Create a LLC Business to Get Rid of Timeshare?

[Carolinian]

Are you able and willing to name the points club(s) involved in these examples please?

With Stouts Hill, it was Sunterra. With Outer Banks Beach Club I and II, it was the Peppertree / Equivest points club.

 

[Carolinian]

If you want a timeshare with those attributes, did you know you can buy one?

The world's oldest timeshare developer, Hapimag, has always had an exit strategy where after a set number of years, they would on request buy your timeshare back at a set percentage of the then-current developer price.

Of course, one thing that also means is that you cannot buy Hapimag resale for a song.

I think what is really needed is some kind of legal procedure, which would probably be the result of a law passed in some state, that would make it possible for the owner who decides he does not want it any more, to get rid of it very quickly, and not be on the hook for any more of these maintenance fees.

People who have the attitude of Mr. Cole here, don't seem to take into account that people's circumstances can change, maybe they lose their job, maybe they lose a bunch of value of their retirement because they were a client of Bernie Maddow, or maybe their health declines and they have medical bills on top of which they can't use it like they could in their younger days, and can't see paying MFs for something they don't or can't use, or there could be any number of other reasons why it is no longer such a great deal for someone.

Maybe there could be a law saying that after you have had it a certain number of years (I'd say no more than 10), if you don't want it any more, then you can give it back to the HOA or whoever, and they have to take it, and you can't be legally held responsible for any more expenses of it.

Of course, any resort could write something like this into the contract without having to wait to get a law passed, so maybe some of them might read this and start thinking about something like that. Because this business of people wanting to get rid of these things and being stuck with these maintenance fees that they can't afford, is just a great big problem, and leads to more problems such as these resale scams, and somebody needs to just solve it once and for all, maybe with something like I have suggested here.

In case anyone is interested, I was in that situation myself, and I found out that they had foreclosed on me (without notifying me), but nobody has ever tried to sue me over it. I don't know if it went on my credit rating or not.

 

[Carolinian]

As to unpaid m/f's, foreclosure suits are brought all the time. With a well managed resort, these are brought while there is only one year's m/f outstanding and it is simply not worth pursuing a deficiency judgment on only one year's m/f. However, those foreclosures can be and often are picked up on credit reports and they can destroy your credit for 7 years. A foreclosure is one of the worst things you can have on a credit report.

The issue as to the fraudulent transfers and push back by HOA's is a relatively new one, and we will just have to see how it plays out. I suspect that if warnings work to halt these practices, that is as far as it will go, but if not these management companies will select some test cases to collect some scalps to use as examples for others. If that still does not work, then, I suspect such lawsuits will become as standard as foreclosures for unpaid m/f's are now.

Yes - I would have to ask - have there ever been any cases where anybody has actually been sued over these unpaid maintenance fees? And what was the result of that? I get the impression that there is a lot of scare-speculation about what could or would happen, and that it has probably not ever really happened (yet). Some concrete examples would be very helpful.

 

[ronparise]

If you want a timeshare with those attributes, did you know you can buy one?

The world's oldest timeshare developer, Hapimag, has always had an exit strategy where after a set number of years, they would on request buy your timeshare back at a set percentage of the then-current developer price.

Of course, one thing that also means is that you cannot buy Hapimag resale for a song.

Thanks for this reference

There is an article here on TUG that gives more info about this company

Two features I find most interesting are:

1) The buy back provision

Hapimag is unique in that it has a share buy back program. All shareholders are allowed to sell their shares back to Hapimag after four years at 82% of its current value (Hapimag charges 18% for administration buy back costs). The current price (1999) of a Hapimag share is Sfr 8.600 (appr. $6.000). The administration costs to buy a share are 2% extra

2) they split maintenance fees

Each owner of a Hapimag share has an obligation to pay an annual for maintenance fee of Sfr 249 (approx. $175) for each share owned. In addition, Hapimag charges approximately $175 per use week (4 persons) for service costs of cleaning, heating, linen, etc.

And heres why its different from what we are used to...This is a quote from the guy that runs the company

"Members really are basically holding Hapimag company stock. Another essential difference is that we’re a non-profit organization that builds or buys properties for its shareholders and therefore we focus on a long term relationship with our customers. Other developers, on the other hand, may lose their interest in the project after the shares are sold."

 

[timeos2]

You can't be forced to buy and no one can be forced to take it

I think what is really needed is some kind of legal procedure, which would probably be the result of a law passed in some state, that would make it possible for the owner who decides he does not want it any more, to get rid of it very quickly, and not be on the hook for any more of these maintenance fees.

People who have the attitude of Mr. Cole here, don't seem to take into account that people's circumstances can change, maybe they lose their job, maybe they lose a bunch of value of their retirement because they were a client of Bernie Maddow, or maybe their health declines and they have medical bills on top of which they can't use it like they could in their younger days, and can't see paying MFs for something they don't or can't use, or there could be any number of other reasons why it is no longer such a great deal for someone.

Maybe there could be a law saying that after you have had it a certain number of years (I'd say no more than 10), if you don't want it any more, then you can give it back to the HOA or whoever, and they have to take it, and you can't be legally held responsible for any more expenses of it.

Of course, any resort could write something like this into the contract without having to wait to get a law passed, so maybe some of them might read this and start thinking about something like that. Because this business of people wanting to get rid of these things and being stuck with these maintenance fees that they can't afford, is just a great big problem, and leads to more problems such as these resale scams, and somebody needs to just solve it once and for all, maybe with something like I have suggested here.

In case anyone is interested, I was in that situation myself, and I found out that they had foreclosed on me (without notifying me), but nobody has ever tried to sue me over it. I don't know if it went on my credit rating or not.

All very well and good. And I have an 8 year old car that is really getting expensive to keep. Where is the law that says I get to return it to Ford and they must pay to keep it safe, insured and running properly until time ends? Or my house - it also seems to be more costly lately and my income simply hasn't grown, in fact has shrunk, so I guess there is a law that says I get to give it to the builder (hey - it's only been 10 years or so) and THEY must pay the taxes, the upkeep, utilities, etc. After all, they built it and now I can no longer afford it!

No one is forced to buy a timeshare and no one can be forced to take it when the current owner's circumstances change. Like anything else you decide you wish to own it is up to you to properly dispose of it when you no longer want or can't afford it. Just because thee are fees involved doesn't change a thing. Legally you own it, are responsible for the costs and need to find a new taker to relieve that burden. Simply saying "my situation changed" is NOT the problem or responsibility of the owners, developer or Association. They did what they have to - you have to handle your part on your own.

If you are so worried about it then don't buy or take a long term lease, like DVC, that has an absolute end date when your purchase and obligations end. Of course that too has a 40+ year life & obligation - so if your situation changes should that be waived as well? It makes no sense. A contract or a purchase would mean nothing if you could always demand to back out when it suited your needs. What about the needs of all the others involved? A one sided contract isn't even enforceable. Both sides have to get a value.

None of this would be happening if the boom hadn't gone bust. That isn't the Associations, the developer, management or even your fault. But each has to deal with it as best they can and that includes no easy out or free pass for anyone involved. Deal with it as the rest of the country has (exempting those who were "too big to fail" of course. Timeshare's didn't make that cut).

Financial changes or scams like Madoff's (sp?) occur. It is extremely unfortunate for those caught in it but if it had succeeded in returning the promised gains would those riches be used to finance others or would those lucky folks pocketed those gains for themselves? Would you write a law to make them take over the timeshares/homes/cars from those who didn't invest in the plan? There are names for that - income redistribution and socialism - last I heard that wasn't the way our economy was meant to work. We take risks every day. Some work out out, others fail. Either way it is up to the individual to handle the consequences.

Looking for an automatic way out of decisions that went bad isn't going to happen.

 

[richardm]

Best argument that I've seen yet on the side that associations and/or developers should not offer deedback programs. Very compelling.

 

[fishingguy]

casual observation

If you've spent any time methodically looking at the filings that get recorded at the county level, it is often easy to see the pattern of recorded paper that indicated foreclosed timeshares. From a big picture perspective, you can sometimes determine what resorts are more aggressive at it, when compared to others.

I was paging through the online records in Sevier County, TN recently to get a feel for this -- I'd estimate I went through 2500 TS records spanning 2 months of activity. Westgate, Wyndham, and Amber affiliated resorts appeared to be very aggressive during that period. [You'll typically see a court filing, followed by various types of deeds and other filings to the resort and maybe eventually to a 3rd party; a result of foreclosure activity on the same unit(s).] Of course you'll also see the efforts from an on-going retail sale presence in Gatlinburg/Pigeon Forge as well.

Other counties that I've looked at in the past were Orange County, FL and Stone County, MO. -- both of which have a huge number of foreclosures being processed all the time. [Not surprising given the number of TS in these over-developed locations.] You can even sometimes see where a final package of TSs were eventually transferred to a liquidator, re-seller or a rental company for final dispo.

So my take is that some resorts are more aggressive/proficient than others in trying to stem the problems from deadbeats. The better ones don't waste a lot of time in these cases; as they seemingly work to protect the rest of the owners; ...probably out of necessity. An Aside: I've periodically wondered if the infrastructure could handle much more of this activity at some counties too.

 

[ronparise]

All very well and good. And I have an 8 year old car that is really getting expensive to keep. ........ After all, they built it and now I can no longer afford it!

Simply saying "my situation changed" is NOT the problem or responsibility of the owners, developer or Association.



None of this would be happening if the boom hadn't gone bust. That isn't the Associations, the developer, management or even your fault. But each has to deal with it

There are names for that - income redistribution and socialism - last I heard that wasn't the way our economy was meant to work.

Looking for an automatic way out of decisions that went bad isn't going to happen.

Timeos2

A couple of things in your post caught my eye:

Regarding your 8 year old car....No one says that ford has to take it back if you dont want it anymore, but But Ford through their dealer network does provide used car lots where they will help you sell it, and in most areas there are independent used car lots. And if it is junk there are junk yards to take it off your hands....In the timeshare industry PCCs are our junk yard

If my situation changes, it is a problem for the association...saying that it isnt dosent make it less of a problem....If I dont pay my fair share to run the resorts where I own it is a problem for the other owners. and they do have to deal with it

The busted boom is not the only reason that folks are not paying their maintenance fees. Im 65 years old, Sometime in the next 50 years or so, Im going to stop paying my fees. The associations ought to expect that and have plans in place to deal with that shortfall in their budget.


Income redistribution and socialism - last I heard that wasn't the way our economy was meant to work. Thats not exactly true...A progressive income tax has been part of our economy for some time... Real estate has always worked best in a community. (a commune) where for example the bigger and better houses pay more in the way of property taxes than I do for my little shack...but we all get to use the same roads to drive home....The guy at the end of the street pays the same tax I do for my home but he gets to use an extra 1000 feet of road that I never drive on...Is that fair, or is it income redistribution and socialism...Call it what you will...its the way the system works. There will community problems that need community solutions. Call it socialism if you will, and perhaps you see socialism as a bad thing, I dont... Its the way our society works. And its the way a timeshare community works..ie solving any problems that come up, for the benefit of all the owners.


Looking for an automatic way out of decisions that went bad isn't going to happen. I agree as long as folks like yourself are in management positions....Ive always thought good management involved anticipating problems and developing solutions to be implemented when or if they happen. ..automaticly...

When a timeshare POA's only plan for dealing with dead or otherwise non-paying owners is foreclosure...that, to me, is poor management. And is all the justification I need for not paying my management fee...


Lets face it In the case of a lot of defaulting owners the association will get the deeds back. Foreclosure is just one way to do it. Its expensive and time consuming. Why not develop other ways to get back control.... reorganize as a co-op rather than as a condo, accept deedbacks, and develop a rental and resale program for example . ...Making the deed back easy or automatic will be a lot better for all of us than the forclosure process. You may not like a socialistic approach like that but its the way timeshares work...ie they are managed for the benefit of all the owners

 

[timeos2]

Income redistribution and socialism - last I heard that wasn't the way our economy was meant to work. Thats not exactly true...A progressive income tax has been part of our economy for some time... Real estate has always worked best in a community. (a commune) where for example the bigger and better houses pay more in the way of property taxes than I do for my little shack...but we all get to use the same roads to drive home....The guy at the end of the street pays the same tax I do for my home but he gets to use an extra 1000 feet of road that I never drive on...Is that fair, or is it income redistribution and socialism...Call it what you will...its the way the system works. There will community problems that need community solutions. Call it socialism if you will, and perhaps you see socialism as a bad thing, I dont... Its the way our society works. And its the way a timeshare community works..ie solving any problems that come up, for the benefit of all the owners.


Looking for an automatic way out of decisions that went bad isn't going to happen. I agree as long as folks like yourself are in management positions....Ive always thought good management involved anticipating problems and developing solutions to be implemented when or if they happen. ..automaticly...

When a timeshare POA's only plan for dealing with dead or otherwise non-paying owners is foreclosure...that, to me, is poor management. And is all the justification I need for not paying my management fee...


Lets face it In the case of a lot of defaulting owners the association will get the deeds back. Foreclosure is just one way to do it. Its expensive and time consuming. Why not develop other ways to get back control.... reorganize as a co-op rather than as a condo, accept deedbacks, and develop a rental and resale program for example . ...Making the deed back easy or automatic will be a lot better for all of us than the forclosure process. You may not like a socialistic approach like that but its the way timeshares work...ie they are managed for the benefit of all the owners

There IS a community solution to timeshare/condo operation & maintenance. It's called the Association. The very group you are trying to argue must accept a problem they did not create nor are equipped to handle. Of course they should plan for foreclosures/defaults etc - and they do if well managed. But good management would end if they simply said "give us YOUR problem condo/week - we the remaining owners will willingly take over YOUR problem ownership, pay more to handle it while you walk away unscathed".

What happens when the 10,000 owners remaining are paying more then opt to get out & 5,000 are left paying? 2,000? 1,000? They still have the "right" to give back what the Association never owned! The Association is chartered to operate and maintain the place, not take over others payment problems or to be a reseller.

Yes a well run Association will EVERYTHING they can - without excessive cost to the paying majority - to minimize defaults and delinquencies. There are many ways, some best not broadcast by the group involved to prevent a "bank run" scenario, to handle the inevitable non-payment. Each and every one of the options needs to be used as best they can. Remember too that by law (and common sense - an attribute often lacking when money is involved) each owner must be treated the same. A benefit (such as the ability to turn in an ownership at no penalty/cost) must be then offered to EVERY other owner. Impossible for any Association to do and survive. If that many really want out then use the system in place to vote to end the resort/Association. That is what you agree to when you buy - not to be able to "turn it in" when you tire of it.

Those that feel there needs to be a right to dump an ownership to a group (the Association) that neither wants it nor is set up to handle it flies in the face of all tenets of property ownership and obligations. We see a problem - and I'm in no way denying that one exists - but want an easy, no to low cost way to be absolved of it because we know it exists. That is never likely to occur as it is not good public policy and would potentially apply to full ownership condos and more - not an intended target.

We should be concentrating instead on creating that "used car" market to create a place to sell off unwanted ownerships. We should also use a continued push to inform the masses of the potential deals a "used" timeshare truly can represent vs the tens of thousands paid for retail with virtually no value - or even an albatross - when you no longer need/want/can afford it. There are, as Carolinian pointed out, systems that DO allow for such a buy back plan. But they are not sold for $1 on eBay - you still pay one way or another.

Associations that blindly ignore the potential or existing problems are on a death track. Those that are too seasonal or dated to survive deserve to be disbanded. There will be some tough choices, costs and legal battles as things shake out. But simply saying you or I as an owner have a right to simply walk away from a purchase and commitment we made by purchasing and joining a resort isn't any answer at all - it is kicking the can down the road to the next guy. That doesn't cut it no matter how lofty the goal or who does the kicking and is no answer to the problem at all. Keep trying.

 

[AwayWeGo]

Times Change. Circumstances Change. Nothing Stays The Same. That's Life.

Im 65 years old, Sometime in the next 50 years or so, Im going to stop paying my fees.

I'm pushing 70. Several times in recent years I have decided I didn't want to keep timeshares that I owned. So I sold'm (once) & gave'm away (2 times + 2 more pending).

Arguably, that was more trouble than abandoning the unwanted timeshares, though not necessarily if the respective HOAs had gone after me aggressively.

However that may be, in taking on the rights & privileges of timeshare ownership, I also took on the obligations. Willingly. With my eyes open. With an understanding that when circumstances change, as inevitably they do 1 way or another, the obligation is on me to do the right thing.

It could be pointed out that because I feel that way, I thought far enough ahead at the outset to form at least an idea of practical exit strategies. That's true.

My son & daughter-in-law are on our timeshare deeds side by side with The Chief Of Staff & Me, JTWROS so that when we assume room temperature, the timeshares belong to them. We didn't have to do that, but we did -- not just as a contingency for when we depart this mortal coil, but also so the kids can more easily enjoy use of the timeshares with us while we are still breathing air. (So far, they use most of the points & the TPUs. The Chief Of Staff & I do most of the Last Calls & Instant Exchanges.)

When we decided it was time to unload our no longer loved timeshares, we did what we had to do at the time to end our ownership responsibly, not so much out of a sense of responsibility (although that's part of it), but mainly so as to avoid any entanglements with bill collectors, process servers, attorneys, courts, credit reporting agencies, etc.

Others may do it differently according to their own preferences & priorities & values. I have no quarrel with that, other than objecting when other timeshare owners' unpaid bills jack up my maintenance fees.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

 

[timeos2]

Lets face it In the case of a lot of defaulting owners the association will get the deeds back. Foreclosure is just one way to do it. Its expensive and time consuming. Why not develop other ways to get back control.... reorganize as a co-op rather than as a condo, accept deedbacks, and develop a rental and resale program for example . ...Making the deed back easy or automatic will be a lot better for all of us than the forclosure process. You may not like a socialistic approach like that but its the way timeshares work...ie they are managed for the benefit of all the owners

A well managed resort will do all the above except automatically accepting deed backs UNLESS, to the benefit of all owners, they have a ready market to quickly turn them around. Few resorts enjoy that demand 52 weeks a year. If not they are breaking the fiduciary duty they have to those owners as it is not their charter to handle others mistakes. They have enough to do simply operating, collecting fees and maintaining the property as they are required to do.

Taking on an additional and potentially crippling obligation to the paying owners to cover those that don't or won't pay isn't sound operation of any Association. The well run Association does everything possible to minimize - not welcome - deed backs/foreclosures and does everything under the sun to make the ownerships a value and to collect what is due from the owners. Every owner. If they want out they need to find a taker willing to accept the obligation or deal with the likely severe consequences of defaulting on an obligation. Such is financial reality.

 

[rrlongwell]

... We should be concentrating instead on creating that "used car" market to create a place to sell off unwanted ownerships. We should also use a continued push to inform the masses of the potential deals a "used" timeshare truly can represent vs the tens of thousands paid for retail with virtually no value - or even an albatross - when you no longer need/want/can afford it ...

There is merit in this approach. Interested owners, owner/professionals, and/or interested Homeowners Association could make this happen. Initially, the Homeowners Associations would have the ball on a modified business model of the pay to get rid of it. They could offer that service. The going rate appears to be about $3,000 dollars plus paid off maintenance fees. They could offer a take-back if they were paid the fee directly all done at closing, no up-front fees.

If the resort is a high demand resort, then they properties can be rented. A couple of Wyndham managed resorts have indicated that they turn their re-possed timeshares over to Wyndham to rent out on their behalf.

 

[AwayWeGo]

You Typed A Mouthful.

We should be concentrating instead on creating that "used car" market to create a place to sell off unwanted ownerships. We should also use a continued push to inform the masses of the potential deals a "used" timeshare truly can represent vs the tens of thousands paid for retail with virtually no value - or even an albatross - when you no longer need/want/can afford it.

You are correct, sir.

We need a Timeshare Channel on cable TV, or at least a Timeshare Show on the Travel Channel -- not some extravaganza sponsored by timeshare companies flogging the glories of their full-freight timeshares, but a sensible introduction for the vacationing public to the realities of timeshares, timeshare resorts, timeshare vacationing, timeshare ownership, timeshare exchanging, the whole works.

What we really need is The TUG Channel. (Wouldn't that be something?)

We also need a whole new biz model for buying & selling timeshares.

No more high-pressure razzle-dazzle & ballyhoo for developer sales. Rather, something more along the lines of Wal-Mart.

No more $1 eBay no-reserve resales. Instead, something patterned more or less after CarMax.

I am not holding my breath waiting for any of those things.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

 

[rrlongwell]

... What we really need is The TUG Channel. (Wouldn't that be something?) ....

It can be done cheaply. Just use the Internet for the Tug Channel. The Tug Channel could intragrate re-sale/rental boards and create a board (not dissimilar to the Multi-List concept) for licensed real estate professionals that are making market in re-sales. To join, they would have to meet minimium Board Established sales practices. This feature would probably need to be established as a non-profit corporation to gain the support needed from the Timeshare world.

 

[TUGBrian]

Many existing brokers use the marketplace to post their listings...as well as use the wish list section to post requests they get from their buyers.

sadly more and more timeshares fall into the category of "not selling for enough to earn comission on".

 

[AwayWeGo]

Fee For Service.

sadly more and more timeshares fall into the category of "not selling for enough to earn comission on".

For those, a flat fee would be appropriate.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

 

[TUGBrian]

well that is how many brokers are dealing with timeshares with low selling prices...they merely charge a flat fee after the sale, vs a % of the sale price.

however a flat fee for a timeshare that may only fetch 100 bucks...isnt really worth their time or effort.

 

[AwayWeGo]

Realistic Fee Has To Be A Given, Even When Fee Costs More Than The Timeshare.

well that is how many brokers are dealing with timeshares with low selling prices...they merely charge a flat fee after the sale, vs a % of the sale price.

however a flat fee for a timeshare that may only fetch 100 bucks...isnt really worth their time or effort.

The flat fee should be based on whatever the realistic charge is for the service, irrespective of the value of the unit.

If the flat fee is $675 & the timeshare sells for $100, so be it. No problem.

For the owner, that still is greatly to be preferred over PCCs & "relief" hornswoggles, etc. -- greatly to be preferred, that is, when a legitimate flat-fee seller is able to find a legitimate $100 buyer.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

 

[equitax]

LLC for timeshare disposal

As most have pointed out this is morally wrong as it attempts to basically burn the rest of the condo owners.

Legally though, in most instances the corporate veil can be lifted if the ill intent can be proven.

Moreover, most condo rules on ts "prohibit" renting for commercial purposes am d that would be he most logical reason to put on an LLC.

Now if you could lose it in a casino somewhere that would be different!

 

[jjmanthei05]

A well managed resort will do all the above except automatically accepting deed backs UNLESS, to the benefit of all owners, they have a ready market to quickly turn them around. Few resorts enjoy that demand 52 weeks a year. If not they are breaking the fiduciary duty they have to those owners as it is not their charter to handle others mistakes. They have enough to do simply operating, collecting fees and maintaining the property as they are required to do.

Taking on an additional and potentially crippling obligation to the paying owners to cover those that don't or won't pay isn't sound operation of any Association. The well run Association does everything possible to minimize - not welcome - deed backs/foreclosures and does everything under the sun to make the ownerships a value and to collect what is due from the owners. Every owner. If they want out they need to find a taker willing to accept the obligation or deal with the likely severe consequences of defaulting on an obligation. Such is financial reality.

I think you would have to put the deed backs into 2 groups. If you can prove hardship (ala lost job, medical bills, dead, ect) that proves they have no means to pay for the timeshare then it is best for the HOA to accept the deed back instead of paying to have it foreclosed on with no chance of getting anything back from the buyer.So they would be out the foreclosure costs and the unpaid MF. For the other category of buyer who can still afford the timeshare (no hardship) but no longer wants it, require them to pay a year or 2 of MF to cover holding costs and then move the units cheaply to other owners. In either case these would be the best situation for the HOA to get those weeks into the hands of owner who actually want the weeks and would be willing to pay.

Jason

 

[timeos2]

I think you would have to put the deed backs into 2 groups. If you can prove hardship (ala lost job, medical bills, dead, ect) that proves they have no means to pay for the timeshare then it is best for the HOA to accept the deed back instead of paying to have it foreclosed on with no chance of getting anything back from the buyer.So they would be out the foreclosure costs and the unpaid MF. For the other category of buyer who can still afford the timeshare (no hardship) but no longer wants it, require them to pay a year or 2 of MF to cover holding costs and then move the units cheaply to other owners. In either case these would be the best situation for the HOA to get those weeks into the hands of owner who actually want the weeks and would be willing to pay.

Jason

That is a great plan and seems to be one way to identify those truly in need vs those who simply see an easy way out. Unfortunately the law doesn't let any Association make that type of determination. The underlying charge to any Association is that no owner can get preferential treatment - what one is offered MUST be offered to ALL or the Directors and Association is likely to find themselves on the wrong end of a successful lawsuit. Just because it would make sense doesn't mean it's legal.

The rules, regulations and laws that apply to condo's, timeshares, co-ops etc are lengthy and detailed. When you buy in you also accept all those rules and that includes the requirement to pay until you are no longer the owner. And there is NO requirement that any Association accept any properties back. That is not why they exist and the law recognizes that. If the true hardship cases really can't afford it then they have to do whatever they can to sell, give away, default - whatever it takes to handle their personal situation. The Association cannot legally bail them out unless it can also bail out every other owner.

Fair? Maybe - maybe not. But it is the law. It's what you agreed to when you bought in.

 

[rrlongwell]

Many existing brokers use the marketplace to post their listings...as well as use the wish list section to post requests they get from their buyers.

sadly more and more timeshares fall into the category of "not selling for enough to earn comission on".

Thanks for the info.

 

[ronparise]

Fair? Maybe - maybe not. But it is the law. It's what you agreed to when you bought in.

John you are truly missing the point.
What I and others here are suggesting is an approach to a problem that the association has. no one is suggesting special treatment for some

Just as you say the individual owner accepted some responsibility when they took ownership, so did the association take on a responsibility when it was formed..and that is to manage the associations business tor the benefit of all.

If I am not paying my dues the association has a duty to do domething about it..."its the law" and if they can do it cheaply and quickly or take their time and spend a lot of money; shouldnt they choose the quick and cheap approach. To do otherwise can only be described as bad management.

 

[rrlongwell]

... The Association cannot legally bail them out unless it can also bail out every other owner. Fair? Maybe - maybe not. But it is the law. It's what you agreed to when you bought in.

I am not sure, laws very by state. Also, Ron raises an outstanding point, the Association is fundamentally responsability is to act in the owners behalf in accordance with the governing documents of the Association and consist with the laws of the state they are operating in. If a financial reason for there action exists, that alone probably would justify the different treatment. Most Associations have counsel or access to counsel so the takebacks can be done in accordance with the law and governing documents.

P.S. I know of a situation where a couple of different associations did take deeds back. There were no legal actions that were taken again the person to require the person to do this. The person contacted the affected associations and they just took it back. In those cases, I am not aware of any requirement on their part to extend the same to other owners. As far as I know, it was done on a case by case basis. Also, for those Developers/Homeowners Associations that use the Right of First Refuals, the option is clearly on the holder of that right.

 

[timeos2]

I am not sure, laws very by state. Also, Ron raises an outstanding point, the Association is fundamentally responsability is to act in the owners behalf in accordance with the governing documents of the Association and consist with the laws of the state they are operating in. If a financial reason for there action exists, that alone probably would justify the different treatment. Most Associations have counsel or access to counsel so the takebacks can be done in accordance with the law and governing documents.

P.S. I know of a situation where a couple of different associations did take deeds back. There were no legal actions that were taken again the person to require the person to do this. The person contacted the affected associations and they just took it back. In those cases, I am not aware of any requirement on their part to extend the same to other owners. As far as I know, it was done on a case by case basis. Also, for those Developers/Homeowners Associations that use the Right of First Refuals, the option is clearly on the holder of that right.

Not saying it doesn't happen but it's dangerous waters. If you knew that x number of owners got to deed back but now you can't (the resort has too many and has now committed the remaining owners to paying those fees) would you feel it's fair & good? The treat all alike rule applies to every Association by common law. Great book written about Association law I've referenced before. It should be read by every owner.