Great new arbitration Opinion against Wyndham from the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals today

[ambere]

Attached is an important 11th Circuit decision today in a lengthy battle against Wyndham. The court held that if the AAA declines to hear an arbitration demand against Wyndham, then Wyndham can not turn around and move to compel arbitration if the timeshare owner proceeds in court. Six of the eight plaintiffs contracted with Wyndham Vacation Resorts Inc. They can proceed with the suit they filed in federal court in Florida.

The court remanded the case for the two plaintiffs who dealt with Worldmark. They will probably need to file demands with the AAA to confirm that the AAA will not hear their cases. Then, they will also be able to proceed in court.

Wyndham has modified its arbitration clause, but there are still many owners out there with the old form of arbitration clause which causes the AAA to decline to hear cases. Now if that happens, owners should be free to sue.

 

[davidvel]

Good ruling, good news.

 

[pedro47]

To the OP. That was an awesome piece of information.

 

[VacationForever]

I am not a lawyer, but can someone please translate to me what this lawsuit is about? I think Worldmark owners can now sue Wyndham in court?

 

[CalGalTraveler]

It sounds like they were putting people in a catch 22. Arbitration court would deny hearing the case leaving the owner with no court recourse. This sounds like it solves that. Arbitration courts are notorious for supporting corporations over consumers.

 

[chapjim]

The opinion attached to OP's post is almost 100% procedural. It will be interesting to see a decision on the merits of the case.

 

[LeslieDet]

It sounds like they were putting people in a catch 22. Arbitration court would deny hearing the case leaving the owner with no court recourse. This sounds like it solves that. Arbitration courts are notorious for supporting corporations over consumers.

AAA arbitration is not a "court". It is an alternative tribunal. The rules for the arbitration are basically agreed to in the arbitration clause you sign when you enter into the contract. And with many of those clauses, the consumer has no leverage to negotiate the T&C. Depending upon the amount in dispute, there may be a 3 person panel or it may only be one arbitrator. Arbitration is expensive also, but theoretically less expensive than going through the court system when you count attorney's fees, however there are costs required to be paid in arbitration that are prohibitive for most litigants. Many arbitrators are retired judges. Some are lawyers who never served on the bench. Arbitration has been a means for corporations to have more protection over litigation and more control of litigation because there will never be a jury in an arbitration. Whereas in the court system, unless it is a specific type of claim, juries are part of our legal process. And, unless there is outright fraud on the part of the arbitrators, there is never a judicial review (ie appeal) of arbitration decisions. Moreover, the rulings are not public.

 

[timsi]

AAA arbitration is not a "court". It is an alternative tribunal. The rules for the arbitration are basically agreed to in the arbitration clause you sign when you enter into the contract. And with many of those clauses, the consumer has no leverage to negotiate the T&C. Depending upon the amount in dispute, there may be a 3 person panel or it may only be one arbitrator. Arbitration is expensive also, but theoretically less expensive than going through the court system when you count attorney's fees, however there are costs required to be paid in arbitration that are prohibitive for most litigants. Many arbitrators are retired judges. Some are lawyers who never served on the bench. Arbitration has been a means for corporations to have more protection over litigation and more control of litigation because there will never be a jury in an arbitration. Whereas in the court system, unless it is a specific type of claim, juries are part of our legal process. And, unless there is outright fraud on the part of the arbitrators, there is never a judicial review (ie appeal) of arbitration decisions. Moreover, the rulings are not public.

Do you think Wyndham should notify all owners to make them aware of the issue with the arbitration clause? I doubt that the company was unaware that they were no longer meeting the standards required by AAA..

 

[geist1223]

Does anyone know when Wyndham modified the Arbitration language in the Sales Contracts?

Also any modification would only effect Contracts after the new language was placed in the Sales Contract. Wyndham can not modify language in a Sales Contract that was entered before that date.

 

[geist1223]

Do you think Wyndham should notify all owners to make them aware of the issue with the arbitration clause? I doubt that the company was unaware that they were no longer meeting the standards required by AAA..

Maybe they should and an ethical company would. But we are talking about Wyndumb.

 

[CalGalTraveler]

AAA arbitration is not a "court". It is an alternative tribunal. The rules for the arbitration are basically agreed to in the arbitration clause you sign when you enter into the contract. And with many of those clauses, the consumer has no leverage to negotiate the T&C. Depending upon the amount in dispute, there may be a 3 person panel or it may only be one arbitrator. Arbitration is expensive also, but theoretically less expensive than going through the court system when you count attorney's fees, however there are costs required to be paid in arbitration that are prohibitive for most litigants. Many arbitrators are retired judges. Some are lawyers who never served on the bench. Arbitration has been a means for corporations to have more protection over litigation and more control of litigation because there will never be a jury in an arbitration. Whereas in the court system, unless it is a specific type of claim, juries are part of our legal process. And, unless there is outright fraud on the part of the arbitrators, there is never a judicial review (ie appeal) of arbitration decisions. Moreover, the rulings are not public.

Appreciate the detailed explanation. Forgive my lack of precision as I am not a lawyer and used the word "court" loosely to signify a place where a decision is determined. My argument remains valid in that most corporations favor arbitration for the reasons you specified; this stacks the odds in their favor. However in the USA it seems there is little one can do to avoid arbitration clauses unless one wants to live off grid and never purchase or receive services, including healthcare.

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

Of late attorneys have actually been turning the tables somewhat on these arbitration clauses by filing arbitration claims (that could have been a class action otherwise) en masse and all at the same time, causing the corporations potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars (or even millions) in arbitration fees. It’s been interesting to watch.

Here’s an example: https://onlabor.org/uber-and-lyft-drivers-turn-the-tables-on-individual-arbitration/

 

[RENTER]

I had 4 owners save New Years Eve for 4 people who had their reservations which they had booked in advance in the summer cancelled this week. This is a major story and you are concerned why it is in this thread? The thread should be why should anyone trust this company.

 

[CYRUS2400]

I had 4 owners save New Years Eve for 4 people who had their reservations which they had booked in advance in the summer cancelled this week. This is a major story and you are concerned why it is in this thread? The thread should be why should anyone trust this company.

Perhaps you can provide a few more details. 4 owners, 4 people. Were the 4 people the actual owners? or guests?

 

[sponger76]

I had 4 owners save New Years Eve for 4 people who had their reservations which they had booked in advance in the summer cancelled this week. This is a major story and you are concerned why it is in this thread? The thread should be why should anyone trust this company.

Wait, aren't you on this forum constantly gloating that while everyone is worried about Wyndham's very public crackdown on renting that you are still able to get away with it, and saying that if they ever get around to cracking down on you, no big deal? Why all the sudden angst and acting surprised for these other owners getting the hammer for renting?

 

[davidvel]

Wait, aren't you on this forum constantly gloating that while everyone is worried about Wyndham's very public crackdown on renting that you are still able to get away with it, and saying that if they ever get around to cracking down on you, no big deal? Why all the sudden angst and acting surprised for these other owners getting the hammer for renting?

 

[sponger76]

View attachment 86083

@davidvel I don't have a dog in this fight, but just sayin'...

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

Wait, aren't you on this forum constantly gloating that while everyone is worried about Wyndham's very public crackdown on renting that you are still able to get away with it, and saying that if they ever get around to cracking down on you, no big deal? Why all the sudden angst and acting surprised for these other owners getting the hammer for renting?

This is an excellent point.

With that said, I would note that someone on disboards someone who rented Bonnet Creek through extraholidays for the first week in December reported they had their reservation cancelled due to “overbooking.” So it does seem like something’s going on. My guess is some kind of software glitch given how incompetent their IT is. Maybe the “ghost inventory” is worse than we thought and they are allowing people to book it. It seems like priority is being given to owners staying on their own points (makes sense) when they have to cancel reservations so it would make sense that RENTER is seeing the effects of this, but the rest of us might not be.

Edit: Or maybe it’s another back-door way for them to crack down on renting. Continued fear of “your reservation may be cancelled at the last minute” certainly might discourage prospective renters. The fact that RENTER is renting a lot during what is probably an owner priority period might put him in more danger of this.

 

[RunCat]

Attached is an important 11th Circuit decision today in a lengthy battle against Wyndham. The court held that if the AAA declines to hear an arbitration demand against Wyndham, then Wyndham can not turn around and move to compel arbitration if the timeshare owner proceeds in court. Six of the eight plaintiffs contracted with Wyndham Vacation Resorts Inc. They can proceed with the suit they filed in federal court in Florida.

The court remanded the case for the two plaintiffs who dealt with Worldmark. They will probably need to file demands with the AAA to confirm that the AAA will not hear their cases. Then, they will also be able to proceed in court.

Wyndham has modified its arbitration clause, but there are still many owners out there with the old form of arbitration clause which causes the AAA to decline to hear cases. Now if that happens, owners should be free to sue.

Thank you for sharing. I was unfamiliar with this case. Having read through the filing from 2021, it seems that this case, regardless of outcome, could have wide implications across the entire timeshare industry.

 

[paxsarah]

It seems like priority is being given to owners staying on their own points (makes sense) when they have to cancel reservations so it would make sense that RENTER is seeing the effects of this, but the rest of us might not be.

This reminds me of an owner who posted in one of the Facebook groups a few months ago who had booked a cash reservation with one of the New Orleans locations, I think with Wyndham Rewards (but definitely a Wyndham rental arm), and then was bumped due to overbooking. She was understandably upset, but it seems beneficial to owners to know that it's the cash guest who will be bumped first instead of owners staying on timeshare points. Especially since the knee-jerkiest anti-Wyndham folks in those groups claim without any evidence that Wyndham regularly bumps owners booked with timeshare points in favor of cash customers.

 

[jp10558]

This reminds me of an owner who posted in one of the Facebook groups a few months ago who had booked a cash reservation with one of the New Orleans locations, I think with Wyndham Rewards (but definitely a Wyndham rental arm), and then was bumped due to overbooking. She was understandably upset, but it seems beneficial to owners to know that it's the cash guest who will be bumped first instead of owners staying on timeshare points. Especially since the knee-jerkiest anti-Wyndham folks in those groups claim without any evidence that Wyndham regularly bumps owners booked with timeshare points in favor of cash customers.

Seems like what they ought to do is fix the system that allows overbooking at all.

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

This reminds me of an owner who posted in one of the Facebook groups a few months ago who had booked a cash reservation with one of the New Orleans locations, I think with Wyndham Rewards (but definitely a Wyndham rental arm), and then was bumped due to overbooking. She was understandably upset, but it seems beneficial to owners to know that it's the cash guest who will be bumped first instead of owners staying on timeshare points. Especially since the knee-jerkiest anti-Wyndham folks in those groups claim without any evidence that Wyndham regularly bumps owners booked with timeshare points in favor of cash customers.

Yeah this is a good point. I’m probably naive but I think Wyndham gets probably too much hate, and most of what is attributed to malice can more easily be explained by incompetence.

 

[geist1223]

Over the last 6 months on www.wmowners.com Worldmark Owners have reported getting cancelled due to alleged over Booking while Wyndumb has Units for Rent.

Then Wyndumb refuses to follow the Governing Documents that require a replacement Booking for the same time period and quality at no cost to the Worldmark Member.

 

[rickandcindy23]

I have major comprehension issues. Thirty pages is too much to read for me. LOL!

 

[davidvel]

@davidvel I don't have a dog in this fight, but just sayin'...

I was just looking forward to their response. So far crickets, so my popcorn was wasted.