If You Want To Say More Than "I object" Consider The Following:
You may be looking for help with the Post Card you recently received from the RCI "Weeks" Class Action Administrator.
If you are considering an objection to the settlement recommend that you first take a look at the informational instructions provided at:
http://rciclassactionlawsuit.com/
You can simply say something like the following:
"I object to the settlement in
In re Resort Condominiums International, LLC Civil Action No. 06-cv-1222 (PGS.)"
THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT YOU GIVE RESONS FOR YOUR OBJECTION.
But, once you have been to the above mentioned site you may decide that you want to say more than the one sentence above.
The following ideas are obviously not unique because we have been talking about these issues for some time.
You can use one or two or all of the provided suggested objections within the body of your objection letter.
You may choose to use some of the wording and write your own version.
What you say and how you say it is up to you.
The suggestions:
1) I object to the rental of any week deposited by a RCI member into the RCI Weeks Exchange Program. If, however, a Settlement is reached that allows for rental of weeks deposited by RCI Weeks members into the Exchange Program, I object to the proposed Section II C (Priority for Weeks Exchanges) exclusivity provision which provides a flat "31 days from the date of deposit” for weeks deposited more than 12 months in advance.
If an exclusivity provision is made part of the settlement, the time frame for exclusivity should run from the date the week is made available for exchange to other RCI members and should be a rolling exclusivity period that provides exclusivity as follows:
• 120 days for deposits 11 or more months in advance of the check-in date,
• 90 days for deposits between 6 to 10 months in advance of the check-in date,
• 31 days for deposits between 3-6 months in advance of the check-in date.
2) I object to the fact that the settlement does not clarify that "Vacation Time" will be made simultaneously available for Exchange when it is used for rental or "for any other purpose." The settlement, if it allows rentals, should state that RCI will make
ALL “Vacation Time” available for
both Exchange and Rental or another purpose, including rental, whether through RCI or through any other exchange program, partner, affiliate or other entity.
3) I object to the proposed “Balancing of RCI Deposits and Rented Inventory,” which allows RCI to “swap out” weeks deposited for exchange by substituting inventory acquired directly from the resorts, or from another source. If such a provision is included in a settlement the provision should clearly state that “Vacation Time” that is deposited by members and is rented or otherwise disposed of by RCI in any manner other than direct exchange by another member”; shall be replaced with inventory that is comparable as to size, season, location, demand, and RCI rating.
4) I object because the settlement does not address the control of misinformation. There should be an RCI employee or department for complaints about misinformation and that employee or department should be empowered to train and monitor RCI employees to ensure that they are not providing misinformation to members, more than is reasonable and occasional human error. RCI should agree to make all reasonable efforts to ensure that misinformation is corrected.
5) I object because the proposed settlement does not prevent RCI from renting member’s deposited weeks for less than the annual maintenance fee that the member is required to pay to the member’s resort. Units deposited by RCI Weeks members into the Weeks Spacebank for exchange should not be offered for rent through RCI or other exchange program, partner, affiliate or other entity for less than the annual maintenance fees, unless said Week is still available within 90 days of the start date. At the 90 day mark RCI (or its affiliate or partner) could then be free to offer said week for whatever it believes the market will bear. If a restriction is put in place, I would have no problem with the restriction excluding Weeks offered as “bonus” vacation time, as these are not "rental” weeks.
6) I object to the short period that the settlement program changes are to stay in place. Program changes should be made permanent or they should be required to remain in place for ten years from the date a settlement is approved by the court. By the time a settlement is reached the alleged improper actions by RCI will have been in place for almost ten years. Any settlement program should remain in force for at least ten years.
7) I object to the proposed short period for disclosure of Weeks Program Activity. As the disclosure period is the mechanism under which members can be assured that RCI is complying with the requirements of the proposed Agreement it should be in place for at least ten years. “Vacation Time” deposited less than ninety (90) days in advance should not be excluded from this disclosure, but should be reported separately. Alternately, the 90 days could be changed to 30 days, if this change is consistent throughout the agreement.
It gives me a headache or worse. It’s not worth energies (or keystrokes) to argue with him.