• The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 30 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other Owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 31 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 31st anniversary: Happy 31st Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    Free memberships for every 50 subscribers!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $23,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $23 Million dollars
  • Wish you could meet up with other TUG members? Well look no further as this annual event has been going on for years in Orlando! How to Attend the TUG January Get-Together!
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    Tens of thousands of subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

Poipu Point - Walk away from ownership?

T_R_Oglodyte

TUG Lifetime Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
16,755
Reaction score
8,784
Location
Mucky Toe, WA
How can DRI control the Board of Directors (I think this is the same as the HOA?)? Isn't membershgip on the board proportional to ownership? Was Poipu not a traditional weeks ownership program where most of the weeks, I would guess, sold so that Sunterra and now DRI would have minority ownership?

So.many owners signed up for points by placing their ownership into one of the DRI trusts which then hold the voting rights (no longer the individual owners ) that the massive vote of the trust - technically & legally independent but actually under DRI control - can easily out vote the often non-reponsive 60% block of independent owners still holding votes.
Current ownership of the resort is ~35% DRI Hawai'i trust and ~10% DRI held inventory, leaving about 55% in the hands of Deeded owners.

Terminating the management contract requires that more than 50% of all ownership interests vote in favor of termination. That is not more than 50% of votes at a quorumed meeting; that is 50% of all owners.

That requirement is contained in the timeshare program documents and has been there, I believe, since Day 1. Further the Timeshare Disclosure Agreements, required by Hawaii Law and signed off on by every person who bought a deeded interest, specifically brings that provision to the attention of purchasers and specifically notes that the provision makes it virtually impossible for owners to force out the management company.
 

T_R_Oglodyte

TUG Lifetime Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
16,755
Reaction score
8,784
Location
Mucky Toe, WA
...
6. Why has Diamond Resorts stopped the timeshare surrender option? I am directly requesting resumption of the surrender option.

Wouldn't that question be better directed to DRI and not the HOA, since it is DRI and not the HOA that has terminated the surrender program?

As far as I know the HOA has never had a surrender program.
 

FanFiltration

newbie
Joined
Oct 16, 2011
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Location
San Francisco
And here I was thinking "What a great deal" when I got a re-sale unit at the Point last spring.

How simply wonderful! Not only do we get to pay an extra $2,000 a year for this SA (per unit), we also get to enjoy the peaceful ambiance of major construction work around the resort during our stay for the next three years at least!

Remember when vacations were meant for relaxing? :doh:
 

dougp26364

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
14,732
Reaction score
3,531
Location
Kansas
Resorts Owned
Marriott Grand Chateau
Marriott Shadow Ridge
Marriott Ocean Pointe
Marriott Destination Club Points
Hilton Grand Vacation Club Las Vegas Blvd
Grand Colorado on Peak 8
Spinnaker French Quarter Resort Branson
And here I was thinking "What a great deal" when I got a re-sale unit at the Point last spring.

How simply wonderful! Not only do we get to pay an extra $2,000 a year for this SA (per unit), we also get to enjoy the peaceful ambiance of major construction work around the resort during our stay for the next three years at least!

Remember when vacations were meant for relaxing? :doh:

We'll, at least in 3 years you'll know that this resort has addressed the issue. One now has to wonder how many other resorts are ignoring the problem......assuming they have the same problem.

Sorry, I know it's of little consolation but, it's the best I can do. Personally, now I'm concerned about every one of our ownerships. Presently, I have one that is in bankruptcy with the land beneath some of the buildings in bankruptcy but not the actual buildings themselve. To top it all off, it appears that the orignal, now bankrupt, developer failed to file the proper deed works with the county, so many owners can't even sell or transfer their deeds since there are not deeds. I'm wondering how much this is going to cost all the owners in the end.

Of course, there's already a group wanting to go all class action on the current management company but, how can they be held accountable? They're not the one who didn't file for deeds. All they're doing is managing the resort. In our case, as I see it, the one to go after is already insolvent. Now we're stuck and the HOA isn't telling us enough information to let us know if we need to be planning for a major SA to buy the land out of bankruptcy or if there's a way we'll get out of this unscathed.
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,895
Reaction score
1,108
Location
eastern Europe
That sweetheart arrangement to try to lock in management was undoubtedly done when the HOA and management were both in the same hands, and was thus self-dealing. I wonder if anyone has consulted a Hawaii attorney about the possiblity of an independent board getting around that.

And now management is abusing its powers to try to preserve itself in control by willfully refusing to follow Hawaiian law to give membership lists to members who requested them, how are you ever going to get them out? To get owners to kick them out, someone needs to get word to all the independent owners, and without lists they simply do not have the tools to do that. This is an appalling abuse of power for their own self interest.


Current ownership of the resort is ~35% DRI Hawai'i trust and ~10% DRI held inventory, leaving about 55% in the hands of Deeded owners.

Terminating the management contract requires that more than 50% of all ownership interests vote in favor of termination. That is not more than 50% of votes at a quorumed meeting; that is 50% of all owners.

That requirement is contained in the timeshare program documents and has been there, I believe, since Day 1. Further the Timeshare Disclosure Agreements, required by Hawaii Law and signed off on by every person who bought a deeded interest, specifically brings that provision to the attention of purchasers and specifically notes that the provision makes it virtually impossible for owners to force out the management company.
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,895
Reaction score
1,108
Location
eastern Europe
In DRI's situation, don't those going into the points club surrender their deeds to the trust? That may make it difficult to try to recover those votes for the underlying members. The circumstances of each resort are different, but in one of the lawsuits between Outer Banks Beach Club I and II and the Equivest / Peppertree interests, OBBC got the court to rule that it was the underlying individual members of their points club which got to vote weeks controlled by the points club in OBBC annual meetings, not the points club directors. It is not impossible to obtain such a result in court, as shown by the Outer Banks Beach Club example, but each case would turn on elements of each state's laws and on the particular legal documents involved.

Under normal circumstances, I would say a 55-60% majority would be hard to organize to defeat a compact 40ish% minority. However, with the majority jolted out of their slumber by this massive SA, those usual calculations may not apply. If there is ever a time to go for it, then it is now.


So.many owners signed up for points by placing their ownership into one of the DRI trusts which then hold the voting rights (no longer the individual owners ) that the massive vote of the trust - technically & legally independent but actually under DRI control - can easily out vote the often non-reponsive 60% block of independent owners still holding votes.
 

JudyS

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,199
Reaction score
218
Location
Clearwater, FL
Sorry to hear about the massive special assessment. Although I do not own there I do feel the pain.
I feel the same. My sympathies to the owners!

My question is this week owners are each assessed aproximately 5800 each. Are the owners there assessed 52 times that or aprox $300,000 each?
Wow is that possible?
I was wondering the same things. The HOA is saying it will cost almost $300,000 to fix each condo. Wouldn't it be cheaper to tear down the condos and rebuild? Where I live, $300,000 will build a heck of nice house, even allowing for the cost of demolishing an existing structure. Just how big are these timeshare units? Is construction really that expensive in Hawaii?
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,895
Reaction score
1,108
Location
eastern Europe
Beware of PCC's

Let me mention one other warning for some who are new to these boards.

On another timeshare board where the Point at Poipu brouhaha has been discussed, several representatives of so-called Post Card Companies (PCC's) came on to troll for business. I suspect that they will be doing all they can to get to Point at Poipu members to get business. Beware of them.

PCC's are called that because of the way all of them used to primarily generate their business, by mailing postcards soliciting meetings at a local hotel. Now they use other means as well. Several state Attorney Generals have investigated a number of them, leading to fines and restitution to customers.

Essentially, these businesses want you to pay them ~$4,000 to take your timeshare off your hands. Some of them send you a power of attorney authorizing them to transfer your timeshare to someone else. The problem is that sometimes they just don't ever do that and you end up still owning the timeshare and out the $4,000.

The other scenario seems more common. They have you sign a deed conveying the timeshare to a limited liability company (LLC) with no assets other than the timeshare deeds being conveyed in. For those weeks that are sellable, they sell them and deed them out of the LLC. Eventually, the others, that are not sellable are just marooned there as the PCC casts the LLC adrift. The HOA then has to foreclose and often has increased time and costs involved with these weeks sitting in dummy LLC's. The PCC does not pay m/f's of SA's on these weeks.

For the customer, the problem with the second scenario is that they have probably been sucked into engaging in a fraudulent conveyance, for which there are consequences. In a recent issue of Timesharing Today magazine, there was an article about how a number of large management companies were starting to push back against the PCC's warning their members that if these transfers were made in the future, the PCC and the timeshare member would both be sued for damages for fraudulent conveyance.

Given the amount of fees involved, I would certainly expect DRI to follow this route at Point at Poipu and aggressively go after any PCC transfers trying to escape the SA. Indeed, it would probably be malpractice for them not to.
 

weisberg

newbie
Joined
Oct 13, 2011
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Location
Florida
First let me thank everyone for their participation in this forum. After reading some of Carolinian's input and talking to my cousin who referenced the Flamingo resort in Sint Martin. I searched some articles I would like to share. They are lengthy.
Diamond Resorts International Complaints & Reviews - Fraud and cheating
Review all Diamond Resorts International complaints
Diamond Resorts International
Posted: 2009-02-09 by  Lucas


Fraud and cheating
Complaint Rating: Company information:
Diamond Resorts International
United States
diamondresorts.com
My wife and I have ownership interests in the Flamingo Beach Resort and the Flamingo Beach Villas in Sint Maarten. These properties were acquired last year by Diamond Resorts International.

When we purchased the time share weeks the initial Maintenance Fees were set in the contract but the contracts were mute with regard to inflation but we were assured that the rates would follow the local inflation rates in St Marten. We have just received our invoice for this year and find that our fees have increased 34% and 42% respectively. When I expressed concern over the increase to Diamond Resorts International I was told to 'get a lawyer'.

If we do not pay the fees we forfeit the properties and our initial investments. We feel that the increase is unconscionable and intended to force owners to abandon their investment so that the properties can be resold.

We understand that a class action suit is being mobilized by a local law firm in Sint Maarten on behalf of owners to address the Maintenance fee increases and the purported use of capital reserves to pay debts. We have also contacted the Attorney General for our state. It is hard to imagine that firms like Diamond Resorts International can operate in such a heavy handed way.

Diamond Resorts International, Hawaii Complaints & Reviews - Corporate Fraud
Review all Diamond Resorts International, Hawaii complaints
Diamond Resorts International, Hawaii
Posted: 2011-10-16 by  Shelly Smith

Corporate Fraud
Complaint Rating: Company information:
Hawaii
United States
I purchased a timeshare at Ka'anapali Beach through Diamond Resorts. During a sales presentation I was told I would save money on maintenance fees if I moved my deeded property ownership into the Hawaii Collection which included the Point at Poipu. On October 14, 2011 I received a maintenance fee invoice which increased by $2, 363.50 or 140%. The increase is for a project that starts on 6/11 and takes 5 yers to complete, yet they are requiring me to pay 84% or $2, 000 by 1/1/12 or face additional fees, penalties, suspension and possible foreclosure. The Board knew of these issues for three years, but waited until 10/11 to communicate this to the owners. A five year project should not include 84% of the money upfront based on estimates and not actuals. There was simply one line item for the total due by the Hawaii Collection of $25, 356, 399 (total project cost $65.8M) with little to no details. This gives new meaning to "Corporate Greed". A corporation of this size should be able to finance the project and pass this along to the owners over a 5-Year period based on actuals and not estimates. Requiring me to pay an additional $2, 000 or 84% by 1/1/12 with an advanced notice of 2.5 months is nothing shy of a corporate scandal. During the sales presentation I was told that I would save money on maintenance fees when mgmt. knew of these costs for three years and failed to include this information in the sales presentation. They simply needed more people to pay for their mistakes. A formal request for detailed information will be sent to Diamond Resorts with the appropriate Attorney Generals Offices copied. The sales presentation to move my deeded property to the Hawaii Collection was done with management's full intent and knowlege that my maintencance fees would significantly increase. On the Assessment Payment Schedule, only one group of owners can finance over 5 years, those with 51, 000 points. What does that represent, 1% of the owners? So, the remaining 99% are basically paying upfront. I am part of the 99%, shall I bring some protest signs for my next visit to Maui?

Diamond Resorts International Complaints & Reviews - Cause Misery For Thousands
Review all Diamond Resorts International complaints
Diamond Resorts International
Posted: 2011-03-13 by  baker1236


Cause Misery For Thousands
Complaint Rating: Company information:
Diamond Resorts International
United States
It is quite clear that this is an organization using theoretically legal, though highly immoral and unfair means, to extract money from vulnerable people. Around 15, 000 people in the UK are currently affected. They are also creating the environment for scammers of a wide variety of types to thrive. They need to be stopped.

It seems that they have taken over the management of a holiday club (Grand Vacation Club) and then engineered changes in the rules to make it almost impossible for members of the club to dispose of their “points”. At the same time they have hiked “management charges” by 40% in one year. These management charges now cost members more than it would cost a private individual to rent an equivalent property all in.

This, unsurprisingly, has both destroyed the value of members’ points holding and left them with, in many cases, totally unaffordable charges. They have then issued threats to anyone slow on payment. These include late night phone calls from the US and warnings of referral to debt collecting agencies. I have no doubt that these tactics are causing serious worry to many people. Attempts to return points and to exit the scheme are met with the reply that you remain liable unless the points are sold (effectively impossible because of the way that their policies have destroyed all value).

For someone who is caught in the web (me), it seems impossible to get out. The only suggested options are bankruptcy and death. Even then it seems they demand that the liability be picked up by your heirs. This leaves members vulnerable to a large number of fraudulent offers from a variety of crooks. One attempt to defraud me was made only yesterday by someone who promised that if I gave him £5000 he would take on my points.

If ever a subject deserves coverage, this is it. Hopefully this is an evil which cannot flourish when exposed to the full light of public scrutiny.
 

weisberg

newbie
Joined
Oct 13, 2011
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Location
Florida
Sorry, I ran out of characters. I also read about the trouble the UK had with DRI in 2008. You can read about this at the mirror.co.uk.
I am sure if we dig deeper we will find more. This is not a corporation I want to be linked with. Once again I can not put my money where I have no trust. My lack of trust does not stop with DRI. I also have questions about our Board of Directors. Thanks for listening again.
Joyce Weisberg
bobweisberg@bellsouth.net
 

dougp26364

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
14,732
Reaction score
3,531
Location
Kansas
Resorts Owned
Marriott Grand Chateau
Marriott Shadow Ridge
Marriott Ocean Pointe
Marriott Destination Club Points
Hilton Grand Vacation Club Las Vegas Blvd
Grand Colorado on Peak 8
Spinnaker French Quarter Resort Branson
I think you missed the part where Sunterra had a group going after the old Sunterra mangement (Sunterror and a Scambulence) when DRI took over. DRI was credited with going to the table and settling the differences in that case.

Part of the problem has also been promises made by former Sunterra salesmen and, Sunterra's lax enforcement of rules that were written into the contract. Sunterra failed, DRI took them over and, when DRI began enforcing the rules as they were written, they suddenly became the evil management company.

I understand the frustration. When we originally purchased a fixed unit/fixed week at Polo Towers, we were told not to worry about it as they were allowing owners to "float" their week. For the first few years, we were able to float out fixed week. Then, when the project neared completion, allowing floating caused issues for those who wanted to use their fixed week/fixed unit. The inventory wasn't there like it had to be by contract and, floating all but ended (except for 60 days before check in). I was mad as all get out as the fixed week/fixed unit we purchased didn't really work for us. Needless to say, I learned to read the contract and the rules.

Just because the rules get bent doesn't mean they will always be bent. I'm not absolving DRI of anything but, I do believe that there are two sides to every story and both sides should be heard.

Recently, there was another owner who had a contract at KBC for a specific view. DRI apparently was trying to interpret the contract in a different manner and he wasn't getting the view he felt he was entitled. He went to bat and, as far as I understand, he prevailed. He had it in writing when he purchased from Sunterra.

Yes, I know it sounds as if I'm constantly defending DRI. I'm not so much as trying to reason things out. I have a long history with DRI (back to October of 1998) and we've had our battles in the past. If you search the old records, you'll find I haven't always been positive but, over time I've learned to look at my contracts. Every time DRI has been within it's rights. DRI isn't the least expensive but, when they want something done, they typically do it right and to a high standard.

It's all about what's in writing, not what's been done before. If it's in writing then it's enforcable. Check those contracts and never go by what the saleman promises or what the resort is doing today. If it's not in writing, it's not guarenteed. I believe that's where many of us go wrong when it comes to timeshare.
 
Last edited:

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,895
Reaction score
1,108
Location
eastern Europe
The real problem is that DRI plays by whatever rules suit them, and if the rules don't suit them, they ignore the rules. Take the Hawaii law that requires timeshare management to provide copies of the membership lists to members who request it. That is more than just a rule, it is a state law. That one is inconvenient for DRI since a member with the membership list might be able to organize members to kick DRI out as management. So guess what?; they just thumb their nose at that rule / law!!!!

When they are playing fast and loose with the clear requirements of state law, how much else are they playing fast and loose with?

Oh, and Sunterror was an earlier group, whose grievance was dealt with by Sunterra. The group dealt with by DRI was the Scottish Action Group Against Sunterra, whose website was sunterrified.com and who had the Scambulance.


I think you missed the part where Sunterra had a group going after the old Sunterra mangement (Sunterror and a Scambulence) when DRI took over. DRI was credited with going to the table and settling the differences in that case.

Part of the problem has also been promises made by former Sunterra salesmen and, Sunterra's lax enforcement of rules that were written into the contract. Sunterra failed, DRI took them over and, when DRI began enforcing the rules as they were written, they suddenly became the evil management company.

I understand the frustration. When we originally purchased a fixed unit/fixed week at Polo Towers, we were told not to worry about it as they were allowing owners to "float" their week. For the first few years, we were able to float out fixed week. Then, when the project neared completion, allowing floating caused issues for those who wanted to use their fixed week/fixed unit. The inventory wasn't there like it had to be by contract and, floating all but ended (except for 60 days before check in). I was mad as all get out as the fixed week/fixed unit we purchased didn't really work for us. Needless to say, I learned to read the contract and the rules.

Just because the rules get bent doesn't mean they will always be bent. I'm not absolving DRI of anything but, I do believe that there are two sides to every story and both sides should be heard.

Recently, there was another owner who had a contract at KBC for a specific view. DRI apparently was trying to interpret the contract in a different manner and he wasn't getting the view he felt he was entitled. He went to bat and, as far as I understand, he prevailed. He had it in writing when he purchased from Sunterra.

Yes, I know it sounds as if I'm constantly defending DRI. I'm not so much as trying to reason things out. I have a long history with DRI (back to October of 1998) and we've had our battles in the past. If you search the old records, you'll find I haven't always been positive but, over time I've learned to look at my contracts. Every time DRI has been within it's rights. DRI isn't the least expensive but, when they want something done, they typically do it right and to a high standard.

It's all about what's in writing, not what's been done before. If it's in writing then it's enforcable. Check those contracts and never go by what the saleman promises or what the resort is doing today. If it's not in writing, it's not guarenteed. I believe that's where many of us go wrong when it comes to timeshare.
 
Last edited:

Kpaul

TUG Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
22
Reaction score
4
No Pity for Diamond on this issue
Originally Posted by timeos2 View Post
DRI, like every Developer / Management, has some flaws and overall seems to be high on the fees they tend to collect. But this is a case where, IMO, they cannot be blamed and are doing the best they can in a no-win situation for everyone involved. You wanna bet they would give up management / sales there IF they had known of the issues that have become obvious now? No one willingly gets into a mess like this - they inherited a problem and as management now have to do what they can to resolve it. The blame lies with those long gone from the picture. Doesn't make it easier to take or make DRI saints but I wouldn't blame them either.

They have to deal with it and so will the other owners as best they can.

Seriously John.... Anytime you want to "give" me a Ocean Front Resort in Hawaii for $65 million of other people's money, I'll buy you several of those drinks with the cute umbrellas.
Diamond has absolutely "nothing" to lose! No matter what they get a completely rebuilt resort paid by owners that are willing to pay and if they have to pay for those that default, they simply sell their week for a "PROFIT"

I typically agree with most of your posts but you are way off on this one.
Just think about what is going on here. Not "ONE" penny will come out of Diamond's pockets.........and I will guarantee that they profit off the construction management or administration.

I'm a real estate developer....I'll take it under those terms in a heartbeat!
Book my flight please...oh by the way, you (the owners) will pay for my First Class Flight and my penthouse accommodations at the Marriott during my stay because I can't stay at a damaged resort.

Laughing all the way to the bank.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

timeos2

Tug Review Crew: Rookie
TUG Lifetime Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
11,183
Reaction score
6
Location
Rochester, NY
Wow - this answer got REALLY long!

No Pity for Diamond on this issue


Seriously John.... Anytime you want to "give" me a Ocean Front Resort in Hawaii for $65 million of other people's money, I'll buy you several of those drinks with the cute umbrellas.
Diamond has absolutely "nothing" to lose! No matter what they get a completely rebuilt resort paid by owners that are willing to pay and if they have to pay for those that default, they simply sell their week for a "PROFIT"

I typically agree with most of your posts but you are way off on this one.
Just think about what is going on here. Not "ONE" penny will come out of Diamond's pockets.........and I will guarantee that they profit off the construction management or administration.

I'm a real estate developer....I'll take it under those terms in a heartbeat!
Book my flight please...oh by the way, you (the owners) will pay for my First Class Flight and my penthouse accommodations at the Marriott during my stay because I can't stay at a damaged resort.

Laughing all the way to the bank.

Good points. I agree that Diamond does seem extraordinarily adept at managing to get owners to pay for things - especially upgrades at resorts that Diamond desires but may or may not have been part of the original plan/design. This results in situations where in most cases the developer of a project will have set the standard then it is up to the new owners to keep it up as the resort ages. The initial cost is in the massive retail purchase price not the annual fees (which at least initially serve to maintain the original resort, not build or rebuild it).

With Diamond we have a situation where they took over what was originally a relatively high end operation - Argosy and others - that evolved into a rather massive mix of great to extremely threadbare resorts in a "collection" known as Sunterra. There was little rhyme or reason to what that group brought under their umbrella - they just seemingly purchased whatever they could get their hands on, ran up debt and paid little attention to nagging issues like collections and resort maintenance/upgrades.

So Diamond buys them out of almost certain financial collapse - but inherits a rather rag tag collection of properties. Many started out as fine places that had been allowed to deteriorate, some had grown to practically unmanageable size and some were just plain dumps or half completed at best. Still it represented a sizable group of locations and a real opportunity.

The path Diamond seems to have picked is one of selective sell offs either of poor resorts or those that can generate fast cash. That has upset some like Carolinian that see it as a slap at an area (Europe) that they happen to appreciate. I'm sure Diamond sees it as a way to improve the bottom line and strengthen the system overall. While sad to see resorts sold off it is hard to argue with that logic for the Diamond system.

The other side is the one you describe. Fees for the individual resorts as well as the Trusts - and to the degree they can raised the fees for the more owner controllable club system where non-trust weeks can be traded for points - have been raised significantly. As Doug has often pointed out it is justified as payment for often massive improvements in the resorts to Diamonds self imposed standards BUT at the expense, with hefty management overhead, of the owners. It is a great plan for Diamond. In fact I have to stand back and admit it is almost genius. I never would have seen that potential for a way to create a large system of timeshares, attempting and so far largely succeeding in raising them to mid - high standards, and doing it on the owners dime! They don't have to build another room for years yet they have a positive, profitable revenue stream. Marriott, Fairfield and others must be looking at it with great envy.

We as owners may or may not like that model but it appears strong and likely will survive even as others falter. If you hang in with them you tend to get greatly improved resort units but at your cost, not the developers/managements. If you decide to get out they tend to be the ultimate beneficiaries as they either get a new owner to pay the fees or add it to one of the Trusts & spread the fees over those owners. As I said it borders on genius.

Any group can and likely will be challenged - Diamond no exception. But they seem to be very strong financially, have a plan and are executing it to near perfection. I have grown to have a grudging respect for them. Their standards, while not quite Hyatt/Marriott level, aren't far off. They have a vision and are executing it - yes, some toes are being stepped on and feelings hurt along the way. They really do seem to care about the "owner experience" as well as the physical state of the resorts under their banner. Unlike most developers they aren't afraid of the need to fund for improvements and reserves. For that alone most owners should be thankful as that is the long term way to insure survival of resorts - especially older ones. But they pay the majority of the costs, not Diamond.

A long way of saying I don't think Diamond is by any means perfect but they will, it appears, do whatever is necessary - admittedly largely on owners dollars - to make a resort "right". You either buy in and hope to get your value out or you throw in the towel. Either way the plan/system they came up with appear to be self sustaining and very well protected within the rules. This is by far the most massive special assessment I've seen from them (or anyone else!) but the fact that the resort is in dire need of the work seems to be undeniable.

It is a shame the weight falls on the owners there and in the Trusts to cover the cost plus overhead, but my guess is as resorts age we'll see this type of thing more and more. Those resorts that have full owner control of the Board might have an option to terminate & sell off those properties - although in reality even small resorts have a tough time getting the super majority needed for any such action - while most will find that the reality is there are blocks of votes held in Trusts or systems that effectively have control. If they want to rebuild or renovate or upgrade it is tough to stop (and, except for costs, why would you want to? An improved resort benefits all owners, albeit at that cost, so any challenge is likely to fail). That is the reality of most timeshares. Buy in with the understanding that costs will do nothing but rise. And there is a real financial risk to owning ANY property - even a "simple" little week of timeshare.
 

gqtapper

newbie
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Location
California
Thanks for all your posts

We got an incredible education last night after opening our "surprise" bill from Diamond Resorts. We were not hit as hard as some of you but still the sting hurts and at a bad time for us financially. We stumbled onto this site trying to research DRI and Poipu history. Thanks for all your posts. Although there are a few I don't agree with like it's our own fault for not reading EVERY single page of the 100 plus disclosure paperwork. When you go into a resort to buy, they don't say your maintenance may double or that in the future when one of our properties is in awful shape you all will have to pay for it. I went through all my paperwork last night and there really isn't any kind of indication of something like this being a possibility. Actually, most of the paperwork you have you initial only has to do with understanding how you use your points etc.
We are going to Maui next week and it really makes me want to warn future buyers. We have all had an expensive lesson with this situation and I am just baffled that there isn't much we can do.
Oh, and for the people who accused some of us of ignoring our proxy voting - it's kind of difficult to vote for folks you don't know and if you don't know they are DRI people etc.
Thanks again and I will be checking daily to read on.....
 
Last edited:

Chinmusic9

newbie
Joined
Oct 16, 2011
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Location
United States
I have found all of the previous replies informative, and it appears that legal involvement will only help the members if the members can find an angle that involves DRI directly. These posts have made it clear that every possible effort to put blame on contractors, Sunterra, architects, insurance companies, HOA, etc. will impact the owners financially and that DRI has effectively put themselves at arms length from significant liability.

However, I think one possibility may involve the lack of disclosure of the problems that have existed at Poipu for years (the last three by admission by the HOA recently) to those of us who were forced into accepting the transition from weeks at Embassy Kaanapali to points in the Hawaiian Collection when attempting to add time. First of all, there was no disclosure of problems at any of the other three properties in the documentation or presentation as I assume, from what many of you said, Hawaii law requires (Poipu, Sedona Summit, Polo Towers). Illinois law certainly does. It does seem that DRI changed their disclosure slightly in 2011, as mentioned by a previous poster who used his right of recission. Secondly, by forcing us to accept points, it removed us from dealing with only the Kaanapali special assessments (which we had to deal with a few years earlier) to involvement in the other properties, a convenient and purposeful effort to expand the financial liability to as many owners as possible. I am sure that our sales experience three years ago can be documented by many others at all four properties.

I would urge Rhinestone Redneck to try and find an attorney to investigate this angle at the California meeting, as well as evaluate the other suggestions made by Carolinian, weisberg, and riothng. Keep us posted and hopefully you can get the meeting taped.
 

dougp26364

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
14,732
Reaction score
3,531
Location
Kansas
Resorts Owned
Marriott Grand Chateau
Marriott Shadow Ridge
Marriott Ocean Pointe
Marriott Destination Club Points
Hilton Grand Vacation Club Las Vegas Blvd
Grand Colorado on Peak 8
Spinnaker French Quarter Resort Branson
John,

I said this long ago about DRI. As an owner, you'd better like where DRI is going because you're just along for the ride.

DRI is a mangement company, not a benfactor to owners. They'll manage the resorts but it's the owners who own and pay for the resorts, their maintence, upkeep and repairs. If there's an issue, it's that the bar was set low by Sunterra and now DRI wants to raise the bar,owner experience, and by default, owner expense.
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,895
Reaction score
1,108
Location
eastern Europe
The path Diamond seems to have picked is one of selective sell offs either of poor resorts or those that can generate fast cash. That has upset some like Carolinian that see it as a slap at an area (Europe) that they happen to appreciate. I'm sure Diamond sees it as a way to improve the bottom line and strengthen the system overall. While sad to see resorts sold off it is hard to argue with that logic for the Diamond system.

.

The issue is not really where the resorts DRI sells off are located but the manner in which they go about it, which often involves riding roughshod over the members.

The first example is Carlton Court in central London, sold off because it had one of the highest market values of any resort in the DRI system and because it was easy to do since it had no individual owners, having been brought into Sunterra when Sunterra was only selling points. Since this is an extreme high demand and low supply location, its sale impacted members choice in vacation location, but that alone would not be enough to raise too much criticism. From information from people in the system, this resort was bought by Sunterra with corporate funds, but then lots of money was spent out of maintenance fee money to extensively refurbish it. That refurbishment certainly improved its sale price, but no one seems to be able to track any of that money being returned by DRI from the sale proceeds to the maintenance funds.

The other is Wychnor Park, whose original developer had sold it as fixed weeks, and did extensive marketing in the local community offering it as ''a country club that is also a timeshare'' stressing members yearround use of facilities. DRI decided to run out the individual members. Since this resort was highly marketable, some speculation was that the purpose was to set it up for sale. If so, the bad economy intervened and a sale has not happened yet. The way they ran out the individual owners was absolutely thuggish. DRI had acquired enough weeks from inventory Sunterra purchased from the original developer plus weeks they had cajoled members into converting to points, that they had enough weeks to vote to terminate the resort as a timeshare. They announced to the individual members that this was precisely what they intended to do, but gave them two options, either convert to DRI points or take a deed at another DRI timeshare that was a considerable distance away. Neither offered use of local facilities, which is what many of the remaining individual members had bought for. They were totally screwed as neither option gave them anything close to what they had or what they wanted. There was not even a cash price on the table. After DRI strongarmed all the individual members out of their ownerships, they kept the resort open for their points members as it still is today. If just one of those individual members had stuck to their guns and refused to budge, they would likely have forced a public sale of the property, in which DRI would have netted less money but at least the individual owners would get their cut of the proceeds.

Of course the DRI move at Wychnor Park was just following an old Sunterra trick. When Thurnham Leisure Industries got in financial trouble, Sunterra bought them for a song. TLI owned three resorts, Thurnham Hall, Club Britannia, and a third resort whose name slips my mind. Sunterra ran out the individual owners at Club Britannia and then sold off that resort, reportedly receiving considerably more money than they had paid for all of TLI. They used a similar tactic, telling the individual owners that they were closing the resort as a timeshare and they had two choices, to accept Sunterra points or a deed to another timeshare far away (actually the third TLI resort and the same one later offered by DRI to Wychnor Park owners). Club Britannia was a seaside resort on the southern coast of England and the resort they were offered was an inland resort north of Birmingham, not at all the same resort experience for own to use members. Again, there was no cash offer, but again all the individual members eventually knuckled under to this screw job.

DRI has already strongarmed members of a small points club at Thurnham Hall out of that program in a similar manner, and there is concern that the next victims could be the individual owners at Thurnham.

As to how resorts can protect themselves from the thugs of these large resort chains moving in and trying to take over, Stouts Hill is a good example. When their member-controlled HOA board heard that their developer had sold his remaining inventory to one of these groups (Sunterra, if memory serves), they moved at the next meeting to amend the by-laws to provide that each owner only got one vote at the annual meeting regardless of how many weeks they owned. That chopped the corporate marauder down to size and kept the individual members firmly in control.
 
Last edited:

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,895
Reaction score
1,108
Location
eastern Europe
interesting newspaper article about disgrunted owner from 2010

The Garden Island Saturday, February 27, 2010

Timeshare owners still disgruntled

by Coco Zickos
.
...PO‘IPU — Hundreds of outspoken timeshare owners at The Point at Po‘ipu are still fed up with mounting maintenance fees that continued to rise some 20 percent this year. Since October, the number of deeded owners concerned with the current management company’s influence on the resort has risen from 250 to around 500 according to Richard Batchelder, who is heading the group of “Concerned Deeded Owners at the Point at Po‘ipu.”

Even though the economy has taken a nosedive, timeshare owners like Brian Carlson, who said he is already enduring difficult financial times, are largely frustrated with Diamond Resort International’s lack of communication with owners.

“There is absolutely no communication between owners and management,” he said Friday.

He now owes some $1,800 in maintenance fees, but when Carlson first invested in the timeshare 14 years ago, payments were only around $500.

During his ownership, Carlson said, he has “never been given the opportunity to vote on anything.”

“I never hear from or know who the HOA is, let alone figure out how they can raise the fees like this,” he said.

Fees have reportedly escalated since DRI took over management in recent years, Batchelder said.

But what has also concerned Batchelder is that DRI still refuses to “give up the owner’s list,” despite repeated attempts by several owners.

“It is our opinion” there would be “thousands” of the resort’s approximately 10,000 owners willing to express concern if “the owner list was released so they could be contacted,” says a letter from the concerned owners.

Hawai‘i Revised Statutes Chapter 514A states, “The resident manager or managing agent or board of directors shall keep an accurate and current list of members of the association of apartment owners and their current addresses ... The list shall be maintained at a place designated by the board of directors and a copy shall be available, at cost, to any member of the association as provided in the declaration or bylaws or rules and regulations ...”

“Whoever controls the owner’s list controls the resort,” Batchelder said.

DRI also still controls a majority of the Vacation Owners Association and Association of Apartment Owners board members, as three of the five directors are employees of the management company, according to Batchelder.

However, Chapter 514A also states, “A director shall not cast any proxy vote at any board meeting, nor shall a director vote at any board meeting on any issue in which the director has a conflict of interest.” In addition, “the number of persons constituting the board ... shall have an elected board of not less than nine members” and that no single apartment should have more than one representative.

“There’s no way we can compete,” said timeshare owner Roger Veach.

In spring 2008, the board voted to give DRI management a $1.5 million “administrative fee” which Batchelder cites as “pure profit.”

“There are literally millions of dollars involved here,” he said.

Attempts to contact DRI Executive Vice President and General Counsel Elizabeth Brennan for comment were unsuccessful.

“The movement of deeded owners, in many people’s mind, is pretty much unstoppable,” says the letter written by the Concerned Deeded Owners at The Point at Po‘ipu.

For more information, visit www.poipuowners.org.


Read more: http://thegardenisland.com/business...42d-11df-91f7-001cc4c03286.html#ixzz1b9yjZAu6
 

JudyS

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,199
Reaction score
218
Location
Clearwater, FL
... my guess is as resorts age we'll see this type of thing more and more. Those resorts that have full owner control of the Board might have an option to terminate & sell off those properties - although in reality even small resorts have a tough time getting the super majority needed for any such action - while most will find that the reality is there are blocks of votes held in Trusts or systems that effectively have control. If they want to rebuild or renovate or upgrade it is tough to stop (and, except for costs, why would you want to? An improved resort benefits all owners, albeit at that cost, so any challenge is likely to fail). That is the reality of most timeshares. Buy in with the understanding that costs will do nothing but rise. And there is a real financial risk to owning ANY property - even a "simple" little week of timeshare.
While it is certainly true that many resorts are aging and need substantial work, I still think there is a real question here about the cost. Why is it $65 million dollars to renovate a property with about 212 units? $300,000 per condo seems very, very steep, especially since it isn't a complete tear-down and rebuild.

Can anyone give me some info about the size of these units? I'm curious as to how much the cost works out to per square foot. Here in the Midwest, quality construction costs maybe $80-$100 per square foot on an improved lot. I would expect costs in Hawaii to be somewhat higher, plus DRI probably adds on a 15% management fee, plus there would demolition costs if they did a tear-down. Still, unless these are very large units, I'd think a complete tear-down and rebuild would be less than $300,000 per condo.
 
Last edited:

bogey21

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
9,455
Reaction score
4,666
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
Still, unless these are very large units, I'd think a complete tear-down and rebuild would be less than $300,000 per condo.

Is it possible that it might not be possible to get the permits necessary for new construction? If so, maybe "renovating" is the only option.

George
 

Geckowest

newbie
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Is it possible that it might not be possible to get the permits necessary for new construction? If so, maybe "renovating" is the only option.

George

Or better yet, Demolish instead of renovating at $65Mil, and sell the Land...
 
Last edited:

dougp26364

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
14,732
Reaction score
3,531
Location
Kansas
Resorts Owned
Marriott Grand Chateau
Marriott Shadow Ridge
Marriott Ocean Pointe
Marriott Destination Club Points
Hilton Grand Vacation Club Las Vegas Blvd
Grand Colorado on Peak 8
Spinnaker French Quarter Resort Branson
Or better yet, Demolish instead of renovating at $65Mil, and sell the Land...

That is going to require, at the very least, a majority vote. Considering that DRI controls nearly 40 to 45% of those votes as presented here or on another Piopu thread, it's going to require that nearly every deeded week owner vote to close the resort. This is assuming that a simple majority can vote for the resort to be closed. It may take more than a simple majority and, depending on how Hawaiian law and the covenents of the resort owners read, it may be a moot point before you begin.

It's been said before but, the beauty of the trust is consolidation of control. Many have warned owners about signing over their voting rights. This issue illustrates that concern perfectly.

Disney is the prefect example of the control a trust based ownership enjoys. Disney recently decided it was moving from I.I. to RCI. Members (owners) had no say in the matter. Disney members are now exchanging through RCI. No vote, no say, just follow.
 
Last edited:
Top