id imagine said attorney also likely collects 75 to 80% of the money disputed in fees...and even after securing said judgements comes the process of trying to collect! Plenty of benefit to him and his firm, not quite as much to the creditor. Everything you wrote after "I'd imagine" is an assumption. That may be right or could be very, very wrong. For example, if attorney's fees can be awarded to the successful plaintiff, then the creditor still gets EVERYTHING owed to him/her/it.
An attorney once told me "the judge isnt going to that guys house and write me a check". Probably not. But receiving a complaint for the foreclosure of your home due to an unpaid judgment will likely get the formerly uncooperative debtor to change his non-paying ways.
the optics I refer to isnt the actual process in court, but the public backlash if owners were commonly sued for a product they cant even give away or give back. You think timeshares have a black eye now, imagine if happened to even a single % of owners who default. I can't imagine that timeshares can possibly get a blacker black eye than they already have. At least, that's my assumption. Moreover, the "public backlash" probably was the reason that California, Florida, and South Carolina passed those consumer-friendly non-deficiency judgment statutes in whatever past decade they did so.
a deed in lieu is almost always the final solution in these situations but almost always after months or even years of default. Which behooves a California, Florida, or South Carolina timeshare owner to suggest a deed in lieu of foreclosure right away while simultaneously making the timeshare entity's people know that you know they will never be able to get a deficiency judgment...so no reason to make threats, etc. for perhaps years in hopes of collecting something.