Transferring a timeshare to an LLC to dispose of

[elaine]

Just transferring does not get you off the hook. HOA/management company has to accept the transfer. Some TS's now require prepayment of 1 year maintenance fees for any transfer now and also require submission of LLC documents prior to approving any transfers to LLCs specifically b/c of the Viking ship issue.

 

[buzglyd]

I don't want to discuss or debate a scale or continuum of "immorality" or other assorted matters or degrees of right and wrong mentioned within other parts of your post.

That much being very clearly stated, I would very much like to hear the logic behind the apparent (and apparently recurrent) belief that any HOA anywhere somehow has any responsibility or obligation to "take back" any timeshare ownership that someone previously voluntarily purchased of their own free will (...and not purchased from that "inflexible" HOA in the first place, it's both very important and highly relevant to note).

I just cannot even begin to grasp the logic. If you are willing to attempt to explain the logic behind that particular thought process, I am definitely all ears.

Yeah this is a flame war waiting to happen. "HOAs" are just volunteer board members who pay their maintenance fees like everyone else.

If you own a blue week in Virginia Beach that you can't sell and there is no developer or sales team on site, I still can't see the logic in burdening the rest of the on time paying owners with your default. It's a voluntary purchase and will just cause the other owners to pay more.

 

[raygo123]

The basis for the original post has to relate back to post number 5, and 19. Avoiding liability. And I agree I have done deed transfers and wills myself. And anyone can set up an LLC as well. The true test is when it is liquidated. It's a little late at that point to find that the courts see it as no more than a proprietorship, and as merely an attempt to avoid liability.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[DeniseM]

A person that has himself as a lawyer, has a fool for a lawyer. Would you really set up an LLC without one?

Not for this purpose, but yes. You can use a site like Legal Zoom, and they will walk you right through it. They have very good live support.

 

[raygo123]

Not for this purpose, but yes. You can use a site like Legal Zoom, and they will walk you right through it. They have very good live support.

I agree. Legal zoom will walk one through setting it up. That's the easy part. But, one must take it one step further. Will it hold up in court? Make sure you ask that as well. Setting it up has nothing to do with whether it will have the results one desires.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[theo]

Yeah this is a flame war waiting to happen. "HOAs" are just volunteer board members who pay their maintenance fees like everyone else.

If you own a blue week in Virginia Beach that you can't sell and there is no developer or sales team on site, I still can't see the logic in burdening the rest of the on time paying owners with your default. It's a voluntary purchase and will just cause the other owners to pay more.

I would hope that this could be a rational and reasoned discussion rather than a flame war. Your astute observations about unpaid, volunteer HOA's are certainly spot on.

To stay focused upon my intended point however, the dots that I just cannot connect and the logic that I just cannot at all wrap my head around is how or why anyone might somehow come to deduce and / or believe that "deedback acceptance" is somehow an obligation or responsibility of any HOA anywhere, when said HOA (no matter where it may be) plainly had no involvement whatsoever in any person(s) having voluntarily and independently chosen to purchase their week(s) in the first place.

The resounding silence of any logical and / or credible explanations being offered for this strange non sequitur seems to consistently to be quite deafening.

 

[ronparise]

I don't want to discuss or debate a scale or continuum of "immorality" or other assorted matters or degrees of right and wrong mentioned within other parts of your post.

That much being very clearly stated, I would very much like to hear the logic behind the apparent (and apparently recurrent) belief that any HOA anywhere somehow has any responsibility or obligation to "take back" any timeshare ownership that someone previously voluntarily purchased entirely of their own free will (...and not purchased from the "inflexible" HOA in the first place, it is both critically important and highly relevant to note).

I frankly cannot even begin to grasp the logic. If you are willing to attempt to explain the logic behind that particular thought process, I am definitely all ears.

My logic on this is

the HOA has an obligation to manage the property and the timeshare for the mutual benefit of all the owners and it does not benefit the owners generally, if some owners do not pay their maintenance fees. Im thinking specifically of the owners known as Viking ships)

So if f I inform the HOA that I cant or wont pay my fees any longer and that it is my intent to default, or transfer my ownership to a Viking Ship I think good management demands that the HOA try to stop me from doing this.. (default or sell to a Viking Ship)

I assume that in the case of default the HOA will foreclose and ultimately own it anyway. And in my experience its easier and cheaper to do a deed in lieu of foreclosure than a foreclosure..

my logic is that if an HOA has the obligation to manage things for the mutual benefit of all the owners, they should develop a an exit strategy that their owners can use> Im not saying that they take ownership of everything, only that they should be the "buyer" of last resort.

 

[buzglyd]

My logic on this is

the HOA has an obligation to manage the property and the timeshare for the mutual benefit of all the owners and it does not benefit the owners generally, if some owners do not pay their maintenance fees. Im thinking specifically of the owners known as Viking ships)

So if f I inform the HOA that I cant or wont pay my fees any longer and that it is my intent to default, or transfer my ownership to a Viking Ship I think good management demands that the HOA try to stop me from doing this.. (default or sell to a Viking Ship)

I assume that in the case of default the HOA will foreclose and ultimately own it anyway. And in my experience its easier and cheaper to do a deed in lieu of foreclosure than a foreclosure..

my logic is that if an HOA has the obligation to manage things for the mutual benefit of all the owners, they should develop a an exit strategy that their owners can use> Im not saying that they take ownership of everything, only that they should be the "buyer" of last resort.

I know it's hard to believe, but many times when owners are offered deedback programs if they pay a small fee, the response is F*^k off. Then they'll go down the road and handover 5 grand to a disposal company.

I'll be in Orlando at the TBMA conference next week. These topics will be front and center. I agree an exit plan is necessary but red week owners have a different agenda than blue week owners.

Sutherland Crossing in FL closed and sold and all the owners got a payout. More of that needs to happen but it isn't easy to accomplish.

 

[raygo123]

I would hope that this could be a rational and reasoned discussion rather than a flame war. Your astute observations about unpaid, volunteer HOA's are certainly spot on.

To stay focused upon my intended point however, the dots that I just cannot connect and the logic that I just cannot at all wrap my head around is how or why anyone might somehow come to believe that "deedback acceptance" is somehow an obligation or responsibility of any HOA anywhere, when said HOA (no matter where it may be) plainly had no involvement whatsoever in any person(s) having voluntarily chosen to purchase their week(s) in the first place.

The resounding silence of any explanations offered for that particular non sequitur seems to consistently be quite deafening.

I agree with you whole heartily. Why should a HOA have any responsibility for the good or bad judgement of others. Yea I heard too many times about the tactics of developers. Put the blame on them not on those that had the bad judgement, the buyer and the developer. The HOA is merely an innocent bystander.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[DeniseM]

This thread is Déjà vu all over again!

 

[ace2000]

This thread is Déjà vu all over again!

Amen! And theo is amazed every time he brings it up, that others actually disagree with him on this topic.

 

[DeniseM]

Amen! And theo is amazed every time he brings it up, that others actually disagree with him on this topic.

Theo didn't bring it up - please stick to the TOPIC.

 

[raygo123]

My logic on this is

the HOA has an obligation to manage the property and the timeshare for the mutual benefit of all the owners and it does not benefit the owners generally, if some owners do not pay their maintenance fees. Im thinking specifically of the owners known as Viking ships)

So if f I inform the HOA that I cant or wont pay my fees any longer and that it is my intent to default, or transfer my ownership to a Viking Ship I think good management demands that the HOA try to stop me from doing this.. (default or sell to a Viking Ship)

I assume that in the case of default the HOA will foreclose and ultimately own it anyway. And in my experience its easier and cheaper to do a deed in lieu of foreclosure than a foreclosure..

my logic is that if an HOA has the obligation to manage things for the mutual benefit of all the owners, they should develop a an exit strategy that their owners can use> Im not saying that they take ownership of everything, only that they should be the "buyer" of last resort.

When does the"buyer of last resort become the norm? When knowing that hey, when I don't want it anymore I'll just tun it in. In my opinion, the easier you make it, the more it will happen. It's not the HOA, it the developer that must step up, and some are listening.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[ace2000]

To stay focused upon my intended point however, the dots that I just cannot connect and the logic that I just cannot at all wrap my head around is how or why anyone might somehow come to believe that "deedback acceptance" is somehow an obligation or responsibility of any HOA anywhere, when said HOA (no matter where it may be) plainly had no involvement whatsoever in any person(s) having voluntarily chosen to purchase their week(s) in the first place.

The resounding silence of any explanations offered for that particular non sequitur seems to consistently be quite deafening.

Theo didn't bring it up - please stick to the TOPIC.

This is the piece that theo continually brings up. I think we all know the main points and counterpoints by now (including yours).

 

[DeniseM]

This is the piece that theo continually brings up. I think we all know the main points and counterpoints by now (including yours).

Yes - and yours as well - so let's stay on topic.

*As long as we have newbies or infrequent posters asking this question, we are going to get this debate, but it is kind of funny.

 

[ronparise]

I agree with you whole heartily. Why should a HOA have any responsibility for the good or bad judgement of others. Yea I heard too many times about the tactics of developers. Put the blame on them not on those that had the bad judgement, the buyer and the developer. The HOA is merely an innocent bystander.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

You are missing the point Ray

The HOA should absolutely not be responsible for anyone's bad judgement and of course the blame is with the developer for creating a worthless piece of crap and the idiot that bought it. and of course the HOA is innocent

But the HOA should not stand by and watch folks default and raise the fees on the folks that dont

It is my position, innocent as they may be, the HOAs are responsible (not for causing the problem, but for its solution) They are obligated to formulate a plan to deal with the problem, or better, develop a strategy so that they dont have the problem in the first place. My point is that accepting deedbacks in some situations may be the best thing to do

That or terminate the timeshare altogether.

 

[rickandcindy23]

A simple call to any resort to ask if they accept deedbacks (should be deedsback, I think, grammatically) is always the first step.

I am on the board at a small resort, and our president has chosen to accept deeds back for a price. But we have no way of disposing of weeks, so our fees just go up a little each time, so we require owner be current on fees and for the owner to pay two years' additional fees upfront.

Our timeshare expires as a timeshare and is RTU and not deeds, so we will end the timeshare in 2032, very likely without any objections from owners, I am fairly sure owners won't be upset. The sale of the six units (in Frisco, CO near Breck) will be substantial cash, which will be distributed to owners on a share basis. It's going to be okay money for the end of a timeshare, much better than Skier's Edge's end, which is now Lodge by the Blue.

So the people who deedback are going to lose in the end. But then again, the resort was built early 80's, so I think a lot of owners will be dead by then, and even Rick and I will be 77. I pretty much don't care what happens in 2032.

The board at this resort has been accused at annual meetings of not letting people out of their timeshare obligations, but those are the people who just stop paying and don't even call or email the board, and we have our emails in every newsletter.

One lady owes 10 years of fees plus attorney fees, and she is angry at the president, who has been very blunt with her. He can be blunt, but he is older and former military. I applaud his tenacity with folks who just stop paying. It really hurts all of us. I just wonder how many people are going to pay to rid themselves of their weeks because I sure don't want them, and I know the other board members have taken on weeks they wish they hadn't.

The other owners have to absorb all of the attorney fees and lost MF's of owners who do not pay.

 

[ronparise]

When does the"buyer of last resort become the norm? When knowing that hey, when I don't want it anymore I'll just tun it in. In my opinion, the easier you make it, the more it will happen. It's not the HOA, it the developer that must step up, and some are listening.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Ray we aretalking about places where the developer is long gone

 

[Saintsfanfl]

It can be difficult to prove intent in a fraud case except for maybe when the plan is posted publicly for all to see before the alleged fraud takes place.

It is really easy to set up an LLC without a lawyer but an attorney probably should be consulted if the plan is to use that LLC to hide from existing personal liabilities. Especially if that LLC has no other purpose.

 

[ronparise]

Yeah this is a flame war waiting to happen. "HOAs" are just volunteer board members who pay their maintenance fees like everyone else.

If you own a blue week in Virginia Beach that you can't sell and there is no developer or sales team on site, I still can't see the logic in burdening the rest of the on time paying owners with your default. It's a voluntary purchase and will just cause the other owners to pay more.

You are missing the point, or at least missing my point.

If I call the HOA and tell them that I am not going to pay another penny to them for the maintenance fees on the timeshare I own. What do you think their response should be.. The other owners are right now on notice that they will be paying more next year

I think that in the case of defaults the HOA has to foreclose after a couple of years of non payment. which means legal fees and court costs and no maintenance fees for a while.

Im just saying a better approach would be to take it back and deal with it right away, either by renting, or selling.

 

[ronparise]

A simple call to any resort to ask if they accept deedbacks (should be deedsback, I think, grammatically) is always the first step.

I am on the board at a small resort, and our president has chosen to accept deeds back for a price. But we have no way of disposing of weeks, so our fees just go up a little each time, so we require owner be current on fees and for the owner to pay two years' additional fees upfront.

Our timeshare expires as a timeshare and is RTU and not deeds, so we will end the timeshare in 2032, very likely without any objections from owners, I am fairly sure owners won't be upset. The sale of the six units (in Frisco, CO near Breck) will be substantial cash, which will be distributed to owners on a share basis. It's going to be okay money for the end of a timeshare, much better than Skier's Edge's end, which is now Lodge by the Blue.

So the people who deedback are going to lose in the end. But then again, the resort was built early 80's, so I think a lot of owners will be dead by then, and even Rick and I will be 77. I pretty much don't care what happens in 2032.

The board at this resort has been accused at annual meetings of not letting people out of their timeshare obligations, but those are the people who just stop paying and don't even call or email the board, and we have our emails in every newsletter.

One lady owes 10 years of fees plus attorney fees, and she is angry at the president, who has been very blunt with her. He can be blunt, but he is older and former military. I applaud his tenacity with folks who just stop paying. It really hurts all of us. I just wonder how many people are going to pay to rid themselves of their weeks because I sure don't want them, and I know the other board members have taken on weeks they wish they hadn't.

The other owners have to absorb all of the attorney fees and lost MF's of owners who do not pay.

I applaud this HOA... they have a plan... 16 years to go

 

[theo]

The valid point was made above by DeniseM that this topic of discussion is, to borrow directly from the late, great Yogi Berra, "Deja Vu all over again".
That is likely because timeshare ownership "termination" options (and / or the honest acknowledgement and acceptance of personal responsibility) remains an ongoing and consistently unresolved problem, not easily or quickly tackled and solved for those interval ownerships of little or no demand or resale market value. Surely much more easily tackled and resolved (i.e., by complete termination as a timeshare property) where RTU contracts (no ownerships, no deeds) have a specific "end" date in near, clear sight.

I acknowledge and respect that there are many different viewpoints, perspectives (and agendas) regarding this subject; I certainly have (and practice) mine and I've never been at all shy about very openly expressing it. I have attempted to do so (...never being "amazed" by disagreement, btw...) with some measure of courtesy and civility.
That being said, this particular drum is one that I've grown very tired of beating. On this particular topic of discussion, as the Shark Tank folks say --- "I'm out".

To each their own viewpoint, perspective and personal opinion; that's what civil discourse is all about. Reasonable people can (...hopefully) agree to reasonably disagree.

 

[am1]

Until laws are changed where punishment for non payment on debts is changed this will continue to happen. Banks and credit card companies take hits of millions of dollars with little recourse. They can easily afford it but timeshares are a lot smaller operations.

I do not think changes to those laws are going to happen and since 2008 quite the opposite. But lets not make this political.

Accepting timeshares back in lieu of foreclosure may be cheaper an easier for the HOA but just encourages more people to do it.

The developers are easy to blame as they sold the timeshares to people for a lot of money who have no idea what they purchased. A lot of times the buyers have large mortgages on their timeshares and have no other option to default.

If the developers had to deposit some of the sales price into the reserve fund so that the timeshares always had value on the secondary market. Or if the resort had enough money in the bank earning a return where mfs were minimal or none required at all. To me that is the ideal solution to this problem but a tough sell on the timeshare tour and no benefit to the developer.

We can all agree that the developer does not care about this so maybe the problem lies with the government allowing developers to do what they want when selling timeshares. The sales people always mention "for legal reasons this and that" but there should be a lot more regulations when selling timeshares.

Or the blame can be with the people who purchased the timeshares without doing their research. With out demand for new timeshares they would not get built and the old ones would maintain their value a little better.

 

[Saintsfanfl]

If I call the HOA and tell them that I am not going to pay another penny to them for the maintenance fees on the timeshare I own. What do you think their response should be.. The other owners are right now on notice that they will be paying more next year

Properly run HOA's accrue estimated bad debt, so a single owner calling and informing that they will not be paying will not necessarily increase the fee for next year.

 

[raygo123]

Ray we aretalking about places where the developer is long gone

Oh I'm sorry I thought we were talking about places like Marriott, Wyndham, or HGVC, etc.

Yes the independent TS does have more of a challenge.
I know at foxrun they would offer them to the current owners.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk