree with you that these owners claiming that they are "damaged" is a stretch given the point exchange value and the fact that the exchange is voluntary. From what I understand, MVC owners don't get access unless weeks are exchanged out of RC.

All of that said, my question is really, who pays for it if the developer does settle? If they settle and 2/3 of the ownership has to pay an assessment, doesn't that just open the door for another class action? I'm just curious how one would navigate the risk of a special assessment here and if that's a possibility if the case were to be settled.
 

dioxide45

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
47,354
Reaction score
18,913
Points
1,299
Location
NE Florida
Resorts Owned
Marriott Grande Vista
Marriott Harbour Lake
Sheraton Vistana Villages
Club Wyndham CWA
All of that said, my question is really, who pays for it if the developer does settle? If they settle and 2/3 of the ownership has to pay an assessment, doesn't that just open the door for another class action? I'm just curious how one would navigate the risk of a special assessment here and if that's a possibility if the case were to be settled.
I highly doubt there would be a special assessment to other owners. That is far to obvious and if they settle, fault would be on Marriott so passing these on as direct costs to owners would be a problem. That said, it is always said that the customer pays for everything. So those costs will get passed on in some way or another, just not as a transparent special assessment.
 

Dean

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
9,909
Reaction score
3,580
Points
648
Usually companies look at this as a financial issue rather than on principle so they likely will settle it if they think that route is cheaper. IMO this is short term thinking with long term risk but that's often the way it goes whether it be malpractice or a large company. That's why I've commented a couple of times on TUG that a settlement does not equate to guilt, that and the fact that judge's and jury's are often activist rather than by the book.

As for passing it on to the owners, that'd be difficult with audits and a BOD. About the most they could do would be to try to recoup it over time through the management contract and on the sale of any units. They likely do have secondary insurance to cover this type of risk and that's probably where most of any payment would come from if applicable.

The bottom line issue seems to be the fact that the cold value of a timeshare is a fraction of the actual cost, the value is in the usage. It's kind of like having a fender bender when you drive a new car off a lot but you didn't have insurance.
 

Ralph Sir Edward

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
2,873
Reaction score
3,501
Points
448
Location
Plano, Texas
The real question will be whether or not Marriott will continue to be able to allow non-RC timeshare owners to book the RC resorts involved.
 

Dean

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
9,909
Reaction score
3,580
Points
648
The real question will be whether or not Marriott will continue to be able to allow non-RC timeshare owners to book the RC resorts involved.
Long term I suspect the answer will be no because they will likely move to a different management company when they can.
 

TravelTime

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
8,092
Reaction score
6,460
Points
499
Location
California
Resorts Owned
All Resale: MVC DPs, Marriott Ko Olina, Marriott Marbella, WKOVR-N, Four Seasons Aviara
I agree we could qualify it as a "bad investment". But when the developer/seller is stating that the property will hold value during sale, that's a mis-characterization that many of the folks here are aware of, but to the average buyer, that may not be very clear. Further, "fairness" seems to be something that falls to the wayside as it relates to owners vs. developers.

I also agree with you that these owners claiming that they are "damaged" is a stretch given the point exchange value and the fact that the exchange is voluntary. From what I understand, MVC owners don't get access unless weeks are exchanged out of RC.

All of that said, my question is really, who pays for it if the developer does settle? If they settle and 2/3 of the ownership has to pay an assessment, doesn't that just open the door for another class action? I'm just curious how one would navigate the risk of a special assessment here and if that's a possibility if the case were to be settled.

Marriott needs to absorb it out of their bottom line and not push it to owners.
 

TravelTime

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
8,092
Reaction score
6,460
Points
499
Location
California
Resorts Owned
All Resale: MVC DPs, Marriott Ko Olina, Marriott Marbella, WKOVR-N, Four Seasons Aviara
Long term I suspect the answer will be no because they will likely move to a different management company when they can.

This has been my fear. I hope the few RC resorts available through MVC do not move. This is a major selling point to me buying into MVC. Just visited RC STT and it is my favorite timeshare so far - other than my DVCs, LOL.
 

Ralph Sir Edward

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
2,873
Reaction score
3,501
Points
448
Location
Plano, Texas
Long term I suspect the answer will be no because they will likely move to a different management company when they can.

I strongly suspect that if the plaintiff win, part of the settlement will be to cut off Marriott access. That is the part of the contract that is in breach. according to what I've read here. (I also suspect if it gets settled out of court, that will be one of the terms of the settlement.)
 

rthib

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
1,973
Reaction score
644
Points
473
Location
DFW, TX
Update, on June 14, "MINUTE ORDER by Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 6/18/2019, re: 410 STIPULATION of Dismissal of Party Robert A. Sklar; 411 STIPULATION of Dismissal of Party Greg Jacobson. ORDERED that, all claims of plaintiffs Robert A. Sklar and Greg Jacobson against Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation, Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc., Ritz-Carlton Management Company, LLC, Cobalt Travel Company, LLC, and The Lion & Crown Travel Co., LLC were dismissed with prejudice as of the entry of the Stipulations for Dismissal"
 

Norcal5

TUG Member
Joined
May 31, 2017
Messages
207
Reaction score
83
Points
139
Update, on June 14, "MINUTE ORDER by Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 6/18/2019, re: 410 STIPULATION of Dismissal of Party Robert A. Sklar; 411 STIPULATION of Dismissal of Party Greg Jacobson. ORDERED that, all claims of plaintiffs Robert A. Sklar and Greg Jacobson against Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation, Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc., Ritz-Carlton Management Company, LLC, Cobalt Travel Company, LLC, and The Lion & Crown Travel Co., LLC were dismissed with prejudice as of the entry of the Stipulations for Dismissal"
Thank you rthib
 
Last edited:

SueDonJ

Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
16,612
Reaction score
5,778
Points
1,249
Location
Massachusetts and Hilton Head Island
Resorts Owned
Marriott Barony Beach and SurfWatch
Update, on June 14, "MINUTE ORDER by Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 6/18/2019, re: 410 STIPULATION of Dismissal of Party Robert A. Sklar; 411 STIPULATION of Dismissal of Party Greg Jacobson. ORDERED that, all claims of plaintiffs Robert A. Sklar and Greg Jacobson against Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation, Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc., Ritz-Carlton Management Company, LLC, Cobalt Travel Company, LLC, and The Lion & Crown Travel Co., LLC were dismissed with prejudice as of the entry of the Stipulations for Dismissal"

They were the only two named in the suit, weren't they? So does it mean this one's done with no harm to MVW, or that a settlement occurred, or something else??

Thanks for keeping this updated, rthib. :)
 

Sapper

Tug Review Crew: Rookie
TUG Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
749
Points
223
Location
Houston, TX
They were the only two named in the suit, weren't they? So does it mean this one's done with no harm to MVW, or that a settlement occurred, or something else??

Thanks for keeping this updated, rthib. :)

My legalese is rusty, but dismissed with prejudice means that the case is over and cannot be brought back on the same grounds. Someone had to pay Marriotts lawyers and I think Marriott can try to recover their costs from the folks who brought the suit.
 

SueDonJ

Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
16,612
Reaction score
5,778
Points
1,249
Location
Massachusetts and Hilton Head Island
Resorts Owned
Marriott Barony Beach and SurfWatch
My legalese is rusty, but dismissed with prejudice means that the case is over and cannot be brought back on the same grounds. Someone had to pay Marriotts lawyers and I think Marriott can try to recover their costs from the folks who brought the suit.

So, no chance this signals a possible mutual agreement to settle? I'm just wondering if Marriott had to concede any of the points brought up, even if the details are hidden.
 
Top