First Lawsuit filed against Viking Ship LLCs / PCCs

[Rent_Share]

If, for example 20% of the weeks at the resort have been foreclosed or deeded back, the value attributable to those weeks could not be distributed to the members but must be given to another non-profit. This is an aspect of non-profit corporations law.

Since the costs of maintaining those weeks having been paid by the paying members, wouldn't the owners be entitled to a pro-rata share from the sale of those interests

 

[JudyS]

....
Some weeks are almost certain to be owned by the HOA itself, as well as cash and other assets. This is what is required to be given to another non-profit. If, for example 20% of the weeks at the resort have been foreclosed or deeded back, the value attributable to those weeks could not be distributed to the members but must be given to another non-profit. This is an aspect of non-profit corporations law.

Well, that sounds like a serious rip-off for the remaining owners, especially if they have been subsidizing those non-performing weeks for many years. Are you sure it works this way?

If it does, perhaps before terminating, the HOA could allow owners to acquire HOA-owned weeks at low cost (possibly deeded as EOY or triennial weeks if there are not enough weeks to give one to each owner). This would distribute the HOA's main asset (HOA-owned weeks) so that owners would benefit from that asset when the resort was dissolved.

 

[benyu2010]

Could we limit MF increase to 'Cost of living +/- x%' I'd feel safer in my indentured servitude if i knew they couldn't just charge anything they wanted.

Ride, you do know or believe the the CPI is a bit manipulated, right....can't go further to explain per TUG policy. The retiree and disabled vets got two years of ZERO increases couple of years ago. Did it reflect the reality from a layman's eye?

 

[VictorW]

With maintenance fees being $741 a year for one week, how does the HoA even justify that when the resort is able to rent for $75/night and is still make money?!

http://www.americana-tahoe.com/specials-packages-,packages-en.html

I would be looking for a way out too if I owned at that particular resort...

 

[Ridewithme38]

Ride, you do know or believe the the CPI is a bit manipulated, right....can't go further to explain per TUG policy. The retiree and disabled vets got two years of ZERO increases couple of years ago. Did it reflect the reality from a layman's eye?

I don't know, i just don't want to wake up one day and find i can't sell AND my MF is now $50,000 a week...I figure since we are making new laws...Lets add on about that too!

 

[vacationhopeful]

One of my favorite tales is Wyndham and fixed week foreclosed intervals.

HOA eats the MFs, HOA can rent through Extra Holidays which charges a 40% commission (and costs like credit card processing fees), Extra Holidays marks a 7 night fixed interval as RENTED even if they rent it for 1 night (removed from their rental pool), HOA pays for legal fees to file foreclosure. When new deed has HOA as owner, HOA is NOT allowed to sell the unit to either current or off the street persons => exclusive contract to sell ONLY to Wyndham WHEN Wyndham asks for inventory at $1 per deed.

Wyndham starts to pay MFs after deed is recorded and transfer (again paid by HOA) to Wyndham. Want to bet that the HOA pays the $299 recording fee twice - once to put it into the HOA's name and again, into Wyndham's entity's name?

And will most of the HOAs ever NOT be controlled by Wyndham? No, because EVERY foreclosed FIXED WEEK deed is sold to the Wyndham CWA Trust.

 

[JudyS]

I don't have a problem with deedbacks - to the developer. Under current law, they HOA's are not equipped to handle a flood of deedbacks, and remember that YOU AND I will pay the maintenance fees until they can sell them. The HOA is YOU and ME, and 5 owners selected to represent us. I am dumbfounded by the posts that want to punish the HOA - THAT'S US!!

It is wrong to put the burden on responsible owners, when the developers created these conditions in the first place.

Pass laws that made the developers responsible for an effective exit plan for owners, and everyone will be happy.

As I said, I am happy to have the developer be the one to take back the deeds, if there is a developer. But Denise, most of these troubled resorts don't have developers. At most of the resorts where I own, the developer has been gone for decades. What do owners at these resorts do?

I don't want to punish anyone. I want timeshares to work better for all owners. Something must be done to stop this problems of "shackled" owners who can't get out of their MFs, as it is severely damaging the value of timesharing for everyone. I can't see any viable alternative other than allowing unhappy owners out of their MFs. If there was a viable alternative, someone would have found it by now.

I do think forcing deedbacks or disallowing credit reporting would have to be combined with new bankruptcy laws. That way, if a resort received a "flood of deedbacks", the resort could go into bankruptcy quickly and the owners would stop paying MFs very soon.

It seems to me that there are two types of timeshare resorts -- those where weeks have value, and those where weeks don't. In the case of resorts where weeks have value, new owners could be found pretty quickly, so deedbacks wouldn't be a problem. A good example of this kind of resort is your Hawaii Westins, Denise. Isn't Westin exercising ROFR at prices up to $25,000? This suggests that there would be no problem whatsoever with finding new owners for these weeks, if some owners walked away. Or, the HOA could take its time finding new owners, to avoid flooding the market with cheap units. Again, no problem -- the HOA just rents the week for more than the MFs, which actually reduces the fees for the other owners.

The other type of resort, where weeks have no value, might end up closing. But so what? The weeks had no value, so owners haven't lost anything. If they still want a timeshare, pick one up for $1 somewhere.

High seasonal resorts are a special case. There, some owners might be upset because they lost their peak summer weeks. Still, though, I don't feel blue week owners should be stuck subsidizing peak owners forever.

 

[DeniseM]

Judy - There is always a developer - they may be long gone, but someone developed the resort, and if a law was passed, they could be held accountable for providing a viable exit plan for owners. Will this work in all cases? - probably not, but as long as the developer is in business it could be implemented, and the law could easily be applied to all resorts in active sales, and all new resorts.

It seems to me that there are two types of timeshare resorts -- those where weeks have value, and those where weeks don't. In the case of resorts where weeks have value, new owners could be found pretty quickly, so deedbacks wouldn't be a problem.

You are forgetting about beautiful resorts in over-built places. Should SVR go out of business because Florida is overbuilt? It is a great resort - but if you opened the flood gate of deed backs, you would just punish the owners who want to own there.

 

[K2Quick]

Okay. Let's say you own a Blue week in Minnesota. Week 3. Maintenance fees are $900 for a 2br unit. Red weeks in the summer have the same $900 assessment. You look at rentals in the area, they go for $100 per week for January. Please tell me your plan to get someone to take this unit that does not involve a scam.

Just give me your theory for how you would approach the problem and come up with a target buyer.

This type of example is what Ken McKelvey gave me which is making timeshares insolvent and that HOAs have put their head in the sand and will not try to solve it.

While the HOA might have its head in the sand, it's more a case of the developer structuring the original contracts to make maintenance fees the same across seasons. In fact, it's the developer's fault for selling those seasons to begin with. The only fair way for seasonal resorts to retain value for everyone and not have resulting mass waves of defaults is for the high season owners to subsidize the low season owners or just not to sell those low seasons to begin with. Instead of ARDA going off on HOAs, why not emphasize to its developer membership to structure contracts that will result in future value - as it stands today, you can guarantee up front that certain weeks won't-sell-even-at-$1-on-ebay somewhere down the line.

I wish it weren't such a moral/ethical issue. I own a seasonal resort (where luckily the HOA works really hard to keep fees down). I bought it for $100 off ebay a little over 10 years ago. The price included that years MF's and closing cost. It is an off season week. I was clueless about timeshares at the time and the time worked for me and I thought that if/when it didn't I might have to pay closing cost and MF's and then could sell/give it to someone else. At the time MF's were just over $300. They are now just over $400. It is not a time I can now use . . . The resort won't take deed backs . . . but even when they did for hardship cases I felt too guilty because I have over $3000 in MF's for all my weeks total so I can afford $400. It just annoys me to pay $400 for something that is worthless and I can't use. And I feel guilty not using the $400 for something more useful for my family . . .The timeshare HOA had a chance to end the timeshare in 2016 with a simple majority but voted to change it to a perpetual ownership thanks to the 70% of summer owners who still own something of value. I think they should feel guilty because the remaining off season owners are being held hostage to the current system.

The system sucks and I hate feeling like everything that is in my power to do makes me feel guilty. Part of it is the old laws when the TS's were built. Part of it is the HOA's not being able to come up with creative solutions.

This is a great personal illustration of the problem. You should not feel guilty about deeding your week back if they'll take it. Right now, the high season owners are using the resort and you're not. You're subsidizing the high season owners just as the case is in many seasonal resorts. Until the MFs rise for the high-week owners, there will never be an impetus to disband or change the fee structure.

This should be an easy fix

If only 12 weeks out of the year have value, Then the association should go after the owners of the other 40 weeks and take them back.

Lets assume mf to be $700 a week or $36400 per year per unit (700x 52)
So now the owners of the 12 weeks will have their mf increased to where it belongs... $3000

Oversimplified but directionally correct in my opinion. Most seasonal resorts have more than 12 weeks of value, but most also have half the year where there's no way you could get rent equivalent to maintenance fees.

Right. That's why I said "how seasonal resorts should be sold". I realize it's not a viable solution for existing resorts, but I'm not sure that passing legislation requiring HOA's to take back ownerships is any more viable (not that I think it's a bad idea). At a seasonal resort, the business model should be such that the property can be run off income from the high season(s) only. Everything else should be gravy. If it can't be sold and run that way, then it either should not be built or should go under.

Agreed 100% - although it does nothing to solve the problem created by developers in the first place.

Judy - There is always a developer - they may be long gone, but someone developed the resort, and if a law was passed, they could be held accountable for providing a viable exit plan for owners. Will this work in all cases? - probably not, but as long as the developer is in business it could be implemented, and the law could easily be applied to all resorts in active sales, and all new resorts.

That's a pretty big if. A lot of these developers went out of business a long time ago. Plus I'm sure the current developers have set up separate corporations for the development of each individual resort in order to shield the mother corporation from liability. If the number of deed-backs became overwhelming, they'd just bankrupt that shell corporation and we'd be back to square one with HOAs shouldering the burden.

 

[timeos2]

The sale is already guaranteed. Its called foreclosure
I suppose they can leave it in the deadbeats name and rent it out each year. but I suspect they will take it back in foreclosure sooner or later anyway, Why not sooner with a deed in lieu,

The alternative is to just write off the mf as something they dont want and raise the mf for the rest of the owners

It is a choice that the Association gets to make. No guarantee what they will do. Hopefully the best for the majority of owners. Thus it may not be a foreclosure or a deed back. Forcing them into a bad choice won't solve anything but would cause serious problems way beyond what we have today.

No guarantee of a sale.

 

[JudyS]

Judy - There is always a developer - they may be long gone, but someone developed the resort, and if a law was passed, they could be held accountable for providing a viable exit plan for owners. Will this work in all cases? - probably not, but as long as the developer is in business it could be implemented, and the law could easily be applied to all resorts in active sales, and all new resorts.

Even if the developer did not actually go out of business, it may be very hard to identify what current corporate entity corresponds to the original developer. For example, I own at a resort that was built by Fairfield in the 1980s. Fairfield became Cendant, which split into several parts, so there is no current corporate entity corresponding to the original developer. Once could argue that Wyndham timeshares should have responsibility, but I doubt that would hold up in court.

I think it would be much, much easier legally to forbid resorts from reporting to credit agencies.

You are forgetting about beautiful resorts in over-built places. Should SVR go out of business because Florida is overbuilt? It is a great resort - but if you opened the flood gate of deed backs, you would just punish the owners who want to own there.

I think the distinction of "resorts with value" versus "resorts with no value" still stands. Some of the resorts on Orlando have no value because they are older or mismanaged, but others have value. I clearly think the Sheraton Vistana Resort (SVR) has value because I recently bought there (despite all the Tuggers telling me not to.)

I have been watching the SVR eBay auctions for a while, and most SVR weeks find new owners fairly easily. Some of the true fixed weeks might be a problem if they are off-season, but there are several possible solutions for that. One approach would be to set up a floating pool with all the deedback weeks -- many of the deedback weeks would be offseason, but some would be peak season, and that would probably be sufficient to give such a floating pool value. Another option would be for Starwood to allow the SVR HOAs to sell their inventory with Staroptions attached, as Sheraton Mountain Vista just did. Also, most weeks at the Sheraton Vistana Resort rent for at least the MFs, so this would be another possible revenue stream for the HOA.

I don't think deedbacks would be a serious problem for the Sheraton Vistana Resort.

 

[timeos2]

I don't know, i just don't want to wake up one day and find i can't sell AND my MF is now $50,000 a week...I figure since we are making new laws...Lets add on about that too!

Many states, Florida is one, has a maximum 15% increase for operations - beyond that requires an owner vote. So a law may already exist to address your worries.

 

[JudyS]

While the HOA might have its head in the sand, it's more a case of the developer structuring the original contracts to make maintenance fees the same across seasons. In fact, it's the developer's fault for selling those seasons to begin with. The only fair way for seasonal resorts to retain value for everyone and not have resulting mass waves of defaults is for the high season owners to subsidize the low season owners or just not to sell those low seasons to begin with. Instead of ARDA going off on HOAs, why not emphasize to its developer membership to structure contracts that will result in future value - as it stands today, you can guarantee up front that certain weeks won't-sell-even-at-$1-on-ebay somewhere down the line.....

Most states require that all weeks pay the same MFs, regardless of season. Developers have learned to get around this problem by selling points instead of weeks, but they hadn't figured that out 20 or 30 years ago. There are many, many older resorts where offseason weeks have MFs far above rental value. This is really where the problem lies. The weeks that people can't give away are generally ones that were originally sold decades ago.

 

[Carolinian]

Since the costs of maintaining those weeks having been paid by the paying members, wouldn't the owners be entitled to a pro-rata share from the sale of those interests

The key is who has title, and the remaining owners do not have title.

A smart HOA that is winding up would find come way to try to offer them proportionately for a nominal amount to existing members, and get them titled in the individual members before they got too far into the process. That way, they would not be in the HOA's name.

There are things that can be done with other association assets as well. For example, a European resort that I formerly owned at voted to dissolve (not for financial reasons or members wanting out but because they could not find voluneets to serve on the board), did not charge the maintenance fee during the final year but paid all expenses from funds already in the bank.

 

[Fredm]

I don't have a problem with deedbacks - to the developer. Under current law, the HOA's are simply not equipped to handle a flood of deedbacks, and remember that YOU AND I will pay the maintenance fees until they can sell them. The HOA is YOU and ME, and 5 owners selected to represent us. I am dumbfounded by the posts that want to punish the HOA - THAT'S US!!

It is wrong to put the burden on responsible owners, when the developers created these conditions in the first place.

Pass laws that made the developers responsible for an effective exit plan for owners, and everyone will be happy.

Denise,

I think a major point is being overlooked.

This is not a hypothetical discussion.
Viking ships ARE dumping non-performing deeds at the HOA's doorstep. So, it is not as if the HOA gets its choice in the matter. Owners ARE subsidizing these deeds now.

The objective should be to prevent performing deeds from becomimg non-performing. Certainly, HOA's should do whatever they can to minimize it.
Deeds were performing when assumed by the PCC. Those that could be sold, were. The remainder wind up with the HOA as non-performing anyway.

HOA's face a choice (not an requirement). Either be proactive, and take whatever additional revenue can be had from accepting deed-backs from performing owners who want out, OR, deal with the fallout on the back-end.

The HOA (hence the owners) have the problem now.
HOA's can do everything a PCC can do (directly or by contract) to place performing deeds in the hands of others.
It is not Armegeddon. It is an opportunity for HOA's to take control, put the PCC's out of business, and perhaps make a buck in the process.

 

[vacationhopeful]

My RCI Points resort can be a winner for off-season weeks owners. A larger unit (2/2 lockoff) in low season, still has enough points to reserve a 1bdr in PRIME season. If you book 12 months in advance and pay the RCI Points Reservation fee of $40 during the HOME RESORT window, you got a PRIME week to use.

Yes, it might cost you MORE than if you owned that particular deeded week; but you can change your week with different dates for Easter, do Xmas on year and Turkey day another, etc using the HOME RESORT booking window and only a $40 exchange fee.

But WHAT I find thoughout ALL my timeshare resorts and experiences is: almost NO ONE likes to PLAN in 12-13 months in advance! Yes, I understand I have to be a slave to 7:59AM, dialing multiple phone lines, 13 months to the day before checkin. And to try an book the dream vacation with Wyndham 3 weeks before checkin ... hope your goal is a MUD WEEK, otherwise, you will not get your #1 or #2 or #3 or #10 dreams

SECRET TO TIMESHARING: Must Plan in advance!

 

[Carolinian]

In many states timeshare developers have to have a license, and some requirements could be implemented for holding that license, such as requiring the developer to take deedbacks and be bonded to guarantee that either it or a substitute will be around to follow through.

The history of Fairfield is a little more complex. They bailed out of RCI and moved to II as they objected to RCI Points (I think they did not beleive it fit well with their own points), as did at least two other developers with internal points systems. Cendent, which owned RCI at the time, bought them and Worldmark, which had also bolted to II, to bring them back to RCI's stable. When Cendent broke up and spun off various pieces, the part that included timeshares was named Wyndham, and the Fairfield resorts were rebranded as Wyndham resorts.

Even if the developer did not actually go out of business, it may be very hard to identify what current corporate entity corresponds to the original developer. For example, I own at a resort that was built by Fairfield in the 1980s. Fairfield became Cendant, which split into several parts, so there is no current corporate entity corresponding to the original developer. Once could argue that Wyndham timeshares should have responsibility, but I doubt that would hold up in court.

I think it would be much, much easier legally to forbid resorts from reporting to credit agencies.

I think the distinction of "resorts with value" versus "resorts with no value" still stands. Some of the resorts on Orlando have no value because they are older or mismanaged, but others have value. I clearly think the Sheraton Vistana Resort (SVR) has value because I recently bought there (despite all the Tuggers telling me not to.)

I have been watching the SVR eBay auctions for a while, and most SVR weeks find new owners fairly easily. Some of the true fixed weeks might be a problem if they are off-season, but there are several possible solutions for that. One approach would be to set up a floating pool with all the deedback weeks -- many of the deedback weeks would be offseason, but some would be peak season, and that would probably be sufficient to give such a floating pool value. Another option would be for Starwood to allow the SVR HOAs to sell their inventory with Staroptions attached, as Sheraton Mountain Vista just did. Also, most weeks at the Sheraton Vistana Resort rent for at least the MFs, so this would be another possible revenue stream for the HOA.

I don't think deedbacks would be a serious problem for the Sheraton Vistana Resort.

 

[Carolinian]

There is a group of timeshare management companies who have announced that they intend to approach this problem on a different legal theory. There was an article about them and that they had announced their intentions to the members at their resorts in Timesharing Today magazine some months ago. They announced that they intended to sue both the PCC and its entities AND the member who conveyed them the week for fraudulent conveyance and seek money damages. I don't think any of those suits have been filed yet, but the problem for a member who used a PCC would be that they either have a big legal expense to defend the suit, possibly in another state, or they get a default judgement, upon which an execution can be issued to garnish wages, or sell the member's car or house or other assets.

So using a PCC can be a big risk, especially when management has put its members on those that these are fraudulent transactions. They will not be in a position now to claim that they did not know.

Denise,

I think a major point is being overlooked.

This is not a hypothetical discussion.
Viking ships ARE dumping non-performing deeds at the HOA's doorstep. So, it is not as if the HOA gets its choice in the matter. Owners ARE subsidizing these deeds now.

The objective should be to prevent performing deeds from becomimg non-performing. Certainly, HOA's should do whatever they can to minimize it.
Deeds were performing when assumed by the PCC. Those that could be sold, were. The remainder wind up with the HOA as non-performing anyway.

HOA's face a choice (not an requirement). Either be proactive, and take whatever additional revenue can be had from accepting deed-backs from performing owners who want out, OR, deal with the fallout on the back-end.

The HOA (hence the owners) have the problem now.
HOA's can do everything a PCC can do (directly or by contract) to place performing deeds in the hands of others.
It is not Armegeddon. It is an opportunity for HOA's to take control, put the PCC's out of business, and perhaps make a buck in the process.

 

[K2Quick]

Most states require that all weeks pay the same MFs, regardless of season. Developers have learned to get around this problem by selling points instead of weeks, but they hadn't figured that out 20 or 30 years ago. There are many, many older resorts where offseason weeks have MFs far above rental value. This is really where the problem lies. The weeks that people can't give away are generally ones that were originally sold decades ago.

I think some developers have learned by selling points - like Marriott whose owners' MF vary depending on the number of points owned. But others like Starwood continue to actively sell weeks in seasonal resorts (Westin Desert Willow for example) where the most valuable week has the same ongoing maintenance fees as the least valuable week despite receiving more than twice the point allocation.

Again, I realize that the ship has sailed for most of the resorts that face the problem. I just think it's silly to make the non-paying low-season week owner out to be the bad guy when he defaults. That guy got taken for a ride by a slimy salesman upfront. If he continues to subsidize the high-season owners who actually use the resort, the high season owners will never understand their burden on the resort's resources compared to the low-season owners' burden. One way or another, the high-season owners will pay a truer-than-base-cost in maintenance fees - it will just show up as bad debt expense rather than operating expenses.

 

[BocaBum99]

As I said, I am happy to have the developer be the one to take back the deeds, if there is a developer. But Denise, most of these troubled resorts don't have developers. At most of the resorts where I own, the developer has been gone for decades. What do owners at these resorts do?

I don't want to punish anyone. I want timeshares to work better for all owners. Something must be done to stop this problems of "shackled" owners who can't get out of their MFs, as it is severely damaging the value of timesharing for everyone. I can't see any viable alternative other than allowing unhappy owners out of their MFs. If there was a viable alternative, someone would have found it by now.

I do think forcing deedbacks or disallowing credit reporting would have to be combined with new bankruptcy laws. That way, if a resort received a "flood of deedbacks", the resort could go into bankruptcy quickly and the owners would stop paying MFs very soon.

It seems to me that there are two types of timeshare resorts -- those where weeks have value, and those where weeks don't. In the case of resorts where weeks have value, new owners could be found pretty quickly, so deedbacks wouldn't be a problem. A good example of this kind of resort is your Hawaii Westins, Denise. Isn't Westin exercising ROFR at prices up to $25,000? This suggests that there would be no problem whatsoever with finding new owners for these weeks, if some owners walked away. Or, the HOA could take its time finding new owners, to avoid flooding the market with cheap units. Again, no problem -- the HOA just rents the week for more than the MFs, which actually reduces the fees for the other owners.

The other type of resort, where weeks have no value, might end up closing. But so what? The weeks had no value, so owners haven't lost anything. If they still want a timeshare, pick one up for $1 somewhere.

High seasonal resorts are a special case. There, some owners might be upset because they lost their peak summer weeks. Still, though, I don't feel blue week owners should be stuck subsidizing peak owners forever.

Another convert. There will be more.

 

[BocaBum99]

There is a group of timeshare management companies who have announced that they intend to approach this problem on a different legal theory. There was an article about them and that they had announced their intentions to the members at their resorts in Timesharing Today magazine some months ago. They announced that they intended to sue both the PCC and its entities AND the member who conveyed them the week for fraudulent conveyance and seek money damages. I don't think any of those suits have been filed yet, but the problem for a member who used a PCC would be that they either have a big legal expense to defend the suit, possibly in another state, or they get a default judgement, upon which an execution can be issued to garnish wages, or sell the member's car or house or other assets.

So using a PCC can be a big risk, especially when management has put its members on those that these are fraudulent transactions. They will not be in a position now to claim that they did not know.

Brilliant idea. Sue the owner who is just trying to get out of a worthless timeshare made worthless by the budgets the HOAs and the high value weeks owners force upon low value weeks owners.

I do not believe that resorts will target owners because they will absolutely lose the PR battle by doing so. The reason why going after the PCCs works is because everyone hates them. They do bad things. And, sold their services unethically when they didn't have to do it.

Once this becomes an HOA/management company against the owner, they will lose.

 

[BocaBum99]

Denise,

I think a major point is being overlooked.

This is not a hypothetical discussion.
Viking ships ARE dumping non-performing deeds at the HOA's doorstep. So, it is not as if the HOA gets its choice in the matter. Owners ARE subsidizing these deeds now.

The objective should be to prevent performing deeds from becomimg non-performing. Certainly, HOA's should do whatever they can to minimize it.
Deeds were performing when assumed by the PCC. Those that could be sold, were. The remainder wind up with the HOA as non-performing anyway.

HOA's face a choice (not an requirement). Either be proactive, and take whatever additional revenue can be had from accepting deed-backs from performing owners who want out, OR, deal with the fallout on the back-end.

The HOA (hence the owners) have the problem now.
HOA's can do everything a PCC can do (directly or by contract) to place performing deeds in the hands of others.
It is not Armegeddon. It is an opportunity for HOA's to take control, put the PCC's out of business, and perhaps make a buck in the process.

Most people who are against deedback solutions are in denial about the problem.

Forget the PCCs, they only deal with dues paying owners who were up to date with their ownerships.

There is still a significant percentage of owners who have decided and will continue to decide to simply stop paying. Their credit is already ruined and they don't care to protect it.

 

[Carolinian]

And with that sort of developer dictatorship in place, you can be sure that the developer will pad the fees for all it is worth. This is a very rotten sweetheart arrangement.

One of my favorite tales is Wyndham and fixed week foreclosed intervals.

HOA eats the MFs, HOA can rent through Extra Holidays which charges a 40% commission (and costs like credit card processing fees), Extra Holidays marks a 7 night fixed interval as RENTED even if they rent it for 1 night (removed from their rental pool), HOA pays for legal fees to file foreclosure. When new deed has HOA as owner, HOA is NOT allowed to sell the unit to either current or off the street persons => exclusive contract to sell ONLY to Wyndham WHEN Wyndham asks for inventory at $1 per deed.

Wyndham starts to pay MFs after deed is recorded and transfer (again paid by HOA) to Wyndham. Want to bet that the HOA pays the $299 recording fee twice - once to put it into the HOA's name and again, into Wyndham's entity's name?

And will most of the HOAs ever NOT be controlled by Wyndham? No, because EVERY foreclosed FIXED WEEK deed is sold to the Wyndham CWA Trust.

 

[Carolinian]

Don't you get it? There is no ''PR battle'' as these things would not normally get into the press. Also, these weeks have been made worthless mostly by RCI's changes in policy from theier rentals to the general public to their termination of the 45 day window.

All that needs to happen is to get a few scalps that can be displayed to other deadbeat owners, so that they will pay. The demonstration cases themselves would likely not be high profile at the time they are going through court, but the defendants would be chosen with care. They will likely live in a state other than where the timeshare is located to add more burden to defending the case. They will be solvent so that the judgment can be collected. They will try to anticipate someone who will not answer, so they can get an easy default judgment, then go to the defendant's home state to get a perfunctory judgment on a judgment, then proceed to have an execution issued to the defendant's local sheriff to go collect.

Brilliant idea. Sue the owner who is just trying to get out of a worthless timeshare made worthless by the budgets the HOAs and the high value weeks owners force upon low value weeks owners.

I do not believe that resorts will target owners because they will absolutely lose the PR battle by doing so. The reason why going after the PCCs works is because everyone hates them. They do bad things. And, sold their services unethically when they didn't have to do it.

Once this becomes an HOA/management company against the owner, they will lose.

 

[Ridewithme38]

Wait till some 80 year old frail looking women on a fixed income gets called up to court! It's not unlikely, hell half the women on here are 80yrs women who would garner anyones sypathy.....the Press will jump all over that..."Mega resorts suing grandma for her pension....Could YOUR grandmother be next??"

Don't you get it? There is no ''PR battle'' as these things would not normally get into the press. Also, these weeks have been made worthless mostly by RCI's changes in policy from their rentals to the general public to their termination of the 45 day window.