I should probably not post in the middle of the night, because I am not sure I made sense up above.
Hmmm ... what am I missing here. The units are functional. Why wouldn't they continue to be functional while one unit at a time is upgraded. Effectively, this is what is happening to a small extent with building H.
I'm not saying this is cost effective use of our maintenance fees or that we can withstand this level of maintenance over time, but at least we will still be able to use the buildings that are serviceable while major maintenance in performed on a different building.
This is certainly possible. And,
for now, that's the plan. Hire a bunch of contractors etc. to repair/remediate the construction defects and subsequent damage to the buildings. The problem isn't whether or not that can happen, or even whether or not it could be done one building at a time.
The problem is that the cost of repair/remediation is large enough that it is probably not worth doing---about what the condos were worth before this was all discovered. They are not going to suddenly be worth twice what they were worth before, so IMO liquidation makes more financial sense.
For those of us who own a few timeshare weeks, that's no big deal---they were already worth less-than-zero, because people were paying closing costs and sometimes offering a year of free use to give them away. It's not like we are losing anything other than the ability to continue to pay MFs and vacation there. I will miss that, but there are other resorts in Hawaii and some of
those are also close-to-free to buy. Heck, I'd rather spend $9K each on a couple of good Marriott traders than "re-buy" my KBV weeks for $9K each. The liquidation process makes that easy--much easier than going into default, which is the other way not to "re-buy" them if for some reason the liquidation vote fails.
The whole owners, on the other hand? The are out some very real money, because the whole condos
were worth mid-six-figures, and now they aren't worth much at all.
Some of the Board members are also affiliated with Wyndham, but I don't see Wyndham being in any different position than we are. They
also probably don't want to spend $450K per condo for condos they already own. They don't really need to push anyone out, because the bad debt (i.e. owners who are not paying) has been high enough and growing that they can re-acquire deeds by foreclosure probably about as fast as they can sell them again. No one is "winning" in any of this, we are all just screwed.
In the beginning of August, the IOA filled a Motion for Summary Judgement, essentially saying: The whole owners aren't members of the IOA, therefore we don't owe them any fiduciary duty. Also, they've had a year's worth of discovery and don't have any material facts at all backing up their stated-with-no-proof allegations that the IOA was in a criminal conspiracy with the AOAO or any other defendants.
Obviously, this is the IOA's perspective and not that of the plaintiffs or the court, but as a member of the IOA I found it interesting reading. I bought a copy and uploaded it to the same Google Drive directory as the original complaint, labeled document 006.
drive.google.com
In related news, the oceanview units appear once again to be reservable for use in 2014. I don't know if they are all in F, or if one of the other two is now habitable.
