RCI apparently sued again over rentals

[Carolinian]

I am told that there is now another lawsuit against RCI over the rental issue, and also some of the points vs weeks issues. This one is in the US District Court in New Jersey, but I don't know what district. It is supposed to be on the website of one of the three law firms involved next week. I will post a link when that info is up.

The plot thickens!

 

[taffy19]

There is some more about it here.

 

[Barbeque]

Interesting a week or so ago I did a search for July or August for SO CAL and Hawaii using a summer CARLSBAD INN week and I got sorry no matches. Today useing the same search I received 4 matches not what I consider as equivalent trades but they were more than none. Maybe these actions will make RCI clean up their act for a while. I have done well exchanging with RCI but have made use of ongoing searches. A few years ago when they wanted my Cabo week we had all kinds of matches now it takes an ongoing search. Supply and demand is dictating trading (They are just manipulating the supply with the rentals)

 

[timeos2]

So much bluster. No results. No need to talk

Personally I would rather drop my membership to any part of RCI than to have anything to do even remotely with these sleezy firms. While I have always hated RCI renting deposits these moneygrubbers aren't the answer, they are a bigger problem. Who says Jackie Childs retired when Seinfelt went off the air?

Fortunately, as I have already stated, its all a bunch of hot air and unlikely to affect anything in the near term. By the time anything comes of it whatever RCI has in mind will already be in place and the members can make their own decisions if they wish to stay and use it or not. No good will come of this that couldn't have been handled much better at the member level. Use it or don't. Thats the real answer. I will now fight as hard as possible from commenting any more no matter what nonsense gets posted until there is something of substance that might actually amount to a change in what RCI does. I don't anticipate having to do that for a long, long time. Fighting my typing hand to stay off the sue RCI threads until then.

 

[Dave M]

Like you, John, I'll make one post and then try to retire from this subject, leaving it to those who expect to see results from these lawsuits.

RCI's contract allows it to use deposited weeks as it sees fit. If we don't like how RCI operates, there are other very good - perhaps better - exchange company alternatives. That combination is a powerful defense for RCI.

RCI reports an amazing success ratio (mid 90s percent range) in matching acceptable exchanges to requests. A leading CPA firm audits those reported exchange numbers every year. That adds to the defense.

If there are so many successes and other good options, where is the broken contractual promise? I don't see one. Does a statement by one employee of RCI for how deposits will be handled constitute a contract, particularly if it's at odds with the legal contract that binds our RCI membership? I don't think so.

As John suggests, this will take many years before it's played out. And I can't see how RCI will be forced to do anything different from what it does today - unless enough members vote by taking their business elsewhere.

I believe suing RCI is merely going to result in an increase in costs for RCI, something that will ultimately be felt by the same people - members - that these suits purport to protect.

I predict that, like most class action efforts, the only real winners will be the lawyers and the shills that gather clients for the lawyers.

 

[BocaBum99]

Actually, there is another winner. That's TUG. The ratings will go up giving the RCI non-likers more to talk about and hope for.

 

[Carolinian]

The idea that it is simply a matter of choosing whether to use RCI oursleves or not doesn't get it. That fails to see the big picture. RCI's new policies are kicking the props out from under resorts by completely altering the dynamics of the ownership/exchange model of timesharing. Ultimately this will threaten the finances of our resorts, resulting in either much higher m/f's or, in some cases, the resort going belly up.

As far as RCI's contract is concerned, it is a contract of adhesion, and therefore probably meaningless when it tramples member rights like this.

If RCI is going to play the rental game, we need to work to either stop it by litigation, legislation, or regulatory action, or we need to work to build the exchanging alternatives like DAE, HTSE, SFX, etc.

Right now, the independents do not have a big enough footprint in the exchange market for RCI to argue that they constitute an alternative. If we work hard enough to get our resorts to get the word out, perhaps they will be in time. For resorts that are not dual affiliated with II and which do not let their members know about the independents, RCI is functionally a monopoly when it comes to exchanging. Monopolies cannot simply be allowed to make up what rules they are governed by.

I suspect that one positive outcome of all of this is that it may get the attention of resorts to look for alternatives, and they may start working more with the independents.

Legislation is another way to deal with this problem. Federal legislation is more difficult than getting some states moving, but states cannot regulate interstate commerce. What states can do is put in some very strong disclosure requirements. Resorts that are affiliated with exchange companies are already required to file exchange disclosures by state law, which are provided by the exchange company. What needs to be added is rental disclosures. If these were required to be provided by developers at point of sale, and included info on how many rentals the exchange company was making to the general public and the range of prices, no one would buy a timeshare from the developers, who would then twist the exchange company's arm to end the rentals. That would solve the problem.

 

[BocaBum99]

Carolinian,

Some of us understand the big picture completely. It's just that some of us believe in a different future for the timesharing industry than you do.

The timesharing concept that you so care about is changing. There will always be a group of people who want to exchange weeks the way it always has been done. So, you don't need to worry about it going away completely. It's just that points and resort groups IS the way of the future for timesharing. Exchange companies are not needed. It's just like long distance companies are not needed for telephone calls.

It's even possible today to get to any timeshare in the world without any exchange companies. Just join a large points based resort group. Reserve weeks you want to use, rent or direct exchange. Use rental profits to rent other units you don't have direct access to through your resort group.

If your resort can't command a rent greater than its maintenance fees, the perhaps it's best for that resort to terminate.

 

[reddiablosv]

Carolinian,

Some of us understand the big picture completely. It's just that some of us believe in a different future for the timesharing industry than you do.

The timesharing concept that you so care about is changing. There will always be a group of people who want to exchange weeks the way it always has been done. So, you don't need to worry about it going away completely. It's just that points and resort groups IS the way of the future for timesharing. Exchange companies are not needed. It's just like long distance companies are not needed for telephone calls.

It's even possible today to get to any timeshare in the world without any exchange companies. Just join a large points based resort group. Reserve weeks you want to use, rent or direct exchange. Use rental profits to rent other units you don't have direct access to through your resort group.

If your resort can't command a rent greater than its maintenance fees, the perhaps it's best for that resort to terminate.

Boca, all progress is change , but all change is not progress!!.. Would it be better for timeshare owners if all exchange companies rented members deposits for profit rather than offering them for exchange?? You know, like RCI. RCI picks the best, we get the rest. The lawsuit accuses RCI of looting the best deposits for their rental pool rather than offering them for exchange. Would it be best for timeshare owners if II, SFX, DAE, HTSE, etc. did the same? If no one challenges RCI now, what is to stop others from following. Market forces???? How many RCI members even know what RCI is doing today???? You don't even believe it, or John , or Dave. You guys are like the OJ jury. The evidence is clear , but you just don't want to believe. It's that or your loyalities are not with timeshare owners? Ben

 

[JLB]

Hopefully I, too, will make one post and retire from this, what has been a burning fuse for years here.

As I said on TS4Ms, I don't believe it is all that important who wins or loses this suit, or what the merits of it are. As a student of the constantly-changing Terms and Conditions I realize the hoops that must be jumped through to file a suit against this company, and the penalties for losing.

The filing of a suit, or suits, speaks loudly and boldy, that it is more than just a few bold people here and on other forums that are upset by Cendant's open system of timesharing, where benefits leak out to folks who have not put anything in. It is no different than when members of a country club see non-members come in and get benefits they have not paid for.

My hat is off to Steve and the few others who have kept these issues in front of us, but especially to Steve, who has fought a good fight here despite opposition that has been no less than vicious at times.

 

[geekette]

I don't think it's a matter of belief or disbelief that RCI is renting inappropriately. It's more a matter of looking after your own interests and not having to care what happens to RCI.

Hardly matters if RCI is or isn't doing something wrong - if a member can't get what they want, REPEATEDLY, then why do business with them? Is there really a place for exchange companies anymore? I don't think so, and I think RCI is positioning itself for when people are completely on the do-it-yourself plan. Sure looks like they're even encouraging it! Cendant would be just fine if RCI ceased to exist - why should even they care about RCI's fate?

Why should I?

 

[BocaBum99]

Boca, all progress is change , but all change is not progress!!.. Would it be better for timeshare owners if all exchange companies rented members deposits for profit rather than offering them for exchange?? You know, like RCI. RCI picks the best, we get the rest. The lawsuit accuses RCI of looting the best deposits for their rental pool rather than offering them for exchange. Would it be best for timeshare owners if II, SFX, DAE, HTSE, etc. did the same? If no one challenges RCI now, what is to stop others from following. Market forces???? How many RCI members even know what RCI is doing today???? You don't even believe it, or John , or Dave. You guys are like the OJ jury. The evidence is clear , but you just don't want to believe. It's that or your loyalities are not with timeshare owners? Ben

Actually, I think it would be best for all exchange companies to go out of business completely and merge their operations with resort operators. There should be no exchange fees. None of my points ownerships charges me to book or cancel a reservation. I'd like to see rentals abound where the rents go to reduce maintenance fees or directly to owners.

Your analogy is a poor one. OJ killing his wife is illegal. RCI renting spacebank weeks is not. If you are getting great exchanges out of RCI, you should remain a member. If you are not, you should terminate your membership. If everyone behaved that way, that would do far more to keep RCI's actions in check than any lawsuit. The problem is that too many people simply accept getting little or nothing for their weeks and yet they keep depositing. If you ask me, that's their fault not RCIs.

By the way, are you an RCI member?

 

[Aldo]

The more the merrier, they say.

 

[Walt]

Who is posting on Threads about RCI that are not members of RCI?

Actually, I think it would be best for all exchange companies to go out of business completely and merge their operations with resort operators. There should be no exchange fees. None of my points ownerships charges me to book or cancel a reservation. I'd like to see rentals abound where the rents go to reduce maintenance fees or directly to owners.

Your analogy is a poor one. OJ killing his wife is illegal. RCI renting spacebank weeks is not. If you are getting great exchanges out of RCI, you should remain a member. If you are not, you should terminate your membership. If everyone behaved that way, that would do far more to keep RCI's actions in check than any lawsuit. The problem is that too many people simply accept getting little or nothing for their weeks and yet they keep depositing. If you ask me, that's their fault not RCIs.

By the way, are you an RCI member?

I have found it interesting that when Threads are written about RCI, Points, Rentals, and Law Suits, that many pro RCI post seem to be posted by Non RCI members. And they may never have been a member of RCI.

I rather not guess who they are. I am both a RCI and II member. How about tellings us if you are or have ever been a RCI member.

Walt

 

[timeos2]

Current memberships:

RCI Points
FairField Points
RCI Weeks
CLub Sunterra
SFX

Former memberships:

II dropped in 2002
DVC sold in 1998

 

[gmarine]

Like you, John, I'll make one post and then try to retire from this subject, leaving it to those who expect to see results from these lawsuits.

RCI's contract allows it to use deposited weeks as it sees fit. If we don't like how RCI operates, there are other very good - perhaps better - exchange company alternatives. That combination is a powerful defense for RCI.

RCI reports an amazing success ratio (mid 90s percent range) in matching acceptable exchanges to requests. A leading CPA firm audits those reported exchange numbers every year. That adds to the defense.

If there are so many successes and other good options, where is the broken contractual promise? I don't see one. Does a statement by one employee of RCI for how deposits will be handled constitute a contract, particularly if it's at odds with the legal contract that binds our RCI membership? I don't think so.

As John suggests, this will take many years before it's played out. And I can't see how RCI will be forced to do anything different from what it does today - unless enough members vote by taking their business elsewhere.

I believe suing RCI is merely going to result in an increase in costs for RCI, something that will ultimately be felt by the same people - members - that these suits purport to protect.

I predict that, like most class action efforts, the only real winners will be the lawyers and the shills that gather clients for the lawyers.

I agree 100%. Well said.

I was an RCI member for 1 year. When I decided I wasnt happy with RCI, I cancelled my membership. Complaining about rentals when RCI comes right and and tells you that you give up all rights to your unit seems silly. You agree to it when you deposit. I dont agree with the renting of units by RCI but they tell you up front. If you dont like it you dont have to deposit your unit or be a member.

Timeshare owners have many other choices. If you bought depending on RCI that was a mistake.

The lawsuit is going to go nowwhere and do nothing. Anyone can sue anyone for anything. There doesnt have to be merit to file a lawsuit.

 

[AwayWeGo]

Indirect Access To I-I ?

Current memberships:

RCI Points
FairField Points
RCI Weeks
CLub Sunterra
SFX

Former memberships:

II dropped in 2002
DVC sold in 1998

Yeah, but don't you get some sort of I-I timeshare exchange access, 1 level removed, through Club SunTerra?

I vaguely recall hearing the SunTerra sales guys saying something like that at a resort "owner update" (which turned out to be just a sales presentation in disguise).

It was all so confusing that we went with RCI Points instead. Plus, getting minimally into RCI Points was ever so much cheaper than the smallest SunTerra deal the sales folks put on the table -- that, plus the fact that our other timeshare, being RCI-affiliated, offered the option of doing Points For Deposit with it if we choose, once we caught on to how that works.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.

 

[timeos2]

II loves the big names

Yeah, but don't you get some sort of I-I timeshare exchange access, 1 level removed, through Club SunTerra?

I vaguely recall hearing the SunTerra sales guys saying something like that at a resort "owner update" (which turned out to be just a sales presentation in disguise).


-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.

Alan - Yes, you are correct. There is a loose affiliation between Club Sunterra and the II system but only for use of your Club points not a general account like Fairfield gives you for RCI. Actually it is a pretty good deal as I have been able to snag new Marriotts using my Club Options (the Sunterra name for points) that I never saw when I did straight weeks deposits with II using the exact same ownership and not even use the whole value of the deposit to do it. To me that shows the favoritism II gives the big names they court so heavily and allow to get away with anything they ask for it seems.

So I guess while I did stop paying to be an II member I am still technically in II.

 

[BocaBum99]

I have found it interesting that when Threads are written about RCI, Points, Rentals, and Law Suits, that many pro RCI post seem to be posted by Non RCI members. And they may never have been a member of RCI.

I rather not guess who they are. I am both a RCI and II member. How about tellings us if you are or have ever been a RCI member.

Walt

Walt,

I am a member of both RCI and RCI Points. I find both marginally useful. As long as I keep getting trade ups or on demand availability when and where I want to go for short or long duration, I'll stay.

I have found the opposite to be true. I find that many of those who continuously complain about RCI remain members when they should just cancel their membership and do something else.

Also, I think you misinterpret those whom you call Pro RCI. I am not sure they are so much Pro RCI as they are Pro consumer choice. If a consumer chooses to get ripped off, that's their prorogative. They assign the accountability to the consumer and not the company. Personal accountability is paramount.

If everyone did the best they could to protect their own interests, RCI wouldn't be able to get away with much of what they do. That is the greatest deterent possible. It's much more powerful than legal action. The problem is that many consumers are apathetic and therefore acquiesce to getting taken to the cleaners. I don't like it, but it's their choice.

 

[Kauai Kid]

I was unhappy with the last two Ford vehicles I had. Solution: buy a Honda.

If you are unhappy with RCI there is a solution. Use someone else. There are many, many, many exchange agencies.

Sterling

 

[Kozman]

Forced RCI Membership

Everyone keeps saying to leave RCI and not do business with them. I would probably consider this, but I am a Fairfield points memeber and we are all forced to be a member through maintenance fees paid.

 

[bogey21]

There is no question in my mind that RCI Weeks no longer has the utility it once had. Although I am a happy RCI Points Member, I keep an independent Weeks Account open for two reasons. First, is that it gives me access to Weeks at Points Resorts where only a small portion of the Resort has converted to Points. I can't access those Weeks from my Points Account. And Second, I like the priority I get when exchanging back into my home resort. It only costs me an Exchange Fee to convert a mid-September Week into a Summer Week at my Myrtle Beach Resort.

Slowly I have been converting my timeshare ownerships into places that I like to go, when I like to go, thus minimizing my need for exchanges. My RCI Weeks Account is paid ahead for a few years. Whenever it is that I am asked to pay a Membership Fee to keep it alive, I will consider dropping it particularly if PFD is still offered by RCI Points.

GEORGE

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

Slowly I have been converting my timeshare ownerships into places that I like to go, when I like to go, thus minimizing my need for exchanges. My RCI Weeks Account is paid ahead for a few years. Whenever it is that I am asked to pay a Membership Fee to keep it alive, I will consider dropping it particularly if PFD is still offered by RCI Points.

That is the rreal key and the best strategy. We have worked our ownerships to a place where RCI is largely irrelevant for our situation.

 

[taffy19]

Everyone keeps saying to leave RCI and not do business with them. I would probably consider this, but I am a Fairfield points memeber and we are all forced to be a member through maintenance fees paid.

That to me is wrong as it should be your choice which exchange company you want to belong to. Only you decide in the first place if you want to make exchanges or not.

 

[JudyS]

I for one am happy to see this lawsuit. I can't be certain that RCI is "skimming" off the best weeks, but the lawsuit offers at least a reasonable chance of finding out if that is the case or not, and perhaps stopping it if it is the case.

I am not a lawyer, but I very much doubt that RCI has the right to rent out any weeks that it chooses and pocket the proceeds, even if RCI's Terms & Conditions says that RCI can do anything that it wants with deposited weeks. The fact that RCI presents itself as an exchange company implies that they will, in fact, provide exchanges, not just take weeks and rent them out. Also, RCI says that they provide comparable exchanges, which will not be possible if a substantial portion of desirable deposits are diverted to rentals.

Furthermore, if RCI really intends its T&C to mean that they can do anything with the weeks they receive (rent them, let them expire even if people want them, give them to their CEO for free, whatever) then I think they are setting up a "lack of consideration" situation. The "RCI can rent out all the weeks because its T&C says so" argument basically says that members give RCI the $89 membership fee and their timeshare week, and in exchange, RCI is allowed to pocket the $89, take the week for its own use, and give the members nothing. This doesn't sound like an legal agreement to me.

As for the advice to just not use RCI, let me point out that people with weeks banked at RCI gave those weeks to RCI as much as three years ago, before the allegations of "skimming" started. The "Don't use RCI" advice doesn't work if they already have your week.