Bluegreen stopping owners from renting?

[geekette]

Charles,
Thank you so much for finding this ( I would've tried but I don't have a copy of the by-laws).

I'm not going to list the other and much larger companies out there that are using Bluegreen for their entire inventory base as I'm sure most of you know them. But, would this individual have a discrimination (or similiar) type lawsuit available to them if BG does not enforce this ruling upon the other companies mega-renting BG points?

That being said, what would you recommend we tell this client? Fight them, try to force them to buy or take back, or dump them like hotcakes in the resale market until they get down to an inventory level that is for personal use?

We don't know which companies/individuals also received a cease and desist order, so I would not assume that your client is the only one.

I don't see that discrimination enters into it as I doubt that BG has any inkling as to the gender, nationality, religion, sexual preference, creed, etc., of your client, and even if they did, I'm not sure that discrimination even applies in such as case as this.

BG sold points for personal use. The points are being used in unintended ways. What discrimination?

Perhaps your client went more overboard on copyright infringement and is the first to get a letter due to most blatant foul? We're just not in a position to know who else is holding a letter like that and in no way would I assume that Only One Letter is being sent.

 

[JeffBrown]

We're just not in a position to know who else is holding a letter like that and in no way would I assume that Only One Letter is being sent.

Good point, part of the reason I posted this was to try and determine if others were out there.

As for discrimination, probably the wrong word to use. My logic here was that if BG is only enforcing on "certain" mega-renters and not all then BG would have to come up with their definition of what determines commercial use and if this persons activities were less than other companies that it was not enforced upon, BG would then have to use that definition against all or none.

On a personal note, I am disgusted at this whole scenario. Throughout the years I've rented timeshares on numerous occasions, all were marketed through my wife's travel agency and we've never had an issue. I've personally been in presentations at Bluegreen and other companies where Rent was discussed as a viable option. I'm beginning to think that this client has a very good case against BG on all of her initial purchases at Big Cedar as during those years they were pitching the Rent possibility very heavily. I'm hoping she can find some of those old documents and bring a new light onto this.

Thanks to all for your input.

 

[SueDonJ]

We don't know which companies/individuals also received a cease and desist order, so I would not assume that your client is the only one.

I don't see that discrimination enters into it as I doubt that BG has any inkling as to the gender, nationality, religion, sexual preference, creed, etc., of your client, and even if they did, I'm not sure that discrimination even applies in such as case as this.

BG sold points for personal use. The points are being used in unintended ways. What discrimination?

Perhaps your client went more overboard on copyright infringement and is the first to get a letter due to most blatant foul? We're just not in a position to know who else is holding a letter like that and in no way would I assume that Only One Letter is being sent.

If the BG documents are similar to Marriott's in any ways other than those already mentioned (which I'd assume they are,) like TUGger bnoble says it simply makes no difference if or how many other similar letters might be out there. They're not required to enforce all of the t&c restrictions upon every owner equally. Think about it - they'd never be able to enforce any of the rules if they're required to enforce them upon every violator at the same instance in the same manner.

It's maddening, frustrating as all get out knowing that others are doing the same unchallenged. I'm guessing that the person to whom this letter was sent is at least a little bit frightened but she can't be blamed for being angry at the unfairness of it, either. In her shoes I'd at least mention to the attorney that she knows of other owners engaged in similar activities, though, because it might help prove a charge of BG being indifferent up until now.

 

[geekette]

Good point, part of the reason I posted this was to try and determine if others were out there.

As for discrimination, probably the wrong word to use. My logic here was that if BG is only enforcing on "certain" mega-renters and not all then BG would have to come up with their definition of what determines commercial use and if this persons activities were less than other companies that it was not enforced upon, BG would then have to use that definition against all or none.

On a personal note, I am disgusted at this whole scenario. Throughout the years I've rented timeshares on numerous occasions, all were marketed through my wife's travel agency and we've never had an issue. I've personally been in presentations at Bluegreen and other companies where Rent was discussed as a viable option. I'm beginning to think that this client has a very good case against BG on all of her initial purchases at Big Cedar as during those years they were pitching the Rent possibility very heavily. I'm hoping she can find some of those old documents and bring a new light onto this.

Thanks to all for your input.

I doubt she'll find it in writing beyond the multi-site. Sales will say anything, are still telling people to rent out to cover maint. Doesn't matter.

Further, the letter points out another issue - the gobbling up of desired weeks to put up for rent damages the other owners' ability to book anything. That's not a new situation, but recently I'd say that the frustration level has increased as the number of commercial outlets for ressies has increased. It has escalated rapidly in the past year or so.

I applaud BG for once again considering The Entire Ownership Base and not just the mega owners, not just the tiny owners. Over time, BG acts in the best interest of most of its owners. And plenty of owners, new and long term, are unhappy at being unable to use points due to mega owners holding the reservations for cash instead AND being able to waitlist to get those reservations they hold for ransom- er, Rent, nudging out the little/med/lg guys. It's a heavily slanted playing field where persons such as your client hold a very clear advantage over the majority of the owners.

Surely your client could understand a simple owner trying to make a reservation only to find nothing available time and again, only to find what they want is being offered for $ elsewhere. Having already paid their maint, why would they want to use cash to pay your client vs points already paid for? And why would BG stand by and let owners become more and more unhappy by this when the original intent of the program was to Use Your Points For Personal Use?

[I mostly travel offseason so do not have a problem using my points, just trying to explain what I understand to be the gripes of others that may have led to this letter your client received].

 

[CharlesS]

I'm beginning to think that this client has a very good case against BG on all of her initial purchases at Big Cedar as during those years they were pitching the Rent possibility very heavily. I'm hoping she can find some of those old documents and bring a new light onto this.

Jeff,

When she purchased the timeshares she agreed to abide by the By-Laws, etc. The By-Laws clearly state that you can't rent. We also signed that we know that only the written documentation is valid and that verbal statements have no authority. No case.

Charles

 

[chriskre]

Jeff,

Bluegreen is trying to stop megarenting in other resorts as well.

I don't own points but do own in BG and am aware that they are trying to limit renting.

Apparently they don't want the competition. :ignore:

 

[CharlesS]

Bluegreen is trying to stop megarenting in other resorts as well. Apparently they don't want the competition.

We do not know Bluegreen's motive. Perhaps it is as geekette stated above.

Charles

 

[chriskre]

We do not know Bluegreen's motive. Perhaps it is as geekette stated above.

Charles

I hope you are right.

 

[gnorth16]

Waiting for Bocabum99 to chime in on this one...I'm sure he won't be happy...

 

[JudyS]

...In the July 19, 1993 By-Laws we find in Article IV, Section 4.18 the following:

"4.18 Guest Use of Accommodations and Facilities. An Owner Member, including Owner Member, may allow guests, including relatives and friends, to occupy an Accommodation during his or her period of occupancy, by giving written notice of the same to the Vacation Club Managing Entity at least thirty (30) before the start of such occupancy, provided that no Owner Member, including Converting Owner Member may charge any individual, or other entity, for the occupancy of the Accommodations. An Owner Member authorizing occupancy by any guest, shall be liable for any damages caused by, or other charges incurred by, any such guest."...

That does sound like renting is prohibited. Oddly enough, Bluegreen didn't include that passage in their "cease-and-desist" letter.

Many timeshare companies have very unclear rules surrounding rental of reservations. DVC's governing docs forbid "commercial activity" but explicitly make reference to members being able to rent reservations. For a long time, I and many other DVC owners took this to mean that running a business out of a DVC unit was forbidden (I'm sure Disney doesn't want people operating souvenir shops in their DVC condos) but that renting out DVC units was OK. Then, a few years back, DVC said that only a limited number of guest reservations would be allowed per owner per year, thereby preventing people from doing large numbers of rentals. (The number I heard was 20 GCs per year, not 10 as previously stated on this thread. I only own enough DVC points for a measly one-bedroom week way off-season, so I have no personal experience with doing large numbers of DVC rentals.)

Another resort where I own is also having a controversy about owners renting their units. Although owners have fractional deeds allowing multiple reservations per year, the condo docs say only one rental a year is allowed. However, this rule was never enforced, and until recently even most of the Board didn't know about it. At that resort, the Board seems willing to amend the condo docs to allow for more renting, but doing so will require a vote of the owners.

 

[Jennie]

I wonder what the limitations are on the number of renters RCI books into the BG units that they do not even own nor have paid any maintenance fees on. RCI members deposit their BG weeks. RCI slips them out the back door and rents them to the general public-non timeshare owners, often times at prices well below what the owners paid in maintenance fees. And surely BG receives a financial piece of the action.

This type of activity severely reduces the number of desirable weeks available to BG Points members. Oh, unless they are willing to pay an annual RCI membership fee, plus a confirmation fee IF RCI "finds" the week they are requesting.

Perhaps the attorney for the BG owner who received the "cease" letter can demand to see the contract signed with RCI re: their rental rights. Surely an owner who has paid to purchase and maintain a property should have equal or better rights than an outside company that siphons off weeks that should be
available to OWNERS ONLY through exchange or perhaps as "last call" inventory.

 

[BocaBum99]

This topic is going to take a lot of time to discuss fully and I am in the midst of a large project that won't allow me to provide all of my thoughts. For now, I will offer the following and I'll chime in as I can.

Bluegreen's intentions are good ones. I know because I have had several discussions with them on the topic of rentals over the past year. As Club manager, they need to make sure that it operates effectively for everyone. When the financial meltdown happened in 2008, resale prices tanked and that created the situation where lots of owners acquired substantial numbers of points to do rentals. This helped the Club because those packages were picked up and maintenance fees were paid. With the Club experiencing significant delinquencies and defaults, this helped the Club.

However, it also created an imbalance as lots of prime weeks were booked and put up for rent as the size and scope of rentals grew with the availability of cheap resale points.

The dilemma for Bluegreen is that they have encouraged rentals for longer than the 9 years I have been doing timesharing. Bluegreen used to have a points rental program that owners used to put their points and reservations for rent. When they terminated it, I created a rental service just for Bluegreen owners that provided a similar full service operation that Bluegreen did. I did it with their support and at their suggestion. They even approved my website and provided a link to it from the Bluegreen owners website. It is the website that is quoted earlier in this thread.

Bluegreen really is trying to do what's best for all owners. I provided many suggestions for what they could do. I do not know exactly what they are going to do, but I do believe it will entail rules changes that will create more balance. I do think that Geekette is right in that Bluegreen probably does not want to eliminate rentals completely because it has always been a part of the Bluegreen ownership culture. That's part of why I got so involved with it from the start. However, Bluegreen must take some action. I know that others have received similar letters over the past year because they contacted me to ask what they should do.

As a recommendation to the OP, I would just have their client call Bluegreen directly and ask them what they would like for them to do. Ask specifically what problems they are causing with their rental program and seek a middle ground that helps Bluegreen with their bigger needs to seek balance in the Club. Agree to some restrictions on what you they do and maybe Bluegreen will allow them to continue in some way. Bluegreen is and always has been that type of company.

Good luck.

 

[BocaBum99]

Rentals are allowed and part of the Bluegreen Owner Culture

This is from the website today:

Bluegreen Rentals
1. How do I put my Points reservation up for rent?
2. Is there a fee associated with putting my reservation up for rent?
3. How far in advance do I need to place my reservation up for rent?
4. Can I place a Bonus Time reservation up for rent?
5. How can I check the status of my rental listing?
6. What happens when my reserved accommodation is rented?
7. What happens if my reserved accommodation isn’t rented?
8. What if I want to cancel or change my rental contract?
9. What happens if the renter damages the unit while using my reservation?


1. How do I put my Points reservation up for rent?
Bluegreen does not offer an owner rental program. However, you are welcome to list your Points reservation(s) with an independent vacation rental company:

Contact the vacation rental company of your choosing to familiarize yourself with their listing process, requirements and policies.
Call Bluegreen at 800.456.CLUB (2582) and make a Points reservation.
List your reservation with the vacation rental company you choose, following their procedures.
After you have listed the reservation with the vacation rental company, be sure to provide Bluegreen with the renter’s name(s) when you receive that information, as it is required for check-in at the resort. In addition, a valid government-issued form of photo identification must be presented by all guests at time of check-in. The name on the reservation must match the name on the ID of the guest who is checking in. It is each owner’s responsibility to provide Bluegreen with the renter’s name by calling 800.456.CLUB (2582) at least 48 hours prior to arrival. This policy is strictly enforced, and any guest who arrives at the resort without a photo ID that matches the name on the reservation will not be permitted to check in.
Back to top
2. Is there a fee associated with putting my reservation up for rent?
Depending upon the rental company you select, there may be a fee associated with listing your reservation, or a commission deducted from your proceeds. Please contact your rental company for details on any fees. Bluegreen does not charge a fee to owners who rent with an independent vacation rental company.

Back to top
3. How far in advance do I need to place my reservation up for rent?
People tend to make vacation plans ahead of time, so it’s best to allow plenty of time for your reserved accommodation to be rented. Keep in mind that Bluegreen and the vacation rental company you choose do not guarantee that your reserved accommodation will be rented.

Back to top
4. Can I place a Bonus Time reservation up for rent?
Bonus Time reservations are for owner use only and cannot be rented. Renters or guests are not permitted to occupy a Bonus Time reservation unless the owner is present.

Back to top
5. How can I check the status of my rental listing?
Please contact your vacation rental company to check the status of your rental listing. Bluegreen does not have access to this information.

Back to top
6. What happens when my reserved accommodation is rented?
As soon as a renter has been secured for your reservation, you must provide the renter’s name to Bluegreen by calling 800.456.CLUB (2582). Check with your rental company to determine their notification process and other procedures.

Back to top
7. What happens if my reserved accommodation isn’t rented?
Your rental company may or may not allow you to cancel your rental contract, possibly for a fee, if your reservation is not rented. They can provide you with specific information regarding their policies for unrented reservations. If your rental company allows you to cancel the contract, you may cancel your Points reservation in accordance with the standard Bluegreen Vacation Club reservation cancellation guidelines. A cancellation fee or forfeiture of Points may apply.

Back to top
8. What if I want to cancel or change my rental contract?
Please call your vacation rental company regarding its policies for cancelling or changing the rental listing. Be mindful of any contractual obligations regarding your rental with an independent company.

Back to top
9. What happens if the renter damages the unit while using my reservation?
Bluegreen collects a credit card for damages and incidentals from all owners and guests at the time of check-in. The renter is held responsible for any damage to the unit while staying at the resort. Any damages will be charged to the credit card that was provided at the time of check-in.

However, if the resort is unable to collect damages from the renter upon check out due to a declined credit card or other reason, the owner’s Bluegreen account may be blocked until payment for the damage can be collected from either the owner or renter. Therefore, we encourage you to be careful when screening and choosing potential renters to avoid such an inconvenience.

 

[BocaBum99]

I wonder what the limitations are on the number of renters RCI books into the BG units that they do not even own nor have paid any maintenance fees on. RCI members deposit their BG weeks. RCI slips them out the back door and rents them to the general public-non timeshare owners, often times at prices well below what the owners paid in maintenance fees. And surely BG receives a financial piece of the action.

This type of activity severely reduces the number of desirable weeks available to BG Points members. Oh, unless they are willing to pay an annual RCI membership fee, plus a confirmation fee IF RCI "finds" the week they are requesting.

Perhaps the attorney for the BG owner who received the "cease" letter can demand to see the contract signed with RCI re: their rental rights. Surely an owner who has paid to purchase and maintain a property should have equal or better rights than an outside company that siphons off weeks that should be
available to OWNERS ONLY through exchange or perhaps as "last call" inventory.

Let's keep RCI out of this. Bluegreen is NOT RCI and RCI has nothing to do with this case.

The job of Bluegreen is to ensure that the reservation system offers reasonable access to owners and partners and utilization is effective amongst owners and other stakeholders.

Bluegreen has affliation agreements where Bluegreen decides what RCI gets. And, in the case of direct exchange partners, they can only book reservations less than 8 months from check in meaning owners have had ample to do book reservations with top priority. What a partner takes matters not because someone who paid maintenance fees got something for what they thought was a fair trade and they used something not considered prime to the Club.

 

[BocaBum99]

Jeff,

When she purchased the timeshares she agreed to abide by the By-Laws, etc. The By-Laws clearly state that you can't rent. We also signed that we know that only the written documentation is valid and that verbal statements have no authority. No case.

Charles

But the owner website says they can.

What is in the bylaws is a rule that was put in place 20 years ago before Bluegreen was actually involved in the Club. Every public action they have taken with the owner population INCLUDING TODAY indicates rentals are fine.

Is an owner more likely to read the bylaws in the multisite public offering statement or the FAQ on the owner website that says that they can put their points up for rent?

Also, technically, that rule suggests that no guests can be placed onto reservations unless the Club manager is given 30-days written notice. If you want to be technical about it, they should enforce that rule as well. Sure, systems today make it easy to add a guest much closer to check in. A reasonable person would conclude that adding a guest without 30-days written notice is reasonable and that rule is simply outdated. But, you cannot technically enforce one part of rule and then not enforce the other part.

This creates a very sticky legal liability for Bluegreen. If you are correct that it is against the bylaws for Bluegreen to allow owner rentals and receive compensation while at the same time they authorized and promoted in on the owner website and people took action based on instructions from the FAQ, then liability is created.

 

[CharlesS]

Is an owner more likely to read the bylaws in the multisite public offering statement or the FAQ on the owner website that says that they can put their points up for rent?

This creates a very sticky legal liability for Bluegreen. If you are correct that it is against the bylaws for Bluegreen to allow owner rentals and receive compensation while at the same time they authorized and promoted in on the owner website and people took action based on instructions from the FAQ, then liability is created.

Jim,

Personally I think owners should read all of the rules they agreed to. But what I think does not matter. What does matter is that the OP asked for something in writing saying that one cannot rent. That I easily found in the amended By-Laws since I have previously read them. (nap time anyone) To date, the BGVC has chosen to not change that by-law. Corporate BG (the managing entity for the Vacation Club) is violating Vacation Club rules. I anticipate that there will be a change in the by-laws shortly.

On a personal note, you do provide a very valuable service for we owners.

Charles

 

[Carolinian]

I can't speak as to Bluegreen, but the language is similar to what was in Club Sunterra/Diamond. There is a TUGgers who used to be quite active here who had accumulated a similarly large number of points and was running a rental business using them. Diamond shut him down; with disastrous financial consequences for him.

That language seems to address whether the timeshare was sold as an investment or not. It seems a big stretch to say that it prohibits renting. Misconstruing that language the way these developers seem to be, might be deemed and unfair or deceptive business practice by the developer. If I were the recipient of such a letter, I would take it to a lawyer specializing in consumer protection law in the appropriate state. You may well have a much stronger legal hand than the developer if push comes to shove.

It is just this sort of crap that makes me never want to own ANY points based timeshare. With a fixed week, a developer cannot play these games with you.

 

[Carolinian]

Spot on! I doubt they sent RCI one of these letters, and RCI is probably the biggest renter of Bluegreen units of them all.

I wonder what the limitations are on the number of renters RCI books into the BG units that they do not even own nor have paid any maintenance fees on. RCI members deposit their BG weeks. RCI slips them out the back door and rents them to the general public-non timeshare owners, often times at prices well below what the owners paid in maintenance fees. And surely BG receives a financial piece of the action.

This type of activity severely reduces the number of desirable weeks available to BG Points members. Oh, unless they are willing to pay an annual RCI membership fee, plus a confirmation fee IF RCI "finds" the week they are requesting.

Perhaps the attorney for the BG owner who received the "cease" letter can demand to see the contract signed with RCI re: their rental rights. Surely an owner who has paid to purchase and maintain a property should have equal or better rights than an outside company that siphons off weeks that should be
available to OWNERS ONLY through exchange or perhaps as "last call" inventory.

 

[Carolinian]

Many states have laws regulating sales of investments. When deeded ownership of timeshare is involved, that is not an issue as deeded real property is usually not covered under those laws. Points, however, is a grey area, and the language that was cited in the letter from BG appears to me to be language designed to be certain that they do not fall afoul of the laws regulating sales of investments, and NOT directed at whether it is permissable to rent ones points or weeks reserved from points.

This language you cite here, however, gives them a stronger legal argument to prohibit renting. It is curious that they did not cite it in their letter. That may speak to the fact that they are only going after SOME rentals, not all rentals, and trying to split the baby that way may get them into a whole heck of a lot of trouble with Unfair or Deceptive Business Practices in consumer protection law.

Jeff,

You asked for it.

In the same Multi-Site referred to earlier, we find the By-Laws of the Bluegreen Vacation Club. In the July 19, 1993 By-Laws we find in Article IV, Section 4.18 the following:

"4.18 Guest Use of Accommodations and Facilities. An Owner Member, including Owner Member, may allow guests, including relatives and friends, to occupy an Accommodation during his or her period of occupancy, by giving written notice of the same to the Vacation Club Managing Entity at least thirty (30) before the start of such occupancy, provided that no Owner Member, including Converting Owner Member may charge any individual, or other entity, for the occupancy of the Accommodations. An Owner Member authorizing occupancy by any guest, shall be liable for any damages caused by, or other charges incurred by, any such guest."

I have checked the Amendments to the By-Laws dated May 5, 1998, December 22, 1999, April 30, 2003, April 18, 2005, and September 26, 2006 and did not find any changes to Section 4.18.

It would appear to me that the statement "provided that no Owner Member, including Converting Owner Member may charge any individual, or other entity, for the occupancy of the Accommodations." is a clear statement of rental policy, ie., you may rent but you may not charge.

Charles

 

[BocaBum99]

Jim,

Personally I think owners should read all of the rules they agreed to. But what I think does not matter. What does matter is that the OP asked for something in writing saying that one cannot rent. That I easily found in the amended By-Laws since I have previously read them. (nap time anyone) To date, the BGVC has chosen to not change that by-law. Corporate BG (the managing entity for the Vacation Club) is violating Vacation Club rules. I anticipate that there will be a change in the by-laws shortly.

On a personal note, you do provide a very valuable service for we owners.

Charles

Exactly. By violating Vacation Club bylaws and encouraging such behavior, they create liability. If we could ever get a quorum, they could change the bylaws.

Bluegreen is not and has never been against the idea of renting. In fact, they have always supported it as I have demonstrated. What they need to do now is implement new rules that put the Club back into balance. I am in favor of that.

Regarding rentals, the new Choice Hotels program is all about rentals. Choice Hotels role is specifically to rent Bluegreen Vacation Club inventory to the general public on their website.

 

[BocaBum99]

Many states have laws regulating sales of investments. When deeded ownership of timeshare is involved, that is not an issue as deeded real property is usually not covered under those laws. Points, however, is a grey area, and the language that was cited in the letter from BG appears to me to be language designed to be certain that they do not fall afoul of the laws regulating sales of investments, and NOT directed at whether it is permissable to rent ones points or weeks reserved from points.

This language you cite here, however, gives them a stronger legal argument to prohibit renting. It is curious that they did not cite it in their letter. That may speak to the fact that they are only going after SOME rentals, not all rentals, and trying to split the baby that way may get them into a whole heck of a lot of trouble with Unfair or Deceptive Business Practices in consumer protection law.

I am completely in agreement with your assessment.

 

[BocaBum99]

Several years ago, Wyndham and WorldMark had to address the issue of rentals. Even though they are both managed by Wyndham, they ended up taking very different paths to address the issue of rentals.

WorldMark actually tried to change the bylaws to make "commercial use" of reservations against the rules. It was adopted by the board and by the next board meeting, they withdrew the prohibition saying that they did not have the systems to implement the rule. Apparently, they decided that they could not simply cancel reservations or determine which transactions across the board were commercial or not. It created too much liability and not setting clear rules that applied to everyone was too much risk.

Wyndham too a different path. Instead of prohibiting rentals, they just started changing the rules to make it ever increasingly more difficult and less profitable to do. That path worked a lot better and is still a work in progress.

At this point, we shall see what Bluegreen decides to do. I do expect rules changes either in the bylaws and/or the way the rules work for booking reservations. There is a real problem and it needs to be addressed in some reasonable way that doesn't get BG into hot water.

 

[MOXJO7282]

Personally I think the crux of the issue is the definition of "commercial".

In a court of law beyond the contract words, the judge is looking at intent and I unfortunately believe from this aspect BG can prove the intent was a commercial enterprise with all the websites and auctions that were taking place.

And unlike Marriott who only make minimal reference to commercial activity BG makes several references in their contract that gives them a stronger position in court.

The only thing I question is if they are singling out select individuals and if so that could be their undoing.

As for RCI I'm sure they have a different contract with them that allows for what they do but again in a court of law is that fair?

I wouldn't even be surprised if RCI is behind this, compelling BG to try to eliminate their competition.

My gut tells me if you had the pockets to challenge them and if you went underground somewhat you could win but does the OP's "friend" want to go down that road?

 

[JeffBrown]

Bluegreen's response

Yesterday afternoon, after Charles provided me with the by-law section declaring no rentals allowed I emailed the client with this advice.

Ok, if you've been reading TUG then you know that they do not allow rent to be collected. This however can actually be gotten around by selling credits to be used at your website. Those credits equal money than can be used for the rights to stay at a resort. However, that is a tricky thing that although I've seen work in the past is not high on my list.

I've read and re-read this letter explicitly and nothing in the letter you received states "You cannot rent" it merely states BG doesn't guarantee you an income from it. The reference to personal usage in paragraph 3 is the author's not something from BG purchase contracts.

I think that the first thing that you should do is to call the person who sent you this letter. Discuss this with them and ask to see a copy of the exact place on your initial purchases that you were told (in writing) that you could NOT rent your units. Advise that person that until you are shown exactly wherein that is stated that you will be continuing your venture but changing all copyrighted materials. One of your main goals here is to get them to commit to honoring all current reservations that have been made.

Now, if you've read tug, one of them finally found where it is stated but it is highly unlikely that BG even knows where that is stated and your next step is to force the issue with them in comparison to any of the other mega-renters of bluegreen points.

I would not recommend dumping the timeshares immediately. I would recommend finding ALL of the initial documents you received during the sales pitch and purchase at Big Cedar. If you know salesmans' names let me know and I can start rounding them up (or may not need to) as I know how most of them in town pitch anyway. Anything we can do to prove that you were NOT TOLD you could not rent will help you.

To clarify that last sentence, from 1999-2004, the sales centers here in the Branson area were actually pitching a "guaranteed rental" pitch which was in writing, that document is what I've been frantically trying to find.

So, the client called BG and here is her response back to me (this is posted with her permission).

I read your email and said a prayer prior to the call to BG counsel! Wala... it worked. Jeremy Speigel, Legal Counsel was extremely pleasant and discussed a new rule which will take place in 30 days, each owner up to 100 reservations at one time. For example, March 6-March 6 2014 etc. He was drafting the letter just before my call. I indicated my concerns with my "personal BG" account and the direction I need to go. He said that they were really trying to minimize the "commercial renting" with BG and hopefully this rule will minimize enough to be substantial with no need for further "limitations" or action from BG. He indicated 3X's he appreciated my call and to call with any further questions or concerns. He indicated he was after a few big BG renters. Since receiving the letter, I have closed website and will be limiting EBAY sales etc. That is okay with me!

Again, thank you for your support and encouragement! I would have NEVER called had it NOT been for your encouraging email. I am a Speech Pathologist for a School District and immediately, took the time to make this call. So very thankful I did it! Thank you Jeff!

So, that should wrap up this string pretty well, I appreciate everyone's help and ideas.

Jeff Brown
Sumday Vacations

 

[akp]

deleted

deleted

Given the summary posted above, I figured I'd delete my comments and let this die out.