Weren't these BOD members already picked by and voted in by Wyndham? Or did Wyndham never vote their interests at the annual meetings?
That doesn't necessarily get you off the bus though. It just gets you relegated to the back of the bus. Until ownership is conveyed to someone else, you are at least still on the bus.
LOL. Come on counselor. Is that your advice?
The BOD was in place through normal elections, I would think. But if I remember reading the bylaws that @chapjim posted a few messages back for Orlando International, there was a way for the membership to replace the BOD.
My general understanding, which admittedly is probably an amalgamation of prior posts and other tidbits I've picked up over time, is that Wyndham holds a majority on the HOA BODs, though admittedly I am not sure how that actually transpires. So if the HOA BOD has five seats, Wyndham, as the developer, holds three of those five seats. If anyone can provide more color on this topic, I'm all ears so to speak.
Not sure if you're posting in jest here, but if you're not, actually, this is typically our advice here on the TUG Wyndham forum put simply. Just stop paying, especially if you own a trust-based timeshare with no deed like CWA, and there's no loan against the original purchase, just stop paying, and it likely won't even impact your credit score.
No I’m serious. I want out of my deed based owned timeshare. Wyndham refuses to take it back. Should I just stop paying until they foreclose ? What if they don’t foreclose ? I can’t just hop off the bus by pushing the stop requested tape.
I think that's about right. My Kingsgate documents were already open, and of the five listed at last year's annual meeting, two are definitely Wyndham/T+L, two are just random owners, and one I couldn't place via a google search. I would guess at an older resort where Wyndham doesn't control a voting majority of the HOA through ownership/PTVO, they're more likely to not control a voting majority of the BOT, either.
Agreed. When Wyndham terminated the deedback agreements for the impacted resort(s), they weren't therefore lying when they said there would be higher MFs and special assessments in the future if these resorts weren't closed and sold off now, while they're still relatively healthy financially and in decent condition overall. They just didn't say why that really was - they didn't share the details as to why. Wyndham knows exactly how many defaulted deedbacks they took on from these resorts every year, and they knew that without those deedback agreements in place, these resort HOAs would collapse under their own weight within a few years. While it may not have been needed per se, there is such a thing as greasing the wheels to encourage others to go along with a certain desired outcome. It's generally going to be an easier process if the HOA BOD is in full support of the desired outcome - because the HOA is the entity that interacts with the interval owners.
Deeded means a legal foreclosure process must be followed - since the deed must be foreclosed upon to take the deed back from you legally. This is a mixed bag from a reporting standpoint as I've seen it go both ways. Some folks indicate they do get dinged on their credit reports from a deeded foreclosure, others don't. With a deedless trust-based ownership like CWA, as long as the owner doesn't have a loan against the original purchase, it's been our standard recommendation to simply stop paying the MFs on the trust-based ownership- and Wyndham will simply take it back after a certain period of non-payment, as doing so doesn't require a legal foreclosure process since there is no deed involved, at least to the best of my understanding. Sure you'll still get threatening form letters and such, but ultimately, Wyndham will simply take it back. This is all embedded in the governing documents and in the T&Cs that you sign (or inherit from a resale) when becoming an owner.
Right. So I’m still on the bus.
I'm not aware of anything stopping Wyndham from doing so, other than the fact that Wyndham doesn't currently report MF payments to the credit bureaus. That said, this is where the simplicity of a trust-based ownership often means it's easier, more expedient and likely less expensive for Wyndham to simply take it back as opposed to dealing with credit bureau reporting and/or third party collections agency in the first place. From what I've gathered, there's a higher risk of credit reporting issues with deeded vs trust based ownerships. Perhaps someone else with better advice and/or actual firsthand experience will chime in here.
History tells us that today's "way out of town" will be tomorrow's "in the heart of town." Give it a few years
From what I can tell from attending a grand total of two HOA meetings, Wyndham does not have anyone actually on the board, but they are not standing too far away. I think the people on the board understand the realities of the situation and are not inclined to go against what Wyndham wants. There's also a General Manager who is an employee... but I am not sure exactly who that person works for. Also do not know if he is a General Manager for several HOA's at Shawnee. There is also an administrative person who is, I believe, an employee of Wyndham/T&L.
Your doctor doesn’t report their fees to credit bureaus either. But when you don’t pay your bills and it goes to collections, it shows up on your credit report.
My response was to the general verbiage that implied Wyndham was paying maintenance fees on essentially ALL these deedback weeks, which to me was very misleading as to the financial burden Wyndham was saddled with. In my experience, we had maybe 5-10 deedback weeks in the "sales chain" at any given time for a 30 unit association. That's not a very large burden for Wyndham to bear for the duration of the sales process. @paxsarah has demonstrated those numbers could vary significantly for another association. YMMV
Yep, that's true, my original point was that Wyndham doesn't appear to have a relationship with the credit bureaus and/or has the reporting structure set up - however after further thought - I bet they actually do have it for the loans they finance internally for developer VOI sales, unless they farm that out to a third party as well, which is entirely possible. IDK nearly as much about the internal financial mechanisms within Wyndham when compared to the IT infastructure.
I think her point was that Wyndham wasn't selling any of the deedbacks at the impacted resorts intentionally, likely for a period of many years, with the express goal of collecting enough deedbacks to obtain majority interval voting status so as to control the exit processes we're tracking today at every impacted resort. Therefore, it's a fairly reasonable conclusion that, specific to the impacted resorts, Wyndham was in fact paying MFs on a fairly sizable chunk of unsold inventory.
I'm guessing Wyndham has a pipeline to the credit bureaus for its loan reporting, because I and several other TUGgers had an issue a few years ago in which zero-balance, essentially closed loans were being reported to the credit bureaus based on resale contracts we had recently purchased. (They were the paid-off loans of the original owners of the contracts from many years ago.) That wouldn't have gone through a third party because we never actually had a loan with Wyndham.
Good info and thanks for sharing - so Wyndham does in point of fact have the ability to perform credit bureau reporting directly - even if it was in error in the instance you pointed out. Why does that not surprise me?
I don't know about Wyndham specifically, but I think the fixed deeded week cannot generally be banned from you renting it out, whereas the points programs certainly can and Wyndham does ban renting it out. There's no "availability" issue with a fixed deeded week.