daviator
TUG Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2011
- Messages
- 1,905
- Reaction score
- 1,874
- Location
- San Francisco, CA
- Resorts Owned
- WKORV, WKORVN, WDW, Westin FLEX, Marriott's MOC, Abound (Trust) Points
Had a discussion about ROFR in a Facebook group and I had (what seems like) an interesting idea, thought I’d post about it here and see if anyone had ever tried it.
Sellers don’t like it when MVC exercises ROFR on a sale they are trying to make, in part because MVC's process is very slow and often causes the ownership transfer not to occur until the subsequent year, which leaves the seller responsible for another year of maintenance fees.
Since ROFR merely allows MVC to “step in” to a buyer's shoes, subject to all of the terms of the purchase contract the buyer was hoping to consummate, would it not make sense to put a strict timeline in every resale purchase contract, like “Buyer and Seller agree that if the sale is not complete within XX (60? 90?) days of the date of this Agreement, the party responsible for the delay will pay $$$ (could be flat fee or $$/day) to the other party, or pay a cancellation fee of $$$ for failing to complete the sale.”
You could massage the terms a bit but the idea would be to force MVC to perform quickly if they decided to step in. It might even dissuade them from exercising ROFR or increasing the price at which they did so. You could have an exception for delays out of either party's control, which would let a buyer off the hook for MVC's delays but would not let MVC off the hook for their OWN delays.
It just seems as if there should be some standard terms that could be inserted into nearly every resale contract which would be onerous to MVC but not to a legitimate buyer. It might not dissuade MVC from exercising ROFR, but at least it might force them to move more quickly and create fewer problems for sellers when they do step in.
Has anyone tried anything like this?
Sellers don’t like it when MVC exercises ROFR on a sale they are trying to make, in part because MVC's process is very slow and often causes the ownership transfer not to occur until the subsequent year, which leaves the seller responsible for another year of maintenance fees.
Since ROFR merely allows MVC to “step in” to a buyer's shoes, subject to all of the terms of the purchase contract the buyer was hoping to consummate, would it not make sense to put a strict timeline in every resale purchase contract, like “Buyer and Seller agree that if the sale is not complete within XX (60? 90?) days of the date of this Agreement, the party responsible for the delay will pay $$$ (could be flat fee or $$/day) to the other party, or pay a cancellation fee of $$$ for failing to complete the sale.”
You could massage the terms a bit but the idea would be to force MVC to perform quickly if they decided to step in. It might even dissuade them from exercising ROFR or increasing the price at which they did so. You could have an exception for delays out of either party's control, which would let a buyer off the hook for MVC's delays but would not let MVC off the hook for their OWN delays.
It just seems as if there should be some standard terms that could be inserted into nearly every resale contract which would be onerous to MVC but not to a legitimate buyer. It might not dissuade MVC from exercising ROFR, but at least it might force them to move more quickly and create fewer problems for sellers when they do step in.
Has anyone tried anything like this?