Poipu Point - Walk away from ownership?

[Poobah]

PR Skills

I agree with Bill that we can't really complain to the State of Hawaii that DRI has a yet to mature its PR skills. But, we can complain

.... that the elected VOA/AOAO has demonstrated a lack of reasonable fudiciary transparency to its constituency needed for a financial action of this magnitude and impact.

There are three classes of votes at The Point @ Poipu, the Trust, the units for sell by DRI, and the deeded owners. When votes are cast, the first two classes are voted as a block and are voted in the best interest of DRI. The deeded owners (the majority) are unable to organize, inform, and motivate owners to participate simply because they do not have access to the list of all deeded owners.

We request the State of Hawaii follow its own statutes and release the owners list so that the majority, in a true democratic manner, elect a Board that truely represents all the constituents.

Just an approach.

Cheers,

Paul​

 

[billstellar]

I agree with Bill that we can't really complain to the State of Hawaii that DRI has a yet to mature its PR skills. But, we can complain

.... that the elected VOA/AOAO has demonstrated a lack of reasonable fudiciary transparency to its constituency needed for a financial action of this magnitude and impact.

There are three classes of votes at The Point @ Poipu, the Trust, the units for sell by DRI, and the deeded owners. When votes are cast, the first two classes are voted as a block and are voted in the best interest of DRI. The deeded owners (the majority) are unable to organize, inform, and motivate owners to participate simply because they do not have access to the list of all deeded owners.

We request the State of Hawaii follow its own statutes and release the owners list so that the majority, in a true democratic manner, elect a Board that truely represents all the constituents.

Just an approach.

Cheers,

Paul​

Thanks Paul for this succinct wording. If Kieth can supply the address I am sure a number of us will write to Hawaii along these lines.
__________________
Whatever I post is my personal opinion and is in no way intended to be, or should be construed to be, an indictment of any company or individual.​

 

[billstellar]

Concerned Deeded Owners at the Point at Poipu( CDOPP)

November 1, 2011
...
3. The State of Hawaii has received dozens of complaints to act on, and they need to receive even more to get them to enforce their own laws concerning time-shares in the State of Hawaii.

...

Regarding to whom to write I found a list of addresses on this web site : http://www.poipuowners.org/LINKS_9ZCV.html .
Also there are references to this approach on the Facebook Group "Point of Poipu Angry Owners".
__________________
Whatever I post is my personal opinion and is in no way intended to be, or should be construed to be, an indictment of any company or individual.

 

[dag2]

voluntary surrender program

DRI has a voluntary surrender program; it does requure that the owner be current on all fees, so that may not help you with the special assessment.

T.R.,

I'm unable to locate this "surrender program". How do I find the info?

 

[fluke]

"Surrender" program

This question was recently asked on the DRI forums and it appears the program has been recently stopped and may restart in the 2nd quarter next year. This is the response:

Thank you for your post. I regret to tell you that at this time Diamond is not accepting voluntary surrenders. You are still welcome to sell your week, if you wish, but be careful in searching for a resale company to assist you with this. Be sure to check references, and also with the Better Business Bureau (BBB) and attorney general both in the state where you live as well as the state in which you own.

It may be that Diamond will again accept surrenders after the second quarter of next year, but you will need to check on this closer to the middle of next year..

 

[fluke]

You may draw your own conclusion but perhaps they stopped it as the Point at Poipu special assesment was announced. And presumedly the assesments will be collected or legal liens placed by mid next year.

 

[timeos2]

I have a different take on the benefits of owning in a trust, and the ability to diversify away individual property or resort risk as a result of this. It is the same as owning a mutual fund instead of an individual stock. The deeded owners are in a horrible position, and that is where I believe the true current risk sits. What would a collapse of 60% of the revenue do? I would not be surprised if this event becomes a marker for some type of future reform for the industry, but that will be a day late and a few dollars short for many. Any Poipu owners that did buy-up into points (and the Diamond Trust) over the past few years should be thanking owners like me, and count your blessings – YOU MADE THE RIGHT CHOICE !!!

Keep in mind that we were previously KBC owners and now must share in the loss with the entire group. The protection afforded to the Poipu owners who did convert into the trust amounts to about $4,100 per week, and here are the round numbers. The assessment for a deeded week is ~$5,800. Within the Trust, a 10 to 11,000 point owner (~ one prime week) is being assessed approximately $1,700 or 17 cents/point. That is a 17 cent assessment on top of the 17 cent/point MF in the trust. So even though our cost has doubled, the sad truth is it looks pretty sweet compared to those with individual deeds.

Better (maybe) for former deeded owners who opted to go to the Trust (but only if you ignore the substantial cost to do that change & giving up your meaningful voting rights) but a terrible "deal" for all the other trust owners.

They tend to sell the Trust on the idea that fees are spread over more (true) but never mention that you'll pay for resorts you may never even see. And seldom do the promised "savings" in fees occur - we all know they only go up, Trust or not. Overall I prefer to have at least a say in things (my vote) and only one property to worry about paying for.

 

[Mr.Benny]

There is a website for The Point at Poipu owners at www.poipuowners.org

There is a movement underway with a letter writing campaign, and donations to assist with a legal fund to take DRI to court.

They are seeking injunctive relief on the Dec 31 date for the first payment and as well, seeking to enforce Hawaii State law that will compel them to turn over the owners list. With this list, they will be able to vote DRI members off the Board of Directors and take control of their resort.

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

There is a website for The Point at Poipu owners at www.poipuowners.org

There is a movement underway with a letter writing campaign, and donations to assist with a legal fund to take DRI to court.

They are seeking injunctive relief on the Dec 31 date for the first payment and as well, seeking to enforce Hawaii State law that will compel them to turn over the owners list. With this list, they will be able to vote DRI members off the Board of Directors and take control of their resort.

An interesting strategy, but IMHO this is absolutely doomed to failure since DRI is neither the entity that is obligated to provide names, nor is DRI the entity that is assessing members.

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

They are seeking injunctive relief on the Dec 31 date for the first payment and as well, seeking to enforce Hawaii State law that will compel them to turn over the owners list. With this list, they will be able to vote DRI members off the Board of Directors and take control of their resort.

From a practical standpoint, rallying the deeded owners is neither important nor critical. In fact, it simply dissipates energy that is better spent implementing a strategy that has a chance of succeeding.

Rallying the deeded owners can succeed only if a minimum of about 95% of the deeded owners vote as a bloc for one specific set of candidates. The chances of that happening are pretty close to zero. In fact, a more realistic strategy would be to take the money people have contributed and use it to buy Powerball tickets, in the hopes of hitting the right numbers and then using the Powerball proceeds to rebuild the resort.

+++++++

Realistically, the only way that DRI members can be voted off is by taking control of the Hawaii Collection trust - replacing the DRI cronies on the Board of Directors of the Trust with Directors who are committed to then using the Trust voting power to vote DRI interests off of the Boards of the individual resorts. The owners that need to be rallied are the owners in the Trust. If the group is interested in replacing the resort Directors, that is the only owners list that really counts.

+++++

I frankly have a very, very hard time taking seriously anyone who thinks they can can take control of the resort by rallying the deeded owners. The primary thrust needs to be getting control of the Hawaii Collection trust. Without accomplishing that, nothing else matters.

 

[timeos2]

From a practical standpoint, rallying the deeded owners is neither important nor critical. In fact, it simply dissipates energy that is better spent implementing a strategy that has a chance of succeeding.

Rallying the deeded owners can succeed only if a minimum of about 95% of the deeded owners vote as a bloc for one specific set of candidates. The chances of that happening are pretty close to zero. In fact, a more realistic strategy would be to take the money people have contributed and use it to buy Powerball tickets, in the hopes of hitting the right numbers and then using the Powerball proceeds to rebuild the resort.

+++++++

Realistically, the only way that DRI members can be voted off is by taking control of the Hawaii Collection trust - replacing the DRI cronies on the Board of Directors of the Trust with Directors who are committed to then using the Trust voting power to vote DRI interests off of the Boards of the individual resorts. The owners that need to be rallied are the owners in the Trust. If the group is interested in replacing the resort Directors, that is the only owners list that really counts.

+++++

I frankly have a very, very hard time taking seriously anyone who thinks they can can take control of the resort by rallying the deeded owners. The primary thrust needs to be getting control of the Hawaii Collection trust. Without accomplishing that, nothing else matters.

The "owners list" for the Trust deeds is very short I believe. It is DRI. The individual "owners" (really members) are NOT the owners anymore at the resort and would not be included in any owners list. And as the DRI Trust is under the control of the trustee(s), who in turn are believed to be at a minimum under influence of DRI, they are not likely to ever release those names to anyone, even other Trust members.

Your thought that this is a near impossibility for any number or reasons seems to be on the mark to me.

And there are MUCH worse than DRI out there. None are perfect but DRi at least appears to have the best interests of the resort in mind (why not - they stand to make money on it in a number of ways from ongoing management to new sales or Trust conversions) and want it up to par. How can even an individual owner complain about that? The costs may be an issue of course but the very survival of the property is at stake and DRI, as the management, is acting exactly as they should to protect it.

Much like Doug I feel a certain comfort in knowing that DRI understands the never ending need to keep these properties current. In the past Sunterra as just one bad example, there are plenty of others including some VERY big brand names, weren't willing to pay or bill for the necessary reserves. That will ultimately result in a very run down resort and/or serious special assessments. This particular SA is rather unique (thankfully) but has been known to be brewing for a number of years. Only the amount seems to be a shock but it takes what it takes to make things right. And the owners are the ones responsible to pay.

The other drama of any revolt to unseat the management is really just a distraction at this point IMO. It may need to be addressed in the long term but right now it isn't the problem.

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

The "owners list" for the Trust deeds is very short I believe. It is DRI.

No - it's not DRI. It's the Hawaii Collection Trust, which is a separate legal entity from DRI. The trust has it's own elected Board of Directors.

The trust holds ~ 35%-40% of the deeds for the resort. DRI itself is also a deeded owner at the resort, holding about 5% of the deeds, leaving the remaining deeded owners at ~55%-60% of ownership. So to vote out the existing board would require that ~90% of those remaining deeded owners to vote as a bloc. As I mentioned in my other post, there are probably better odds of winning at Powerball than there are of getting that 90% bloc vote from the deeded owners.

The trust has it's own owners list, which is the only owners list that really matters, in my opinion. That is the only list that is worth going to the mattresses to obtain, because the whole effort to replace directors at the resort will never have enough votes in support if the Trust does not cast it's votes in favor of replacing directors.

 

[Mr.Benny]

There is a website for The Point at Poipu owners at www.poipuowners.org

There is a movement underway with a letter writing campaign, and donations to assist with a legal fund to take DRI to court.

They are seeking injunctive relief on the Dec 31 date for the first payment and as well, seeking to enforce Hawaii State law that will compel them to turn over the owners list. With this list, they will be able to vote DRI members off the Board of Directors and take control of their resort.

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

There is a website for The Point at Poipu owners at www.poipuowners.org

There is a movement underway with a letter writing campaign, and donations to assist with a legal fund to take DRI to court.

They are seeking injunctive relief on the Dec 31 date for the first payment and as well, seeking to enforce Hawaii State law that will compel them to turn over the owners list. With this list, they will be able to vote DRI members off the Board of Directors and take control of their resort.

Duplicate post, so duplicate reply.

1. Suing DRI is, IMHO, a total waste of time since DRI is not the entity that is charging the assessment to owners, nor is DRI the entity that controls the owners list.

2. There aren't enough deeded owners to gain control of the resort by that means. The only way to gain control of the resort is to first gain control of the Hawaii Collection trust.

*****

Until the leaders of the deeded owners groupls realize that the critical issue is gaining control of the trust, it's hard to take them seriously. To me, that failure demonstrates that they haven't taken the time to understand the resort governance. Talking about starting legal action without first grasping how the resort is governed is ..... I'll just leave it to you to supply your adjectives of choice.

 

[timeos2]

No - it's not DRI. It's the Hawaii Collection Trust, which is a separate legal entity from DRI. The trust has it's own elected Board of Directors.

The trust holds ~ 35%-40% of the deeds for the resort. DRI itself is also a deeded owner at the resort, holding about 5% of the deeds, leaving the remaining deeded owners at ~55%-60% of ownership. So to vote out the existing board would require that ~90% of those remaining deeded owners to vote as a bloc. As I mentioned in my other post, there are probably better odds of winning at Powerball than there are of getting that 90% bloc vote from the deeded owners.

The trust has it's own owners list, which is the only owners list that really matters, in my opinion. That is the only list that is worth going to the mattresses to obtain, because the whole effort to replace directors at the resort will never have enough votes in support if the Trust does not cast it's votes in favor of replacing directors.

Correct - it is the DRI Trust. But it is still one owner & many members. I still doubt they are under any requirement to identify the members of their private Trust (nor would those members want them to!)

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

Correct - it is the DRI Trust. But it is still one owner & many members. I still doubt they are under any requirement to identify the members of their private Trust (nor would those members want them to!)

I imagine that would depend on the laws for wherever the trust is incorporated. Though I suppose that if the trust also has to have approval from various states in which it operates, they might be a patchwork of applicable requirements.

 

[bogey21]

A tough situation. From the outside looking in (I don't own at Poipu Point) I think the owners are eventually going to have to suck it up and pay. I would, however, hold off writing the check until the absolute last minute hoping that something positive would happen in the interim.

George

 

[artringwald]

Five Stages

1. Denial
2. Anger/Resentment
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance

Okay, I'm ready for acceptance. I'm not happy with the big SA, but I love the resort and I want to see it maintained. I'm not in the trust, but you can be sure I'll be voting next election, and I'll be looking closely at the candidates. Other than that, I really don't see how legal action has any chance of accomplishing something positive.

 

[Fisch]

1. Denial
2. Anger/Resentment
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance

Okay, I'm ready for acceptance. I'm not happy with the big SA, but I love the resort and I want to see it maintained. I'm not in the trust, but you can be sure I'll be voting next election, and I'll be looking closely at the candidates. Other than that, I really don't see how legal action has any chance of accomplishing something positive.

Well said.

 

[MOXJO7282]

A tough situation. From the outside looking in (I don't own at Poipu Point) I think the owners are eventually going to have to suck it up and pay. I would, however, hold off writing the check until the absolute last minute hoping that something positive would happen in the interim.

George

If I loved the resort I think ultimately I'd come up with the money but my biggest concern would be knowing that there is going to be many, many that won't or simply can't come up with the money. What about all those defaults? Who comes up with the money to cover those associated SA payments.

So I could see paying and then being asked for more. That is what we concern me the most.

 

[timeos2]

If I loved the resort I think ultimately I'd come up with the money but my biggest concern would be knowing that there is going to be many, many that won't or simply can't come up with the money. What about all those defaults? Who comes up with the money to cover those associated SA payments.

So I could see paying and then being asked for more. That is what we concern me the most.

I'm not positive what the estimated delinquency factor is under the current SA but I seem to recall it is between 10-15%. In that case it is quite high and hopefully will cover the potential defaults that will occur. The other part is that the early defaults will (again hopefully) be sold to new buyers near the end of the project & thus will return to paying status. There certainly is a potential for a shortfall but they have done a relatively conservative job of anticipating the inevitable percentage of non-payments. Plus if they have adjusted reserves correctly they could conceivably dip into those if required to complete the work rather than assess a second time. Only time will tell how this ends up going.

 

[artringwald]

Anybody watch House Hunters last night? They bought a house within walking distance of the Point At Poipu. I wonder if they had the house inspected for water intrusion.

 

[Luv2Travel2000]

Walking Away

I'll walk away and gladly ruin my credit. I won't need any credit for decades to come anyway. I am an owner of three weeks (2 bedroom unit) at the Point at Poipu. My regular maintenance fee per week is $1,348. Special assessment fee per week is $5,893. That's $7,241 per week owned or, for me, $21,724! There is no way in hell I am paying that or any portion of it. I do believe MANY owners will walk away, far more than the "10% default" rate that DRI is estimating and say they will cover. If it's greater than 10% then owners who stick around and pay may end up paying a lot more. No thank you.

 

[california-bighorn]

I'll walk away and gladly ruin my credit. I won't need any credit for decades to come anyway. I am an owner of three weeks (2 bedroom unit) at the Point at Poipu. My regular maintenance fee per week is $1,348. Special assessment fee per week is $5,893. That's $7,241 per week owned or, for me, $21,724! There is no way in hell I am paying that or any portion of it. I do believe MANY owners will walk away, far more than the "10% default" rate that DRI is estimating and say they will cover. If it's greater than 10% then owners who stick around and pay may end up paying a lot more. No thank you.

Not that I'm giving advise, but, in many cases like this if you file a letter with the credit reporting companies, the credit score hit you would take is often minimized by the circumstances. And from what I've read here, some things just don't "smell" right and there will be some finger-pointing going on for a while. It's too bad as we stayed here a few years ago and really enjoyed the resort and our stay.

 

[MOXJO7282]

I'll walk away and gladly ruin my credit. I won't need any credit for decades to come anyway. I am an owner of three weeks (2 bedroom unit) at the Point at Poipu. My regular maintenance fee per week is $1,348. Special assessment fee per week is $5,893. That's $7,241 per week owned or, for me, $21,724! There is no way in hell I am paying that or any portion of it. I do believe MANY owners will walk away, far more than the "10% default" rate that DRI is estimating and say they will cover. If it's greater than 10% then owners who stick around and pay may end up paying a lot more. No thank you.

There has to be many that simply cannot come up with that kind of money. Its a sad state of affairs for a place that is supposed to be a stress reducer not creator.