Marriott Aruba Ocean Club Owners Being Ripped Off By Marriott - READ IF AN OWNER

[rickxylon]

Has the board shown any proof to any of the owners that they have spent this amount on lawyers? I personally have not received any proof of these expenses and question the validity. Maybe this is the beginning of sucking more assessment money (will this be assessment #3 now??) from the owners.

Have you "received any proof" for all the other expenses that are in the budget and therefore "question the validity" of those?

 

[Steve A]

Indeed I am an owner, and a happy one at that. The letter also indicated that Marriott has hired a parliamentarian to take part in the meetings, and that a very large percentage of owners voting declined to have their names and addresses released to the plaintiffs. Marriott did not cast their votes in this matter.

 

[tlwmkw]

Steve A,

I think you can be sure that what MVCI and your board is telling you is true. They are under such scrutiny from the concerned owners group that I'm sure they are dotting every i and crossing every t- hence the parliamentarian being at the annual meeting. They would be foolish to put out anything that isn't verifiably true because they know that all records may be opened in a court of law and examined if a law suit ever occurs. It sounds like the only things that they are not telling you are confidential issues that have to be kept that way for Marriott business reasons. The concerned owners are asking for transparency and from my perspective they are getting that to the extent that MVCI and the board can do so.

tlwmkw

 

[lovearuba]

believe what you want

Steve A,

I think you can be sure that what MVCI and your board is telling you is true. They are under such scrutiny from the concerned owners group that I'm sure they are dotting every i and crossing every t- hence the parliamentarian being at the annual meeting. They would be foolish to put out anything that isn't verifiably true because they know that all records may be opened in a court of law and examined if a law suit ever occurs. It sounds like the only things that they are not telling you are confidential issues that have to be kept that way for Marriott business reasons. The concerned owners are asking for transparency and from my perspective they are getting that to the extent that MVCI and the board can do so.

tlwmkw

Guess I know there is no skepticism on your part because Marriott always tells the truth right?

 

[mnabnpos]

Have you "received any proof" for all the other expenses that are in the budget and therefore "question the validity" of those?

As an owner of 2 weeks at the AOC I should be entitled to view any documents, invoices or correspondences if requested in writing. Don't you think this is a right as owners to see where our money is going, and, if myself, as an owner who pays maintenance fees and assessment fees should be able to inquire about these expenses?

 

[mnabnpos]

Steve A,

I think you can be sure that what MVCI and your board is telling you is true. They are under such scrutiny from the concerned owners group that I'm sure they are dotting every i and crossing every t- hence the parliamentarian being at the annual meeting. They would be foolish to put out anything that isn't verifiably true because they know that all records may be opened in a court of law and examined if a law suit ever occurs. It sounds like the only things that they are not telling you are confidential issues that have to be kept that way for Marriott business reasons. The concerned owners are asking for transparency and from my perspective they are getting that to the extent that MVCI and the board can do so.

tlwmkw

I have to disagree, if they are using our owners money to pay for this lawsuit and expect us to pay in the future then we should be entitled to view all the courts documents and expenses incurred unless Aruba law is different than US law as far as confidentiality goes.

 

[rickxylon]

Guess I know there is no skepticism on your part because Marriott always tells the truth right?

And you always tell the truth, right?

 

[rickxylon]

I have to disagree, if they are using our owners money to pay for this lawsuit and expect us to pay in the future then we should be entitled to view all the courts documents and expenses incurred unless Aruba law is different than US law as far as confidentiality goes.

If the suit is dropped, no more money would be needed by Marriott to defend themselves. What is the purpose of this lawsuit and why is it continuing?

 

[Dean]

As an owner of 2 weeks at the AOC I should be entitled to view any documents, invoices or correspondences if requested in writing. Don't you think this is a right as owners to see where our money is going, and, if myself, as an owner who pays maintenance fees and assessment fees should be able to inquire about these expenses?

I can't speak to Aruban law but what I understand of FL law would require they show you requested items directly from the resort but it'd have to be in person. Indirect items including contracts with Marriott rather than the resort itself would not be included.

Guess I know there is no skepticism on your part because Marriott always tells the truth right?

Wasn't a large part of this process to prove whether Marriott was honest or not in selling the resort. I was under the impression that certain parties were going to prove they were not in the courts, what happened?

:deadhorse: Is this what you guys were looking for?

No dead horse as of yet. Too many unanswered questions on both sides including the accusation that the owners list may have been stolen and/or used inappropriately.

 

[modoaruba]

Dean,
I was just trying to have the right icon posted when pertaining to the dead animal in a previous post.This-:deadhorse:not this .
Just being politically correct.We don't want to make this into another issue
Dotting those I's and crossing them T's

 

[Dave M]

Has the board shown any proof to any of the owners that they have spent this amount on lawyers?

The "proof" will become available. Like most - if not all - Marriott timeshare resorts, the financial statements for AOC are audited each year by independent CPAs (or chartered accountants or accounting professionals of a similar profession, depending on the country). In AOC's case, the financials are audited by Pricewaterhouse Coopers, one of the four largest and most respected CPA firms in the world. The 2008 audit report is on the AOC owner's site and the 2009 report will likely be added to the site when the audit is complete, discussed with the board and released for owner review.

That audit report, although it won't address any expenditures as small as $100,000, will be the evidence that the financial statements are not misleading. Could the audit report be wrong? Sure. Auditors make errors. But such errors are extremely rare. And when auditors do make errors, it often costs them many millions of $$. Thus, they take their responsibility very seriously.

 

[ecwinch]

But Marriott determines who the auditor is. With all the resorts that MVCI has them audit, and corporate business that Marriott throws their way, do you really think that Price Waterhouse is independent? Did we not learn anything from Enron?

I mean this is a corporation that has foisted off a defective and unsafe building on unsuspecting owners.

 

[Dave M]

Yes, PW is independent. And, yes, there was a lot learned from the Enron case. That's why the CPA profession and a regulatory body have enacted strict controls, oversight and independent audits of auditors to ensure that the credibility of the profession is at the highest level possible. Partners and employees of an auditing firm that claim to be independent and aren't can easily be the subject of long jail terms, as has been demonstrated on several occasions in recent years.

I stated above that auditors, just like the rest of us, make mistakes. When they do, it's usually a mistake of omission, a task they should have performed based on the circumstances - and didn't. That's why it can get very expensive - even a threat to their very existence (e.g., for Arthur Andersen) - when auditors make mistakes.

Short of having the opportunity to audit the financial records yourself, an opportunity you won't get, that audit report is the proof of financial reliability that owners (and corporate shareholders) get when there are audited financial statements. The record for independent auditors is relatively stellar when you consider the thousands of companies that are audited every year.

Incidentally, Pricewaterhouse doesn't audit all of the Marriott resorts. Those audits are spread out among a variety of firms - for the very reason that you accused Marriott of. Further, Pricewaterhouse is not even the firm that audits Marriott! That audit, the big bucks work, is performed by Ernst & Young.

 

[lovearuba]

Generally speaking

Yes, PW is independent. And, yes, there was a lot learned from the Enron case. That's why the CPA profession and a regulatory body have enacted strict controls, oversight and independent audits of auditors to ensure that the credibility of the profession is at the highest level possible. Partners and employees of an auditing firm that claim to be independent and aren't can easily be the subject of long jail terms, as has been demonstrated on several occasions in recent years.

I stated above that auditors, just like the rest of us, make mistakes. When they do, it's usually a mistake of omission, a task they should have performed based on the circumstances - and didn't. That's why it can get very expensive - even a threat to their very existence (e.g., for Arthur Andersen) - when auditors make mistakes.

Short of having the opportunity to audit the financial records yourself, an opportunity you won't get, that audit report is the proof of financial reliability that owners (and corporate shareholders) get when there are audited financial statements. The record for independent auditors is relatively stellar when you consider the thousands of companies that are audited every year.

Incidentally, Pricewaterhouse doesn't audit all of the Marriott resorts. Those audits are spread out among a variety of firms - for the very reason that you accused Marriott of. Further, Pricewaterhouse is not even the firm that audits Marriott! That audit, the big bucks work, is performed by Ernst & Young.

Generally speaking, and fair statements and in their opinion. There is a lot left out of audit reports and the scope areas are generally selected by the auditee. I too am in an auditing field and have worked with all of the top 4 firms. I do believe most auditors do their best to be independent but there are always exceptions, Enron, Worldcom. This is why we are all burdened with Sarbanes Oxely and Model Audit Rules. I wont mention firms names but could easily find situations where the auditor for a company did not find issues that I later found by having another firm perform the same procedures and the results were very different.

 

[tlwmkw]

Lovearuba,

If you really believe this then why doesn't the concerned owners group offer to pay for a separate, independent audit? This would not add to the costs of other owners and might (though you would probably say that MVCI had influenced whoever you hired) satisfy you. I still stand by my statement that Marriott is being very careful and going by the book, and yes that will cost the board at the AOC. That is standard policy for any company with a threat of a lawsuit, they make sure that anything that could be scrutinized in discovery for a suit is done following all corporate rules. The problem is that many owners want to keep the resort with Marriott and up to Marriott standards. We have seen this on this thread when some owners have expressed their non-support for your cause. In these situations the majority rules and it looks like most of the owners there just want to move on and let this become an unpleasant memory.

My understanding is that the renovations have been done and that the resort looks good. Your goals now should be to keep it that way and to make sure that money is set aside from the maint fees to allow for future renos and avoid any more special assessments.

just my opinion and I'm sure you won't agree, but good luck anyway,

tlwmkw

 

[rickxylon]

Very well said. I couldn't agree with you more. Time to move on and enjoy life as well as save everyone money and frustration.

 

[Dean]

Dean,
I was just trying to have the right icon posted when pertaining to the dead animal in a previous post.This-:deadhorse:not this .
Just being politically correct.We don't want to make this into another issue
Dotting those I's and crossing them T's

Actually I think there ARE some unanswered questions that deserve answers. The likely theft and inappropriate use of the owners list would definitely be my top concern were I an owner there, much above the $$$ involved and any concerns for Marriott dishonesty in the sales process. Also, as I stated much earlier in this thread, lack of proof and completion of the legal action is essentially a vote in favor of Marriott.

 

[mnabnpos]

Yes, PW is independent. And, yes, there was a lot learned from the Enron case. That's why the CPA profession and a regulatory body have enacted strict controls, oversight and independent audits of auditors to ensure that the credibility of the profession is at the highest level possible. Partners and employees of an auditing firm that claim to be independent and aren't can easily be the subject of long jail terms, as has been demonstrated on several occasions in recent years.

I stated above that auditors, just like the rest of us, make mistakes. When they do, it's usually a mistake of omission, a task they should have performed based on the circumstances - and didn't. That's why it can get very expensive - even a threat to their very existence (e.g., for Arthur Andersen) - when auditors make mistakes.

Short of having the opportunity to audit the financial records yourself, an opportunity you won't get, that audit report is the proof of financial reliability that owners (and corporate shareholders) get when there are audited financial statements. The record for independent auditors is relatively stellar when you consider the thousands of companies that are audited every year.

Incidentally, Pricewaterhouse doesn't audit all of the Marriott resorts. Those audits are spread out among a variety of firms - for the very reason that you accused Marriott of. Further, Pricewaterhouse is not even the firm that audits Marriott! That audit, the big bucks work, is performed by Ernst & Young.

Dave, Eric, Dean and Love, Thank you for clarifying some things. I don't know if I am considered a concerned owner but I would just like some answers as to where all this money that we are shelling out now and possibly in the future are going. Maybe my thoughts will change when I visit the OC this summer and see the upgrades in person. I just hope that they are not like the gaudy renovations that were made to the Marriott Resort next door. From the pictures I've seen online the AOC upgrades look very nice.

I received the notice from the AOC BOD and what concerns me is the line that states: "Up to this point, over $100,000 has been spent on legal defense costs. Unfortunately, the Association's legal defense costs will continue to rise until the conclusion of these legal proceedings." It also states both lawsuits were filed specifically against the AOC Cooperative Association - no other parties were listed as codefendents. If this is the case where is this $100K coming from to pay for these legal defenses? It doesn't sound as though Marriott is involved in this lawsuit.

Rickxylon, I absolutely agree with you - What is the purpose of this lawsuit and why is it continuing? As I read in the AOC BOD letter that there are two lawsuits - one is involving access to our personal information but what is the other?

Also, I don't want to keep incurring anymore additional expenses other than the regular fees I'm supposed to be paying for my timeshares (maintenance, reserve and now utilities). I think we have had enough of these assessments. If these assessments continue then I believe there is some mismanagement and misallocation of funds going on with the current AOC BOD. Therefore, maybe Mr. Knox and the rest of the board should step down and let us try and get some folks in there that are more qualified and competent. After reading this forum and understanding more of what has been going on I am becoming more distrustful of this current AOC BOD. I am one of the first timeshare pre-construction purchasers of the AOC (over 12 years now) and these problems NEVER happened until this board was elected. Just my personal thoughts and opinion.

 

[SueDonJ]

Does all this mean that lawsuits have actually been filed to get the list of owners' contact info, because the majority of the owners did not vote to change the current provision? It's confusing because there's been no mention at all of lawsuits actually being filed to this point, and the last time the board mentioned legal fees they were only associated with the costs for Marriott and MAOC to correctly/legally respond to challenges made by the "concerned owners" group. I would think that if things are now progressing through the Court system (rather than through challenges to the bylaws and timeshare governing docs,) the costs will escalate further at a fairly rapid pace.

I know there've been comments throughout this from the "concerned owners" that Marriott has not been completely forthcoming with all info, but the level of distrust that exists now is really surprising. Are some of you seriously thinking that any of the big four accounting firms are in Marriott's pockets and are willing to suspend accepted legal practices and put their professional reputations on the line for one MVCI resort? I'm sorry, but I've gotta say that the idea is preposterous. I'm married to a Partner in an accounting firm and there is no way that the partners of PW or any other well-established firm would collectively agree to it.

Honestly, if I was at the point as some of you are where I distrusted Marriott so utterly and completely, I'd want no part of owning any Marriott timeshare. If any of you who do think this way can explain, I'd love to know your thinking process - why aren't you just selling your week(s) for whatever you can get and removing the negativity from your life?

(PS - Dave, I think ecwinch was being a bit sarcastic with his post about the auditors possibly being in Marriott's pocket, but it's good you offered some expertise about the auditing process. )

 

[tlwmkw]

Suedonj,

You are absolutely right. This is just going to get more and more expensive if the lawsuits continue. The irony is that the concerned owners are really suing themselves since they are owners at the resort and the board was elected by them to represent them. So they'll be paying the concerned owners lawyers as well as the AOC's lawyers via their maintenance fees- how can they possibly win in this case? If I owned there I would be starting to get upset at the extra expense they are putting on all the other owners.

As to the accounting firms I agree with you there too- after what happened with Enron and Arthur Andersen in recent years I don't think they would "look the other way" and allow MVCI to do anything that wasn't legal. It's not in the interest of the accountant to take any risk in this. What benefit would it be to them? None. As you say there is a huge amount of distrust between the two sides and no sign of anyone meeting in the middle. I think getting out is the best option for those that don't like it. They bought a Marriott resort and if they don't like how it's run then they should vote with their feet and leave. I remember Ellen sold her week there after all this came about. She still likes MVCI but not so much the AOC.

tlwmkw

 

[modoaruba]

Divide $100.000 by the number of unitsX52.
How much is that per individual unit?
I forgot how many there are.
Thanx

 

[Dave M]

Based on the info in the FAQs for this forum, there are 125 units. Multiply that by 51 (not 52, because one week is unsold and reserved for maintenance) and you come up with 6,375 weeks. That's about $15.69 per owner - so far. That might not seem like much, but it's going to go higher and for what?

 

[Dean]

Based on the info in the FAQs for this forum, there are 125 units. Multiply that by 51 (not 52, because one week is unsold and reserved for maintenance) and you come up with 6,375 weeks. That's about $15.69 per owner - so far. That might not seem like much, but it's going to go higher and for what?

Dave actually it's likely already higher, the number presented was likely what had been spent and accounted for at a certain point in the past. These things almost always end up being assigned a cost less than the true cost esp when you consider people's time and they always end up with straggling costs that continue to pour in well after an issue is essentially closed. Then there's possible reduced resale value that is passed directly to owners for all but unsold units. Then there are the lasting effects and costs such as the Parliamentarian and system changes just for the BOD and Marriott to further protect themselves. I can't see anything under a quarter mil even if there are no further actions going forward.

 

[rickxylon]

There have been a lot of very wise words shared so far about the futility of continuing any current law suits. May we please have a response from the person/people in the "concerned owners'" group stating that they will withdraw any and all suits.

 

[mnabnpos]

Does all this mean that lawsuits have actually been filed to get the list of owners' contact info, because the majority of the owners did not vote to change the current provision? It's confusing because there's been no mention at all of lawsuits actually being filed to this point, and the last time the board mentioned legal fees they were only associated with the costs for Marriott and MAOC to correctly/legally respond to challenges made by the "concerned owners" group. I would think that if things are now progressing through the Court system (rather than through challenges to the bylaws and timeshare governing docs,) the costs will escalate further at a fairly rapid pace.

I know there've been comments throughout this from the "concerned owners" that Marriott has not been completely forthcoming with all info, but the level of distrust that exists now is really surprising. Are some of you seriously thinking that any of the big four accounting firms are in Marriott's pockets and are willing to suspend accepted legal practices and put their professional reputations on the line for one MVCI resort? I'm sorry, but I've gotta say that the idea is preposterous. I'm married to a Partner in an accounting firm and there is no way that the partners of PW or any other well-established firm would collectively agree to it.

Honestly, if I was at the point as some of you are where I distrusted Marriott so utterly and completely, I'd want no part of owning any Marriott timeshare. If any of you who do think this way can explain, I'd love to know your thinking process - why aren't you just selling your week(s) for whatever you can get and removing the negativity from your life?

(PS - Dave, I think ecwinch was being a bit sarcastic with his post about the auditors possibly being in Marriott's pocket, but it's good you offered some expertise about the auditing process. )

I wouldn't say that I am unhappy with MVCI with regards to the AOC - I actually like and enjoy my timeshares. But I am becoming, if not already, unhappy, with the current AOC BOD - if these unnecessary fees continue to rise I really have to take a long hard look as to whether it is still financially feasible to own at the AOC.

If there is any unhappiness with Marriott it is that I am disappointed with Marriott in respect to their greed and how they have overbuilt the end of Palm Beach. The beach is at the point of being so congested and over-crowded and will only get worse with the Ritz Carlton being built next door.

I wouldn't know about Marriott's accounting firms and any dishonesty going on with them but having been going to Aruba for over 30 years now and seeing how the island has changed/developed and the promises of the Aruban govt to limit the number of resorts/rooms on the island if anything the previous Aruban administration were in the pockets of Marriott. I believe my facts are correct on this but approx. 2-3 weeks before a new Aruban govt was to be sworn in the Aruban govt leaving office worked out a deal with Marriott to break ground on the RC. That same administration had worked with Marriott to approve building the Surf Club also..