Timeshare Closing Services Inc.- asking for SSI numbers

[theo]

Yikes!

Larry,

FWIW, a resort I own which is managed by Southwind Management company now states that a state ID and Soc. Sec # must be provided before they will transfer ownership. This is a relatively new development for the two resorts I have managed by Southwind. I would expect you're likely to run into this again in the future.

While the resort you were dealing with did not require that information, other resorts do. This is likely a blanket policy by the closing company to avoid problems with those management companies who do require that information and is in place because it would be nearly impossible to keep up with every change made by every timeshare management company out there.

It wasn't a problem for you this time but it could be in the future. This seems to be a way for management companies to protect themselves from PCC's, which appear to be bundling titles in trusts or corporations, then bankrupting the trust or corporation to avoid paying MF's on the timeshares they've collected and can't get rid of.

I suspect that doug's observations are absolutely correct regarding both the process and the reasoning.

That said, I for one would be very reluctant (...at best) to blindly provide my social security number to unnamed, unknown people I have never met, with absolutely no knowledge about (and no basis for any particular confidence in) their ability and / or willingness to properly secure and protect such personal, private information. In addition, who knows how many others will also see that info as paperwork changes hands among multiple other unnamed, unknown individuals in the course of paperwork processing?

A current, valid driver's license or other state issued i.d. requirement I can understand and accept, but requiring a social security number just seems way "over the top" (...to me, anyhow). After all, a SSN would seem to be the "holy grail" for those of ill intent in the arena of identity theft --- so why tempt fate by asking for the casual (and entirely unnecessary) blind distribution thereof?

 

[ronparise]

I suspect that doug's observations are absolutely correct regarding both the process and the reasoning.

That said, I for one would be very reluctant (...at best) to blindly provide my social security number to unnamed, unknown people I have never met, with absolutely no knowledge about (and no basis for any particular confidence in) their ability and / or willingness to properly secure and protect such personal, private information. In addition, who knows how many others will also see that info as paperwork changes hands among multiple other unnamed, unknown individuals in the course of paperwork processing?

A current, valid driver's license or other state issued i.d. requirement I can understand and reluctantly accept, but providing a social security number just seems way "over the top" (...to me, anyhow). After all, a SSN would seem to be the "holy grail" for those of ill intent in the arena of identity theft --- why tempt fate by the casual (and entirely unnecessary) blind distribution thereof?

This stuff is usually required in any real estate transaction....something about national security and terrorists and homeland security.....either give it up or dont buy...

Last time I was at an airport they made me take off my shoes and belt...and open my bag....talk about an invasion of privacy...but I had a choice..I could have stayed home...and the folks at the resort wanted to see my drivers license and they took a credit card authorization...same thing...either give it up or go home.....By the way my debit card was compromised after that visit..several unauthorized charges from somewhere in Europe (I was in Las Vegas)...all part of the price we pay for living in this country in the digital age...get used to it

 

[Carolinian]

This is just another reason to find a local attoney to close through, not one of these unqualified timeshare closing companies.

 

[kenie]

This stuff is usually required in any real estate transaction....something about national security and terrorists and homeland security.....either give it up or dont buy...

Last time I was at an airport they made me take off my shoes and belt...and open my bag....talk about an invasion of privacy...but I had a choice..I could have stayed home...and the folks at the resort wanted to see my drivers license and they took a credit card authorization...same thing...either give it up or go home.....By the way my debit card was compromised after that visit..several unauthorized charges from somewhere in Europe (I was in Las Vegas)...all part of the price we pay for living in this country in the digital age...get used to it

So how many terrorists are buying timeshares Ron??

Come on.... Are people really this paranoid?

 

[theo]

Comparing apples and kumquats...

My intended point, clearly expressed but apparently missed (...perhaps deliberately; I'm not sure) pertains only and specifically to social security numbers being unnecessarily placed into the hands of unknown, unnamed, unlicensed, anonymous entities who have no legal authority to demand (or ever even see) that information in the first place. That should be clear enough, even for Ron Parise...

In most real estate transactions, participants deal with state licensed, ahem...."professionals"....of known name, identity, agency affiliation and inherent legal accountability. Moreover, to the best of my knowledge, there are also specific governmental requirements (i.e., mandatory IRS reporting of the transaction details) involved, so the collection of social security numbers in those instances seems to me to be both required and entirely appropriate. Likewise for providing proper identification for security screening at airports --- and I don't care a whit about my (...or your) shoes having to be removed or my (...or your) bags' contents being fully examined --- there is certainly no permanent "collection" of any personal SSN data in so doing.

By contrast, in my objection re: a resale timeshare closing being conducted by an entity with unknown, unnamed, unidentified employees (of indeterminate number or background, to boot) at an entity not even licensed in any way by any authority in the first place, as either a business or by individual employee, I submit that the situation is quite simply entirely different --- or comparing oranges to tire rims, if you will. There is certainly a time and a place for appropriate security measures and providing detailed personal i.d.
In my view, that quite simply does not include any anonymous Internet timeshare resellers or "closers".

Don't spout uninformed nonsense about "the price of living in the U.S. in the digital age" or "get used to it".
My former employment required me to undergo mandatory full field background (and financial) investigation every five years for the past three decades, with my overt consent provided in advance, under signature. Although very intrusive, I had / have no problem with proper identification and personal data being required by, collected by or provided to authorized governmental authority wherever and whenever necessary or appropriate. On the other hand, however, I quite simply regard providing my social security number to unknown, unidentified, anonymous yahoos who are reselling or "closing" timeshares over the Internet as being not only legally unnecessary, but patently absurd and completely unacceptable, even in concept.

Just my experience-based personal opinion --- you are most certainly entitled to harbor your own.

 

[Dave H]

My intended point, clearly expressed but apparently missed (...perhaps deliberately; I'm not sure) pertains only and specifically to social security numbers being unnecessarily placed into the hands of unknown, unnamed, unlicensed, anonymous entities who have no legal authority to demand (or ever even see) that information in the first place. That should be clear enough, even for Ron Parise...

In most real estate transactions, participants deal with state licensed, ahem...."professionals"....of known name, identity, agency affiliation and inherent legal accountability. Moreover, to the best of my knowledge, there are also specific governmental requirements (i.e., mandatory IRS reporting of the transaction details) involved, so the collection of social security numbers in those instances seems to me to be both required and entirely appropriate. Likewise for providing proper identification for security screening at airports --- and I don't care a whit about my (...or your) shoes having to be removed or my (...or your) bags' contents being fully examined --- there is certainly no permanent "collection" of any personal SSN data in so doing.

By contrast, in my objection re: a resale timeshare closing being conducted by an entity with unknown, unnamed, unidentified employees (of indeterminate number or background, to boot) at an entity not even licensed in any way by any authority in the first place, as either a business or by individual employee, I submit that the situation is quite simply entirely different --- or comparing oranges to tire rims, if you will. There is certainly a time and a place for appropriate security measures and providing detailed personal i.d.
In my view, that quite simply does not include any anonymous Internet timeshare resellers or "closers".

Don't spout uninformed nonsense about "the price of living in the U.S. in the digital age" or "get used to it".
My former employment required me to undergo mandatory full field background (and financial) investigation every five years for the past three decades, with my overt consent provided in advance, under signature. Although very intrusive, I had / have no problem with proper identification and personal data being required by, collected by or provided to authorized governmental authority wherever and whenever necessary or appropriate. On the other hand, however, I quite simply regard providing my social security number to unknown, unidentified, anonymous yahoos who are reselling or "closing" timeshares over the Internet as being not only legally unnecessary, but patently absurd and completely unacceptable, even in concept.

Just my experience-based personal opinion --- you are most certainly entitled to harbor your own.

Theo:

I agree in part with you. I agree with not giving it to UNLICENSED people. However, those of us that are licensed and national agents for major title underwriters, do have a need for that information.

First, many resorts require us to provide it to them. In addition to that, as a licensed full service title agency, we have to satisfy our regulators (Department of Insurance and our title underwriters) that we have complied with both the US Patriot Act and the Know Your Customer laws. We have to do it on every transaction, because even our escrow files are pulled for audits. Real title agencies, do fall under the finacial transactions requirements under those regualtions.

Actually for us it is an audit point in audits to make sure we have run all the parties in the transaction against the US Patriot act system. (not because terriorists by timeshares as some have asked, but because it is the law).

But that is the difference between those of us that are licensed and those that are not licensed. Remember, when I talk about licensed I talk about state regulatory licenses and not the closing company that went and filed for their business license.


Dave

 

[ronparise]

So how many terrorists are buying timeshares Ron??

Come on.... Are people really this paranoid?

Ive never met a more paranoid bunch than the folks Ive met here on TUG

 

[dougp26364]

Ive never met a more paranoid bunch than the folks Ive met here on TUG

Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean that people aren't out to get them.

Anymore, one doesn't need your SS# to commit identity fraud. I've had a devil of a time getting a second fake SS# off one of my credit reports. It was placed there by Capital One when someone used an guarenteed issue app to take out a credit card, run up the bill and never pay it off. I still get collections calls over that debt and it's well over a decade old.

If you're that paranoid about giving out you SS#, then sign up for Lifelock or lock your credit yourself to prevent anyone from opening accounts in your name or with your SS#.

 

[theo]

Good advice --- but no need for name calling...

If you're that paranoid about giving out you SS#, then sign up for Lifelock or lock your credit yourself to prevent anyone from opening accounts in your name or with your SS#.

Done and done in my case, on both counts --- long ago. That said, I see no need or constructive benefit in name calling or labels like "paranoid"; a specific term of psychology.

I have a long personal history of mandatory full disclosure to proper authority, far beyond that which most civilians ever encounter in their entire lifetime. Outside of those particular authorized circles however, I'm admittedly very cautious. Accordingly, I've never experienced any personal security breach, credit card fraud or identity theft --- and I don't ever expect to do so. If that caution and due diligence gets me labelled as "paranoid", so be it --- but I don't ever spend any time fixing damage resulting from the careless handling or distribution of personal information or data...

 

[gandalf252002]

Yes, people ARE this paranoid. I recently sold 3 Shell timeshares and agreed to pay all closing costs. Two individuals did not include their SSN and I got a an email from the Chicago Title saying this is a requirement in order to close. The buyer now wants "full disclosure" and "expectations" as to what this information is used for. Despite that both I and the title company has explained that it is to establish the billing account the buyer refuses to provide this.

So how many terrorists are buying timeshares Ron??

Come on.... Are people really this paranoid?

 

[theo]

NOT a legal requirement...

The buyer now wants "full disclosure" and "expectations" as to what this information is used for. Despite that both I and the title company has explained that it is to establish the billing account the buyer refuses to provide this.

I'm not your concerned buyer, but with all due respect I think that you (and the title company) are both conveniently choosing to overlook a very basic and fundamental fact here regarding your buyer's concerns:

A social security number is *NOT* legally required just to set up a "billing account"!

Shell might very well want the buyer's SSN, in order to later facilitate collection proceeedings in the event of default on membership payments, but there is a huge difference between a "company preference" and a "legal requirement".

I hope that your sale still goes through, but I fully understand and relate to your buyer's concerns. It's not "paranoia"; it's a thoroughly legitimate concern and caution regarding the entirely unnecessary release and distribution of a critical piece of very personal, very permanent identifying information. No more, no less.

P.S. I see that you (...and kenie above, having both thrown around the "paranoid" label...), are apparently Canadian citizens. Just out of curiousity, does Canada have a equivalent personal, government issued, lifelong identifying number comparable to what is known in the U.S. as a "social security number"?

 

[MaryH]

Hi Theo,

Canadian has an equivalent called Social Insurance number. It is used for credit check by bank and credit card company when you take out a loan or CC and also to open bank account since if you have over I think $50 of interest they need to report to the government.

I am pretty careful about my credit card numbers and id number since when I was working down in Florida a few years ago, citibank called me that someone attempted to charge $1500 US from home depot there. uhmm I am staying in a hotel and lives in Canada and I rarely shop at home depot personally even in Canada so they flagged it. Several collegues had their visa, mastercard and AMEX compromised too. When we got together and figured out what we had in common (different credit card companies, 2 different hotels, 3 different car rental companies, fly different airlines, eat at same restaurants sometimes but not all pay with credit card, etc). We finally figured out we all go to the same gas station near the clients office to fill up and all of us have used CC there. So our best conclusion is one of the employee (or the owners) have been stealing cc numbers and trying to use them for fraud.

If you give your identity and credit card information to someone you don't just give to that business, you give it to all the employees of the business more than likely. and I am pretty some are not that careful about shredding that information when they are done with it.

 

[MaryH]

Hi Theo / gandalf,

Canadian has an equivalent called Social Insurance number. It is used for credit check by bank and credit card company when you take out a loan or CC and also to open bank account since if you have over I think $50 of interest they need to report to the government.

I am pretty careful about my credit card numbers and id number since when I was working down in Florida a few years ago, citibank called me that someone attempted to charge $1500 US from home depot there. uhmm I am staying in a hotel and lives in Canada and I rarely shop at home depot personally even in Canada so they flagged it. Several collegues had their visa, mastercard and AMEX compromised too. When we got together and figured out what we had in common (different credit card companies, 2 different hotels, 3 different car rental companies, fly different airlines, eat at same restaurants sometimes but not all pay with credit card, etc). We finally figured out we all go to the same gas station near the clients office to fill up and all of us have used CC there. So our best conclusion is one of the employee (or the owners) have been stealing cc numbers and trying to use them for fraud.

If you give your identity and credit card information to someone you don't just give to that business, you give it to all the employees of the business more than likely. and I am pretty some are not that careful about shredding that information when they are done with it.

Some business in some state ask to see id if you cash a check or even use credit card.. But most just check the picture to match face rather then take the number down for their records which I am okay with.

 

[Free2Roam]

In the past two years I've had two different closing companies (ebay purchases) ask for my SSN for two different resorts. I refused... but offered to provide it directly to the resort management companies since I would have an ongoing relationship with them. Both transactions completed with no problems... And neither resort has requested it.

 

[theo]

'Nuff said...

In the past two years I've had two different closing companies (ebay purchases) ask for my SSN for two different resorts. I refused... but offered to provide it directly to the resort management companies since I would have an ongoing relationship with them. Both transactions completed with no problems... And neither resort has requested it.

Thank you for weighing in with your personal, direct experience and for sharing your wise and prudent approach to such intrusive requests from obscure, unlicensed "closing companies" seeking entirely unnecessary personal information. Your results clearly reinforce that which has been stated previously:

A social security number is *NOT* legally required just to set up a "billing account"!

 

[ronparise]

Yes, people ARE this paranoid. I recently sold 3 Shell timeshares and agreed to pay all closing costs. Two individuals did not include their SSN and I got a an email from the Chicago Title saying this is a requirement in order to close. The buyer now wants "full disclosure" and "expectations" as to what this information is used for. Despite that both I and the title company has explained that it is to establish the billing account the buyer refuses to provide this.

As theo says,,,its not the law..but it doesnt make any difference to you does it?...you need to find another buyer

 

[ronparise]

Thank you for weighing in with your personal, direct experience and for sharing your wise and prudent approach to such intrusive requests from obscure, unlicensed "closing companies" seeking entirely unnecessary personal information. Your results clearly reinforce that which has been stated previously:

A social security number is *NOT* legally required just to set up a "billing account"!

You are Im sure absolutely right, but maybe you are dead right

In thinking of the guy that steps off the curb, at a cross walk, without looking both ways. He doesnt have to, because, after all, he has the right of way. He has no legal obligation to look both ways. That bus should have stopped, it didnt. That guy was "dead right"

So what if it isnt legally required..I still look both ways at the crosswalk, even if I have the right of way, and if it facilitates a transaction I want to get done; I give up my social security number too

 

[theo]

Go for it, Ronnie...

...if it facilitates a transaction I want to get done; I give up my social security number too

I have no doubt that you readily do so, as is certainly your prerogative and choice, despite the fact that you'd most likely still easily get the deal done (as per previous poster's cited experience) while holding your ground on the unnecessary release of personal SSN. But again, it's certainly your personal choice to make.

Btw, while it's a lame and completely irrelevant analogy, it's probably also a good idea for you to continue looking both ways in those aforementioned dangerous crosswalks...

In regard to casually advising the Shell seller to just "...go find another buyer", I'd recommend keeping the interested buyer and instead telling Shell and the closing company to "back off" from an arbitrary requirement which they don't need to be imposing at all in the first place. Then again, that's probably just another one of a (likely infinite) number of topics, viewpoints and positions on which you and I would likely never agree...

 

[ronparise]

I have no doubt that you readily do so, as is certainly your prerogative and choice, despite the fact that you'd most likely still easily get the deal done (as per previous poster's cited experience) while holding your ground on the unnecessary release of personal SSN. But again, it's certainly your personal choice to make.

Btw, while it's a lame and completely irrelevant analogy, it's probably also a good idea for you to continue looking both ways in those aforementioned dangerous crosswalks...

In regard to casually advising the Shell seller to just "...go find another buyer", I'd recommend keeping the interested buyer and instead telling Shell and the closing company to "back off" from an arbitrary requirement which they don't need to be imposing at all in the first place. Then again, that's probably just another one of a (likely infinite) number of topics, viewpoints and positions on which you and I would likely never agree...

Not sure what you want Theo..Ive already said you were right....as always

 

[JOBILLBORF]

I used this closing company for two of my timeshares. Had no problem.