Trouble - Marriott Grand Residence Tahoe [Management Agreement in Jeopardy?]

[bnoble]

One possible answer: Even when you are right about a dispute, it may be cheaper to give in than to fight the legal fight required to prevail. And, at the end of the day, "more profitable" is more important to a for-profit company than "we were right."

 

[SueDonJ]

You keep writing multiple paragraphs about this, but you never address the logical issue I presented.

If they were so very absolutely correct to charge this HOA, why did they refund them when challenged?

One possible answer: Even when you are right about a dispute, it may be cheaper to give in than to fight the legal fight required to prevail. And, at the end of the day, "more profitable" is more important to a for-profit company than "we were right."

First it should be clear that the suppositions being made are based only on a statement in the response letter from the BOD, which doesn't at all prove wrongdoing by Manager Marriott:

"... While the Board has strived to have good working relations with the Management Company over the years, the recent lawsuit is not without precedent. In 2021, we were forced to file suit against the Management Company for reimbursement of money that the Management Company unilaterally and without authorization took from Association accounts to pay for legal costs associated with other claims, including a class action lawsuit, against the Management Company that did not even involve the Grand Residence Club. The Management Company ultimately agreed to reimburse the Association and the lawsuit was dismissed. ..."

Another possibility could be similar to what happened with the threatened class action from the former president of the Aruba Ocean Club BOD and the owners he'd convinced to join him, when it appeared that Marriott recognized that the cost to ownership for the unexpected roof repairs was extremely high and so they agreed to meet them somewhere in the middle, assuming some of the costs without an admission that they were responsible for any of the costs or that the claims being alleged by the group were legitimate.

Understand, I'm not claiming that type of remedy is what happened here because none of us knows the details. I'm only saying that there could be any number of reasons for Marriott to capitulate (if in fact they did) and for some of those reasons there may be history that shows a pattern.

 

[bizaro86]

One possible answer: Even when you are right about a dispute, it may be cheaper to give in than to fight the legal fight required to prevail. And, at the end of the day, "more profitable" is more important to a for-profit company than "we were right."

Possible, although that would depend on where the money came from to give in to this HOA. For example, if the money for the settlement came from the other HOAs and this HOA should in fact have paid for some of it then that's clearly a breach of their duty to those other HOAs. And we know based on how smart their lawyers are that they would never charge those other HOAs without cause.

Now, it's possible MVW just paid for the residence club's share themselves. That would certainly surprise me unless the amount of money was very small, and it doesn't seem consistent with their past practice to me (eg how they dealt with hurricane closures).

Occam's razor suggests to me that they gave the money back because they shouldn't in fact have charged it, but obviously there's no way to know for sure.

 

[SueDonJ]

Another question comes up with every mention of any of the lawsuits filed by the GR Tahoe BOD against Marriott: who's paying the legal fees for these lawsuits??

 

[LeslieDet]

You keep writing multiple paragraphs about this, but you never address the logical issue I presented.

If they were so very absolutely correct to charge this HOA, why did they refund them when challenged?

You honestly make me laugh. No one here has provided any documentation regarding how the OT wage dispute was resolved. Some vague reference in a line of a letter saying there was a refund. You immediately run with that to jump to an unsupported conclusion that statement was factual and that statement means 100% of whatever was charged was reimbursed. Again, there are absolutely zero facts to support your assumptions.

As I have said repeatedly, I am not privy to the litigation either. However, given my experience, when folks like you and your buddy were aghast at money being paid to resolve an OT dispute for an employee from Newport Coast, I simply explained to you that under California law there are representative actions that would explain why that can happen. It is actually logical. Based upon my 35 year career in law, I am simply explaining to you that if there was a settlement that allocated costs among all properties in California, I guarantee you that there was documentation to support how the allocations were made. I have never professed to be privy to that documentation. If there was an adjustment made on the allocation, I guarantee you that there would be documentation to support any such adjustment. That is how it works in the real world. It is called critical thinking.

You are NOT being logical; there are no facts upon which you are basing your assumptions. You are merely speculating about what you think may have happened. You obviously spend a lot of time obsessing over MVW. LOL.

 

[LeslieDet]

This is true. GRC actually has the lowest unpaid fees of any MVC location by the end of the year when the final payment is due. Management always points this out in each annual meeting. The 29% was the unpaid amount for the entire year, but reported at the mid-point of the year. Like saying right now the property has a 99% unpaid MF for 2024. That 29% isn't past due, just still unpaid.

Thanks for the information. I obviously do not own there and was simply looking at the information on the minutes.

 

[LeslieDet]

Another question comes up with every mention of any of the lawsuits filed by the GR Tahoe BOD against Marriott: who's paying the legal fees for these lawsuits??

The HOA itself will be obligated to pay the attorney's fees, and if there is no money in the HOA, then the BOD would have to seek a special assessment to cover the fees. I doubt that any law firm would take that type of case on a contingency; and most firms would require a retainer, as well as keeping the fees receivable current. It is curious if the BOD directs the manager to send money to the lawyers, and there is no money to send, how the BOD will deal with that. Perhaps a member of the BOD is fronting the costs?

Anyway, in litigation, each party is responsible for its own fees and costs, absent a means to shift those fees and costs to the other party. That means can be contractual or by statute. I haven't looked, but I assume the management agreement contains a fee clause. But that fee clause goes both ways. And fee shifting is not something that happens automatically, even when one party prevails after trial. The amount must be reasonable and it must be approved by the trial judge. Meaning that it is not often any litigant is ever made whole by an attorney's fee motion post trial.

 

[timsi]

[Moderator Note: As warned previously, this post has been heavily edited to delete random comments related to this poster's repeated criticisms of Marriott including those related to MF's at other Marriott resorts and Vistana Customer Service defects, as well as the completely unrelated topics of ARDA funding of timeshare-related legal fees and GoFundMe accounts. As always, feel free to hit the Report button to bring this to the attention of other mods/admin if there are questions.] <-- SueDonJ

The HOA itself will be obligated to pay the attorney's fees, and if there is no money in the HOA, then the BOD would have to seek a special assessment to cover the fees. I doubt that any law firm would take that type of case on a contingency; and most firms would require a retainer, as well as keeping the fees receivable current. It is curious if the BOD directs the manager to send money to the lawyers, and there is no money to send, how the BOD will deal with that. Perhaps a member of the BOD is fronting the costs?

Anyway, in litigation, each party is responsible for its own fees and costs, absent a means to shift those fees and costs to the other party. That means can be contractual or by statute. I haven't looked, but I assume the management agreement contains a fee clause. But that fee clause goes both ways. And fee shifting is not something that happens automatically, even when one party prevails after trial. The amount must be reasonable and it must be approved by the trial judge. Meaning that it is not often any litigant is ever made whole by an attorney's fee motion post trial.

We lack many details, [...]

Yet, based on your writing, and given the lack of details, one may conclude you believe that a management company should never be sued (so convenient for Marriott!). Are there any circumstances at all in which you believe litigation is warranted? The BOD members have a stake in the game as owners, and continuously suggesting that they are irrational or worse seems rather partisan. [...]

 

[LeslieDet]

Yet, based on your writing, and given the lack of details, one may conclude you believe that a management company should never be sued (so convenient for Marriott!). Are there any circumstances at all in which you believe litigation is warranted? The BOD members have a stake in the game as owners, and continuously suggesting that they are irrational or worse seems rather partisan.

LOL - you really make me laugh. You have no grasp of how the legal process works. And you sure as heck have no idea what I do or do not believe. But folks who are ignorant of the law just can't seem to wrap their heads around the fact that while anyone can file a lawsuit, the simple act of filing the lawsuit does not guarantee any result. Whether or not that lawsuit is successful depends upon (1) the facts and (2) the law.

Unlike you and some of your conspiracy theorist pals, I will not engage in rumor and innuendo and wild speculation. As someone who practiced complex commercial litigation for years, I guarantee you that there are many circumstances in which litigation is warranted. There are also many circumstances in which it is not warranted. But again, the decision to file should be prudently analyzed and based upon (1) facts and (2) the applicable law.

 

[davidvel]

LOL - you really make me laugh. You have no grasp of how the legal process works. And you sure as heck have no idea what I do or do not believe. But folks who are ignorant of the law just can't seem to wrap their heads around the fact that while anyone can file a lawsuit, the simple act of filing the lawsuit does not guarantee any result. Whether or not that lawsuit is successful depends upon (1) the facts and (2) the law.

Unlike you and some of your conspiracy theorist pals, I will not engage in rumor and innuendo and wild speculation. As someone who practiced complex commercial litigation for years, I guarantee you that there are many circumstances in which litigation is warranted. There are also many circumstances in which it is not warranted. But again, the decision to file should be prudently analyzed and based upon (1) facts and (2) the applicable law.

Don't forget the trial judge and possibly the jury, appellate courts, and competence of counsel and witnesses.

 

[ivywag]

My sentiments exactly.

The owners at Hyatt Sunset Harbor recently tried to withdraw from MVCI/Hyatt management. Although there were compelling reasons, it became nearly impossible to collect the necessary votes from the members because many fear the unknown of not having the Hyatt name. Key West is a market not unlike Lake Tahoe (we live in the Bay Area so are familiar with your resort) where your clientele is very specialized and it is a boutique market. Also the developer generally holds the votes from the unsold points/units and can vote those equally to those of the members. Also, there is the usual apathy and many do not even vote. It’s not impossible, but just a heads up that it’s an uphill battle.

 

[VacationForever]

The owners at Hyatt Sunset Harbor recently tried to withdraw from MVCI/Hyatt management. Although there were compelling reasons, it became nearly impossible to collect the necessary votes from the members because many fear the unknown of not having the Hyatt name. Key West is a market not unlike Lake Tahoe (we live in the Bay Area so are familiar with your resort) where your clientele is very specialized and it is a boutique market. Also the developer generally holds the votes from the unsold points/units and can vote those equally to those of the members. Also, there is the usual apathy and many do not even vote. It’s not impossible, but just a heads up that it’s an uphill battle.

This is not the same situation because MVC wants out of managing Grand Residence and it will happen if that's what they want in the end.

 

[igopogo]

There are five of us signed on to this letter. If you would like to join, please send me a DM. Planning to send it tomorrow night. If we get a few more signed on we will send it as a joint letter, otherwise we will each send it individually.

 

[WBP]

There are five of us signed on to this letter. If you would like to join, please send me a DM. Planning to send it tomorrow night. If we get a few more signed on we will send it as a joint letter, otherwise we will each send it individually.

As a recipient of letters like this one, in the past, I have a few thoughts.

1.
This letter is a step in the right direction, and you are to be credited for being engaged in your Association’s best interests, and for taking this important first step (post-letter (“NOTICE”) from MVC). In my opinion, this juncture should serve as a “Call to Action” to all Unit Owners at Grande Residence Club-Lake Tahoe, to be attentive, get involved, and become engaged. GONE are the days of assuming that your HOA BOD and Management Company, are individually or collectively going to look after your best interests (particularly, considering that GRC-Lake Tahoe is heading towards implosion, on a number of fronts (e.g. loss of the Marriott affiliation, expensive/time consuming/contentious litigation, etc, a disruption to the mental health/well-being/focus/job security/employee retention of the staff, loss of “Marriott Systems,” and brand recognition that come with the Marriott affiliation, a high potential for a serious defection of Unit Owners/Fire Sale of fractions/way below market value adverse action/sale of fractions, and resulting mass of unsold inventory (placing the financial burden of those unsold fractions and maintenance fees on the remaining Unit Owners) and the list goes on, and on);

2.
If it were me, I would do a Deed Search for all Unit Owners, and foot the bill for a letter to all Unit Owners, calling the risks ahead of them, to their attention, and requesting their engagement/action, via a password protected, private website;

3.
I would demand a “Stay of Execution,” signed as an Agreement by BOTH SIDES, HOA Board, and Management Company, of 90-120 days, to allow sound minds, and a Mediator, to take over negotiations. It could be that the Unit Owners demand that the HOA Board appoint a Blue-Ribbon Committee for this purpose, and remove the HOA Board from that role (with the Blue Ribbon Committee reporting to the HOA Board, in an advisory capacity);

4.
I would recraft the proposed letter to get to the absolute most critical points. I would be very careful about the syntax of the letter, as if the letter is not coming from a meaningful sample size of Unit Owners, I would not represent the authors as representative of the Unit Owners. I would encourage Unit Owners to sign such a letter as individuals;

5.
In the interim, I’d amass as much data as I could collect about litigation against MVC and MI, coming from timeshare/fractional owners, and I would create a script for HOA Board Members to interview other MVC fractional Board Presidents;

6.
I would give very serious consideration to reaching out to Robert Bone, Esquire, of the Timeshare Board Law Group LLP, who salvaged a mess at Olympic Village Inn.

Good Luck.

 

[VacationForever]

We ran a small/mid-size business for many years and we were one of the most paranoid owners when it came to following wage and hour law, as described by our 2 attorneys. Seeing that some of you are criticizing LeslieDet about her posts with regards to the wage and hour lawsuit, I agree with her that when a branch/resort is found to be non-compliant, that remedy would then be applied company-wide. So, we don't know if funds were actually reimbursed to Grand Residence or not, as I am inclined to believe that funds that were taken out of Grand Residence were legitimate. We don't know what was the actual outcome because we were not privy to the details.

 

[davidvel]

We ran a small/mid-size business for many years and we were one of the most paranoid owners when it came to following wage and hour law, as described by our 2 attorneys. Seeing that some of you are criticizing LeslieDet about her posts with regards to the wage and hour lawsuit, I agree with her that when a branch/resort is found to be non-compliant, that remedy would then be applied company-wide. So, we don't know if funds were actually reimbursed to Grand Residence or not, as I am inclined to believe that funds that were taken out of Grand Residence were legitimate. We don't know what was the actual outcome because we were not party to the details.

That is all true. But what these owners are saying is they should know. This is material information that should have been disclosed to the owners at the time that it happened, one way or another. I have no idea what the Board told the owners about the prior suit, but from the comments here from involved long term owners, it doesn't seem like much/enough.

 

[dioxide45]

That is all true. But what these owners are saying is they should know. This is material information that should have been disclosed to the owners at the time that it happened, one way or another. I have no idea what the Board told the owners about the prior suit, but from the comments here from involved long term owners, it doesn't seem like much/enough.

The problem is that BOD don't want to share bad news. I get our spring and fall newsletter from Harbour Lake and it is mostly full of fluff. They gloss over what is driving higher costs to move on to what updates and other fancy stuff they are doing. We know nothing about how SB-4D will impact our resorts and annual fees. I am sure a big increase will be sprung upon us again at the end of next year.

 

[TUGBrian]

id prefer folks stay on topic and avoid the petty nonsense... but it doesnt appear we all get what we want anymore these days.

 

[SueDonJ]

As moderator:

Enough. Anybody who needs a refresher, the TUG Rules are easy enough to read and understand. "Be courteous." It's simple.

Every thread on TUG I've ever read that relates to serious - SERIOUS - issues affecting an individual resort or a small subset of owners eventually devolves into harsh words and calls for moderation. It's basic human nature that's bound to come out but it doesn't need to be the reason that this thread ends up closed. We're all supposed to be adults here, and if any of us can learn anything when these situations/threads arise it's that letting people air out their worries, fears and expertise can help. I was taught by one of the best moderators on this board exactly this lesson while I was a not-always-nice participant in one of the worst Marriott timeshare debacles that's ever been aired out here, and I'm following his example now. Take a breath, clear your head, and if you want this forum to remain a useful platform for learning what needs to be learned by all involved, rein in your baser natures. I think this thread is important; please don't force its closure.

 

[travelhacker]

Just a note that the offenders don’t appear to own at Grand Residence. This has severe implications for us as owners, so please keep this on topic.

 

[WBP]

Just a note that the offenders don’t appear to own at Grand Residence. This has severe implications for us as owners, so please keep this on topic.

“Severe Implications” is spot on. I’m glad that someone appreciates the high stakes nature of this dilemma.

 

[TUGBrian]

perhaps my microphone isnt turned up and folks cant hear me.

 

[igopogo]

I'm putting myself on a T-9 minute hold as I try to delve into the financials. One thing I have noticed is that while there is mention of selected line-item budget deficits and surpluses in the BOD minutes, I can't find a summary of actual annual expenses by line item anywhere. Does this exist?

A few of interesting things I noticed on this year's budget:
- Activities is budgeted down 85% (maybe this goes to brand standards)
- Landscaping / Grounds is budgeted down by about 2/3
- Park Ave Development is budgeted up by about 50%
- Gas is budgeted down.
All of these comparisons are to last year's budget, since there are no actuals I can find. If would be nice to have some discussion about these significant changes.

I wonder how much we would save if the fire pit, which rarely has a soul nearby, were turned off.

 

[WBP]

I'm putting myself on a T-9 minute hold as I try to delve into the financials. One thing I have noticed is that while there is mention of selected line-item budget deficits and surpluses in the BOD minutes, I can't find a summary of actual annual expenses by line item anywhere. Does this exist?

A few of interesting things I noticed on this year's budget:
- Activities is budgeted down 85% (maybe this goes to brand standards)
- Landscaping / Grounds is budgeted down by about 2/3
- Park Ave Development is budgeted up by about 50%
- Gas is budgeted down.
All of these comparisons are to last year's budget, since there are no actuals I can find. If would be nice to have some discussion about these significant changes.

I wonder how much we would save if the fire pit, which rarely has a soul nearby, were turned off.

I am surprised that the HOA President’s Report does not provide a narrative explanation of some of the variances that you describe, above. GRC-Lake Tahoe, could be a case of a lot of people becoming too comfortable; the HOA Board, Management Company, and the Unit Owners (who, to some unknown extent, may not have been engaged and monitoring the activities of the HOA Board and Management Company). In my opinion, gone are the days of accepting “trust me” as justification for HOA Board and/or Management Company behaviors.

There should be lessons learned in all of this for all MVC/RCC fractional owners and timeshare owners, that can be “generalized” to all MVC products. As has been said, before, I am highly suspect of MVC’s senior leadership, who I am certain, do not subscribe to the “Marriott Values (of Marriott International)” that MVC represents in the sales and marketing process. To be blunt, I believe that those senior most MVC Leaders are deceptive. Do I believe that if those MVC Leaders are on a tight leash, by the HOA Boards, that they can do a good job, yes (in part, a result of the Owner Benefits that MVC brings to the table), but, I believe those senior most MVC Leaders must be watched like hawks, with Outside Auditors looking after the best interests of HOA Unit Owners, on behalf of the HOA.

 

[dioxide45]

I'm putting myself on a T-9 minute hold as I try to delve into the financials. One thing I have noticed is that while there is mention of selected line-item budget deficits and surpluses in the BOD minutes, I can't find a summary of actual annual expenses by line item anywhere. Does this exist?

A few of interesting things I noticed on this year's budget:
- Activities is budgeted down 85% (maybe this goes to brand standards)
- Landscaping / Grounds is budgeted down by about 2/3
- Park Ave Development is budgeted up by about 50%
- Gas is budgeted down.
All of these comparisons are to last year's budget, since there are no actuals I can find. If would be nice to have some discussion about these significant changes.

I wonder how much we would save if the fire pit, which rarely has a soul nearby, were turned off.

Gas would be down simply because fuel prices are down. THe other items , landscaping and activities, are probably ares that were easy to cut in order to offset increases in other areas.