UPDATE: RCI CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT - must read for all RCI members [Includes Results]

[DeniseM]

Jennie - Thank you to you too! Didn't mean to leave you out!

 

[Jennie]

Jennie - Thank you to you too! Didn't mean to leave you out!

I want all TUGgers to know that DeniseM has provided an enormous amount of support and encouragement "behind the scenes" and has helped "the cause" in countless ways.

Goofyhobbie has been a tireless crusader as well!

 

[GadgetRick]

I want all TUGgers to know that DeniseM has provided an enormous amount of support and encouragement "behind the scenes" and has helped "the cause" in countless ways.

Goofyhobbie has been a tireless crusader as well!

x2!!! They're the best!

 

[RustyS]

Susan and Jennie,

Thanks for all your hard work. I truly hope the proposed settlement gets rejected.

Hear hear. And Denise. And Brian. And TSToday... The point is thanks to all who beat the drum, got the word out, fostered communication, and helped overcome RCI's desire to let this issue go quietly into the good night.

 

[rickandcindy23]

Thanks to Jennie and Susan, and I hope the objectors get some satisfaction. I am one of those who sent my letter a few days before the deadline. I actually encouraged my fellow board members at my resorts to also object, and I believe at least four or five of them did. There was not enough time to notify all of the owners at the two resorts, and it would have taken a special mailing to accomplish it, which is a shame.

I hope to see better trading power within 45 days for my blue weeks, which are difficult to even give away. I cannot travel within two weeks, which is when the good inventory seems to appear.

My goal as a board member at two resorts is to make sure all members know there are alternative exchange companies that are free to join, have lower fees, and will provide better exchanges and benefits than RCI will give. As Susan's post points out, many resorts believe the strong language in their affiliation agreements, and therefore force owners to use RCI only. It's nonsense, as we know, but I have experienced this myself at my own resort, so I know it happens. Perhaps RCI should have to enlighten all management companies and developers that depositing with other companies is always an option.

 

[motomem]

So, 400 to 500 objections so far from a membership of what - 2 million?? Kind of just scratches the surface, it seems. But, this might be a decent showing for a class action suit, I'm not sure.

Of the class, would be be helpful to find out how many are active in RCI? RCI might have 2 million members but if only 45% of them are active the objection showing would have much more meaning.

Many memberships come from vacation clubs that "provide" membership in RCI. Many of these owners may never use RCI to exchange. Just a thought.

 

[EYLive]

Hi, I'm new to these forums.
My family owns a timeshare via RCI. We're pretty pissed off by their service and have been trying to end our contract.
"Brokers" have been hounding us about letting them take over the contract but they want us to send them ~$2,000.
I came upon this thread, and while I haven't read through all 37 pages, it looks like you guys are finally doing something about this scam.
Is it too late to take part in the class action suit? What do I need to know to be a part of this?

Thanks,
-EY

 

[DeniseM]

Hi EYLive - the deadline to send in an objection to the current proposal was Nov. 20th, but things are just getting interesting. Stay tuned for more info. coming soon!

BTW - Don't pay an upfront fee to sell your TS - that is a common scam!

 

[EYLive]

Thanks. We'll sit tight.

 

[Jennie]

Hi, I'm new to these forums.

Is it too late to take part in the class action suit? What do I need to know to be a part of this? Thanks

The deadline for filing an objection, or a claim for one of the "trinkets" has passed. But you are automatically a member of the class action lawsuit, since you have not "excluded" yourself (a/k/a "opted out"). So if any beneficial changes occur as a result of the settlement, you will automatically receive them.

 

[jerseygirl]

Jennie / Susan --

How can I follow the court docket for delays, etc? I'm thinking very seriously of coming to the hearing ... but would hate to make that long drive if there's a chance it will be postponed.

-- Jerseygirl (no longer in Jersey so it's not an insignificant drive!)

 

[BigElm]

Now we wait.....

In the meantime, Happy Thanksgiving!!! :whoopie:

 

[Jennie]

Jennie / Susan --

How can I follow the court docket for delays, etc? I'm thinking very seriously of coming to the hearing ... but would hate to make that long drive if there's a chance it will be postponed.

-- Jerseygirl (no longer in Jersey so it's not an insignificant drive!)

The "Fairness Hearing" is definitely scheduled to take place on Monday, November 30th at 2:30 p.m. at the Federal Courthouse, 402 E. State Street, Trenton, N.J at 2:30 p.m. with Judge Peter G. Sheridan presiding.

It would take a major event to cause a cancellation. The Court Clerk's Office can be reached at 609-989-2065 to double check.

It looks like a "knock-down drag out fight" is brewing based upon the slew of last minute papers that have been filed by the Plaintiffs' and Defendant's attorneys trying, among other things, to discredit the objections filed by RCI Weeks members. I will post excerpts soon of some of the most egregious claims being made.

 

[Jennie]

Here's one excerpt from a notice filed with the Court on 11/24/09 by one of the Plaintiffs' attorneys, David C. Berman:

"Annexed hereto is a summary of all requests for opt-outs that have been received in this matter. This list includes all requests received to dat and not merely requests since the supplemental notice was served. Because the deadline to mail requests for exclusion was Friday, November 20, 2009, we expect to receive a few more and update this summary on or before the Fairness Hearing on November 30, 2009.

Significantly a review of the requests for exclusions received by this law firm discloses that as of November 19, 2009 at least 70 individuals opted out as he or she were completely satisfied with the Weeks Program Experience.
(The bold and underlining were added by me.)

HUH? Does this make any sense?

It is significant to note the following instructions for opting out as listed on the official web site: www.weeksprogramsettlement.com

"How do I exclude myself from the settlement?

To exclude yourself from the settlement, you must send a letter by mail saying that you want to be excluded from In re: Resort Condominiums International, LLC, Civil Action No. 06-1222 (PGS). Be sure to include your program identification number, your name, address and telephone number. You must mail your exclusion request postmarked no later than November 20, 2009 to:

David C. Berman
A Professional Corporation
P.O. Box 111
Morristown, NJ 07963-0111"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no mention about providing a reason for choosing to exclude yourself from the lawsuit. I find it incredulous to believe that at least 70 people who opted out took the time and effort to explain that they did so because they were completely satisfied with the Weeks exchange program !!!!!!!!!!!

And especially because further research would have revealed that the main reason a member would probably want to opt out would be to reserve his or her right to bring their own separate lawsuit against RCI.

If any TUG member or guest chose to "opt out" and would care to disclose their reason for doing so, I'd very much like to hear it. I sincerely doubt that it was based upon "complete satisfaction" with the way in which RCI has been running the Weeks exchange program!

 

[tschwa2]

"There is no mention about providing a reason for choosing to exclude yourself from the lawsuit. I find it incredulous to believe that at least 70 people who opted out took the time and effort to explain that they did so because they were completely satisfied with the Weeks exchange program !!!!!!!!!!! "

Maybe the RCI executives had there own Timeshare Family and Friends Campaign to write in and opt out becuase they "love" the current RCI program so much. They have a lot to lose and I am sure there were discussions about ways to counter the negative objections with positive ones.

 

[rickandcindy23]

Jennie, I would venture to guess that those who "opted out" were trying to object to the lawsuit and didn't know there was a difference.

I think Timesharing Today came out in time for subscribers to write letters. I hope so. And I hope those who chose to opt out really meant to make that choice.

 

[crazyhorse]

HUH? Does this make any sense?

The PLAINTIFF`s council filing a notice with the court stating that:


Significantly a review of the requests for exclusions received by this law firm discloses that as of November 19, 2009 at least 70 individuals opted out as he or she were completely satisfied with the Weeks Program Experience.

I don`t understand court procedure or etiquette, but I would have expected such a statement to have come from the RCI`s attorneys, not those acting for the plaintiffs.

No it doesn`t make sense Jennie! Unless of course the plaintiff`s side want the settlement accepted as soon as possible.

 

[Goofyhobbie]

Some Statistics

Because we do not know exactly how many opt out notices, objection letters or claims were properly filed prior to the designated deadlines we will wait to provide statistics sometime after the Fairness Hearing on November 30th. Stay Tuned.


Happy Thanksgiving To All

 

[Jennie]

No it doesn`t make sense Jennie! Unless of course the plaintiff`s side wants the settlement accepted as soon as possible.

That's exactly the situation. The Plaintiffs' attorneys were willing and anxious for the proposed settlement to be approved by the Court at the first "Fairness Hearing" on June 16th. The Judge ruled otherwise. They are just as anxious for this seriously flawed settlement to be approved at the second "Fairness Hearing" on November 30th. With "friends" like this, who needs enemies.

 

[WoodbridgeVA]

That's exactly the situation. The Plaintiffs' attorneys were willing and anxious for the proposed settlement to be approved by the Court at the first "Fairness Hearing" on June 16th. The Judge ruled otherwise. They are just as anxious for this seriously flawed settlement to be approved at the second "Fairness Hearing" on November 30th. With "friends" like this, who needs enemies.

I suspect the "plaintiffs" attorneys are simply in it for the greenmail opportunity. Take a look at what the settlement provides in legal fees for them vs what the actual plaintiffs recieve. Keep in mind they do not get paid until/unless the case is finally settled.

 

[london]

Settlement Will Not Be Finalized For 1 More Year

I have a feeling that the final settlement will be a year or more from now.

Hopefully, RCI will make further concessions in an effort to get the class action suit resolved.

 

[Carolinian]

I think it clearly shows who's side these ''plaintiffs attorneys'' are really on. Let RCI pay them, that is who they are really working for, and they prove it yet again. They really do need ethics complaints filed against them after this is over. Failure to conduct discovery, at a minimum, was gross negligence, or perhaps even collusion.

The PLAINTIFF`s council filing a notice with the court stating that:


Significantly a review of the requests for exclusions received by this law firm discloses that as of November 19, 2009 at least 70 individuals opted out as he or she were completely satisfied with the Weeks Program Experience.

I don`t understand court procedure or etiquette, but I would have expected such a statement to have come from the RCI`s attorneys, not those acting for the plaintiffs.

No it doesn`t make sense Jennie! Unless of course the plaintiff`s side want the settlement accepted as soon as possible.

 

[catcher24]

Posted by Carolinian:
Failure to conduct discovery, at a minimum, was gross negligence, or perhaps even collusion.

I agree with this 100%. In a case of this significance and as many members in the plaintiff's class as there are, this was simply gross dereliction of duty on the part of plaintiffs' attorneys. Perhaps they thought a quick settlement and pay day were in the offing and discovery would simply be wasting time to their ultimate goal$$$$$$.

 

[Jennie]

Here's a bit of "back door" good news. One of my friends faxed me a letter received from one of her home resorts explaining that they are now newly affiliated with Interval International. Enclosed with the letter was an offer entitling her to receive 3 years I.I. membership for the price of one--under $100. total. And it described how the "search first" feature allows the owner to hold onto her week until a desired exchange is found. My friend is a senior, not very "sharp" about timeshare issues. But she said she is going to give it a try instead of renewing her soon to expire RCI membership. She said she particularly likes the fact that she can just use her week herself if she doesn't find something of interest to exchange into.

The resort explained that they took this action because of increasing owner dissatisfaction in obtaining desired RCI exchanges. They encouraged owners to give I.I. a try. This is a smaller resort with "tiger" trading power. The manager has held the position for years, and is trusted and respected by the owners so many are likely to take the advice. Hopefully more resorts will do this if the RCI lawsuit does not result in significant improvements in the way they service their members.

 

[blueparrot]

After reading of some of the seemingly strange antics of the official plaintiffs attorneys, I talked to a friend who is a lawyer. He said the failure to take discovery was a huge red flag that something was seriously amiss. The gag provision preventing the listed plaintiffs from saying anything bad about their attorneys was also something he found very unusual and seemed to indicate that the manner in which those attorneys handled the case made them realize that their clients would have bad things to say about them.

How do we go about filing ethics complaints about these attorneys?