• Welcome to the FREE TUGBBS forums! The absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 32 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 32 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 32nd anniversary: Happy 32nd Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    All subscribers auto-entered to win all free TUG membership giveaways!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $24,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $24 Million dollars
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    Tens of thousands of subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

Join complaints against Starwood

gmarine

gmarine

Tug Review Crew: Rookie
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,310
Reaction score
20
I've gotten a ton of emails from people unhappy with the Starwood changes that have been made. For those who havent followed the threads, basically Starwood has decided that they have the right to tell non-SVN owners what week at their resort that they can deposit with Interval. Non-SVN owners have deeded property rights. Once we make a reservation, we are free to do as we wish with that week. Starwood doesnt get to control our deeded weeks.

I've spoken to Starwood multiple times by phone and it seems Starwood management believes they have the right to do this since it only affects deposits with II.

Imagine Starwood telling you that you cant rent week 52, but instead they will give you week 50. Its essentially the same thing. If you make a reservation and then deposit that week with II you are giving the usage of that week to II. Starwood has no right to interfere. Allow them to do this with no fight and who knows whar could be next.

That being said, I think its time to move on and up. Myself and some other Tuggers I have spoken with are going to start gathering Starwood owners for the purpose of fighting this.

Among the actions are going to be complaints to the Real Estate Commissions and Attorney General's of any state where an affected resort is located. One TUG member is going to post on his travel blog. I'm also going to contact law firms that have previously handled timeshare cases to look into a lawsuit against Starwood.
Details of Starwood screwing owners will be put up on every and any timeshare/travel message board that we can find.
Complaints to Interval will be sent as well.

At the very least we are going to get it out there that Starwood isnt owner friendly.

If your interested in joining the complaints please send me a PM. Any help in gathering members would be appreciated.

George
 
Count me in!
 
While I'm not a fan of litigation, I am a fan of its discovery phase, where each side is allowed to propound interrogatories, requests for production, and requests for admission to the other side and follow-up with depositions, etc. of key employees.

This may be the only way to figure out what SVO has been doing with all of our maintenance fee and special assessment monies and what has been happening to the revenue generated from rentals, etc.

The biggest problem with this discovery phase is that you have to actually sue someone in the US to trigger it, and once you've sued someone you often can't easily stop suing them if you change your mind or run out of money.

I understand that Canada has a pre-litigation phase where you can obtain limited discovery from a potential litigant before you actually sue them. If so, this would be the way to go. We could see SVO's documents, etc. produced and then decide what to do with that info.

Are there any Canadian SVO owners (preferably who purchased over the phone while they were still in Canada) willing to look into this option for the team?

-nodge
 
Last edited:
Nodge, I may am Canadian and I purchased my SVR while in Canada. I would like to help you out but to do what you have in mind would require the services of a member of the legal profession and the meter starts running on that the minute you walk into their office.
 
amanven said:
Nodge, I may am Canadian and I purchased my SVR while in Canada. I would like to help you out but to do what you have in mind would require the services of a member of the legal profession and the meter starts running on that the minute you walk into their office.
Click to expand...

Thanks for checking in!

Hmmmm. I'm pretty sure ARDA won't be helping us out here despite the millions it has collected from us through SVO's illegal opt-out or donate plan. (Funny, I don't recall this story making it into MSC either.)

Let's see if any Canadian attorneys chime in to at least confirm my understanding of Canadian litigation procedures. We can then take things from there.

-nodge
 
Last edited:
Count me in as well gmarine. I can help with letter writing if needed. I'm also willing to contribute to a legal fund.
 
Tally Ho!!!
 
I am in, of course! We need like 200 people to get a good attorney at a low cost per person, if we go that route. Can we get that many from TUG? That would be awesome.

My new gripe:

I can see ALL of the Westins on the islands this morning with my lowliest trader, a Foxrun week 13. That means NO more priority, and trading power is not needed to get them.

Is this accidental? Planned? Why doesn't Starwood want us to see the units in their system, when it's worked for Marriott for years. Starwood isn't looking out for the owners, just to stop people here on TUG from taking advantage of the system. I am going to put ongoing searches in with my Sheratons and my Foxrun and see which comes through first for me. If my Foxrun comes through, we will know the motives of this latest move by Starwood: they want new blood for their sales tours, and will take away our priority to get it.
 
rickandcindy23 said:
I am in, of course! We need like 200 people to get a good attorney at a low cost per person, if we go that route. Can we get that many from TUG? That would be awesome.

My new gripe:

I can see ALL of the Westins on the islands this morning with my lowliest trader, a Foxrun week 13. That means NO more priority, and trading power is not needed to get them.

Is this accidental? Planned? Why doesn't Starwood want us to see the units in their system, when it's worked for Marriott for years. Starwood isn't looking out for the owners, just to stop people here on TUG from taking advantage of the system. I am going to put ongoing searches in with my Sheratons and my Foxrun and see which comes through first for me. If my Foxrun comes through, we will know the motives of this latest move by Starwood: they want new blood for their sales tours, and will take away our priority to get it.
Click to expand...


Cindi, there is more than likely going to be no cost for any legal action. I hope it doesnt come to that. I really do like Starwood but we do have to protect our rights. However, if it does come to that, more than likely one of two things is going to happen.

First, since Starwood is taking away deeded property rights, the Attorney General's of any state affected could take action against Starwood.

Second, if there does turn out to be a lawsuit filed, it would more than likely be taken on by a law firm on a contingency basis. This is from a friend who is a lawyer but not in this area of law. He also tells me that with the sheer volume of Starwood members that any law firm would look for class action status. Its for this reason they would take it on contingency.

Lets just hope Starwood heeds the complaints and stops this non-sense before any of this has to be considered.

I'm also contacting the NY Times writer who did an article featuring TUG members back a few months ago. Myself and Cindy were interviewed for the article. I'm going to ask her to consider an article on one of the pitfalls of timesharing, specifically developers trying to take advantage of owners. I think it would make a great story.:)
 
I would be glad to talk to the NY Times writer, too. I own a deeded fixed week/fixed unit at SVR that is the week before or after Easter 65% of the time - and it has been designated a floating week in my II Acct. now.

How can they possibly deny me the right to deposit my deeded FIXED week/unit???
 
Count me in! I am an WMH owner (resale).
Starwood should know better than this.
 
Not just SVC behind the problem

DeniseM said:
I would be glad to talk to the NY Times writer, too. I own a deeded fixed week/fixed unit at SVR that is the week before or after Easter 65% of the time - and it has been designated a floating week in my II Acct. now.

How can they possibly deny me the right to deposit my deeded FIXED week/unit???
Click to expand...

Ask any Wastegate owner. With II's tacit blessing they just do it! The problem isn't only with the corrupt developers but the exchange company with no stomach for member rights as well. Sounds like II to me!
 
Stevens397 is on board too. That makes two companies I own who are screwing their owners - Starwood and the Manhattan Club.
 
I'm also on board if SVN insists on taking my reserved week away once I place the "request first" with II. I have not tried it yet...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top