"Timeshare Transparency Act" new proposed bill

[TUGBrian]

having a recording of the presentation available would be a game changer for sure.

though id imagine due to that fact alone it has a less than zero chance of ever happening.

 

[dioxide45]

I recall Diamond touting how they were recording the signing. The problem with that is that the recording is only there to protect them, not the buyer. They also won't hand over the recording except under subpoena and the sales reps are known to heavily coach buyers on what not to say during signing.

 

[easyrider]

So all it would really do is extend the rescission period to 14 days nationwide?

It also provides an exit of ownership provision. This is a biggie, imo.

Bill

(C) a specification of each option available12 to the individual for ending ownership of the13 timeshare;

 

[dioxide45]

It also provides an exit of ownership provision. This is a biggie, imo.

Bill

(C) a specification of each option available12 to the individual for ending ownership of the13 timeshare;

But what will they list there? "Transfer your ownership to another individual or entity". Nothing burger.

 

[tha]

I didn't see that addresses "how" you access your timeshare. MVC is now implementing Minimum Stay requirements while still advertising that you can make reservations for 1 or more days withing 8 months of arrival. This does not seem to do anything to that type of "Revenue Team" driven manipulation.

This applies to "leases" and "rents" "for a specific period of time less than 1 full year during any given year". Talk about unintended consequences.

 

[easyrider]

But what will they list there? "Transfer your ownership to another individual or entity". Nothing burger.

"A specification of each option available to the individual for ending ownership of the timeshare."

Legally, a specification is defined as A meticulous outlook or proposal for a particular thing or plan. A documented content depicting specific details such as charges or conditions of a contract.

In the purchase contract there would be a disclosure explaining the available options to end the ownership of the timeshare. If a company has an exit program, they will be bound by the terms of that exit program, when it is written in the contract. Currently, a company can offer exit as a courtesy. They can change these options. If it is actually specified in the contract that they are providing an exit, then they have to provide an exit as defined in the contract.

Telling you to transfer your ownership to another person is an available option. Travel and Leisure will tell you this when you ask about exit options. If Travel and Liesure says an option is to exit as a courtesy is available only when we offer it most buyers would say wtf.

If Travel and Leisure places verbiage that they have an exit program in the contract then that becomes part of contract and since this is a disclosure at the point of sale I think this would be the only way a buyer proceeds feeling good about buying.

Same thing applies for all of the companies regarding point of sale disclosures.

Bill

 

[dioxide45]

"A specification of each option available to the individual for ending ownership of the timeshare."

Legally, a specification is defined as A meticulous outlook or proposal for a particular thing or plan. A documented content depicting specific details such as charges or conditions of a contract.

In the purchase contract there would be a disclosure explaining the available options to end the ownership of the timeshare. If a company has an exit program, they will be bound by the terms of that exit program, when it is written in the contract. Currently, a company can offer exit as a courtesy. They can change these options. If it is actually specified in the contract that they are providing an exit, then they have to provide an exit as defined in the contract.

Telling you to transfer your ownership to another person is an available option. Travel and Leisure will tell you this when you ask about exit options. If Travel and Liesure says an option is to exit as a courtesy is available only when we offer it most buyers would say wtf.

If Travel and Leisure places verbiage that they have an exit program in the contract then that becomes part of contract and since this is a disclosure at the point of sale I think this would be the only way a buyer proceeds feeling good about buying.

Same thing applies for all of the companies regarding point of sale disclosures.

Bill

But will the timeshare entity put something in the contract unless they know they can fulfill it 100% of the time? Sure they have a timeshare exit program, but we know they don't take back every timeshare. Just because they offer something to some people I don't think it means they have to put that in the contract. They certainly won't bind themselves to something if they can avoid it. As noted about unintended consequences, if forced to do something they may just stop offering an exit program altogether.

A bigger question is, can the timeshare model be sustained without all the shenanigans that goes on today in the sales and marketing process. Can timeshare developers still continue to develop timeshares and remain profitable without the high pressure sales pitch. Does the value proposition exist when you just look at the numbers? I think it used to with legacy programs, and certainly does with resale. But that isn't what the big companies are selling today. Most are selling a points based program at prices that would take the average user decades to get a return on investment. Even longer if they finance it at developer interest rates.

 

[easyrider]

But will the timeshare entity put something in the contract unless they know they can fulfill it 100% of the time? Sure they have a timeshare exit program, but we know they don't take back every timeshare. Just because they offer something to some people I don't think it means they have to put that in the contract. They certainly won't bind themselves to something if they can avoid it. As noted about unintended consequences, if forced to do something they may just stop offering an exit program altogether.

A bigger question is, can the timeshare model be sustained without all the shenanigans that goes on today in the sales and marketing process. Can timeshare developers still continue to develop timeshares and remain profitable without the high pressure sales pitch. Does the value proposition exist when you just look at the numbers? I think it used to with legacy programs, and certainly does with resale. But that isn't what the big companies are selling today. Most are selling a points based program at prices that would take the average user decades to get a return on investment. Even longer if they finance it at developer interest rates.

"A specification of each option available to the individual for ending ownership of the timeshare."

The meaning to me is this would be a point of sale disclosure where they would be required to say exactly what , if any, exit option they have. If they don't have an option available they would be required to say that. If they do have an option to end the timeshare ownership, which is an exit, they would have to disclose what it is and how it works.

A contract specification is a written part of a contract to eliminate ambiguities between the parties of the contract. All parties are legally bound to the terms.

You are right in a big way because many people don't read or understand the contract and a salespersons narrative is usually what sells any product. In the long run , for a good salesperson and an uneducated consumer it will be business as usual regarding the sale.

The difference might be that if that exit plan is part of the contract, there would be terms to allow people to get out legally instead of all of the things that happen now with some of the better companies.

Bill

 

[JohninUtah]

John Curtis, Dave Ramsey call out 'legalized fraud' of the timeshare business

Utah Sen. John Curtis on Friday joined personal finance expert Dave Ramsey on

www.ksl.com

 

[Roger830]

There should be no time limit as to when a time share can be canceled.

If it's a good value for members, then one should be able to cancel at any time and then deal can easily be sold to a new member. Perhaps if this was the policy, there would be a waiting list.

After the recession period, any deposit, loan payments, and maintenance fees would be forfeited.

 

[JONC777]

ARDA will probably use as much influence as they can to lobby against this lol.

 

[StarSailer]

Speaking as a newbie who fell for the hype, bought, and later rescinded per Florida law... I don't think this bill would have changed anything. It does nothing to address lies that won't self-expose until after rescind periods end, and as mentioned most states already have rescind periods sufficient for people with enough suspicious or instant purchase regret to fact check and get out.

Using Florida/Tennessee as inspiration I would have instead suggested the minimum rescind period ends after the longer of:
7 days after signing if buyers had opportunity to inspect or tour property prior to signing.
10 days after signing if buyers bought property unseen.
4 days after account creation sufficient to view current availability with floating/point systems.

I feel the last point would be an important new item to deal with timeshares that sell on lies and then deliberately slow walking account creation until after the rescind period expires.

Spoiler: Slightly off topic, but the full wishlist of reforms I would want to see would be something like:

a) Finance Reform. The financing packages being pushed are predatory insults to injury. Seller-offered financing on timeshare and other micro fractional purchases should have a cap. Say, no longer than 5 year repayment terms with interest not to exceed 5-points over the average prime loan rate.

b) Resale vs Retail treatment reform.
- Contracts should, if there is a resale/retail difference, have a signature line showing buyers have been informed of the difference. That would at give unsuspecting buyers a hint that the resale market exists, that their purchase is likely to loose value, and provide a small incentive for developers to avoid resale/retail differential treatments to save having to make the disclosure.
- Limitations on how much difference is legally permitted between retail vs resale use/fees. Westgate, I'm looking at you.
- Resorts that treat resale/retail differently must offer an initiation fee (optional to resale buyers) to allow their week to be treated as if retail purchased.

c) Exit Reform.
- Require timeshares to offer a partial refund period. Maybe 80% refund if cancelled outside rescind period within first year, 60% refund if cancelled within second year, 40% refund if cancelled within third year. This gives buyers a guaranteed exit if buyers discover they can't book and use their timeshare as expected.
- Require timeshare companies selling developer deeds distinct from resale to offer buy-back at no less than 20% current advertised MSRP. That punishes the practice of advertising an inflated MRSP list prices followed by a hard sale to accept today-only discounts and would reward resorts/companies that provide equal resale/retail treatment.
- Require resorts that have no developer/resale to accept deed backs and cancellations with a modest liquidation damages limited to perhapse 2 years MFs.

 

[TUGBrian]

believe we have discovered why the bill is so poorly written...

apparently the two main sources for advisory information to these senators regarding the industry are:

Dave Ramsey and a large exit company (that poses as a law firm)


explains quite a bit!

 

[Hindsite]

There should be no time limit as to when a time share can be canceled.

If it's a good value for members, then one should be able to cancel at any time and then deal can easily be sold to a new member. Perhaps if this was the policy, there would be a waiting list.

After the recession period, any deposit, loan payments, and maintenance fees would be forfeited.

Who, other than owners/members do you expect to pick up the cost for this?

 

[vacationtime1]

Who, other than owners/members do you expect to pick up the cost for this?

A "small detail" that everyone is ignoring,

 

[Roger830]

Who, other than owners/members do you expect to pick up the cost for this?

If there isn't sufficient demand for the product without deceit and aggressive sales tactics with high commissions, then perhaps that system shouldn't exist.

We own three weeks at a south Florida ocean front timeshare that has seen prices increase since we bought resale 14-26 years ago. They have taken deeds back.

 

[jbercu]

ARDA will probably use as much influence as they can to lobby against this lol.

ARDA will also use the money collected from "voluntary" contributions for lobbying against any timeshare bill at the federal level.

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article313832529.html

Jason Gamel, ARDA president and chief executive office, said it “interferes with states’ rights to regulate real estate property by introducing duplicative federal regulations and injecting unnecessary federal regulations into the marketplace.” He also said it does nothing “to address the third-party fraud which has been the subject of several state and federal investigations,” and said ARDA “stands ready to work with state and federal regulatory authorities to clean up the third-party fraud and abuse that we see in the industry today.”

AARP is endorsing the Timeshare Transparency Act.

https://www.curtis.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Timeshare-Transparency-Act-Senate-Endorsement-Letter.pdf

I think that getting hung up in how to stop the bad, illegal, unethical, harassing, abusive behavior of the timeshare industry misses the revolutionary value of the bill which is intended for the first time to bring consumer protection legislation at the federal level to curb the industry.

The biggest challenge for us as timeshare Owners is to put extreme pressure to balance the money that ARDA is willing to throw at Congress and the White House to kill this bill.

For ARDA, plan B is to work with congress to enact timeshare legislation that resembles the California and Florida timeshare legislation that diminishes and overrides the consumer protection laws enacted in these states to protect Owners in planned developments. The California and Florida timeshare legislation was written by ARDA for the benefit of ARDA member organizations. This ARDA sponsored legislation was passed in the states as timeshare consumer protection legislation, and ARDA will try to do this again at the federal level.

This is a call to action for TUG members to pick our own representatives such a Brian at TUG, TARDA - Irene Parker (https://tarda.org/),
Michael Finn at Finn Law Group and other timeshare advocate leaders to work with the Senators on the bill instead of ARDA.

Jake

 

[Hindsite]

If there isn't sufficient demand for the product without deceit and aggressive sales tactics with high commissions, then perhaps that system shouldn't exist.

We own three weeks at a south Florida ocean front timeshare that has seen prices increase since we bought resale 14-26 years ago. They have taken deeds back.

Its the exception that ownerships are worth more than they were bought for direct, and a lot (probably most) people buy direct. Resale is different, so your example is not representative of the wider system.

If HOAs/Developers were to take back weeks just because people didn't want them, they there would need to be cost added to maint fees to cover that, plus the risk of surplus inventory not getting rented to cover the maint fees. That model is what collapses some independent resorts. MVC are currently loosing their shirts big time trying to recover the costs of the inventory that they own, thankfully the MVC shareholders are taking that loss on, not owners.

 

[Roger830]

Its the exception that ownerships are worth more than they were bought for direct, and a lot (probably most) people buy direct. Resale is different, so your example is not representative of the wider system.

If HOAs/Developers were to take back weeks just because people didn't want them, they there would need to be cost added to maint fees to cover that, plus the risk of surplus inventory not getting rented to cover the maint fees. That model is what collapses some independent resorts. MVC are currently loosing their shirts big time trying to recover the costs of the inventory that they own, thankfully the MVC shareholders are taking that loss on, not owners.

I agree that the situation I talked about is not representative of the current systems being sold.

At our resort there is still an original owner couple when we go that bought two weeks in the mid-80's from the developer and later bought three more weeks. They own weeks 52-4 and are happy with their ownership. I have known others that were also pleased. Florida works because it's a 52 week season which is also true for Hawaii.

The blunt reality is that the points system is inherently flawed. Not everyone can book Christmas and 4th of July week as the salesman will tell them. Quite often owners don't even get enough points for a full week.
If all of the points in the system are sold, then if January isn't fully booked, some members won't be able book a vacation. When partial weeks are booked, there are holes where nobody can book single days. There are mud seasons that most members don't want.

Because they aggressively sell a flawed system, they should take back the ownerships on demand..

 

[easyrider]

Who, other than owners/members do you expect to pick up the cost for this?

A "small detail" that everyone is ignoring,

The terms of exiting should be the contract is paid off and a fee. That seems to be what Travel & Leisure is doing.

I think the entire timeshare concept is changing from small deeded single locations to large vacation club membership types. This is better for both the member and the membership for many reasons.

Bill

 

[Hindsite]

The terms of exiting should be the contract is paid off and a fee. That seems to be what Travel & Leisure is doing.

Great if T&L are doing that, and even better if its in the contract. Once the developers can't recover the costs, or make a profit from taking ownerships back, they'll stop. In the end someone has to pay and its not going to be the timeshare companies unless they can see a profit behind it. Then what?

 

[TUGBrian]

its all about money. there is a dollar amount that someone would take over ANY timeshare ownership for if the fee was high enough.

the problem is that any industry "standard" exit program is going to drastically increase the number of potential buyers who learn the ugly secret that is "what happens when im done with it?" before buying instead of after and id expect that to impact retail sales significantly.

this industry only survives in its current format when the vast majority of new buyers remain oblivious to resale and depreciation truths.

 

[chapjim]

But will the timeshare entity put something in the contract unless they know they can fulfill it 100% of the time? Sure they have a timeshare exit program, but we know they don't take back every timeshare. Just because they offer something to some people I don't think it means they have to put that in the contract. They certainly won't bind themselves to something if they can avoid it. As noted about unintended consequences, if forced to do something they may just stop offering an exit program altogether.

A bigger question is, can the timeshare model be sustained without all the shenanigans that goes on today in the sales and marketing process. Can timeshare developers still continue to develop timeshares and remain profitable without the high pressure sales pitch. Does the value proposition exist when you just look at the numbers? I think it used to with legacy programs, and certainly does with resale. But that isn't what the big companies are selling today. Most are selling a points based program at prices that would take the average user decades to get a return on investment. Even longer if they finance it at developer interest rates.

See Post #2 in this thread.