First Lawsuit filed against Viking Ship LLCs / PCCs

[DeniseM]

Oh, I see. So go after the small time crook (that often actually provides a useful service to many timeshare owners - an exit strategy) despite the fact that nothing good will come from it. In fact, what will surely come from it is more bad press for the industry. But just leave the big time crooks alone. Makes perfect sense.

What? Who said that?

VegasBella - Your logic is impeded by that chip on your shoulder.

BTW - although abandoning the deed my "provide a useful service" to some owners, it is doing harm to the majority of the owners, who are faithfully paying their MF's.

Do you know who pays delinquent MF's? YOU AND I DO - not the HOA, not the developer - the other owners.

There have been years where I have had to pay hundreds of dollars to cover other owners' delinquent maintenance fees.

 

[VegasBella]

Denise,
Must be the same chip that effects your reading comprehension.

Listen, I live in Vegas, one of the cities hardest hit by the housing bubble burst. I live in a community with an HOA. Our community was built shortly before the bubble burst. Many of the homes in our community went into foreclosure during that time. I served on our HOA for 2 years. In that time, not only did we survive, we were able to reduce our HOA fees. All the while, we maintained the pool, the landscaping, the entrance gates, etc. We repainted everything and got some new benches for the park.

Good management can handle forclosures. Good management can deal with people who can't or won't pay the HOA fees. PERIOD.

 

[DeniseM]

Denise,
Must be the same chip that effects your reading comprehension.

Listen, I live in Vegas, one of the cities hardest hit by the housing bubble burst. I live in a community with an HOA. Our community was built shortly before the bubble burst. Many of the homes in our community went into foreclosure during that time. I served on our HOA for 2 years. In that time, not only did we survive, we were able to reduce our HOA fees. All the while, we maintained the pool, the landscaping, the entrance gates, etc. We repainted everything and got some new benches for the park.

Good management can handle forclosures. Good management can deal with people who can't or won't pay the HOA fees. PERIOD.

You are comparing apples to oranges. Most people are highly motivated to have a roof over their heads - you simply cannot compare home ownership to all the challenges facing timeshare owners, and HOA's.

There are no simple answers, and after you have been on TUG longer, you will understand more of the complexities. At this point, with what, 5-6 weeks on TUG? your pontificating may be a bit premature.

 

[vacationhopeful]

Denise,
Must be the same chip that effects your reading comprehension.

Listen, I live in Vegas, one of the cities hardest hit by the housing bubble burst. I live in a community with an HOA. Our community was built shortly before the bubble burst. Many of the homes in our community went into foreclosure during that time. I served on our HOA for 2 years. In that time, not only did we survive, we were able to reduce our HOA fees. All the while, we maintained the pool, the landscaping, the entrance gates, etc. We repainted everything and got some new benches for the park.

Good management can handle forclosures. Good management can deal with people who can't or won't pay the HOA fees. PERIOD.

Big difference your HOA where the HOA is NOT providing 24/7 front desk staff, weekly turnover of units for new guests, and a payroll for some grounds keeping and pool service. Dang, you didn't even get paid and only wrote the checks to your 2 or 3 contractors.

Now if you had 150 apartments YOU managed all services to with a guest cycle of every 7 days, provide new beds every 5 years, handled a bedbug problem, had insurance payments to cover slip & falls and 50+ FT employees with required medical insurance --- I might consider your success to be interesting and noteworthy.

 

[timeos2]

Denise,
Must be the same chip that effects your reading comprehension.

Listen, I live in Vegas, one of the cities hardest hit by the housing bubble burst. I live in a community with an HOA. Our community was built shortly before the bubble burst. Many of the homes in our community went into foreclosure during that time. I served on our HOA for 2 years. In that time, not only did we survive, we were able to reduce our HOA fees. All the while, we maintained the pool, the landscaping, the entrance gates, etc. We repainted everything and got some new benches for the park.

Good management can handle forclosures. Good management can deal with people who can't or won't pay the HOA fees. PERIOD.

And if the floodgates were opened to every owner in your development to stop paying fees and turn in their property to the HOA just how long could the good management / HOA Board continue to maintain things? Survive at all?

Your argument is non-nonsensical. No HOA can survive if they are willing to simply take back any ownership offered. Period.

(Of course owners with full ownerships are far less likely to deed back as they live there and/or have tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars at risk. With a timeshare the amount "invested" is small enough that they are willing to just walk away - and stick other owners with the problem - rather than properly deal with it themselves. Still the idea and obligations are the same in both situations. Only the magnitude of personal investment tends to differ.)

 

[VegasBella]

You are comparing apples to oranges. Most people are highly motivated to have a roof over their heads - you simply cannot compare home ownership to all the challenges facing timeshare owners, and HOA's.

Riiiiight... because none of the foreclosures in Vegas were investors. They were all first time buyers and they all lived in their homes. OK, sure. Whatever you say.

My point is that our HOA actively dealt with people who wanted out. We didn't just ignore them and push them towards desperate action. We cut our costs so we could reduce the HOA fees so more people could pay them. We kept up our community so it was attractive to potential buyers, making it easier for people to sell if they needed out. We became more lenient with our rules for renting so that became a more viable option for owners.

Point is.. we recognized the situation and worked to help people. TS HOAs can do the same: offer to take deeds back without forclosure, make it easier to rent and sell, lower MF fees if possible, etc.

 

[VegasBella]

And if the floodgates were opened to every owner in your development to stop paying fees and turn in their property to the HOA just how long could the good management / HOA Board continue to maintain things? Survive at all?

If all the owners want out then the property should be disolved/sold.

If so many owners at a property are that disatisfied with the timeshare, then that property has MUCH bigger problems than some PCCs. If that's the case, then the HOA isn't doing even the very basics of their job correctly.

 

[BocaBum99]

No need to create another layer of protection for these owners.
HOA's should take the deed and the cash kicker, and let them out if that is what the owner wants.

I partially agree and partially disagree. I agree with your proposed solution. In fact, I would like to make it law. I disagree that it will now be adopted by the lion's share of resorts. Just look at John's pushback. He is providing every excuse in the book why the HOA is not culpable and can't solve the problem.

First, John has served/serves on a board at his resort. He is a smart, understands the industry and is a fairly reasonable timeshare owner. Same with Denise. However, they believe that when a person buys a timeshare that they are ethically bound to provide their own exit strategy. They absolve the HOA from any accountability for the lack of liquidity in the timeshare market even when it is their own budgeting that makes the timeshares worthless.

Second, many if not most timeshare HOAs have their head in the sand regarding owners who want out and cannot find a reasonable exit. John believes that all owners who want out are just lazy and are not willing to do what it takes to find another owner for their timeshare. Therefore, they are not going to take action to accept deedbacks.

Third, when the timeshare resale transfer act gets adopted, PCCs will ultimately have no homes to put loads of timeshares. More importantly, the only viable exit strategy will be removed from the industry. The majority owners, many of whom own the high season at a resort, can reject any proposal to terminate the timeshare plan and continue to force minor owners, many of whom own off season weeks whose maintenance fees can be 3-4 times more than it would cost a renter to rent such a week into a lifetime of slavery subsidizing the vacations of high demand week owners. The only out is default on the maintenance fees and ruin your credit. Or, death, at which time the asset abandonment laws in bankruptcy finally protect the dead owners estate.

So now, more than ever, is there legislation required to enable timeshare owners some type of exit strategy. Okay, the industry didn't like the PCCs, they are going to be gone now. They created their own bad reputations when there was no need to do so. When the last exit strategy is gone. The next target is going to be the HOA and it is going to be ugly and it is going to be by legal means. I look forward to it because HOAs have been shielded for far too long when some of us knew from the beginning, they were the only ones who could solve the problem and they didn't.

 

[DeniseM]

Riiiiight... because none of the foreclosures in Vegas were investors. They were all first time buyers and they all lived in their homes. OK, sure. Whatever you say.

My point is that our HOA actively dealt with people who wanted out. We didn't just ignore them and push them towards desperate action. We cut our costs so we could reduce the HOA fees so more people could pay them. We kept up our community so it was attractive to potential buyers, making it easier for people to sell if they needed out. We became more lenient with our rules for renting so that became a more viable option for owners.

Point is.. we recognized the situation and worked to help people. TS HOAs can do the same: offer to take deeds back without forclosure, make it easier to rent and sell, lower MF fees if possible, etc.

It sounds great on paper - but how do you do it?

Here is the huge weakness in your argument - What if 25% of your owners want to deedback their timeshare???

-Who is going to pay those maintenance fees? I will tell you who - the other owners!

You are going to punish 75% so that 25% can have an easy out? How is that equitable???

If so many owners at a property are that disatisfied with the timeshare, then that property has MUCH bigger problems than some PCCs. If that's the case, then the HOA isn't doing even the very basics of their job correctly.

Again - you don't understand what's going on here: I have ready hundreds of posts from owners who want out of their timeshares.

10% are dissatisfied with their timeshares.

20% have financial problems.

70% want out because they never should have bought a timeshare in the first place - they don't know how to use it, and never tried to figure it out - they just want an easy out.

I am not willing to finance that "easy out" - maybe you are. After you have paid hundreds of dollars in MF for other owners, you might see things differently...

 

[BocaBum99]

I think I figured out what is going to happen next. All of these owners who used to go to PCCs for their exit strategies are just going to move their timeshares to LLCs that they themselves form. A whole industry of help is going to emerge so that owners can shield themselves from toxic timeshare assets.

There is no need to change the law on credit reporting. One already exists when they transfer it to their own LLC or Corporation. Cost would be less than $1000.

 

[BocaBum99]

It sounds great on paper - but how do you do it?

Here is the huge weakness in your argument - What if 25% of your owners want to deedback their timeshare???

-Who is going to pay those maintenance fees? I will tell you who - the other owners!

You are going to punish 75% so that 25% can have an easy out? How is that equitable???

No, if the timeshare resort has value, then other owners will absorb those intervals. Tell me right now, if the Westin Resort you own did automatic deedbacks and Westin offered FREE deeds at WKORV-N to current owners, what would happen? I claim that ALL of the units would be taken and ALL maintenance fees would be covered by happier owners.

If the units are not taken by the current owners, then there is a fundamental flaw with that resort. Either the maintenance fees are too high, the resort is not competitive with alternatives in the area, or the HOA is guilty of gross mismanagement over years of neglect.

The first thing the resort can do is cut maintenance fees and amenities by 25-50%. If it cuts enough, eventually the resort will have some value to someone even if it is just investors looking to make a profit on rentals.

If it can't get its act together, it needs to terminate the plan. This is where Ken McKelvey's work in fixing bankruptcy law could help.

 

[VegasBella]

What if 25% of your owners want to deedback their timeshare???

-Who is going to pay those maintenance fees? I will tell you who - the other owners!

If your income is cut by 25% does that mean you automatically have to cut one of your expenses by 25%? It does if you can't find/ don't see another way to replace the lost income. It does if you choose to cut that expense rather than another.

But if you have an emergency savings account (much like an HOA's reserve account) then you can stay afloat a while, perhaps long enough to find another income stream.

Similarly, if 25% of the owners want out, an HOA has options:
- They can rent the units
- They can sell the units
- They can cut costs
- They can change the MF structure (for example, charge higher MF for higher demand weeks and lower MF for lower demand weeks)
- They can find an investor to convert 25% of the resort into a hotel or restaurant
- They can find a sponsor (not sure how this would work, just brainstorming)

Ultimately if 25% of owners want out then it's going to cause problems one way or another. Either the HOA can deal with it (hopefully effectively by employing creative strategies) or they can leave it to the PCCs.

 

[DeniseM]

As you know, that is not an option at the Westin, because Starwood has the BOD by the short hairs.

I am sure that Starwood prefers foreclosure, so they can get free inventory to sell.

Yes, Tuggers have tried to get on the board, but Starwood manipulates the elections to make it virtually impossible.

Recently, there was an election at Sheraton Desert Oasis, and a candidate supported by TUG got the most votes, but because they didn't make the quorum, the board choose the candidate - and although there were 2 open spots - they didn't pick the person who got the most votes.

This is just one of may reasons why "simplistic" statements about how easy it is to make changes, are naive.

 

[DeniseM]

If your income is cut by 25% does that mean you automatically have to cut one of your expenses by 25%? It does if you can't find/ don't see another way to replace the lost income. It does if you choose to cut that expense rather than another.

But if you have an emergency savings account (much like an HOA's reserve account) then you can stay afloat a while, perhaps long enough to find another income stream.

Similarly, if 25% of the owners want out, an HOA has options:
- They can rent the units
- They can sell the units
- They can cut costs
- They can change the MF structure (for example, charge higher MF for higher demand weeks and lower MF for lower demand weeks)
- They can find an investor to convert 25% of the resort into a hotel or restaurant
- They can find a sponsor (not sure how this would work, just brainstorming)

Ultimately if 25% of owners want out then it's going to cause problems one way or another. Either the HOA can deal with it (hopefully effectively by employing creative strategies) or they can leave it to the PCCs.

Very creative - but you are assuming that the BOD has carte blanche to make any changes they want - not true at all. Timeshare ownership and management are regulated by contractual terms and conditions. Most of your ideas would violate those terms and conditions. It's just not that simple.

In reality, what would happen is that until those units could be sold, the remaining owners would shoulder the maintenance fees of those who defaulted - which would probably result in more owners defaulting.

Also - because of the economy, I would bet that if given the chance to walk away with no consequences, that at the majority of timeshares, a full 25% of owners would choose to walk away. NOT because there is anything wrong with the resort, but simply because they want out for a multitude of reasons that the resort has NO control over: Old age, change in financial situation, illness, lack of interest in timesharing, etc. The BOD cannot change those things.

 

[BocaBum99]

As you know, that is not an option at the Westin, because Starwood has the BOD by the short hairs.

I am sure that Starwood prefers foreclosure, so they can get free inventory to sell.

Yes, Tuggers have tried to get on the board, but Starwood manipulates the elections to make it virtually impossible.

Recently, there was an election at Sheraton Desert Oasis, and a candidate supported by TUG got the most votes, but because they didn't make the quorum, the board choose the candidate - and although there were 2 open spots - they didn't pick the person who got the most votes.

This is just one of may reasons why "simplistic" statements about how easy it is, are naive.

Everything is hard. I am not naive. In fact, I am probably one of the most sophisticated timeshare owners on this message board and can prove it in debates.

Every solution to big problems starts with a simple concept. Then, the rest of the unintended consequences follow and works arounds do as well.

The basic problem in the timeshare industry is two fold.

1) There is no way millions of timeshare owners to exit their properties.
2) There is no way for timeshare resorts that should go out of business to actually go out of business.

If we are talking about developers who are currently selling property, it would be very simple to create a law to force the resort to be the buyer of last resort. If they are making money selling retail, they should and need to take back any properties that are on the market. They just choose not to do so at times when it is convenient for them. SVO is a good example of that.

Then, there are resorts that are no longer affiliated with a developer. These are the ones that need to step up or go out of business. Create a sales and marketing program for their intervals. Take deedbacks. If they can't make it work because the timeshare is not viable, then terminate it and sell off the property.

Legislation should be geared around the free market being able to work. Allowing resorts to die that can't prove to be viable. Legally mandating deedbacks with 1-2 years fees would do it. Locking owners into a lifetime of maintenance fees with no exit is immoral.

 

[timeos2]

If your income is cut by 25% does that mean you automatically have to cut one of your expenses by 25%? It does if you can't find/ don't see another way to replace the lost income. It does if you choose to cut that expense rather than another.

But if you have an emergency savings account (much like an HOA's reserve account) then you can stay afloat a while, perhaps long enough to find another income stream.

Similarly, if 25% of the owners want out, an HOA has options:
- They can rent the units
- They can sell the units
- They can cut costs
- They can change the MF structure (for example, charge higher MF for higher demand weeks and lower MF for lower demand weeks)
- They can find an investor to convert 25% of the resort into a hotel or restaurant
- They can find a sponsor (not sure how this would work, just brainstorming)

Ultimately if 25% of owners want out then it's going to cause problems one way or another. Either the HOA can deal with it (hopefully effectively by employing creative strategies) or they can leave it to the PCCs.

As an HOA Board Member you must be aware that the use of specified Reserve Funds for any type of regular operations - regardless of justification - is against the law. The Board/Management can be sued by the owners for that and even D&O insurance will not cover you (willful acts aren't covered).

If 25%+ of Owners want to or are in default you had better takes steps to end the HOA in an orderly fashion as the law provides for. If the remaining owners do NOT vote to end it then you continue to accept deed backs (thus obligating them to ever increasing fees) they had better vote that Board out & start over. That is not a responsible or responsive Board.

As Denise says simplistic answers often appear to be great until they meet the laws and facts of the real world. This debate seems prone to hitting the wall of legalities that prohibit (for good reasons) the very "magic" solutions some are proposing. I applaud the effort but lets work on what is doable nit what seems to be a great concept that cannot be implemented.

The problem lies with the sales model and Developers. Concentrating the actions there will ultimately succeed where patches or forced "solutions" on groups such as HOA's not equipped or chartered to handle them will never work.

Simplistic that works? Every active Developer must have a program to sell existing ownerships at any resort they have a sales presence at. Problem solved. Ease of implementation? Nearly impossible. Developers want us to concentrate on the HOA's at the scapegoats as that way they continue on their merry way & aren't having to deal with the problems thy have created & foster even now.

 

[buzglyd]

If your income is cut by 25% does that mean you automatically have to cut one of your expenses by 25%? It does if you can't find/ don't see another way to replace the lost income. It does if you choose to cut that expense rather than another.

But if you have an emergency savings account (much like an HOA's reserve account) then you can stay afloat a while, perhaps long enough to find another income stream.

Similarly, if 25% of the owners want out, an HOA has options:
- They can rent the units
- They can sell the units
- They can cut costs
- They can change the MF structure (for example, charge higher MF for higher demand weeks and lower MF for lower demand weeks)
- They can find an investor to convert 25% of the resort into a hotel or restaurant
- They can find a sponsor (not sure how this would work, just brainstorming)

Ultimately if 25% of owners want out then it's going to cause problems one way or another. Either the HOA can deal with it (hopefully effectively by employing creative strategies) or they can leave it to the PCCs.

It's not quite as easy as you make it sound.

Most of the governing documents were written back in the 70s and are very inflexible.

It is next to impossible to get a super-majority of owners to even vote.

In some cases, the best plan of action would be to close the resort and sell the land.

It's never easy because the guy who owns July 4th week on the beach in Myrtle Beach has a very different opinion than the guy who owns Jan. 4th week at the same resort.

 

[BocaBum99]

Very creative - but you are assuming that the BOD has carte blanche to make any changes they want - not true at all. Timeshare ownership and management are regulated by contractual terms and conditions. Most of your ideas would violate those terms and conditions. It's just not that simple.

In reality, what would happen is that until those units could be sold, the remaining owners would shoulder the maintenance fees of those who defaulted - which would probably result in more owners defaulting.

Also - because of the economy, I would bet that if given the chance to walk away with no consequences, that at the majority of timeshares, a full 25% of owners would choose to walk away. NOT because there is anything wrong with the resort, but simply because they want out for a multitude of reasons that the resort has NO control over: Old age, change in financial situation, illness, lack of interest in timesharing, etc. The BOD cannot change those things.

What is your proposal or conceptual framework for solvng the problem? I have proposed several.

Are you going to say that the status quo sans the PCCs and Viking Ships is fine and owners who can't find a home for their timeshares should just acquiesce to having no reasonable way out?

If you are, you are seriously delusional because the next stage is law suits against the HOAs for gross mismanagement and the next timeshare scam that is created solely because the HOAs are not williing to do the right thing.

 

[DeniseM]

I agree with John - the HOA/BOD is not the bad guy here. Remember, the BOD is a small group of owners (5-6) who are unpaid volunteers, and may be under tremendous pressure from the developer to vote the party line. It is a thankless job!

It is unreasonable to blame them for all the ills of the timeshare world, or to expect them to work magic. The problem is bigger than that.

What is your proposal or conceptual framework for solvng the problem?

I think some of your proposals are good, but some of your ideas punish responsible owners, and I don't agree with that at all.

I don't think that Viking Ships are a solution, and I certainly don't think it's fair to punish the majority of the owners who ARE paying their maintenance fees, to assist a small number of owners who aren't.

In the long run, I think the developer has to be held more accountable, because under the current laws, the BOD's just do not have the ability to make the sweeping changes that are necessary.

 

[Fredm]

So now, more than ever, is there legislation required to enable timeshare owners some type of exit strategy. Okay, the industry didn't like the PCCs, they are going to be gone now. They created their own bad reputations when there was no need to do so. When the last exit strategy is gone. The next target is going to be the HOA and it is going to be ugly and it is going to be by legal means. I look forward to it because HOAs have been shielded for far too long when some of us knew from the beginning, they were the only ones who could solve the problem and they didn't.

Maybe things have to get much worse before HOA's come to grips with it.

Well, here's hoping that enlightened sef-interest/preservation kicks in before then. No matter what happens half the owner population is sure to be screaming about it.

 

[timeos2]

It's not quite as easy as you make it sound.

Most of the governing documents were written back in the 70s and are very inflexible.

It is next to impossible to get a super-majority of owners to even vote.

In some cases, the best plan of action would be to close the resort and sell the land.

It's never easy because the guy who owns July 4th week on the beach in Myrtle Beach has a very different opinion than the guy who owns Jan. 4th week at the same resort.

Often a resort cannot disband as the Developer (or a successor) not only has on site sales rights but has also a large block of ownership. It doesn't take that much for them to thwart any disband attempt as those usually require a super majority type vote to succeed.

Again they don't want it to end as they are the beneficiaries of the present system. Not the HOA's - not the other owners. They have a set up where they can force the resort to exist while seemingly tying owners to forever fees (not really true but close). They often get the foreclosures back so they can sell them again at high profits.

So make the sales/Developer HAVE to resell weeks for owners or have a guaranteed buy back. Now if the reort is s good one with value not only the Developer/sales want it to exist but the owners too. If not the sales/Developer groups can't sell the ownerships they HAVE to accept back thus they too would want the project terminated. Both issues solved and guess what. The basic problem is the sales/Developer and NOT the individual owners or HOA. That is my key point.

Going after HOA's is the wrong approach and is playing into the hands of the real problem source - Developers.

 

[vacationhopeful]

Many of us here (Tuggers) have been VERY involved with different HOAs - both big developers and smaller (self managed) resorts. I have experience with Wyndham and VRI. I regularly speak to and get feedback directly from Resort Managers, assistant resort managers, front desk supervisors, maintenance directors, HOA members, Board of Director members and even the night time front desk auditor.

I try VERY hard to keep a balance on my comments to praise and to be constructive in nature. Resort management personnel call me back, take time to walk me thru active rehab/contruction projects, adopt my ideas for improvement and try to recruit me for different resort HOA boards.

The economy for the last 6-7+ years stinks. The older the resort, the more likely management is dealing with dementia, dead owners, assisted living, heirs at war, along with victims of Bernie or pension plans that went bankrupt. Only a few occupations have NOT seen their net income do down; almost all middle and blue collar level families have seen their net incomes go down and quality of life decrease. Life has gotten harder.

Yes, there are still persons who don't live in the New World - I was thrown into this with a job layoff in 1982 --- last year I had corporate medical and a defined pension plan (but not vested by 6 months).

VegasBella, times in the world change. Read more, ask questions, visit your resort and talk to senior management & staff, talk to other owners, look who is around you while at your resort. Take care of your parents and grandparents, clean out a relatives house, move someone into assisted living, listen to a vet or homeless mother, volunteer at a abused women's shelter, etc. Try having your family live on the value of food stamps for a month.

I guess the proper phrases are "take off your Rose Color glasses" and "simple fixes only apply to shallow problems".

 

[buzglyd]

Often a resort cannot disband as the Developer (or a successor) not only has on site sales rights but has also a large block of ownership. It doesn't take that much for them to thwart any disband attempt as those usually require a super majority type vote to succeed.

Again they don't want it to end as they are the beneficiaries of the present system. Not the HOA's - not the other owners. They have a set up where they can force the resort to exist while seemingly tying owners to forever fees (not really true but close). They often get the foreclosures back so they can sell them again at high profits.

So make the sales/Developer HAVE to resell weeks for owners or have a guaranteed buy back. Now if the reort is s good one with value not only the Developer/sales want it to exist but the owners too. If not the sales/Developer groups can't sell the ownerships they HAVE to accept back thus they too would want the project terminated. Both issues solved and guess what. The basic problem is the sales/Developer and NOT the individual owners or HOA. That is my key point.

Going after HOA's is the wrong approach and is playing into the hands of the real problem source - Developers.

Many of the resorts that are having these problems haven't had a developer near them in years.

Don't forget, without the developers, we would all be staying in hotels.

 

[VegasBella]

Take care of your parents and grandparents

All my grandparents are dead.
My dad is dying.

listen to a vet or homeless mother

Done

[volunteer at a abused women's shelter

Done

Please STOP with the assumptions about me and my life. I may be younger than most of you and I may be new to the timeshare world, but I have experienced many things in life. I am not naive about life stuggles.

Furthermore, you're simply providing reasons for why many owners NEED exit strategies.

"simple fixes only apply to shallow problems".

I did not propose "simple fixes". In fact, my concept was actually this: It doesn't have to be as simple as 'some owners default so the rest pay more.'

I find the notion that we ought to bully owners into paying their MFs morally repugnant. These are vacation ownerships. This is not group health insurance. The financial duty we TS owners owe one another is simply not high in the moral realm. It's a business decision, a financial contract about a LUXURY. If they want out, they should be able to get out. Making it extremely difficult to get out is cruel.

 

[timeos2]

I find the notion that we ought to bully owners into paying their MFs morally repugnant. These are vacation ownerships. This is not group health insurance. The financial duty we TS owners owe one another is simply not high in the moral realm. It's a business decision, a financial contract about a LUXURY. If they want out, they should be able to get out. Making it extremely difficult to get out is cruel.

A boat is usually a luxury too. If I owe on that should I be able to walk away & never pay it off as my income was down or I tired of it or the dock fees are too high now? How ridiculous.

It isn't difficult to "get out".

1st choice - Sell. For little. Or nothing if you want. Or subsidize a year or two of annual fee to the new buyer. Most resorts will sell under these terms. If not work to get your bad resort disbanded. That is a real option but, again, takes work and time to accomplish.
2nd choice - Go for a deed back. If they accept - great. If not then you remain responsible for
3rd Choice - Pay until #1 occurs OR you default. Yes, there is a "cost" - a potential hit to your credit - but it is a fact you agreed to the obligation and now you unilaterally want to end the contract / agreement to YOUR sole benefit. So, if you do it, it will cost YOU a possible credit nick. Big deal. Or you can SELL IT!!! Legally. To a real, fee paying owner.

When I hear of people willing to pay thousands to "be out" but they won't take the time or expend the effort to sell it then I know they aren't really hurting - they just want out of what they now feel is a bad agreement and they don't want it to hurt THEM - no matter how much it hurts others.

NO SYMPATHY from me. If they were really so broke then they wouldn't have $2000-$6000+ to pay to a scammer to place the time in a Viking Ship. They would just let it go - unpaid - live with foreclosure and be happy they can put food on their table & have a roof over their heads. A foreclosure for fees isn't a big deal and certainly not as important as basic shelter & food to any family.

Those are NOT the people we are talking about. The ones that have thousands to give are scamming the system and milking things to benefit themselves. Apparently that doesn't bother you and I'm very glad that is not the type of moral outlook or overall life attitude the members of my resorts HOA Boards have. They do care about the truly needy and know that the free loaders don't deserve a break.

Fortunately the vast majority do know that a contract / agreement / obligation can't be dismissed on a whim when it suits them. The few that think otherwise will find out it doesn't fly. Just like the greedy Wall Streeters, bankers, bubble investors, etc. The current lawsuit that started this thread is the start of he end for this type of operator. Thank heavens.

Now lets get serious and go after the source and the ultimate fix. The Developers / marketers that created the mess. It was not & is not the HOA's.