modoaruba I'll catch up on this board(maybe) when I return. I'll have a drink for all of you while I sit back and watch the sunset. WHATEVER!:wave:[/QUOTE said:Have 2. Have a great vacation.
modoaruba I'll catch up on this board(maybe) when I return. I'll have a drink for all of you while I sit back and watch the sunset. WHATEVER!:wave:[/QUOTE said:Have 2. Have a great vacation.
These are all good points but I'd expand on the "MVCI could not have predicted..." a bit. I think that if the roof was leaking as far back as owners say it was, the BOD should have determined that it was necessary to increase the reserve fund at least minimally to offset any repairs that could have been prudently predicted given the leaks. I say the BOD and not MVCI because the contractual responsibility for reserve matters rests with the BOD. Certainly if the owners knew about the leaks then it must have been mentioned to the BOD members, if they didn't know themselves. Doesn't it follow that the BOD would have at least mentioned the concerns to the people who were hired to write the reserve-related reports for the property's condition?
These are all good points but I'd expand on the "MVCI could not have predicted..." a bit. I think that if the roof was leaking as far back as owners say it was, the BOD should have determined that it was necessary to increase the reserve fund at least minimally to offset any repairs that could have been prudently predicted given the leaks. I say the BOD and not MVCI because the contractual responsibility for reserve matters rests with the BOD. Certainly if the owners knew about the leaks then it must have been mentioned to the BOD members, if they didn't know themselves. Doesn't it follow that the BOD would have at least mentioned the concerns to the people who were hired to write the reserve-related reports for the property's condition?
No, I think this was MVCI's responsibility to present this information to the BoD. The BoD is a group of part-time volunteers. MVCI has day-to-day responsibilty for operating the property. If the water damaged occurred to the extent alleged, then MVCI should have investigated the cause, and then reported that problem to the BoD. With recommendations on how to address.
I am uncomfortable pinning all this blame, and the responsbility for everything on the BoD. A well-run resort has the BoD setting policy and direction, and the managing entity running the day to day.
I just heard from an owner that some of the ceiling tiles on the first floor were down due to leaks in the roof. IS there anyone down there or jsut back in the last day or so who can anyone verify this? If there is a leak, with a new roof, why is the building still leaking? Renovations are to start next month, they better have all these leaks fixed or we will be throwing away alot of money.
I was told that fire alarm sprinklers went off on a floor above and caused this. It happened on Sunday I think. We spoke to one of the people working on it - nothing whatsoever due to the rain Friday.
Not just a few it was a FLOOD - we happened to be walking through to the SC when it happened. They have most of the hallway behind a tarp for about 20 feet. Just enough room for you to walk by.
See how assumptions can be deceiving? Until all the facts are in the best built theoretical scenario can fall apart quickly. From potential "proof" of yet another poorly executed repair/replacement to a perfectly plausible and no fault occurrence (unless the activation of the sprinkler system is also going to be somehow related to Marriott management shortcomings) in the blink of an eye. Be sure you have your facts correct or all you end up doing is repeating the oft told story of the little boy crying wolf.
. . . Don't Confuse Me With Facts -- My Mind Is Made Up.As we say in Texas "Never let the facts get in the way of a good story"....
See how assumptions can be deceiving? Until all the facts are in the best built theoretical scenario can fall apart quickly. From potential "proof" of yet another poorly executed repair/replacement to a perfectly plausible and no fault occurrence (unless the activation of the sprinkler system is also going to be somehow related to Marriott management shortcomings) in the blink of an eye. Be sure you have your facts correct or all you end up doing is repeating the oft told story of the little boy crying wolf.
That is why I asked for verification. I didn't make any accusations. So now we ahve the facts. Lots of questions here where a stmt has been made and verification asked for.
Ellen,
Congrats on selling the unit. I hope you are enjoying Hawaii. We are moving forward on this end.
Marriott has told owners recently they are not taking on any new units for listing as they have too many now.
. . . Don't Confuse Me With Facts -- My Mind Is Made Up.
-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.
I am often confused when I read your comments. I just shake my head and think, what is he actually saying.
I do understand repairs were made and do understand that rain is not a normal occurrance in Aruba but given the known leaky conditions of that resort, these things should be fixed by now. I am not really following how a ceiling needed to be fixed because a fire alarm condition. What exactly does that mean. If there is indeed a continued problem we should ask for pictures so that owners can have relevant information. Marksue did just that, he asked for validation.
marksue said:I just heard from an owner that some of the ceiling tiles on the first floor were down due to leaks in the roof. IS there anyone down there or jsut back in the last day or so who can anyone verify this? If there is a leak, with a new roof, why is the building still leaking? Renovations are to start next month, they better have all these leaks fixed or we will be throwing away alot of money.
The simple fact is that rain wasn't involved in the situation yet the original post was worded (purposely or not) so it sounded like yet another Marriott Management outrage of incompetence. Your post also supports that misconception as the whole thing turned out to be a fire sprinkler problem. So "things should be fixed by now" doesn't apply to this. The on going and often speculative charges lead to this type of error and there are most likely others like you that now think the roof is still a problem and once again the Board/Marriott has blown it thanks to an incorrect posting. It really undermines any credibility of those crying wolf. The original post didn't ask for verification but sounded like someone had uncovered yet another roof/building leak problem after they were supposed to be fixed. "Why is the building still leaking?" is not an appeal for verification it is yet another accusation of faulty work done. Artful changes to "clarify" after being called on an obvious error doesn't change the original post.
A post asking "I hear there were some ceiling tiles that were damaged by water. Does anyone know what happened?" would have allowed for the proper response from someone in the know and not resulted in a false impression of roof problems. Its all in the wording and the assumptions being made.
A post asking "I hear there were some ceiling tiles that were damaged by water. Does anyone know what happened?" would have allowed for the proper response from someone in the know and not resulted in a false impression of roof problems. Its all in the wording and the assumptions being made.
Here's the official voting results for the 2009 Annual Meeting: