First Lawsuit filed against Viking Ship LLCs / PCCs

[bogey21]

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.

Not saying that this should or shouldn't happen but I have been waiting for it. Fearing this could happen is one of the reasons I made sure to get rid of my Weeks the right way.

George

 

[Ridewithme38]

Not saying that this should or shouldn't happen but I have been waiting for it. Fearing this could happen is one of the reasons I made sure to get rid of my Weeks the right way.

George

It can't happen, no judge would even accept the case...there's no merit to the acccusations

It's like me suing Carolinian for walking on my sidewalk, there was no lose or crime against me...and not even a hint of evidence that she ever did that

 

[BocaBum99]

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.

I get it completely. For someone in the legal profession, you couldn't have a poorer track record with your legal recommendations. All the class action law suits have failed aside from $10 refunds that only made attorneys rich.

Right now, the Florida law has no opposition because the only ones against it are the PCCs who are reviled. It doesn't matter what they say about trying to help the owner because nobody believes them.

However, it is true that this legislation will make it virtually impossible for paying owners who want out of certain resorts to get out of their timeshare. The PCCs are going to stir them up in a rage against the HOAs. I believe that strategy will work.

Any resort that goes after owners is stupid. They won't do it enmasse. It is absolutely insane to go after an owner who was loyal to the resort for years and chose to exit their timeshare through a third party and got duped by them. I welcome such stupid resorts to do it because their case will be highlighted into the new PCC pitch.

Actually, I spent the weekend thinking through the PCC next move. I have a new program that they can pursue that is compliant with the laws and will turn the owners against the HOAs for not giving them a reasonable exit. It will happen because the PCCs are way smarter than the HOAs.

 

[BocaBum99]

Not saying that this should or shouldn't happen but I have been waiting for it. Fearing this could happen is one of the reasons I made sure to get rid of my Weeks the right way.

George

It won't happen because it will backfire. The PCCs will use these cases as a way to prove that the HOAs are not on their side. They will probably also use John's posts in this thread claiming that such owners are lazy. That will really make them mad.

The bottom line is that there are credit worthy owners who simply want a reasonable way out. The PCCs are on their side. When they can't help them get out, they will set their gun turrets onto the HOAs. When that happens, it will be a positive step for the industry because the PCCs have always been a distraction. They only exist because HOAs have failed their owners by not taking appropriate action to give them a reasonable exit plan.

 

[BocaBum99]

I'll help Carolinian out again when he attempts to impugn my reputation with innuendo about my relationship with PCCs.

I don't like PCCs. What I am anticipating is their next moves. They aren't going to stop when there is a need in the industry to liquidate timeshares. I want them gone and I want them to be replaced by HOAs who take deeds back. If the resort is worried about getting flooded with deed backs, then tell owners you will take back 10 deeds per month (or some acceptable number) and conduct a dutch auction for how much future maintenance fees they must pay for the deedback. That will throttle back the demand.

Not attempting to solve the problem is unethical and should be illegal.

 

[VegasBella]

All that needs to happen is to get a few scalps that can be displayed to other deadbeat owners, so that they will pay.

That's utterly ridiculous. "Deadbeats" aren't paying enough attention to what other "deadbeats" are doing for this little plan to work.

The few potential "deadbeats" who are paying attention and who still want out are simply going to find another way out. People who are sick of setting their money on fire will eventually figure out a way to stop it.

 

[e.bram]

Carolinian:
The PCC and former TS owners can file a counterclaim againt the HOA and BOD members. There would be a venue problem if the owners reside in different state than the TS.
Also the management company could be sued. a big legal mess for not too much money in the scheme of things.
If you include discovery with the multutude of litigants, the case could take years to resolve.

 

[Beefnot]

I have seen these in Orlando, however the monthly HOA fees are above $500. I have seen them go for under $30,000 but the HOA fees are too high to make it worthwhile.

$6,000 per year in HOA for a fully furnished (and periodically refurbished) second home doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me. Heck, they could even have a rental program for owners to recoup some of the HOA fee. I think a properly managed mixed use program might work.

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.

Correct. Will never happen. Or if it does, it will bomb. Carolinian is on drugs.

 

[Beefnot]

PCCs are picked on because they make exorbitant margins and employ questionable tactics for the inventory they acquire from consumers. But how about all the inventory they are acquiring from developers? They are dumping that inventory too, and I would imagine using Viking Ships as appropriate for value-less properties, with the developers likely knowing full well while turning a blind eye. Perhaps lawsuits should be extended to include developers as well.

 

[Tia]

No lawyer but what about a statue of limitations? Seems that might be a problem for older resorts.

Carolinian:
The PCC and former TS owners can file a counterclaim againt the HOA and BOD members. There would be a venue problem if the owners reside in different state than the TS.
Also the management company could be sued. a big legal mess for not too much money in the scheme of things.
If you include discovery with the multutude of litigants, the case could take years to resolve.

 

[Carolinian]

This would not be a criminal case but a civil one, and if no answer is filed, then a default judgment is likely. If an answer is filed, then in civil court the standard of proof is the greater weight of the evidence. I suspect that they are waiting until they can nail the right sort of defendant who makes a Viking Ship / PCC transfer AFTER the management publicized this, so that no defense that the defendant did not know what was going on would get to first base. I doubt the first cases will involve people who had transfered before management put the word out on the PCC's. They will want the tightest cases they can get.

It can't happen, no judge would even accept the case...there's no merit to the acccusations

It's like me suing Carolinian for walking on my sidewalk, there was no lose or crime against me...and not even a hint of evidence that she ever did that

 

[Carolinian]

Correct. Will never happen. Or if it does, it will bomb. Carolinian is on drugs.

Maybe you ought to read Timesharing Today magazine. There was an article there several months ago on the management companies that had announced this policy and that they intended to follow through with it. The players involved are not likely to back off.

 

[Carolinian]

Most states have longarm statutes that would not leave any realistic venue challenge.

I do not know for certain how these managment companies would proceed, but I would not expect a multitude of litigants. I expect the defendants will be carefully chosen along the lines I have posted earlier. The management companies will want scalps they can hold up as examples. They will try for default judgments, I suspect, and if they get them, the cases will move rapidly. On what theory do you think someone could file a counterclaim that would not be deemed frivolous and the attorney and perhaps client punished for that under Rule 11 (that is the federal rule of civil procedure, but many states use the same rule number for the same thing)?

These management companies have now put members in those resorts on notice, so they cannot feign ignornance now.

Carolinian:
The PCC and former TS owners can file a counterclaim againt the HOA and BOD members. There would be a venue problem if the owners reside in different state than the TS.
Also the management company could be sued. a big legal mess for not too much money in the scheme of things.
If you include discovery with the multutude of litigants, the case could take years to resolve.

 

[Ridewithme38]

These management companies have now put members in those resorts on notice, so they cannot feign ignornance now.

What kind of notice could they give "warning anyone who asks for money to sell your timeshare is just going to defaud the HOA" How could that hold up?

 

[JudyS]

.... If the resort is worried about getting flooded with deed backs, then tell owners you will take back 10 deeds per month (or some acceptable number) and conduct a dutch auction for how much future maintenance fees they must pay for the deedback. That will throttle back the demand...

I think most owners would object to such a "dutch auction." However, a resort could simply limit the number of deedbacks they accept each year, with the first owners to submit certified letters being the "winners."

TUG has debated this "Should resorts accept deedbacks?" issue for several years, while the problem of owners wanting out has remained. I really think it's time to stop debating if resorts should accept deedbacks, and turn to how resorts should accept deedbacks. Given that many owners want out, how can resorts accept deedbacks in a way that is most fair to all owners and most likely to result in a good outcome for the resort and its remaining owners? (Depending on the resort, a "good outcome" could mean anything from income from sales of HOA-owned deeds to shutting down the resort in an orderly fashion.)

 

[timeos2]

It is simply incredible how those that are at best on a fringe of an industry, or perhaps a tiny owner in one, can be the do all and be all experts on how things have been, are, should and will be. Those actually running the day to day operations and handling the legalities, rules, regulations, lawsuits, regulatory filings, dealing with owners, clients, developers, banks, States and more naturally have no clue what goes on. How could they?

It's time to settle back and wait a bit and see where things stand a year or two from now. I'll be shocked if even 10% of the hotly debated problems and even less of the grand solutions presented are anywhere to be found then. I'll also place money on the fact that there will be resorts in better spots than today who have not accepted deed backs, some will be worse while those that did will be better off in some cases - worse in others.

These things don't happen overnight, they don't happen as any one or two people think they will or should and there are virtually no cases where some grand, sweeping plan or solution is suddenly implemented and the issue resolved (good or bad).

Experts and guru's come and go but somehow the resorts seem to carry on. Old scams die, new ones are launched. Some resorts are proactive and make strides, others are truly in denial and may or may not suffer for it.

Laws are changed, rules are made and almost invariably compromise, not edicts, are the rule of the day. Developers will get some wins and suffer some loses. Same for owners. Same for management. Same for outside operations. When things change so will the approach from all the different players.

There are problems not just in timeshares but in many areas of real estate. Changes in one area often have unexpected effects in others. Laws in general tend to move toward the center favoring neither side in these BBS discussions. It would be an earth shaking change if Developers had to accept deed backs and equally earth shaking if resorts were absolutely forced to. Neither is likely and some plan, possibly not even thought of here, will be passed if any action on it is taken at all. It will not be as dramatic or sweeping as speculated.

The only sure thing is a few will declare they saw it coming and that was EXACTLY what they meant by one or more of the posts we've enjoyed. If they are even around by then.

 

[Beefnot]

I know I will be right on the mark.

 

[Fredm]

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.

Maybe the Americana suit is the first of what you are referring to.

 

[Carolinian]

What kind of notice could they give "warning anyone who asks for money to sell your timeshare is just going to defaud the HOA" How could that hold up?

Well, no. It would be anyone who demands money to take your timeshare off of your hands.

And, what is really interesting is that while these management companies in the Timesharing Today article said they intended to proceed with suits based on fraudulent conveyances, it could be even easier. Many of the deeds INTO PCC's are drafted in a way that they are not valid to pass title, although most of them I have seen that convey the weeks back out from the PCC seem to be valid. It may be that this is just incompetence by the closing companies or it may be a deliberate effort to try to give the PCC's a back door out if everything goes to crap. I have seen numerous of these deeds that did not meet all North Carolina requirements for a valid deed, and I had some email correspondence with someone in the timeshare business in another state who had noted that many of the PCC's which use POA's in their transfer process are not doing it properly and all of those deeds could be challenged (I have not really looked in depth at the POA issue, as he had - and he is a licensed attorney - but the issue he raised did appear valid to me on the surface). Management companies may not even have to get to the issue of fraud. The sloppy (deliberately sloppy?) deeds into the PCC's may be enough itself to leave the original member holding the bag. If I were advising a North Carolina timeshare that wanted to play hardball on these things, that is exactly the direction I would go.

 

[Carolinian]

If you look at the Hapimag buy-backs (and that timeshare chain, the world's oldest, actually pays members for their timeshares), there are limits as to how many they will buy during a time period, but if the number is exceeded, then remaining requests are put on a waiting list and it just takes a bit longer.

I think most owners would object to such a "dutch auction." However, a resort could simply limit the number of deedbacks they accept each year, with the first owners to submit certified letters being the "winners."

TUG has debated this "Should resorts accept deedbacks?" issue for several years, while the problem of owners wanting out has remained. I really think it's time to stop debating if resorts should accept deedbacks, and turn to how resorts should accept deedbacks. Given that many owners want out, how can resorts accept deedbacks in a way that is most fair to all owners and most likely to result in a good outcome for the resort and its remaining owners? (Depending on the resort, a "good outcome" could mean anything from income from sales of HOA-owned deeds to shutting down the resort in an orderly fashion.)

 

[e.bram]

Carolinian and anyone else:
Would your warning include points schemes(trust types) ,as well, they charge money to take your TS off your hands?

 

[Ridewithme38]

Well, no. It would be anyone who demands money to take your timeshare off of your hands.

But thats what i'm saying....that warning won't hold up in court, all a PCC has to do is say the fee is a 'sales fee' or 'consulting fee' or really, tell the owner that they are NOT one of those evil PCC's mentioned by the resort....There is just no way, unless the PCC specifically tells the owner, in writing, that they are going to 'put the timeshare into a llc that they plan to bankrupt' that the courts will be able to prove that the owner had ANY intent to defraud or knowledge of what was going to happen...

It's grasping at straws, you wouldn't even need a good lawyer to prove that and could possibly counter sue for dozens of things just because of the accusation

 

[BocaBum99]

Maybe the Americana suit is the first of what you are referring to.

Actually, in looking at the defendants list, it does not look like any of the original owners are named. That would be a data point suggesting that going after them is not a good legal strategy.

In naming the PCCs, their holding companies and the ring leaders who appeared to have created these companies, it appears that the legal strategy is to go after the Viking Ship holding companies and attempt to pierce the corporate veil of these shell companies to target the wallets of those creating a scheme to potentially defraud.

If that is the strategy, I think the plaintiffs will lose because all the defendants have to do is prove they created a business model that worked for years in liquidating timeshares for owners through resale and rental. It only recently started failing because of zero value timeshares caused by the mismanagement of the resort. This will prove they have knowledge that many units are worthless. So, they cannot then go forward with a new company to perpetuate the same scheme.

If anything, I think this lawsuit will force many of the PCCs to go out of business because they will use the one and only get out of jail free card by saying we tried and it failed. Isn't this what everybody wants? They will have to come up with a new business model.

Of course, there will be sloppy title work that was done. Perhaps those deals could be voided. If that happens, then the title companies will be the ones who are on the hook to rectify the situation. That might be covered by their Errors and Omissions insurance. It could also be why they are named in the complaint. This would be the only way I could see the original owner getting dragged into this suit. But, it won't be for all transfers. Only the ones that were not done properly.

The above is completely different than what Carolinian wants which is the scalp of an innocent, loyal, dues paying owner who tried many different ways to get out and couldn't until they found a PCC who found a home for their timeshare for a fee. This is an utterly stupid idea. The idea of holding up such a scalp to scare away other owners from using PCCs couldn't be more flawed. Such a case would be used in the sales pitch for the next PCC business model, whatever that may be.

 

[Rent_Share]

Doesn't appear that the suit has named any of the PCC victims (clients) as co conspirators, however there is that ever present Doe and Roe's 1- 100 which allow the complaint to be amended to add in as many additional defendants found during discovery.

Noticed a long time Tug Subject: Uri L. Fried, a Wisconsin Resident

288 Post Ago

 

[BocaBum99]

288 Post Ago

so what? There are still ZERO original owners named. Roe and Doe could just as easily mean Rent Share.