kpeiper
TUG Member
I continue to be very frustrated that Wyndham has forced Shell Vacations Club (SVC) owners to use RCI for exchanges with an EXCLUSIVE agreement even though the Shell Owners Association bylaws allow for multiple exchange company affiliating. Of course, the board is heavily filled with Wyndham employees and you have no access to any non-Wyndham Board members. I have sent this letter to the SOAW board. They have an obligation to act in the best interest of the OWNERS. Why don't they see that RCI is an inferior product with a dismal selection. I'm just asking for dual affiliation. That would be a WIN. Of course Wyndham states that II was poorly utilized and owners prefer RCI!
In the mean time, working with legislative analysts to get the Vacation Ownership Timehare Act of 2004 in California updated with more owner protections. It is overdue to get some additional guidelines for Developers/Managers since as the industry has consolidated and is driven to higher profits to the shareholders.
Here is an abbreviated copy of the letter for SVC owners. If you agree, please send your feedback to the board! Time to put down the rubber stamp to approve the Wyndham revenue grab. Board needs to speak up!
Shell Owners Association West (SOAW) Board,
I have been an owner with Shell Vacations Club (SVC) since 2008. I have had the opportunity to experience many amazing vacations with my family using my SVC 20,485 grandfathered signature points of ownership. I have learned to utilize my ownership and appreciate the value of timeshare ownership.
First, I would like to provide you with a history of my grievance with Wyndham, SVC and SOAW:
With limited access to SVC properties, I have frequently utilized exchange companies to access locations outside of the SVC network of resorts. For many years, my family enjoyed the selection of high-quality reports available through Interval International (II) when they were affiliated with SVC. Once Wyndham became the management company for SVC and the contract with II ended, SVC selected Wyndham-owned RCI to provide exchange services. Despite Wyndham’s self-serving claim that II was underutilized and there was an owner preference for RCI, I am not aware that there was any owner feedback considered, or preference polls conducted. I have also been informed by Wyndham that the contract they entered with RCI is exclusive with no competing affiliations allowed. This contractual “nepotism” should have been carefully reviewed by the board to ensure the owners interests were primary in the agreement.
After trying to utilize the RCI exchange agreement for my vacation need, I because increasingly frustrated with the universally lower quality of resorts available through RCI than previously offered through II. In general, RCI offers a higher number of older, independent time-share projects that are well past prime and often need modernization. I tried to ascertain if there was an affiliation with II that could be utilized at my own expense for membership like the dual affiliation agreement in place, but carefully hidden and difficult to navigate, for the Wyndham-managed Wordmark the Club. I could not find a way to use SVC with II. I asked Time Dierks, VP of Owner Utilization for Wyndham if it was possible to use II with SVC at the 2024 SOAW during the open forum. He confirmed that there was indeed an agreement that would allow exchanges with II and I could contact him after the meeting for assistance. When I followed up with him later, he apologized that he had given me incorrect information and assured me that he would investigate the matter. After a year of some conversation back and forth with no resolution and some indication that it might be addressed when the new RCI contract was up for renewal. He then assigned John De Vivo, Director, Compliance and Customer Experience Strategy to help me find a resolution. I provided him with a comparison of II vs. RCI resorts to illustrate the difference in quality. I pointed out that II exchanges are actually much less expensive than RCI exchange for the non-signature owners. We had some dialogue back and forth that seemed like there was a potential solution. For that reason, I did not bring this up at the 2024 SOAW Meeting. Following the meeting, John quit responding and the dialogue stopped.
Since that time, I have had some additional conversation with Jeff Pank, Board President and Tim Dierks with no resolution.
These are the facts, my current grievance and desired resolution for the SOAW board to consider:
I invite you to reach out to me for a dialogue if you have any questions. Again, I value being an owner of Shell Vacations Club. It has provided some great vacations. As the sales team promotes more “dots on the map,” I am just seeking to expand my access to resorts that are equivalent to the ones I own at the maintenance fees that I pay. This is an easy fix. Wyndam’s profits from exchanges are not the board’s primary objective. Let’s focus on owner satisfaction and quality vacations.
In the mean time, working with legislative analysts to get the Vacation Ownership Timehare Act of 2004 in California updated with more owner protections. It is overdue to get some additional guidelines for Developers/Managers since as the industry has consolidated and is driven to higher profits to the shareholders.
Here is an abbreviated copy of the letter for SVC owners. If you agree, please send your feedback to the board! Time to put down the rubber stamp to approve the Wyndham revenue grab. Board needs to speak up!
Shell Owners Association West (SOAW) Board,
I have been an owner with Shell Vacations Club (SVC) since 2008. I have had the opportunity to experience many amazing vacations with my family using my SVC 20,485 grandfathered signature points of ownership. I have learned to utilize my ownership and appreciate the value of timeshare ownership.
First, I would like to provide you with a history of my grievance with Wyndham, SVC and SOAW:
With limited access to SVC properties, I have frequently utilized exchange companies to access locations outside of the SVC network of resorts. For many years, my family enjoyed the selection of high-quality reports available through Interval International (II) when they were affiliated with SVC. Once Wyndham became the management company for SVC and the contract with II ended, SVC selected Wyndham-owned RCI to provide exchange services. Despite Wyndham’s self-serving claim that II was underutilized and there was an owner preference for RCI, I am not aware that there was any owner feedback considered, or preference polls conducted. I have also been informed by Wyndham that the contract they entered with RCI is exclusive with no competing affiliations allowed. This contractual “nepotism” should have been carefully reviewed by the board to ensure the owners interests were primary in the agreement.
After trying to utilize the RCI exchange agreement for my vacation need, I because increasingly frustrated with the universally lower quality of resorts available through RCI than previously offered through II. In general, RCI offers a higher number of older, independent time-share projects that are well past prime and often need modernization. I tried to ascertain if there was an affiliation with II that could be utilized at my own expense for membership like the dual affiliation agreement in place, but carefully hidden and difficult to navigate, for the Wyndham-managed Wordmark the Club. I could not find a way to use SVC with II. I asked Time Dierks, VP of Owner Utilization for Wyndham if it was possible to use II with SVC at the 2024 SOAW during the open forum. He confirmed that there was indeed an agreement that would allow exchanges with II and I could contact him after the meeting for assistance. When I followed up with him later, he apologized that he had given me incorrect information and assured me that he would investigate the matter. After a year of some conversation back and forth with no resolution and some indication that it might be addressed when the new RCI contract was up for renewal. He then assigned John De Vivo, Director, Compliance and Customer Experience Strategy to help me find a resolution. I provided him with a comparison of II vs. RCI resorts to illustrate the difference in quality. I pointed out that II exchanges are actually much less expensive than RCI exchange for the non-signature owners. We had some dialogue back and forth that seemed like there was a potential solution. For that reason, I did not bring this up at the 2024 SOAW Meeting. Following the meeting, John quit responding and the dialogue stopped.
Since that time, I have had some additional conversation with Jeff Pank, Board President and Tim Dierks with no resolution.
These are the facts, my current grievance and desired resolution for the SOAW board to consider:
- I am contacting you as a board members of the Shell Owners Association West (SOAW). Board members have fiduciary responsibility to the owners to ensure that the management company, Wyndham (WYN) follows the club rules and bylaws.
- Although there is a necessary symbiotic relationship between SOAW and WYN, Board members employed by WYN must act in the best interests of SOAW when conducting business on behalf of the association.
- Shell Vacations Club (SVC) has had prior successful exchange agreements with both Interval International (II) and RCI in the past. The quality of II locations is far superior, exchange fees for non-elite owners are much lower than RCI. Dual affiliation give owners increased choice and the freedom to self-pay for a second exchange program, II, if desired. This increases value of ownership which the board should support.
- II has indicated that they would be willing to re-establish an exchange agreement with SVC. They will not allow individual owners to exchange without an agreement between SOAW or WYN in place.
- WYN currently has agreements with BOTH RCI and II in place for Worldmark the Club. SVC can easily follow this precedent and despite claims of “cost impacts,” this should be nominal as the work mirrors work already being conducted.
- The SVC bylaws state the following in Chapter 9: Exchange Rights and Rules:
- 9.2.A. At the member’s own option and risk, any member may exchange his or her use rights through an external exchange program.
- SVC currently contracts with RCI and that program is part of the club as defined in 9.2.B
- 9.2.C.1. The Association may enter into an exchange contract with one or more exchange companies to provide traditional exchange services to home club members.
- Although the Association “may enter into an exchange contract with one or more exchange companies” it appears that WYN has entered into an exclusive agreement with RCI on behalf of SVC. SOAW should still have the right to enter an exchange agreement and have the management company, WYN administer the activities of that agreement. If the RCI/WYN agreement infringes on the rights of the association to establish an agreement with II, was that approved by the board? Was the board aware that the owner’s right to exchange with multiple companies is being denied?
- At no time have I surrendered my right to exchange my ownership interests with II as the external exchange program of my choice. SVC’s refusal to establish a contract is denying my right to exchange my use rights through an external exchange program of my choice.
- WYN owns RCI and the exclusive contract with RCI as the designated program company without a bid process and board review and approval is a conflict of interest. Did the board have any oversight or input into the selection of RCI?
- The association has the right to ask WYN to establish a contract between SOAW and II for exchange services.\
- The board has a fiduciary responsibility to manage WYN’s actions to get the best value for owners.
- I ask the board to establish an exchange agreement between SOAW and II to allow owners to exchange with II at their own expense. The board can then ask the management company, WYN to administer the secondary exchange program as part of their ongoing management responsibility. It is in the owner’s best interest and value to have a choice of exchange programs. The board must make decisions in the best interest of owners, protect rights afforded by the association bylaws and preserve value of ownership.
I invite you to reach out to me for a dialogue if you have any questions. Again, I value being an owner of Shell Vacations Club. It has provided some great vacations. As the sales team promotes more “dots on the map,” I am just seeking to expand my access to resorts that are equivalent to the ones I own at the maintenance fees that I pay. This is an easy fix. Wyndam’s profits from exchanges are not the board’s primary objective. Let’s focus on owner satisfaction and quality vacations.
!
