Refusing a timeshare in a will

[Beaglemom3]

Timeshares are widely known as "toxic assets".

 

[pacodemountainside]

Simple Solution

If a member of AARP go to their attorney referral service and arrange for free 45 minute consultation with a local estate planning attorney. Ask him to give a written opinion or at least verbal.

Otherwise call local bar referral service and they will arrange 1 hour consultation. Here in Denver costs $75.00.

Then you can get a good night's sleep!:zzz::zzz::zzz::zzz:

Better than electric ass scratchers, post'ems, pop top beer cans, sliced bread, turn signals, ball point pens, etc.

 

[napfabob]

Chief Listener

As a financial advisor who specializes in Estate Planning, the concept of refusing to accept property left to you is called a "Disclaimer". In other words, if I leave my time share to my spouse and she "disclaims it, it goes to the next beneficiary in line that would have received the time share if she had been deceased at the time of the disclaimer (go back and read the will or trust to see who is next in line). Let's assume my son is next in line, he can also "disclaim" the asset (my time share) as can any successor beneficiary. When you run out of beneficiaries, the asset is stuck in the estate. In my opinion, you want this asset in the "probate" estate and not in a living trust and you want to be sure that the estate had no other assets, at any time. None of the attorneys I work with have ever had this problem but I assure you, it is coming. The above advice is a consolidation of our combined thinking. To be clear for all concerned, no other "probate" assets should be available to the executor of the estate so that there are no funds to pay any fees or maint expenses. To avoid probate at the time of your death, your "other" assets should either be in a living trust or in joint name with rights of survivorship with the beneficiary intended to inherit the other assets. Don't just talk to any attorney, talk to a specialist who deals in estate planning and settlement on a full time basis. Good luck.

 

[bogey21]

Reading this reminds me of why I disposed of my TS Weeks in an orderly fashion and gave everything else I owned (except my race horses which can be more of a liability than an asset) to my kids and ex-wife 11 years ago. Essentially my estate should be about zero and not a problem for anybody. And for what it is worth I didn't talk to or hire an attorney.

George

PS I live on an annuity and Social Security, drive a leased car, and have Medicare and solid back-up health insurance.

 

[TheWizz]

As a financial advisor who specializes in Estate Planning, the concept of refusing to accept property left to you is called a "Disclaimer". In other words, if I leave my time share to my spouse and she "disclaims it, it goes to the next beneficiary in line that would have received the time share if she had been deceased at the time of the disclaimer (go back and read the will or trust to see who is next in line). Let's assume my son is next in line, he can also "disclaim" the asset (my time share) as can any successor beneficiary. When you run out of beneficiaries, the asset is stuck in the estate. In my opinion, you want this asset in the "probate" estate and not in a living trust and you want to be sure that the estate had no other assets, at any time. None of the attorneys I work with have ever had this problem but I assure you, it is coming. The above advice is a consolidation of our combined thinking. To be clear for all concerned, no other "probate" assets should be available to the executor of the estate so that there are no funds to pay any fees or maint expenses. To avoid probate at the time of your death, your "other" assets should either be in a living trust or in joint name with rights of survivorship with the beneficiary intended to inherit the other assets. Don't just talk to any attorney, talk to a specialist who deals in estate planning and settlement on a full time basis. Good luck.

I have been considering a Living Trust for me and my wife. I think you answered my main question/concern - when we die, I'd like to let me children have a "choice" for inheriting our timeshares (or not). If the timeshares are in the trust, then they really have no choice but to keep/accept them as the new directors/owners of the trust, but if we leave them (timeshares) out of the trust, then the Disclaimer would be an option for them. Correct??

 

[lilpooh108]

As a financial advisor who specializes in Estate Planning, the concept of refusing to accept property left to you is called a "Disclaimer". In other words, if I leave my time share to my spouse and she "disclaims it, it goes to the next beneficiary in line that would have received the time share if she had been deceased at the time of the disclaimer (go back and read the will or trust to see who is next in line). Let's assume my son is next in line, he can also "disclaim" the asset (my time share) as can any successor beneficiary. When you run out of beneficiaries, the asset is stuck in the estate. In my opinion, you want this asset in the "probate" estate and not in a living trust and you want to be sure that the estate had no other assets, at any time. None of the attorneys I work with have ever had this problem but I assure you, it is coming. The above advice is a consolidation of our combined thinking. To be clear for all concerned, no other "probate" assets should be available to the executor of the estate so that there are no funds to pay any fees or maint expenses. To avoid probate at the time of your death, your "other" assets should either be in a living trust or in joint name with rights of survivorship with the beneficiary intended to inherit the other assets. Don't just talk to any attorney, talk to a specialist who deals in estate planning and settlement on a full time basis. Good luck.

Best advice in this thread, thanks.

 

[Rent_Share]

I have been considering a Living Trust for me and my wife. I think you answered my main question/concern - when we die, I'd like to let me children have a "choice" for inheriting our timeshares (or not). If the timeshares are in the trust, then they really have no choice but to keep/accept them as the new directors/owners of the trust, but if we leave them (timeshares) out of the trust, then the Disclaimer would be an option for them. Correct??

It's cleaner to leave them outside of the trust, If all of the assets of value are included in the trust.

If they are already in the trust I do believe they can be disclaimed by the beneficiaries of the trust also, maintenance fees would have to continued to be paid until the trust was liquidated. Eventually it would be owned by a trust with no assets.

Sat through a presentation (webinar) for a PCC, they really push the lie that there is no way out for the children and that the parents are going to burden the children and gran children into perpetuity. They even used a 12 % increase in MF Burden having the fees double every 6 years. Even though parents might continue paying for their own mistake the PCC price is "cheap" to "save their children". We need to include the negation of Timeshares are a burden to your heirs in all PCC discussion to counteract the emotional string the PCC's are pulling in their medicine shows

 

[pacodemountainside]

That is what my "expert estate planning attorney" told me.

Once creditors have been legally notified and filed claims, valid claims paid including MF through cutoff date then then is nothing to go after.

Said he had personally done several probates and no problems.

 

[persia]

Well, a lot of people might not consider death an easy way to get you out of a financial obligation, but it does work. The estate only needs to bring things current to close. Nobody can be obligated to accept what is willed to them, nobody can force an estate to pay more than current debt. It's simple, the best way out of timesharing is to die.

just seems like BS to me, if you have to pay hundreds of dollars to get rid of most timeshares, how could it be so easy just to 'abandon' it without the HOA trying to rob your estate of every penny they could get?

I don't picture any of these corrupt self serving thieves HOA board members just rolling over and taking a TS week

 

[TheWizz]

...
Sat through a presentation (webinar) for a PCC, ...
We need to include the negation of Timeshares are a burden to your heirs in all PCC discussion to counteract the emotional string the PCC's are pulling in their medicine shows

Apologies, but other than Partido Comunista de Colombia or Polynesian Cultural Center, what does "PCC" stand for??

 

[Rent_Share]

Not sure how you can have been here since 2009 and not encountered "PCC" (Post Card Company) Using the Google search of the TUG site reflects 2,210 hits for PCC, however since Hilton is one of the few brands with some resale value, the PCC's may not be targeting Hilton Vacation Owners, so there may not be much discussion in your threads

They are timeshare "disposal" companies that due mass mailings via a post card to invite owners to a seminar. The seminar is the exact opposite of the podium pitch that suckered the owners in when they bought. They accurately paint the resale market as dismal, out the up front fee companies as fraudsters (many believe that most PCC's were up front gee scammers before moving on) and paint a scenario that the maintenance fee contract will go up and continue to be a burden to their children and their children's children . . .

For a mere 3 X your annual maintenance fees, providing they are current and there is no loan, XYZ Relief will take the timeshare off your hands.

Some have the owner execute a POA (Power of Attorney) which the PCC or a slightly removed entity will endeavor to sell it on ebay, eventually throwing in transfer costs and up to a years maintenance fees of necessary, Gross profit still = 2 X annual maintenance fees. Of they can't sell it and the PCC goes out of business the original owner is still the owner of record and will receive bills for future maintenance fees.

Alternatively some PCC's actually record the deed in the name for a shell corporation, potentially using two, one for very saleable timeshares and one for the $ 1.00 or less variety. As the potential maintenance fee obligation begin to loo that corporation is allowed to go in default and a new corporation is formed to handle defaults - The metaphor for this entity (an affiliate of the PCC) is Viking Ship

 

[TheWizz]

Not sure how you can have been here since 2009 and not encountered "PCC" (Post Card Company) Using the Google search of the TUG site reflects 2,210 hits for PCC, however since Hilton is one of the few brands with some resale value, the PCC's may not be targeting Hilton Vacation Owners, so there may not be much discussion in your threads

They are timeshare "disposal" companies that due mass mailings via a post card to invite owners to a seminar. The seminar is the exact opposite of the podium pitch that suckered the owners in when they bought. They accurately paint the resale market as dismal, out the up front fee companies as fraudsters (many believe that most PCC's were up front gee scammers before moving on) and paint a scenario that the maintenance fee contract will go up and continue to be a burden to their children and their children's children . . .

For a mere 3 X your annual maintenance fees, providing they are current and there is no loan, XYZ Relief will take the timeshare off your hands.

Some have the owner execute a POA (Power of Attorney) which the PCC or a slightly removed entity will endeavor to sell it on ebay, eventually throwing in transfer costs and up to a years maintenance fees of necessary, Gross profit still = 2 X annual maintenance fees. Of they can't sell it and the PCC goes out of business the original owner is still the owner of record and will receive bills for future maintenance fees.

Alternatively some PCC's actually record the deed in the name for a shell corporation, potentially using two, one for very saleable timeshares and one for the $ 1.00 or less variety. As the potential maintenance fee obligation begin to loo that corporation is allowed to go in default and a new corporation is formed to handle defaults - The metaphor for this entity (an affiliate of the PCC) is Viking Ship

Aren't we quick to judge... Geez... I did a regular search and got zero results - not sure why that is the case. Of course I've heard of them and from them many times, just not as "PCC". I prefer to call them slugs! Not sure how I can have survived this long w/o knowing that either! Guess I'm just not as smartz as some of you folks... Thanks for the edification.

 

[Rent_Share]

Didn't mean to offend or Judge

Native Tug Search won't work on three characters "Search Tug Via Google" is more accurate.

But there has been so much discussion it would be hard to miss

 

[TheWizz]

Didn't mean to offend or Judge

Native Tug Search won't work on three characters "Search Tug Via Google" is more accurate.

But there has been so much discussion it would be hard to miss

I guess I don't get out enough. Now I know... Thanks for the insight and now I'll sleep MUCH better tonight knowing we aren't talking about the Partido Communista de Colombia on TUG!

 

[twinmommy19]

This will sound morbid, but seeing this string makes me wonder why nursing homes haven't become a hot commodity for disposing worthless timeshares. Wouldn't deeding a unit to a person who is going to die very soon be a synthetic way of dumping worthless ownerships? If a buyer chooses not to select heirs in the deed doesn't the ownership just end with his / her death?

 

[e.bram]

How about a hospice?

 

[pacodemountainside]

Just find a bum down on skid row with a drivers license and give him a jug of wine!

 

[twinmommy19]

How about a hospice?

Nah - that wouldn't work. The closing would probably take too long.

Think about it - all these stupid TS companies promising to unload your garbage TS if you shell out a couple thousand to no avail. But the solution is simple. A 90 year old in a nursing home could make a ton of money for his/her family... It could work almost like an insurance policy. Seller (unloader) agrees to pay 2 years of maintenance in advance - deposits early in the exchange bank. Pays the 90 year old $1,000 to sign his name on the transfer deed. The 90 year old can pick up 100 of these things and would make $100K upfront. The risk of course would be that he lives more than 2+ years and the maintenance comes due. But if he doesn't pay the maintenance for a couple years (and his children's names are not listed as heirs on the deed), is anyone actually responsible for picking up the back payments anyway? I doubt it.

 

[DeniseM]

This will sound morbid, but seeing this string makes me wonder why nursing homes haven't become a hot commodity for disposing worthless timeshares. Wouldn't deeding a unit to a person who is going to die very soon be a synthetic way of dumping worthless ownerships? If a buyer chooses not to select heirs in the deed doesn't the ownership just end with his / her death?

No, it does not - it goes to his estate. You have an estate that has to be settled whether you have a will or not.

 

[tschwa2]

No, it does not - it goes to his estate. You have an estate that has to be settled whether you have a will or not.

While this is true I think a letter written by the executor of the estate to the timeshare stating that the owner is deceased no one in the family will accept the timeshare and the estate does not have any money or only has enough money to pay for one additional year MF's will do the trick to have the HOA allow a deed back. It won't work for every timeshare but if there is even a shred of chance that the resort allows hardship deedbacks, I think dead falls into that category.

 

[twinmommy19]

Yes - the maintenance fees the family could get stuck paying if owed. But it would be arranged in a way that the previous owner prepays a couple years and deposits early. Plus I don't think the TS has a great case to collect current year dues if the owner dies and did not "use" the week yet. so in reality the elderly person would have to live another 3+ years for that to come into play. I don't mean it in a callous way, but it can't be too hard to find a "buyer" who is unlikely to outlive that timeframe...

I thought most TS's give an option not to pass ownership to heirs? If that's the case and the guy puts it in his will specifically that he does not wish to pass the TS ownerships to his family could the family really still get stuck with it?