Feedback please! (bad rental?)

[learnalot]

Can she argue as you posted and maybe win at court? Sure! Does that make it right? Not to me. Let's just leave at that....

I agree with this.

 

[ace2000]

I still believe there was not a verbal agreement about a "no cancellation policy". Yumdrey even stated that the renter set the pay terms. As a renter, I doubt she said "I know I can't cancel". Yumdrey also said she never actually sent the agreement terms.

Because of it being commonplace around TUG that there are no refunds, I agree that the $178 should be accepted and end this ordeal, but I'm not so sure that a judge would feel the same way with the information we have been provided with at this point.

That's the whole point... there's a 'legal' side of this one and an 'ethical' side or in other words... just doing the right thing. Sometimes the two can be opposed to each other. Legally, Jennifer probably has a potential winning case, because it comes down she said vs. she said. However, that doesn't make it right, and Jennifer is not the kind of person I'd want to interact with on any transaction.

And what really matters in this transaction is what Paypal decides, forget about the courts. I highly doubt either party will continue with their threat of taking legal action after Paypal makes their decision, it won't be worth it. One of them is going to end up with the full $400, and I'll say it again... it will probably be Jennifer, because Paypal almost always takes the buyer's side in a dispute.

 

[Ridewithme38]

I think its as reasonable to accept that forever didn't think the deposit was non-refundable as it is that Yum thought that everyone knows that deposits are non-refundable

can you really fault anyone in this case...sure it went further then it should have...but thats what happens on internet forums...little seeds of doubt grow into big piles of..*CENSORED*

 

[SueDonJ]

The one and only time we ever went the timeshare rental route was years ago, a DVC Points rental through the disboards. It was the first time for the DVC owner, too, and we were equally nervous. We talked on the phone a few times to get more comfortable and then used a template contract that was recommended by the site. The terms on that contract included a "no refunds" policy but made an exception - if we cancelled and the owner was able to rent the existing reservation for the same amount or more, we would get a refund of what we'd paid.

I think that's way more reasonable than the "no refunds ever" policy that you all seem to be in favor of, and I think it goes a long way toward making the rental process less risky for those who trust owners to do the right thing.

Gotta say, this thread only reinforces my thought that the risks with renting timeshares, for all parties, are simply not worth whatever income or savings you can generate.

 

[e.bram]

I think that small claims courts would side with Yumday. The judge always looks for compromise and will usually rule against those who refuses a reasonable settlement(which Yumday made). And they are a little looser with court rules.

 

[ampaholic]

I think its as reasonable to accept that forever didn't think the deposit was non-refundable as it is that Yum thought that everyone knows that deposits are non-refundable

can you really fault anyone in this case...sure it went further then it should have...but thats what happens on internet forums...little seeds of doubt grow into big piles of..*CENSORED*

I agree with this ...

 

[vckempson]

Jennifer, I have one simple question of you. What do you believe is the purpose of a deposit?

I can't speak for real estate as it often has special laws. I can speak to something like a private used car sale . It is "PRESUMED" to be non-refundable unless specifically stated otherwise in a written contract. Isn't a deposit meant to hold you to an agreement by forcing a loss on you if you break the agreement. What other purpose is there? It's not a rhetorical question. Even for the naysayers here, what other purpose does a deposit represent?

I also re-read several of your posts about the confirmation for the the reserved week not being for the week you were going. I asked yumdrey to send me a copy of the confirmation, just as she offered to do for any of us wanting to see it. Seeing a scanned copy, it was surprising to see that it was for the exact week you agreed to. The confirmation was issued back in April and had nothing to do with your rental, per se. She already had the exact week you wanted reserved and sent you a confirmation of just that.

If you win the paypal dispute, you should still send her $178. That's the right and moral thing to do, irrespective of whether Paypal or your relative lawyer say otherwise. Legalities don't always rise to the level of being the right and moral thing to do. For many, we answer to a higher final arbiter than the law, requiring us to go far beyond what this crazy world thinks is ok to get away with. I hope you are one of those people.

 

[brucecz]

The one and only time we ever went the timeshare rental route was years ago, a DVC Points rental through the disboards. It was the first time for the DVC owner, too, and we were equally nervous. We talked on the phone a few times to get more comfortable and then used a template contract that was recommended by the site. The terms on that contract included a "no refunds" policy but made an exception - if we cancelled and the owner was able to rent the existing reservation for the same amount or more, we would get a refund of what we'd paid.

I think that's way more reasonable than the "no refunds ever" policy that you all seem to be in favor of, and I think it goes a long way toward making the rental process less risky for those who trust owners to do the right thing.

Gotta say, this thread only reinforces my thought that the risks with renting timeshares, for all parties, are simply not worth whatever income or savings you can generate.

I respectfully disagree. Without a written a no cancellation policy I would have more work for less pay on rentals if the renter does not honor their word. I will no longer accept that risk. Would you as a owner? Not if you do not want you pocket picked by those who would not honor their word.

So if you were the owner who does rentals and the renter wants to back out, what do you feel would be a fair amount if you had cancelled 4 ads and then had to pay again to to relist them again and the time it takes to repost the ads ?

Would you eat those new ad costs and not want to get paid for the extra work involved?

Do you work for free?

Lets say it was a prime holiday week reserved 6 months before the check in and then the renter wants out less than 14 days before check in and you could have rented out 4 other times 6 to 1 months if the week had not supposedly been rented.

no cancellation policyIMHO the printed terms have to be fair for both and protect both.

The reason that most of the owners have a no cancellation policy is we have learned a leason in regards to last minute cancellations.

Fool me once on your last minute cancellation request, shame on you. Fool me twince on a last minute cancellation, shame on me.

Simply a lot of the last minute cancellations requests from new customers are not due to last minute problems but someone trying to take advange of last minute discounts from someone else.


Bruce

 

[sungandjudy]

I think its as reasonable to accept that forever didn't think the deposit was non-refundable as it is that Yum thought that everyone knows that deposits are non-refundable

can you really fault anyone in this case...sure it went further then it should have...but thats what happens on internet forums...little seeds of doubt grow into big piles of..*CENSORED*

Reading OP's original post, I believe she knows exactly that her deposits are non-refundable.

 

[foreverloves]

Since she was TUG member for a year and contributed numerous posts, I think she knows the accepted rental terms for a timeshare. Can she argue as you posted and may be win at court? Sure! Does that make it right? Not to me. Let's just leave at that....

Just saw this at random, but how would I know this? I own. I've never rented. I go by what a seller tells me. When I was a leasing manager, I was only able to keep what I was entitled to.

There's an awful lot of "well, you should 'know' how it 'normally' is" or " 'Everyone' does it 'this' way". I don't get that. I really don't.

This seller should not have lied about refunding me - she did.

This seller should have provided the documents to prove a loss. How do I know what the heck she rented it for? She didn't provide it.

But the bottom, bottom line is, you are only entitled to keep anyone's money if the buyer has agreed that a deposit can be retained as LIQUIDATED DAMAGES.

For the record, I offered to split her loss with her. If she lost $200 bux, I'd have split that, plus pay her paypal fees, pending proof of the loss, of course. Some can say 'oh you should pay it all', but I'm sorry. I don't HAVE to make her whole, unless we had an agreement that said I had to (writing, email, verbal even!) - but I offered to split it. Hey, you take a hit for not having things in writing and never telling me you were keeping the cash, and I'll take a hit too.

She refused that. Her first answer was, "If I give you proof of my loss, are you taking the $178?" (What does THAT have to do with it???) and then followed up with, (basically) "Never mind - I'm not giving you anything. Nice talking to you."

Hmmm.

She threatened lawyers - gave the ADDRESS of someone in Washington DC. Hmm. In court, you'd have to prove the loss...?

But who needs court? Why did she bring stupid lawyer talk into it?

Don't know.

The owner resold the unit to someone else. I don't know why she took a loss on a 3 bedroom in Hilton Head. I don't care if it was the day before check in. That's high season. Taking a loss is baffling to me. And, to date, unproven.

If I had signed an agreement that said I was responsible for the whole thing, or that money would retained, - hell! even if she had said this in email!! - I wouldn't BE HERE RIGHT NOW.

If the seller had decided to TELL ME FIRST that I was LOSING ALL OF MY MONEY, I would have GLADLY helped her find a tenant to pay full price.

Yesterday, I signed up to take a CLEP exam for college.

Before I gave them my payment, I had to click on a check box that said that my $25 fee was NON REFUNDABLE.

If I don't take the test, I don't get my money back.

I know this.

It's not hard.

I was told ahead of time - no surprises!

The concept stands. It's really not any harder than that. Let your buyer know your terms ahead of time, and if they back out, you are protected.

 

[rickandcindy23]

The concept stands. It's really not any harder than that. Let your buyer know your terms ahead of time, and if they back out, you are protected.

You should have asked the terms, if you didn't know them.

I agree with Bruce. This was a last-minute rental, and the OP sought the dates Yumdrey had. It's not like this reservation was foisted upon Jennifer without any interest.

Our daughter's no refund policy is 50%, 60 days out, then at 60 days, 100% in full; < 60 days payment is due in full for last-minute rentals. She has been kind enough to give a partial refund, when something comes up like this situation, but she rarely gives back in full. The refund is only to keep the customer for future rentals, and even then, her clients sometimes don't even appreciate the partial refund. The contract states no refunds. People often question the contract, and she says, "You were supposed to read the contract, not just sign it." She has a huge explanation on her email signature.

She incurs expenses of guest fees, and most people want their names on the reservations well ahead of time. Those cost $99 for Wyndham, less or zero for other companies. And then there is her time.

 

[foreverloves]

Isn't it obvious that the OP just wanted to find support from this board to back out of the agreement? If it were me, I would rule in favor of the owner.

Isn't it obvious that your posts are ill-informed, caustic, and needlessly shrill? Since *I'M* the OP, allow me to enlighten you by stating, unequivocally, that I don't require an internet forum to 'find support' to do anything you suggest. Clear cut rental terms solve problems like this, not uninformed, cretinous posts like yours. Your armchair psychoanalysis falls woefully short. I don't mind disagreement and I don't have to be right all of the time, but please don't try to boil down a (semi) complicated issue with watered-down Oprah-speak about 'support' or whatever.

 

[timeflies]

.Again I would rent from Yumdrey but there is no way I would do any kind of business with Foreverloves.

 

[rickandcindy23]

Isn't it obvious that your posts are ill-informed, caustic, and needlessly shrill? Since *I'M* the OP, allow me to enlighten you by stating, unequivocally, that I don't require an internet forum to 'find support' to do anything you suggest. Clear cut rental terms solve problems like this, not uninformed, cretinous posts like yours. Your armchair psychoanalysis falls woefully short. I don't mind disagreement and I don't have to be right all of the time, but please don't try to boil down a (semi) complicated issue with watered-down Oprah-speak about 'support' or whatever.

Whoa, I am shocked by your indignation, and your attack on a very respected TUG member. I don't think anyone is more respected than BB.

I guess Yumdrey could have sent back your $400, if someone else offered more money for the rental of the week. This could have happened, if Yumdrey was dishonest and didn't stand by his/her word, and then would you say you had a verbal agreement? It's really about you and your losses and not about anyone else.

Think about your reaction to the above situation, if you can be at all sympathetic with anyone but yourself.

 

[vacationhopeful]

Isn't it obvious that your posts are ill-informed, caustic, and needlessly shrill? Since *I'M* the OP, allow me to enlighten you by stating, unequivocally, that I don't require an internet forum to 'find support' to do anything you suggest. Clear cut rental terms solve problems like this, not uninformed, cretinous posts like yours. Your armchair psychoanalysis falls woefully short. I don't mind disagreement and I don't have to be right all of the time, but please don't try to boil down a (semi) complicated issue with watered-down Oprah-speak about 'support' or whatever.

Amazing, the shell-shock and confused rentor with a broken foot (or was it a leg to some), can communicate so very well, clear, and concise in this post was not that inexpereinced housewife trying to go on the family beach vacation. Shrill is perhaps a very interesting term you have labeled on a member of this forum who does not EVER responsed like you have to any poster.

Look in the mirror!

You are my very first and only person that I am blocking. Goodbye!

 

[heathpack]

Jennifer, I would suggest that you stop & take a step back before you continue posting here. I have to say that for awhile you had my sympathy. You broke your leg and could not travel in a timeframe that was so short relative to the verbal agreement to rent that the paperwork had not even been signed yet. I also am of the mindset that your deposit is nonrefundable when renting a TS, but I can see in your individual case why you might think/hope otherwise, you were really still in the process of securing the rental.

However, then you came to TUG and did a number of pretty bad things. One, in this thread, you stated that the week secured was a different week than you needed which turned out to be untrue. Then two, you suggested the whole thing might be a scam, you had not heard back from your rentor. But you did not mention that you rentor was a 4-year member with nearly 2000 posts. You knew your rentor was out of the country in a situation that made it hard for her to communicate. The likelihood of your rentor never showing up on TUG again was remote. So now you came to her house and openly disparaged her. Of course that is going to move things in an acrimonious direction and you have to accept that you are the one who moved things that way. Third, you opened the PayPal dispute, which now means (I assume) that you two can't just come to a settlement on your own. And fourth, you have shown zero sympathy to rentor who turned out to have a much bigger crisis than you did- sorry but deceased father trumps broken leg by a big margin. Maybe part of the reason she had to rent at a loss is that she has a lot to deal with since her father passed and she doesn't have the time to devote to renting the week out right now. Remember, you agreed to rent it & then backed out, you are the one creating more work for rentor right when her father has passed away suddenly. I (and I guess many other TUGGERS) would think more highly of you if you recognized any of these things, but you seem very focused on being right in the letter of the law here and I'm sorry but the negative manner in which you are portraying yourself in this matter is not worth $400 IMO.

Now I don't think Yumdry is blameless in all this- I have found it very hard to follow all of what she's saying, I have the impression English is not her native tongue and the communication during this whole mess have been poor on both ends. I also think if you all were in the middle of a transaction, it would have been very reasonable for you to hope to get a quick email - " father passed away unexpectedly, will be out of country for 4 days & hard to reach, don't worry I have your week for you". That would have been really helpful but I'm not sure I would personally have had the presence of mind to do so if I were in Yumdreys shoes.

On the whole, Yumdry has turned out to be way more in the right than you are. I would suggest you consider again that YOU scuttled the deal and are ultimately the genesis of the problem. Food for thought, you are a big girl and can decide what you say next here on the TUG forum. It just would be nice to hear a little bit of you taking responsibility for this situation and a consequent conciliatory tone.

H

 

[brucecz]

Isn't it obvious that your posts are ill-informed, caustic, and needlessly shrill? Since *I'M* the OP, allow me to enlighten you by stating, unequivocally, that I don't require an internet forum to 'find support' to do anything you suggest. Clear cut rental terms solve problems like this, not uninformed, cretinous posts like yours. Your armchair psychoanalysis falls woefully short. I don't mind disagreement and I don't have to be right all of the time, but please don't try to boil down a (semi) complicated issue with watered-down Oprah-speak about 'support' or whatever.

When you were a leasing manager, did you use a written agreement for your leases?

Bruce

 

[vckempson]

But the bottom, bottom line is, you are only entitled to keep anyone's money if the buyer has agreed that a deposit can be retained as LIQUIDATED DAMAGES.

This one little statement is what the entire disagreement is about. All the rest is smoke and mirrors.

Do you even know what liquidated damages are? That's when you get to keep the entire deposit, EVEN IF there aren't really any damages. So yes, you are correct, yumdrey can't keep the deposit if she isn't out any money.

And yes, you are correct that the money is refundable if it's not in writing; BUT ONLY to the extent that yumdrey is not out any money. The deposit, whether detailed in writing or not, is there to cover any damages in the event that you breach the contract, which you did. That is the default legal purpose for a deposit, unless you, the depositor, get something to the contrary in writing. Ethically, morally and legally, you owe her the money she's out as a result of you breaching the contract.

Can't you reach a settlement with Yumdrey for that and drop the paypal dispute? There's a chance you can both safe face a bit here.

 

[sungandjudy]

Jennifer,
In my eyes you've lost some credibility because of your 'misinformations".
First you stated that there was confirmation to the date that you wanted. Then you come back later that it wasn't for the right date. (Here, I gave you the benefit of doubt and believed you.) Then later, we found from rentor that date was in fact correct and until now you give no explanation for this.
Now, you are focusing on written agreement and legality of transaction (ie. there is none and therefore, I am not responsible for anything.) You also claim that you didn't know that the deposits are non-refundable. The thing is, I am not sure at this point whether you are telling the truth or not at this point. I think other members feel the same way.

 

[sungandjudy]

Jennifer, I would suggest that you stop & take a step back before you continue posting here. I have to say that for awhile you had my sympathy. You broke your leg and could not travel in a timeframe that was so short relative to the verbal agreement to rent that the paperwork had not even been signed yet. I also am of the mindset that your deposit is nonrefundable when renting a TS, but I can see in your individual case why you might think/hope otherwise, you were really still in the process of securing the rental.

However, then you came to TUG and did a number of pretty bad things. One, in this thread, you stated that the week secured was a different week than you needed which turned out to be untrue. Then two, you suggested the whole thing might be a scam, you had not heard back from your rentor. But you did not mention that you rentor was a 4-year member with nearly 2000 posts. You knew your rentor was out of the country in a situation that made it hard for her to communicate. The likelihood of your rentor never showing up on TUG again was remote. So now you came to her house and openly disparaged her. Of course that is going to move things in an acrimonious direction and you have to accept that you are the one who moved things that way. Third, you opened the PayPal dispute, which now means (I assume) that you two can't just come to a settlement on your own. And fourth, you have shown zero sympathy to rentor who turned out to have a much bigger crisis than you did- sorry but deceased father trumps broken leg by a big margin. Maybe part of the reason she had to rent at a loss is that she has a lot to deal with since her father passed and she doesn't have the time to devote to renting the week out right now. Remember, you agreed to rent it & then backed out, you are the one creating more work for rentor right when her father has passed away suddenly. I (and I guess many other TUGGERS) would think more highly of you if you recognized any of these things, but you seem very focused on being right in the letter of the law here and I'm sorry but the negative manner in which you are portraying yourself in this matter is not worth $400 IMO.

Now I don't think Yumdry is blameless in all this- I have found it very hard to follow all of what she's saying, I have the impression English is not her native tongue and the communication during this whole mess have been poor on both ends. I also think if you all were in the middle of a transaction, it would have been very reasonable for you to hope to get a quick email - " father passed away unexpectedly, will be out of country for 4 days & hard to reach, don't worry I have your week for you". That would have been really helpful but I'm not sure I would personally have had the presence of mind to do so if I were in Yumdreys shoes.

On the whole, Yumdry has turned out to be way more in the right than you are. I would suggest you consider again that YOU scuttled the deal and are ultimately the genesis of the problem. Food for thought, you are a big girl and can decide what you say next here on the TUG forum. It just would be nice to hear a little bit of you taking responsibility for this situation and a consequent conciliatory tone.

H

Very well said.

 

[ace2000]

Clear cut rental terms solve problems like this, not uninformed, cretinous posts like yours. Your armchair psychoanalysis falls woefully short.

Jennifer, I know several on this thread planted this seed in your head and gave you the guilt-free out that you mention again here... and you took that train of thought and ran with it. Which is what I've had a problem with the whole time.

Next, some suggested that this was some kind of scam... and you appeared to like that, because you said nothing to set the story straight, even though you knew it wasn't a scam.

Then others suggested that you file a paypal dispute... again, you ran with that.

It still comes down to what's right and wrong.

I have a couple of questions (that I've asked previously and remain unanswered)...

Jennifer - what's the purpose of a deposit and why did you think you were paying it to yumdrey in the first place?

And this question is for Jennifer or yumdrey... what was the reason or justification given for Paypal dispute? That should be interesting.

 

[ace2000]

I have the impression English is not her native tongue and the communication during this whole mess have been poor on both ends.

Overall, I really have a lot of respect for your overall post and agree with 90% of it.

But, why does everyone keep saying this? I think that she has communicated very well on this thread. What is the part that you feel that Jennifer misunderstood because of a language barrier in this matter? It's my belief that Jennifer knew why she was paying the deposit and is trying to strong arm yumdrey to get her money back. I find this thinking about a language barrier kind of patronizing myself.

If you just condense all this nonsense down to the basics, it comes down to Jennifer paid a deposit, backed out of the deal, and wants to get her full deposit back (or at least $300 of it). I just feel like everyone is giving Jennifer way too much rope here.

Please don't take offense...

 

[rickandcindy23]

Jennifer - what's the purpose of a deposit and why did you think you were paying it to yumdrey in the first place?

The deposit was to hold the week for your use.

But if Yumdrey found someone else and said, "I have someone who is going to pay me 100% of the amount upfront and am returning your $400," you would have been angry (had you not broken your foot and planned to go on that trip).

So then you would be saying, "I paid a deposit for you to hold the week for me."

 

[sail27bill]

I usually rent timeshares to and from friends without a rental agreement. If anything, this thread has made me realize that maybe this is not a good idea anymore (and my husband is an attorney so I should know better).

FWIW, I canceled my trip to Harborside 90 days out in 2009 because of a family situation. I had an acquaintance who offered to rent it but wouldn't even give a deposit to hold. She kept saying "Don't worry, I'm good for it", but wanted me to put the confirmation in her name. Wasn't happening. When after the third request with no money, I dropped it into Interval. Needless to say she was very upset. She felt we had an agreement. If she had given me any money, we would have as far as I am concerned. I was only asking for the maintenace fee for the 2bedroom so it was a good deal. Anyway, long story short, she was mad, but this year I am going to Marriott Oceanwatch next month on the Interval trade where I really wanted to stay so it worked out for me.

My take is, once you have a deposit made, that shows intent, and thus an agreement. Although I have broken two toes, very painful, so I probably would have been sympathetic to the situation. I hope that both of you can work something out. In my opinion, it isn't a lot of money, so bringing lawyers in can get very expensive.

Anita

 

[ace2000]

I usually rent timeshares to and from friends without a rental agreement. If anything, this thread has made me realize that maybe this is not a good idea anymore (and my husband is an attorney so I should know better).

FWIW, I canceled my trip to Harborside 90 days out in 2009 because of a family situation. I had an acquaintance who offered to rent it but wouldn't even give a deposit to hold. She kept saying "Don't worry, I'm good for it", but wanted me to put the confirmation in her name. Wasn't happening. When after the third request with no money, I dropped it into Interval. Needless to say she was very upset. She felt we had an agreement. If she had given me any money, we would have as far as I am concerned. I was only asking for the maintenace fee for the 2bedroom so it was a good deal. Anyway, long story short, she was mad, but this year I am going to Marriott Oceanwatch next month on the Interval trade where I really wanted to stay so it worked out for me.

My take is, once you have a deposit made, that shows intent, and thus an agreement. Although I have broken two toes, very painful, so I probably would have been sympathetic to the situation. I hope that both of you can work something out. In my opinion, it isn't a lot of money, so bringing lawyers in can get very expensive.

Anita

We could start a whole new thread about letting friends or family members use your unit. You mentioned that they were paying you for it... however, I've invited family members on our timeshare trips before, and it's amazing how wishy-washy the whole process works. Because usually we don't ask them to pay... it means nothing for them to back out at the last minute... or leave your plans completely up in the air because they go back and forth on their schedule plans. I feel that working with friends and family through the process requires a lot of patience and communication!