II 2025 update - all bad news

[Kapolei]

It was good while it lasted. Can someone tell me if they can withhold a deposit from a member from the inventory so they can sell it as a getaway?

 

[Hindsite]

It was good while it lasted. Can someone tell me if they can withhold a deposit from a member from the inventory so they can sell it as a getaway?

Not sure what you mean with this, but if you are asking if Getaway inventory can be available where no exchange inventory is available or if a deposited week can be put into getaway and not exchange inventory then: Yes.

Someone may deposit a week and do a cruise exchange so II need to recoup the costs of what they have to pay the cruise company. You see that come up as expensive looking getaways available further in advance than normal.

It is the resorts and timeshare brands that determine what goes into getaway vs exchange inventory and some brands also determine what actually gets deposited to II vs what a member has deposited. Sheraton and Westin are examples of this where an owner deposits their owned unit size and season and Vistana decide what actual week gets deposited to II.

Points systems have to do this, as you may get 3 weeks of exchange from 1 weeks worth of Hyatt points deposited. Along the way II and the timeshare companies have to try and find a way for people with poor deposits to get better ones, as that is easy to do. They also need to offload orphaned and surplus inventory so use II as a way to do that via Getaways, Flexchange and Accom Certs.

I remain stunned at the value we have managed to get over more than 20 years and it looks like its going to continue for a good while yet, even with the cuts to benefits and increases in price. If it stops for how we travel, we'll just give away the timeshares knowing it served us very well for decades.

 

[Kapolei]

Not sure what you mean with this, but if you are asking if Getaway inventory can be available where no exchange inventory is available or if a deposited week can be put into getaway and not exchange inventory then: Yes.

Someone may deposit a week and do a cruise exchange so II need to recoup the costs of what they have to pay the exchange company. You see that come up as expensive looking getaways available further in advance than normal.

It is the resorts and timeshare brands that determine what goes into getaway vs exchange inventory and some brands also determine what actually gets deposited to II vs what a member has deposited. Sheraton and Westin are examples of this where an owner deposits their owned unit size and season and Vistana decide what actual week gets deposited to II.

Points systems have to do this, as you may get 3 weeks of exchange from 1 weeks worth of Hyatt points deposited. Along the way II and the timeshare companies have to try and find a way for people with poor deposits to get better ones, as that is easy to do. They also need to offload orphaned and surplus inventory so use II as a way to do that via Getaways, Flexchange and Accom Certs.

I remain stunned at the value we have managed to get over more than 20 years and it looks like its going to continue for a good while yet, even with the cuts to benefits and increases in price. If it stops for how we travel, we'll just give away the timeshares knowing it served us very well for decades.

Well, that sounds good to me. Mine are worth + or - zero which is better than zero. I am losing interest though because I no longer believe I can pick up a decent unit from a last minute dump. That has taken the fun out of it. And yes some one will take them like I took them for the transfer fee.

 

[djyamyam]

I took the suggestion by @alwysonvac and contacted Mark at II. I heard back today from an associate and got a couple answers.

1. For any current unused late deposits that have the flexchange restriction, if they were deposited more than 30 days out and less than 59 days, they will become unrestricted deposits after July 1. For any deposits that were deposited >14 days but less than 30 days, they will continue to be late deposits subject to the 30 day flexchange restriction. So it will mirror new deposits policy after July 1

In a follow up post, I mentioned that my flexchange deposits were still limited to the old 59 day limitation and the new flexchange guidelines hadn't been enacted yet. I received a response to my follow up message to Mark and he indicated the following:
"All deposits should be updated to reflect the new status by July 13, 2025".

Interval Guest Certificate — As of July 1, 2025, the number of complimentary Guest Certificates included with an Interval Platinum® membership will change to three per membership year. Please note that if you have more than three complimentary Guest Certificates remaining in your Interval Platinum membership, the total will be adjusted to three as of July 1, 2025. In addition, the cost of Guest Certificates will increase to $89

So I was in the scenario they outlined as an example in the wording above. Yesterday, I had 4 GCs in my account and I didn't want to lose out on that additional GC and used one on an exchange that I might have a guest use so we would have 3 leftover. Today, my account only shows 1. In talking with the guide, I was told how they applied the policy was you used 2 of your certificates so you only have 1 remaining (ie. 3 - 2 =1). I don't get that logic from the new wording. Am I off on my interpretation? Did anyone else think what I thought?

In the guest cert issue, what was written above is not what was done. Mark has confirmed that what was done is "it".
"Regarding the guest certificates, any free guest certificates already used during the current yearly Interval Platinum membership will be deducted from the count. As a result, the current guest certificate count is correct. No adjustments will be made."

I'm not happy about the outcome but it doesn't look like there is any recourse to change the handling on GCs. They basically did a retroactive adjustment, which is not what seemed to have been communicated. @dioxide45 I think you got lucky on your account

 

[jp10558]

Wow, this makes little sense to me to do it this way - most companies will just change on renewal. I guess they didn't want to deal with a 5 year potential trail off date, but I also really wonder how many people have Platinum at 5 years (or even more than 3 years) to the next renewal? I guess like all TS stuff, bad press doesn't matter for the companies as again - what are you going to do? Get rid of TS entirely? Never exchange again? Does RCI treat you better if you're in an independent resort that you can choose and change company?

For me (and I will bet many at TUG) it all comes down to dollars and cents - is what I get through my TS sufficiently still a savings over my alternatives? If so, I keep doing it. I think where they'll have issues is once they cost close to getting access via another method or staying at non TS resorts or multiple hotel rooms.

 

[dioxide45]

In the guest cert issue, what was written above is not what was done. Mark has confirmed that what was done is "it".
"Regarding the guest certificates, any free guest certificates already used during the current yearly Interval Platinum membership will be deducted from the count. As a result, the current guest certificate count is correct. No adjustments will be made."

I'm not happy about the outcome but it doesn't look like there is any recourse to change the handling on GCs. They basically did a retroactive adjustment, which is not what seemed to have been communicated. @dioxide45 I think you got lucky on your account

This is pretty poor implementation of the adjustment to the counts. I mean, they communicate one thing but then do another and refuse to make an adjustment based on what was written? That just plain sucks.

 

[rickandcindy23]

I agree with you @Hindsite as we have gotten such incredible value out of our ownership of Marriott and Sheraton weeks. I am amazed at what we have gotten through exchange. The Westin Nanea weeks we got for 2026 for our oldest son and his wife's anniversary trip using 2 bedrooms at SBR. What a deal for the kids and for us. The grandkids are out of school, and it's an ideal time to be on Maui. I grabbed six units for that trip. It was an amazing exchange opportunity. I am in awe of the trading power. That is just ONE example of so many. I hope it lasts.

 

[claraj]

I am pretty happy with my first exchange - I was able to get (2) 2BRs at Aruba Surf Club with my 2BR silver week at Los Suenos!! Our party of 10 was really happy with the room upgrades I was able to secure at the last minute.

Regarding the loss of GCs, I am not that bothered since my membership renews in August and I didn't really have a use for the remaining GCs.

 

[Kapolei]

There is a ton of Welk (now Hyatt) being sold at low cost as getaways. But none are available to me on exchange with an OL studio like they were last year. II is definitely pushing me towards the exit. I only have to dump two to get out for good.

 

[dioxide45]

There is a ton of Welk (now Hyatt) being sold at low cost as getaways. But none are available to me on exchange with an OL studio like they were last year. II is definitely pushing me towards the exit. I only have to dump two to get out for good.

What are the resort codes? I may search for those and see what I see on an exchange with a Marriott. Perhaps they are all just available for cash getaways?

 

[Kapolei]

VLW WMX … maybe I spoke too fast … those are all outside 60 days … are we at 30 or 60 now?

 

[dioxide45]

VLW WMX … maybe I spoke too fast … those are all outside 60 days … are we at 30 or 60 now?

We think Flexchange is still 59 days right now.

 

[dioxide45]

VLW WMX … maybe I spoke too fast … those are all outside 60 days … are we at 30 or 60 now?

I see a lot of 1BR units September through July using a Marriott 2BR deposit.

 

[Kapolei]

I see a lot of 1BR units September through July using a Marriott 2BR deposit.

I remember seeing all of that in the past with an upgrade fee. Then when the 59 day period arrived the upgrade fee would go away. I will track this going forward to see what happens. I saw one unit last week with my OL studio. The location is kind of isolated but it is not terribly far from family that I visit. And it is an example of getting a very good quality stay in exchange for a pos timeshare.

 

[TravelJoy]

You agreed to the T&C's when you made your purchase. "Membership benefits other than the exchange privilege, including certain Interval Gold, Club Interval Gold, and Interval Platinum benefits, are subject to separate terms and conditions . Said benefits, their providers, and their terms of use may be changed, substituted, or eliminated without prior notice." You don't have a case.

Loading…

www.intervalworld.com

Wrong:

AI Overview

+13




Here's a breakdown of relevant legal concepts and case examples in California:
1. Unconscionability and Terms of Service (TOS) in California:

• California Civil Code Section 1670.5 allows courts to refuse to enforce unconscionable contracts.
• For a contract to be unenforceable due to unconscionability, it must be both procedurally (circumstances of creation) and substantively (fairness of terms) unconscionable. Procedural unconscionability is often found in "contracts of adhesion", while substantive unconscionability involves unfair outcomes.
• California courts scrutinize arbitration agreements, particularly in employment contexts, and may refuse to enforce them if found unconscionable, allowing claims to proceed in court.

2. Case Example: Ramirez v. Charter Communications, Inc. (2024)

• The California Supreme Court found an employment arbitration agreement between Charter Communications and an employee (Ramirez) unenforceable due to unconscionability.
• Unconscionable terms included a lack of mutuality in claims covered, shortened filing deadlines, and unfair attorney fee provisions.
• This case emphasizes California's strict approach to arbitration agreements and the need for fair and balanced contract terms.

3. Unfair Competition Law (UCL) in California:

• California's UCL (Business and Professions Code Section 17200) prohibits "unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice".
• The UCL has a broad scope, covering various actions like misleading advertising and practices that harm consumers.
• Examples include false advertising, hidden fees, and placing unenforceable terms in contracts.
• Cases like Kraus v. Trinity Management Services, Inc. (2000) have addressed restitution in private UCL actions.
• Another California Supreme Court case affirmed that consumers have standing to sue under the UCL if they can show they were misled and suffered economic harm.
• Individuals, businesses, the California Attorney General, and local prosecutors can enforce the UCL.

4. Additional Points:

• Terms and conditions are legal agreements, and companies must notify users of changes.
• If a company changes TOS without consent, new provisions may be unenforceable, and users may have claims for breach of contract or consumer protection violations if they can show damages.
• California law protects consumers from automatic renewals without consent and requires easy cancellation options.
• The Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) may also assist consumers affected by unfair business practices.

In summary, California courts are inclined to favor customers and employees when companies attempt to use their terms and conditions, including arbitration agreements, to bypass consumer protection laws or create unconscionable results. Unconscionability is a key legal concept in these cases, focusing on both the circumstances of the agreement and the fairness of its terms. California's Unfair Competition Law also provides a means to address various unfair or deceptive business practices.

 

[TravelJoy]

Lawuits are costly. The class is also very small so trying to get an attorney to take it on contingency would be difficult. Sometimes there are times we just need to suck it up and determine if a company is still worth doing business with.

Yes this is generally true where it can be difficult to find a lawyer but at the same time, there are generally firms very eager to make a quick buck and the question of bad pr + lawyer fees would weigh into their model as well, it's a two way street particularly if it's a very small class. IMO it's never good to walk away especially at this juncture where it's not costing us anything and on principles you give them a inch they take a mile. They know full well this is a retail shakedown and most will lay down and take it.

 

[Kapolei]

I see a lot of 1BR units September through July using a Marriott 2BR deposit.

So, I was wrong on this. I was searching with the wrong deposits. The ones expiring. Everything can still be found with OL. The one thing lost is MKO. I will update if I ever see it reappear.

 

[Mongoose]

Wrong:

AI Overview

+13




Here's a breakdown of relevant legal concepts and case examples in California:
1. Unconscionability and Terms of Service (TOS) in California:

• California Civil Code Section 1670.5 allows courts to refuse to enforce unconscionable contracts.
• For a contract to be unenforceable due to unconscionability, it must be both procedurally (circumstances of creation) and substantively (fairness of terms) unconscionable. Procedural unconscionability is often found in "contracts of adhesion", while substantive unconscionability involves unfair outcomes.
• California courts scrutinize arbitration agreements, particularly in employment contexts, and may refuse to enforce them if found unconscionable, allowing claims to proceed in court.

2. Case Example: Ramirez v. Charter Communications, Inc. (2024)

• The California Supreme Court found an employment arbitration agreement between Charter Communications and an employee (Ramirez) unenforceable due to unconscionability.
• Unconscionable terms included a lack of mutuality in claims covered, shortened filing deadlines, and unfair attorney fee provisions.
• This case emphasizes California's strict approach to arbitration agreements and the need for fair and balanced contract terms.

3. Unfair Competition Law (UCL) in California:

• California's UCL (Business and Professions Code Section 17200) prohibits "unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice".
• The UCL has a broad scope, covering various actions like misleading advertising and practices that harm consumers.
• Examples include false advertising, hidden fees, and placing unenforceable terms in contracts.
• Cases like Kraus v. Trinity Management Services, Inc. (2000) have addressed restitution in private UCL actions.
• Another California Supreme Court case affirmed that consumers have standing to sue under the UCL if they can show they were misled and suffered economic harm.
• Individuals, businesses, the California Attorney General, and local prosecutors can enforce the UCL.

4. Additional Points:

• Terms and conditions are legal agreements, and companies must notify users of changes.
• If a company changes TOS without consent, new provisions may be unenforceable, and users may have claims for breach of contract or consumer protection violations if they can show damages.
• California law protects consumers from automatic renewals without consent and requires easy cancellation options.
• The Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) may also assist consumers affected by unfair business practices.

In summary, California courts are inclined to favor customers and employees when companies attempt to use their terms and conditions, including arbitration agreements, to bypass consumer protection laws or create unconscionable results. Unconscionability is a key legal concept in these cases, focusing on both the circumstances of the agreement and the fairness of its terms. California's Unfair Competition Law also provides a means to address various unfair or deceptive business practices.

LOL, With AI as your counsel, you’re sure to win. Not sure how any of that applies with the exception of T&C, but that “May” statement by AI is a definite sure thing, and your out is to allow you to “Cancel”. Please keep us updated on your case.

 

[TravelJoy]

LOL, With AI as your counsel, you’re sure to win. Not sure how any of that applies with the exception of T&C, but that “May” statement by AI is a definite sure thing, and your out is to allow you to “Cancel”. Please keep us updated on your case.

It's always baffling to me how people have a knee jerk affinity to mandates set by corporations and heel on command, courts often strike down unfair stunts by unscrupulous parties. Still pending, I'll get a favorable outcome and keep you updated.

 

[Mongoose]

It's always baffling to me how people have a knee jerk affinity to mandates set by corporations and heel on command, courts often strike down unfair stunts by unscrupulous parties.

We can agree on that, as well as government edicts. I just don’t see this as something to forge a legal battle over. If you don’t like the product being offered, then don’t buy it. All you will do with a CA is make the attorneys richer, drive up everyone else’s costs and you might end up with a $25 discount coupon after attorneys fees.

 

[TravelJoy]

We can agree on that, as well as government edicts. I just don’t see this as something to forge a legal battle over. If you don’t like the product being offered, then don’t buy it. All you will do with a CA is make the attorneys richer, drive up everyone else’s costs and you might end up with a $25 discount coupon after attorneys fees.

Attorneys are always last course of action. I never buy products I don't like, as do most people. Clearly this isn't the issue, but bait and switch after the transaction is the issue, in the same manner one doesn't pay full fare only to be docked 40% for no reason, it's just cause to take it full force.

 

[claraj]

Not sure if this was discussed yet, but with the change to late deposits, which are now unrestricted if deposited less than 30 days but greater than 14 days, would we expect to see more deposits being delayed to 30 days within check in as opposed to 60 days? Just thinking through the scenario of booking a stay with MVC points as backup which would now become restricted points if you end up waiting until 30 days before check-in. Sorry of this post is unclear and confusing.

 

[dioxide45]

II website is down for maintenance. A day earlier than they usually are. I wonder if they are working on instituting the Flexchange changes.

 

[djyamyam]

In a follow up post, I mentioned that my flexchange deposits were still limited to the old 59 day limitation and the new flexchange guidelines hadn't been enacted yet. I received a response to my follow up message to Mark and he indicated the following:
"All deposits should be updated to reflect the new status by July 13, 2025".

II website is down for maintenance. A day earlier than they usually are. I wonder if they are working on instituting the Flexchange changes.

Looks like that was the case. A couple of my previously restrictred flexchange deposits are now unrestricted and one that was a <30 day flexchange deposit did have the restriction window drop from the 59 to 30 day window. So all the changes seem completed

 

[dioxide45]

Looks like that was the case. A couple of my previously restrictred flexchange deposits are now unrestricted and one that was a <30 day flexchange deposit did have the restriction window drop from the 59 to 30 day window. So all the changes seem completed

I am noticing similar with retrades. Exchanges for checkin that are more than 30 days but less than 60 are not restricted where one checking in next week can't retrade more than 30 days out. These are not Eplus retrades.