Marriott Destination Points...They have done it!!!!!! {Merged}

[Numismatist]

the very same "lottery" language is already in the existing docs (reservation procedures) for weeks resorts, always has been

Correction: so now we pay MORE to be in the lottery...:rofl:

 

[wuv pooh]

the very same "lottery" language is already in the existing docs (reservation procedures) for weeks resorts, always has been

Yes, but no one complains when Marriott takes a MR points exchange weeks and books a crappy shoulder season Platinum - that is fair

Now if Marriott took that same week and booked a 'prime' week that is theft

They used to trust Marriott, but not anymore

Oh the tangled webs we weave

 

[NJDave]

Does that mean that, conceivably, Marriott has leeway to change from first come first serve for booking high demand weeks to ranking in order of point value ownership, for example?

Hopefully that is something Marriott will never implement. Hopefully their lawyers were just trying to cover every contingency for the future.

From what I read in the documents, Marriott has the legal right to do whatever they please in almost every area. You just have to trust them.

 

[SueDonJ]

I am growing to love you (in a platonic way) in spite of the fact that we never agree on how Marriott is treating it's owners. You are in favor of whatever Marriott does and you trust them to do what is right for owners. I don't trust Marriott at all and I feel that they will cheat you whenever they can. In spite of our differing opinions I like listening to what you have to say. I really feel from the bottom of my heart that what I post is true and that if you convert to points that you will forever be sorry, but you have blind faith in Marriott and will convert with nothing in writing keeoing them from infating pponts costs in upcoming years. I feel sure that I am right and you are wrong, but only time will tell for sure. No matter how it turns out I hope we can remain friends even though I am almost positive that my predictions will proven to be correct and you will eventually regret putting so much trust in Marriott and their points program.

How sweet, Tombo. You're growing on me, too. And how boring would life be if we only only picked friends who agreed with us all the time?! You can disagree with me any time you please.

About "trust" in Marriott - over on that monster Aruba board they always said I had too much trust in Marriott, too, all because I usually didn't agree that they had a right to expect what they were demanding from Marriott. I do trust Marriott - but only to do whatever it is that they possibly can do to protect their own interests in their products. Within that framework, the only thing we owners can do is try to make their products work the best they can for us. That thread reinforced for me a long time ago that Marriott's contracts are written to give themselves a whole lot more protection than some Weeks owners believe. If you're going to question/challenge them you need to realize that they're going to protect you only if it serves their interests, and you better come prepared. As Dean said in one post over there, "you better bring your big boy pants." (One of my favorite TUG lines EVER!)

In this new thing they obviously have more power over points allocations than I thought they did. With dioxide's help (thanks, dioxide!) I realize I was reading things wrong. What I thought is that the underlying trust's allocations would be subject to the same Florida laws that require DVC to correlate points to inventory. Well, it turns out that Marriott has set up enrollment in the trust the same way as weeks, and owners of both are required to join the exchange company. As dioxide said, the exchange company is subject to less stringent laws and that means Marriott has more protections.

So what are we left with now? We have two choices - stay as is and "trust" Marriott to not muck around with home resort and II exchange usage as much as it might be possible for them to do, or enroll in this new thing and "trust" that Marriott will be inclined to favor Points owners over Weeks because their interests lie in making their new offering a success. Not much of a choice, I agree, but the answer is going to be different for every owner and it can only be based on how much Marriott needs what we own to be successful. In my case it isn't that I am in favor of what they've done or that I trust them to protect me - it's that they're asking me to choose from the lesser of two evils and I have to consider how what I own protects me.

I have good weeks. That's fairly obvious because when I compare the value that Marriott has assigned to them at rollout, my points are stretching further for exchanges than most others. It won't always be that way, I know, but if you remember in that speculation thread I always said that I expected newer resorts to have more value and that point inflation would occur over time. As my weeks become older they'll lose value - that's just a fact of timeshare life no matter if you're dealing with a points or weeks system. So if Marriott considers my weeks to be somewhat valuable then I am somewhat protected.

There isn't complete protection with points, no doubt. But I'm also thinking that Weeks usage may be less protected now with Marriott's focus on making a success of Points. I'm convinced that Marriott will have access to II Weeks deposits for Points exchange requests, and can't help but believe that the impact will increase over time. Home resort usage is beginning to be questioned - how exactly will inventory be allocated for Premier and Base Points owners, and how will it impact 13- and 12-month Weeks reservations? I've always thought that within Weeks, Marriott wasn't required to hold back 50% of every week but instead 50% of the season's weeks. Everybody always said that was wrong, it had to be per week, but there's nothing in the contracts to say that it's wrong. It's always appeared to me that Marriott did it on a weekly basis because that didn't cause problems for them. Well, if they need to change that in order to make their Points system successful, will they? I don't know. Like I said, I'm not certain they can, but they've never spelled it out one way or the other. To me that means the ball is in their court.

As far as resale value, every Weeks owner loses out with this new rollout. Weeks are devalued even further than I'd expected them to be because further resales will be restricted from joining Points. Some of us have been saying for ages that Marriott shouldn't have been expected to protect resale value - that's not what they've ever done. They've historically used ROFR to pick up inventory on the cheap when they have a need for it. That's it's only purpose. And as unbelievable as it seems, my sales rep didn't try to tell us that our weeks would have resale value (probably because we had a Timeshare Resale mag in our hands when we met her.) She did tell us that our price that day would be less than what it might be from Marriott in the future and that was the truth. The impact on resale values isn't any different whether you enroll or not which means it's simply not a factor.

Tombo, I can't stand on principle here the way you can. I'm in the fortunate position of owning Weeks that have some value in this new system now. Another thing history teaches us about Marriott is that those who come in on the ground floor of any new product get the most value out of that product. So I'm still leaning towards enrollment.

Now I've written a novel. Again. In the end what I hope is that this all works out to fall somewhere in the middle and we all get at least enough usage value to keep giving us nice vacations for a good many years.

 

[ngmaui]

It has been exhausting reading this thread but it also have been a very nice learning experience for me. We are interested in enrolling in the points system. For us, now that our family has grown by 3, traveling to Hawaii just is not as practical anymore. As a result we have had decent luck with II and have even gotten ACs with our deposit but even then, we have occasionally felt the fear of trading down. Also, with the potential of 5 airfare tickets...It is very restrictive and many times more expensive to fly weekend to weekend verses midweek. I have a lot of appreciation for the flexibility of a points based system ever since learning and studying the DVC. We would be owners of the mouse if we could afford 2 timeshares right now. The 3900 points that our 1Bed 2 Bath MOC Oceanview would give us looks like a lot of options at other resorts we would love to stay at.

Anyway, I was wondering if anyone had looked into what happens to an II account that has an unused deposit in it with the switchover to points. Our situation is our II membership runs out in August, we have one unit that has been deposited with expiration in Sept 2011 and no ongoing requests.

So our question is, if we join the Marriott Points system before my II account expires does our existing account with our deposit just get extended or do we have to setup a new II points account and then have to pay a 1 year renewal on our existing account to be able to exchange out deposit after the August expiration of our membership?

Thanks for everyone's input to this thread and for any help you can give me on this...

 

[camachinist]

So our question is, if we join the Marriott Points system before my II account expires does our existing account with our deposit just get extended or do we have to setup a new II points account and then have to pay a 1 year renewal on our existing account to be able to exchange out deposit after the August expiration of our membership?

Conventional wisdom would indicate that, since your deposit is long gone into II's system, in order to use it, you will need to maintain your II account. If you're 'switching' to Marriott's 'system', investigate the strategy of extending your II account and receiving an A/C for your 'troubles' of using your existing deposit. Alternatively, prior, consult with Marriott as they might have a more 'customer friendly' solution. Remember, Marriott is about empowering their employess to satisfy the customer

 

[davidvel]

As stated above, this language is the same, verbatim, as the language in the current reservation procedures (at least at mountainside).

Wow! This language is NOT in the Shadow Ridge docs (and I can't imagine any other CA MVCI resort.)

hipslo, could you post the exact language you found in mountainside docs?

 

[bobpark56]

Questions:

So...if Marriott charges more in points for reservations than it grants when one deposits, won't that result in a gradual (or rapid, in some folks' view) build-up of inventory? I.e., fewer units rented than deposited?

Where, then, will this inventory go?

And if Marriott has this inventory, why would they be drawing from Interval's inventory, as some have alleged?

Has Interval really agreed to let Marriott withdraw inventory from units deposited with II? Does Marriott have this right?

There are many things I don't yet understand here.

 

[hipslo]

Wow! This language is NOT in the Shadow Ridge docs (and I can't imagine any other CA MVCI resort.)

hipslo, could you post the exact language you found in mountainside docs?

I don't have an electronic version of the docs to post (and I am too lazy to type it from scratch) but the language is found in Section 1.10 of the Reservation Procedures (which is Exhibit E to the Declaration of Condominium.) The language is nearly identical to the language posted above, conformed for differences in defined terms. Substantively, it is identical. (Ok, I'll admit it, I am also an attorney).

By the way, while I am not 100% certain, I think they actually did use this system at Mountainside for several weeks during the winter olympics, which took place around the time that Mountainside first opened. I always took the language to apply to only that sort of a special event, though of course, as written, it is much broader. I never much worried about it, since there is also language that states that they can change the reservation procedures however they want, at any time, to "more effectively fulfill reservation requests and properly operate the reservation program". That seems to give them enough leeway to do all sorts of things.

 

[davidvel]

Questions:

And if Marriott has this inventory, why would they be drawing from Interval's inventory, as some have alleged?

Has Interval really agreed to let Marriott withdraw inventory from units deposited with II? Does Marriott have this right?

Putting aside natural fear that we will all be robbed... I have seen no language that indicates that MVCD could simply withdraw weeks from Interval. As I understand it, they would trade in Interval just like anyone else through their massive corporate account.

If II allows MVCD to trade a dog for Maui summer, then it would be a problem, and it would be suicide for II.

 

[davidvel]

I don't have an electronic version of the docs to post (and I am too lazy to type it from scratch) but the language is found in Section 1.10 of the Reservation Procedures (which is Exhibit E to the Declaration of Condominium.) The language is nearly identical to the language posted above, conformed for differences in defined terms. Substantively, it is identical. (Ok, I'll admit it, I am also an attorney).

By the way, while I am not 100% certain, I think they actually did use this system at Mountainside for several weeks during the winter olympics, which took place around the time that Mountainside first opened. I always took the language to apply to only that sort of a special event, though of course, as written, it is much broader. I never much worried about it, since there is also language that states that they can change the reservation procedures however they want, at any time, to "more effectively fulfill reservation requests and properly operate the reservation program". That seems to give them enough leeway to do all sorts of things.

Interesting. Makes sense. I am sure Marriott's lawyers searched for language in all the docs giving them the most leeway to do anything they want, and included that in the program conditions.

 

[hotcoffee]

Putting aside natural fear that we will all be robbed... I have seen no language that indicates that MVCD could simply withdraw weeks from Interval. As I understand it, they would trade in Interval just like anyone else through their massive corporate account.

So, you actually believe that when Marriott wants to withdraw a week from II, they will simply submit some type of a search similar to what we do and hope for a hit? I suspect that the computer will be programmed to hit on the week they want as soon as it is deposited. They might pop a week in to cover the one they are taking, but I cannot imagine that they will not get what they want.

If II allows MVCD to trade a dog for Maui summer, then it would be a problem, and it would be suicide for II.

Well it has not been suicide for them since Starwood starting doing something similar. You'll probably never snag a prime Westin week through II because Starwood is not going to let that happen.

 

[Dean]

Well, then maybe they should tell you that when you buy rather than imply in various timeshares appreciate in value.

It's be a great pitch. "Pay $30K + $1000 in MFs for the rest of your life. Over the next 10 years, the cost of your vacations will be $4000/year or approximately $600/night. A lifetime of prepaid vacations!"

I can bet that when you bought, you signed papers acknowledging this very fact if you bought retail, if you bough resale, you assume the original buyers commitments. We've already established that verbal agreements are not binding. I think people have to get over the timeshare sales rhetoric and start taking responsibility for the agreements they signed up for legally.

You must have never sat through a Marriott timeshare presentation and mentioned resales. Marriott bragged that their resales values were one the highest in the industry thanks to ROFR. I was told that every time I attended a Marriott slaes presentation. I was also told that I would never actually own a cheap resale Marriott because marriott would ROFR it. Both turned out to be lies, but Marriott DID proudly announce that their resales held their value at every presentation I attended and it was part of their sales pitch.

Did you believe them? I know I didn't.

While reading the MVC Exchange Company Disclosure Guide for Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program, I came across the following information:

Exchange Company (MVC Exchange Company] has the right to establish priority lists, lottery systems, or other alternative methods off reserving accommodations in an effort to ensure the fair and equitable reservations and use of accommodations during holidays, events, and other high demand periods. If implemented, access to certain use periods by a member may be restricted in a given year based upon the member's ranking in a lottery or some other allocation methodology established by Exchange Company.

I'm pretty sure this option is in the legal paperwork for weeks as well at least at all the ones I've seen. Even if not, Marriott could institute it under the reservation rules.

 

[davidvel]

I'm pretty sure this option is in the legal paperwork for weeks as well at least at all the ones I've seen. Even if not, Marriott could institute it under the reservation rules.

Not at MRD.

 

[DanCali]

I can bet that when you bought, you signed papers acknowledging this very fact if you bought retail, if you bough resale, you assume the original buyers commitments. We've already established that verbal agreements are not binding. I think people have to get over the timeshare sales rhetoric and start taking responsibility for the agreements they signed up for legally.

Dean,

Sales people lie. It's a fact. But you justifying lies as a means to achieve sales is puzzling to me and I don't know how to react to that.

I do honor my commitments. I pay my MFs... Your statement

I think people have to get over the timeshare sales rhetoric and start taking responsibility for the agreements they signed up for legally.

seems to imply I made a commitment to keep my mouth shut... That I never committed to (although if you join the points system you will lose your voting rights too). If I feel wrong by Marriott I can educate other owners so they learn from my mistakes. If that costs Marriott in lost sales, I could care less - especially since, as you point out, they don't really care about my wealth (i.e. resale value) in particular. Frankly, I could also care less that there is a tiny clause in the contract saying any lie told me to is ok. Stretching the truth is one thing but using blatant lies to achieve timeshares sales is reprehensible - especially when customers are older and more naive than many of us. And even more so when the product sold is worth 70% less when resold. I cannot see how anyone can justify that.

I also don't understand how you can justify a company telling people (verbally of course) that a product appreciates and the devising various schemes intended to purposely depreciate that same product just to increase their profits. If your timeshare is worth zero to you - I'll buy from you for a couple hundred dollars. If it's worth more than zero, you should care - it affects you as well.

 

[tombo]

I can bet that when you bought, you signed papers acknowledging this very fact if you bought retail, if you bough resale, you assume the original buyers commitments. We've already established that verbal agreements are not binding. I think people have to get over the timeshare sales rhetoric and start taking responsibility for the agreements they signed up for legally.

Did you believe them? I know I didn't.

I'm pretty sure this option is in the legal paperwork for weeks as well at least at all the ones I've seen. Even if not, Marriott could institute it under the reservation rules.

I can't beleieve that you condone the blatant systemic use of lies to sell timeshares as an acceptable business practice because there is a clause in the contract stating that no promises or claims made verbally are binding. If it was your retired parents they lied to and sold a week, I guess that would be OK even if they were older and not at the top of their mental game. If they sell your wet behind the ears children based on lies and put your children into debt for 30 years, it is OK because your children shouldn't have been so stupid and uneducated in the ways of business. You would probably call it a learning experience you are glad marriott taught them the hard way. I guess Marriott and Bernie Madoff can employ the same sales tactics of lies, mistatements, and half truths, and if only Bernie had been as legally smart as Marriott and got the buyers to sign a contract relieving him of all responsibility for verbal promises, then he would just be doing business with people who deserved to be ripped off too. Do you feel that con men who can find a way to legally protect themselves from prosecution by using a legal contract voiding all verbal promises and statements they made are simply good businessmen?

People do not DESERVE to be sold one thing in a sales presentation which is in reality far different than what they actually own when they sign the contract. To infer that customers who aren't business and contract savy deserve to be ripped off is ridiculous. That is like the woman in a short skirt who is raped being at fault for wearing the short skirt or having too many drinks. Don't blame the victim for being a victim, blame Marriott for preying on people who don't know better. People go to a sales presentation, they are promised that they can get Hawaii every year, that they are locking in a lifetime of vacations at todays prices,that buying this timeshare will save them 10 times what it costs to buy it, they are promised that what they are buying will have one of the highest resale values in the industry, and the sales staff and Marriott know all of that is a lie, yet they tell the lies every day to sell timeshares. They operate selling timeshares promising many things that aren't true, but it is OK since when it comes time to sign the contract all verbal promises and descriptions they used to sell the timeshare are now null and void.

I don't do business that way, I don't condone businesses which operate in such a manner, and I am shocked that anyone feels that selling in such a manner, whether legal or not, is an acceptable business practice. I guess anything you can do which is legal is acceptable to you no matter whether it is moral or right.

If it happened to a relative of yours, whether the misleading sale was made by Marriott or any other company, I bet you would feel differently. I can't imagine anyone looking their children or parents in the eye after falling vicitm to a sham of a sales presentation and saying it is your fault, you were stupid, you trusted the sales person, rather than blaming the sales person for misleading your parents/kids into buying something that wasn't close to what they were told they were buying. Perhaps you can without any qualms look strangers and/or family in the eye and say you screwed up, it is your fault, and now you must take responsibility for your legal contract you signed based on lies and half truths you were told by the sales dept. If you have no qualms treating people in such a manner, perhaps you should sell for Marriott because if you only care about what is legal with no regards to morality, there is a bunch of money to be made.

 

[5infam]

Questions:

So...if Marriott charges more in points for reservations than it grants when one deposits, won't that result in a gradual (or rapid, in some folks' view) build-up of inventory? I.e., fewer units rented than deposited?

Where, then, will this inventory go?

And if Marriott has this inventory, why would they be drawing from Interval's inventory, as some have alleged?

Has Interval really agreed to let Marriott withdraw inventory from units deposited with II? Does Marriott have this right?

There are many things I don't yet understand here.

Hi Bob,

If I understand you first question correctly, you are asking what will Marriott do with the extra inventory on the skim, correct? If so, then the answer appears to be that they will be renting those points out to points owners. Remember, from the release of this program going forward, they only sell points - and not points to a specific resort (which would make me buy into this whole thing easier), but when you buy points, you buy them to every single resort that has a points chart, which i believe is every resort in the U.S. and the Caribbean. Also, points are expensive, so people may not go for a whole week anymore, and may just go for a few days, etc. That is actually a good thing about points is you can go for a few days, or add on days to a week or whatever. Anyway, that is what they will do with the inventory - or just rent it out for cash.

In regards to "why would they draw from II"...that is pretty simple as well. Many of the folks buying points only, have no home resort, and there are several resorts that are sold out or are nearly sold out. So, as a points owner, if you want to go to a sold out resort, technically, Marriott can only get you a week there if an owner of that resort, who has enrolled in the points program, turns their week in for points. This will allow Marriott to let the points member stay at the resort. However, if they are short on inventory, then they would look to deposits in II from those owners that did not enroll in the points program. This is where I and others are really pissed at Marriott, because they should leave us weeks owners alone, and let us trade as we have, without them sticking their hand in the "weeks" cookie jar, to solely benefit the points program. Now, we are not 100% sure this is how it works, but the language I have seen appears that this is how it will work, and there is the anger.

Whether Marriott has the right to do this or not - I have no idea. I like you, would hope not - but it appears they have. We are all waiting on someone to come up with a clear written response from Marriott or II, but as of yet - just more confusion.

Hope that helps!

 

[camachinist]

Probably already mentioned, but other sources of weeks at 'sold-out' resorts are ROFR's and trustee sales by Marriott. Even if the resort is sold out, at most resorts, Marriott can cherry pick the 'good deals' (there is discussion of how the parameters of the DPC will affect resale week values) via ROFR and they can foreclose on weeks in default and add them to the trust. According to them, no 'new' weeks will be sold so I would presume all this activity will now benefit the trust. I imagine there are other methodologies as well. With every week Marriott-'trusted', Marriott gets another ownership vote on the HOA.

 

[dioxide45]

Probably already mentioned, but other sources of weeks at 'sold-out' resorts are ROFR's and trustee sales by Marriott. Even if the resort is sold out, at most resorts, Marriott can cherry pick the 'good deals' (there is discussion of how the parameters of the DPC will affect resale week values) via ROFR and they can foreclose on weeks in default and add them to the trust. According to them, no 'new' weeks will be sold so I would presume all this activity will now benefit the trust. I imagine there are other methodologies as well. With every week Marriott-'trusted', Marriott gets another ownership vote on the HOA.

Foreclosed weeks due to delinquent MF don't become property of Marriott, they belong to the HOA.

 

[camachinist]

I meant 'trustee sales' of weeks in 'default' of mortgage payments. Usually those weeks have back MF's owed as well, which are satisfied at the trustee sale. I would suspect that in nearly all cases Marriott is the successful bidder at such sales.

You do raise an interesting point though....if the HOA 'owns' the week in default of MF's, does that week get marketed as a week or will it go to the trust via a deal with Marriott? Hmmm

 

[Bunk]

I'd like to comment on Dean's comment: "We've already established that verbal agreements are not binding. I think people have to get over the timeshare sales rhetoric and start taking responsibility for the agreements they signed up for legally."

The conclusion that verbal lying is OK because verbal lies do not create binding contracts is terribly cynical and will excuse all types of dishonest behavior in our business and personal relationships.

It almost paints the legacy owners as people who deserve to be victims because they were stupid enough to rely on what the sales staff told them.

It is important to remember that Marriott set up the sales program and trained its staff in what to say. Marriott's sales staff induced people to buy the timeshares.

It is important to keep the record clear in case any prospective new buyers happen to read these posts. I believe the overwhelming sentiment among the posters is that new buyers should realize that Marriott has created a system in which it can and probably will change the terms in the future for its benefit. I believe that the new system offers new buyers less protection and rights than the legacy system. I would consider the treatment of the legacy owners an important factor in making a business decision as to whether to invest a substantial amount of money in this new program.

 

[TheTimeTraveler]

I meant 'trustee sales' of weeks in 'default' of mortgage payments. Usually those weeks have back MF's owed as well, which are satisfied at the trustee sale. I would suspect that in nearly all cases Marriott is the successful bidder at such sales.

You do raise an interesting point though....if the HOA 'owns' the week in default of MF's, does that week get marketed as a week or will it go to the trust via a deal with Marriott? Hmmm

Does Marriott really need to bid on these weeks? If they really want a juicy week then they can just wait until it crosses their desk during the ROFR process and just scoop it up.

 

[camachinist]

While no reflection upon current events, I can say, back in 2003, NCV sales staff didn't make any representations which later proved to be exagerations or outright lies. They sold the resort and the opportunity for 'pre-paid' vacations and the II book was hardly seen nor mentioned. I didn't know about resales and the disparity in value but that was my ignorance, not their fault for not informing me. In a lot of things Marriott, since then, things have changed. If I had heard as many conflicting and often confusing statements/rules/interpretations as have been shared by members here on TUG (in their interactions with Marriott) I never would've purchased developer.

Does Marriott really need to bid on these weeks?

Unclear, but my understanding is Marriott packages and sells the mortgages and services them. Someone would need to be paid. I presume the investors (financial companies) don't want to have timeshare REO's. We were mortgagors with Marriott so I understand a little of the process.

 

[SueDonJ]

Wow! This language is NOT in the Shadow Ridge docs (and I can't imagine any other CA MVCI resort.)

hipslo, could you post the exact language you found in mountainside docs?

Not Mountainside, but here it is from SurfWatch's Management Agreement:

"RESERVATION PROCEDURES
1.8 PRIORITY LISTS; LOTTERIES
The Management Company, on behalf of the Board, reserves the right to establish priority lists or lottery systems in an effort to ensure the fair and equitable reservation and use of Units during high demand periods (e.g. holidays, special events, etc.) If implemented, access to certain Use Periods and the availability of certain check-in/check-out days by an Owner may be restricted to a given year based upon the Owner's ranking in a lottery of some other allocation methodology. The Management Company may establish and administrative for this service."

Of course the Management Agreement is "subordinate to" the Master Deed, which contains this in "Exhibit F to Master Deed, Timesharing Declaration":

"6. Reservation Procedures
(e) In the event either the Management Company or the Association determines that the current reservation system is unmanageable or is, for any reason, unfair to some or all of the Owners, the Management Company or the Association may, without the consent of the Owners and in its reasonable business judgment, revise the reservation system from time to time and cause such system to contain one or more of the following features:
(i) A system which assures that each Owner will have an equal opportunity to make a reservation for the more popular holiday periods;
(ii) A priority system for reservations which will give preference to those Owners who did not receive their desired reservation in the previous year;
(iii) Different minimum and maximum time periods or dates for requesting a reservation request, and;
(iv) Such other conditions, restrictions and limitations as the Management Company or the Association shall deem necessary under the circumstances to assure a manageable and fair system."

Barony Beach's documents contain similar wording in the Management Agreement and "Exhibit G to the Master Deed, Timesharing Declaration."

 

[wuv pooh]

I'd like to comment on Dean's comment: "We've already established that verbal agreements are not binding. I think people have to get over the timeshare sales rhetoric and start taking responsibility for the agreements they signed up for legally."

The conclusion that verbal lying is OK because verbal lies do not create binding contracts is terribly cynical and will excuse all types of dishonest behavior in our business and personal relationships.

It almost paints the legacy owners as people who deserve to be victims because they were stupid enough to rely on what the sales staff told them.

It is important to remember that Marriott set up the sales program and trained its staff in what to say. Marriott's sales staff induced people to buy the timeshares.

It is important to keep the record clear in case any prospective new buyers happen to read these posts. I believe the overwhelming sentiment among the posters is that new buyers should realize that Marriott has created a system in which it can and probably will change the terms in the future for its benefit. I believe that the new system offers new buyers less protection and rights than the legacy system. I would consider the treatment of the legacy owners an important factor in making a business decision as to whether to invest a substantial amount of money in this new program.

You all keep banging this drum, but I am with Dean on this one.

I have purchased two timeshares with Marriott. In both of them (Florida and Virginia) I had to specifically sign a document that stated:

1. I understand that timeshares are NOT an investment, and my purchase should not be based on any perceived investment value.
2. I understand that I have NO right to exchange, trade for points, lock off, or do anything EXCEPT occupy my full week during one week during the season that I purchased. My purchase should not be based on any expectation of any of this continuing.
3. I understand that anything that was promised to me that is not in this written contract is null and void. During my second purchase I had to get the salesman to hand write in a promise made to me that was not in the document and get initialed by both of us. My purchase should not be based on anything that is not written.

To claim after the fact that you did not understand this is not believable to me. Kind of like the people who make 2,000 a month and sign up for a 5,000 a month mortgage payment. No one forced you to make the deal, in fact the State Attorney General has done his best to make you turn down the deal and even provided you a recission period if you are stupid enough to sign the deal.

The benefits have ALWAYS been at the discretion of Marriott and everyone has acknowledged this signing on. There may be some individual exceptions at early resorts, but this has been consistent for a long time.

You acknowledge this logically when you say that Marriott is taking our vote. Marriott is taking our vote to vote against the interests of the point system and the DISAFFLIATION of the resort from the point system WHILE we are members of the same point system. If your resort did disaffiliate from Marriott then you WOULD LOSE every benefit of the Marriott system, but you would STILL HAVE a right to occupy, a MF obligation, and a vote in the HOA. Everything but these basic rights is dependent on the generosity of Marriott and what they think is best for their business and their customers. NOTHING has changed, except that you no longer agree that the system that robbed other owners to provide you with extra benefits is now being changed to make it fair to those owners and it may hurt you because you feel entitled to the extra benefits.

Or do you feel that trading your studio for a 2bd is 'comparable'? Is it 'fair' that II takes garbage weeks spins them to gold and then sells the garbage as getaways for less than MF? And you wonder if Marriott gets any complaints from the owners who are screwed? What is really driving this is that 10 years ago all the resorts sold for similar dollars and really were comparable. My first tour in Hawaii the week was only $2,000 more than Williamsburg. Today the weeks in the system range from former Horizons weeks to Marco and Hawaii weeks that were sold for $70 or $80k for one week. II is incented to make transactions and not some vision of comparable despite their rhetoric and transactions is what they make. These transactions have become increasingly unfair over time and Marriott is now taking back control of their inventory. Somewhere is a parallel universe is another board made of of people who are thrilled that someone is finally going to be looking after their interests. The truth is a weeks exchange system is not sustainable with huge disparities between resorts which is why everyone who has more than one is moving to points. As usual, Marriott is last, but they get to the right place eventually.