[ 2012 ] How we FINALLY got rid of our timeshare

[ccwu]

I have a timeshare that I did not use for years. I emailed to resort to request them to relieve my obligation by taking back the deed a week ago. I offer to pay next year's MF. I just received letter today asking me to pay a non-refundable fees of $500 for title research (very reasonable. The closing cost usually are higher than this.) Once they are sure the title is clear and all fees paid, they will proceed to prepare paperwork for me to transfer the deed back to the association.

DeniseM layed out a few steps to do to get rid of the timeshare that you do not use. I did most steps she adviced. I just did not think the resort will help me out. What did I know. Thanks to the all the advices.

The past December, I did turn back my three membership to Perennial Vacation Club (Once upon a time, my son loved to ski at Heavenly when he was in college in SF area, I bought three Perennial because he likes Eagle's Nest.) PVC send me letter with agreements immediately after I request to turn back the memberships. PVC charged about $50 each to transfer the membership back. I did not have to pay the 2012 dues. I think just talk or email to the resort to see if they would do anything to help you out.

I did give away one to a friend a few years ago. She is greatly appreciate the timeshare. She traveled and exchanged many years with her children and family with the timeshare. She constantly mention about that and let me know her appreciation.

 

[pacodemountainside]

I don't care if it is a luxury or not - "I" am not willing to subsidize other owners' bad decisions and buyer's remorse. If they want out - they should pay for the privilege - not responsible owners.

I own 9 weeks of timeshare - are you really telling me I should come up with another $1,800 a year to pay for other people's mistakes? I don't think so!

Denise:

I have bad news for you! There is no Santa Claus and you are paying for defaults. See Cheryl's post!

No where did I propose all resorts levy a $200 fee for deliquinces . I said "say $200" which is accounting jargon for a suggestion/proposal for discussion. At BC probably zero while old run down resort much more!

If you look at budgets you will be getting in mail over next couple months all will have a provision for bad debts. The ONLY way you can avoid paying for deadbeats is not paying your MF! The more that go to bankruptcy or Viking Ships the more you pay!

If resort agrees to accept deed from owner who cannot pay MF and car loan to get to work or just 1 year MF why is it not a win, win situation? Somehow owner will skip a car payment, new electric ass scratcher or a couple TGIFs to avoid harsh collection action.

The olde rock and hard place and ***** creek without a paddle!

 

[DeniseM]

This is what you said - it was very clear:

Instead, we recommend a special assesment of say $200 per owner so we can set up reserve fund and can take deed backs.

I don't care if it is $200 or $20 - I am completely unwilling to do this with my hard earned money.

If my HOA develops a plan where owners can pay at least 3 years of maintenance fees and relinquish their timeshares, and they have a solid plan to resale these weeks, then I'm all for it - but I have no interest in pays a SA to pay for it...

 

[timeos2]

Part of your ownership agreement is that you will cover your share of bad debt. That number represents the cost of those who don't pay but will be limited by a well run Association to the small number that for whatever reason don't pay & go through the collection/foreclosure process. The amount will be reduced by rentals and resales of the ownerships. It is not part of your agreement to simply take time back & pay those fees due for anyone wanting to stop paying. Would you ever agree to such a one sided deal? If it makes sense to accept all deeds offered then a resort can do so but to simply say it must happen even if it is not in the owners/Associations best interest is not the case now nor does it make any sense. If you vote it in fine but until it is agreed to it is not an option you can demand.

The only creek lacking a paddle is your stance. The docs and laws support ours. You don't have to agree or like it but that's how it is and is likely to remain. I

 

[OprahtheHutt]

I am not interested in subsidizing other people's buyer's remorse...

Unfortunately, you already are subsidizing this...

 

[DeniseM]

Unfortunately, you already are subsidizing this...

To a certain degree, but can you imagine what would happen if we threw open the door and let everyone default? What would happen if the resort sent out a newsletter to everyone and said, "Hey, you can default - it's OK - no penalty - come one, come all!"

People who would normally not even consider defaulting would do it, because then it would seem like it must be OK, because after all it was all packaged up nicely and offered by the resort. Even very popular resorts could be completely overwhelmed by too many deed-backs.

And what about the owners that don't default - are their rights secondary to people who want to default?

 

[Beefnot]

Unfortunately, you already are subsidizing this...

Just think, many resorts already have bad debt of 15% or more annually. People can get all haughty and indignant and theoretical, but when it comes right down to it, they are paying for the problem right now. If there are alternatives that can reduce that line item, folks should be all for it. But they cut off their nose to spite their face. And so it goes...

 

[Beefnot]

To a certain degree, but can you imagine what would happen if we threw open the door and let everyone default? What would happen if the resort sent out a newsletter to everyone and said, "Hey, you can default - it's OK - no penalty - come one, come all!"

People who would normally not even consider defaulting would do it, because then it would seem like it must be OK, because after all it was all packaged up nicely and offered by the resort. Even very popular resorts could be completely overwhelmed by too many deed-backs.

And what about the owners that don't default - are their rights secondary to people who want to default?

Allowing meaningful alternatives for those who want out need not mean default.

 

[DeniseM]

Allowing meaningful alternatives for those who want out need not mean default.

Absolutely - but the post I responded to, is a proposal for a $200 special assessment to dues paying owners and one year's maintenance fee to the defaulting party - hardly equitable. I already stated above that the defaulting party should be charged at least 3 year's MF and the on-going owners should not have to subsidize the program with a SA.

 

[DeniseM]

Just think, many resorts already have bad debt of 15% or more annually. People can get all haughty and indignant and theoretical, but when it comes right down to it, they are paying for the problem right now. If there are alternatives that can reduce that line item, folks should be all for it. But they cut off their nose to spite their face. And so it goes...

Do you honestly think that only 15% of owners would default if all they had to pay was one year's MF??? Resorts would be overwhelmed by deed-backs - it would be completely unmanageable.

 

[Beefnot]

Do you honestly think that only 15% of owners would default if all they had to pay was one year's MF??? Resorts would be overwhelmed by deed-backs - it would be completely unmanageable.

I dunno, maybe more. I would like to see more than 1 year personally, but if the HOA is able to get units in new hands within a year on average, then there would be no net negative impact for those that elected this option. For what it's worth, I wouldnt call that defaulting.

 

[DeniseM]

I dunno, maybe more. I would like to see more than 1 year personally, but if the HOA is able to get units in new hands within a year on average, then there would be no net negative impact for those that elected this option. For what it's worth, I wouldnt call that defaulting.

Since these would be timeshares that apparently couldn't even be given away by the owner, I would not expect them to routinely sell within one year, especially if the resort got a flood of deed-backs all at once. I don't think it would be prudent or reasonable to expect to turn them around in one year - especially if you accepted all deed-backs.

 

[Cheryl20772]

I don't care if it is a luxury or not - "I" am not willing to subsidize other owners' bad decisions and buyer's remorse. If they want out - they should pay for the privilege - not responsible owners.

I own 9 weeks of timeshare - are you really telling me I should come up with another $1,800 a year to pay for other people's mistakes? I don't think so!

Denise, I would say that our experience says that you might better prepare yourself for such an eventuality as it has happened and could well happen to your timeshares as well. It doesn't matter if you like it or not, if they need to, they can and will do it.

 

[DeniseM]

Denise, I would say that our experience says that you might better prepare yourself for such an eventuality as it has happened and could well happen to your timeshares as well. It doesn't matter if you like it or not, if they need to, they can and will do it.

Cheryl - Resorts cannot charge a special assessment to set up a reserve fund to take back deed-backs for sale - look at John Chase's posts above - he is a long time BOD member.

 

[Carolinian]

Cheryl - Resorts cannot charge a special assessment to set up a reserve fund to take back deed-backs for sale - look at John Chase's posts above - he is a long time BOD member.

Further, HOA's are almost invariably organized as non-profit corporations, and their legal ability to engage in commercial activity is limited.

 

[Carolinian]

Bad debt SA's happen, but usually because of bad budgeting the prior year by the BOD. It is time to cheange the board if you have them at your resort.

A SA to set up a commerical venture to acquire and resell weeks is a horse of a different color.

As to SA's, I prefer the system used by several HOA's on the OBX where they have to be voted on by the entire membership, not just the BOD.

This obviously happens. We just had to pay $97.28 special assessment to Grand Seas Resort. This summer there was a special meeting of the board of directors who voted to impose the fee to cover bad debt from defaults and we have no choice (if we want to use the resort) but to pay up.

I don't see how it fixes the problem. What it will do is cause further defaults as people refuse to pay this fee and things just further slide down while the resort owners still try to sell unit weeks at developer prices. They need to face reality and try to find cheap/free new homes for the stray dog weeks they are foreclosing on.

Somehow this seems to have met the requirements for a SA. They did it and we had to pay or lose our use of our week.

 

[Beefnot]

Cheryl - Resorts cannot charge a special assessment to set up a reserve fund to take back deed-backs for sale - look at John Chase's posts above - he is a long time BOD member.

Much of what timeos2 writes may be indeed legitimate experience, but I also find it to be conventional knowledge that is not necessarily reflective of legal capability. I have found inaccuracies in what he has posted relative to things I have discovered in internet searches.

 

[Beefnot]

Further, HOA's are almost invariably organized as non-profit corporations, and their legal ability to engage in commercial activity is limited.

Defining that at as a commercial venture would be a very broad interpretation. When I read some things you write, I often recall that saying, it's not what You know, it's what you can prove.

 

[csxjohn]

Unfortunately, you already are subsidizing this...

I think it is going to get worse before it gets better if it ever does get better.

Sitting on my balcony here at Tropic Shores Resort watching the ocean tide and waves flatten everything that people build in the sand(sand castle type structures) it is making me think that the timeshare industry has a sand foundation.

As more and more resorts are being built the older ones are becoming less desirable. That coupled with the aging of the owners I see this all washing away in the future.

None of us want to hear it but more and more people are walking away from their ownership and it is costing us remaining owners more and more to make up for the loss of that income. Now the MFs are increasing and more people will want out.

We are just sitting here waiting for that wave to wash it all away. It may not happen this year or in the next few but if we keep looking the other way and don't come up with a plan to stop it, that wave will be here.

We can say we don't want to pay for the non payers but we are doing it now and will continue to do so until a solution is found or that wave washes our units away.


I'm also beginning to realize that my health may soon make it impossible for me to drive or travel to enjoy vacations in the future. What will I do then? I know I won't keep paying MFs on things I can't use. If I can't drive the car, it will go, if I can't physically maintain my property, it will go, and if I can't travel at all, the TSs will go. If I can't sell them or give them away I will find a way to get away from them. You don't think I'll sell the car, move into an apartment and keep the TSs do you? The OP found a way and so will I.

I don't have a solution to this problem, I hope someone finds one soon. My family will not accept the timeshares when I pass so if I go while I still own, no problem. Don't worry though, I'm not jumping off this 11th floor balcony to get away from my TSs.

 

[timeos2]

Defining that at as a commercial venture would be a very broad interpretation. When I read some things you write, I often recall that saying, it's not what You know, it's what you can prove.

Have your Internet searches exposed you to the fact that if an Association sells more than 50 weeks in a year they are required to file a full sales disclosure? That is the 400+ page document that Developers sweat over and is not inexpensive to create and file. If an Association sells 50 weeks or more they effectively become a developer and take on all sorts of new (and likely unwanted not to mention costly) obligations.

Nothing is ever as easy as an outside view makes it appear. And of course we all know that if it's on the Internet it is a verified fact. Sadly the real world demands that Associations, Developers and you and I abide by the legal requirements and not the nirvana the Internet and other sources may envision. Until that changes the true facts are that many of the proposed "solutions" to the minority of owners who want to be released without repercussions from a contract they willingly accepted and enjoyed simply cannot be utilized. Feel free to propose changes to the laws and regulations so that they can be - it may be a slight bit of uphill climb to achieve. Good luck.

 

[ccwu]

Timeshares are not so gloomy per ARDA.

http://www.arda.org/arda/news-information/default.aspx?id=2708

 

[bogey21]

I'm also beginning to realize that my health may soon make it impossible for me to drive or travel to enjoy vacations in the future. What will I do then? I know I won't keep paying MFs on things I can't use. If I can't drive the car, it will go, if I can't physically maintain my property, it will go, and if I can't travel at all, the TSs will go. If I can't sell them or give them away I will find a way to get away from them. You don't think I'll sell the car, move into an apartment and keep the TSs do you? The OP found a way and so will I.

This is pretty much what happened to me. I saw the writing on the wall and decided that the day was coming that I would no longer be able to use my Weeks. So I went into an "orderly dispose" mode. It took almost 3 years but I managed to unload 6 of my 7 Weeks. The one I didn't dump (I transferred it to my Son) is a ski Week in Colorado that he uses. My point is that disposing of a TS "portfolio" is not an instantaneous thing. It takes time and planning.

George

George

 

[gnorth16]

At what point can the HOA take the usage for a specific year and rent it our to recover MF's?

Even if they recover some of the MF's, it is better than letting it sit empty.

 

[timeos2]

At what point can the HOA take the usage for a specific year and rent it our to recover MF's?

Even if they recover some of the MF's, it is better than letting it sit empty.

It depends on the State rules and the exact collection policy of each resort. But normally it's within 30-90 days of the ownership becoming past due in a given billing cycle. There is usually a notice requirement which can be easily met with an annual policy notification to all owners as part of the billing.

Renting by the Association of delinquent time is a key part of proper collection procedures.

 

[e.bram]

If the unit is rented, the delinquent owners has to get credit for the rental less reasonable fees.