What happens to a Marriott week when we die?

[LeslieDet]

So after I pass, would I be able to just give my kids my login info and they could continue to use my timeshare in my name, but paying MFs and using guest certificates so they get the benefit without actually having to be on the hook by being on title? Would there be any downside to that?

Of course that isn't how it works. First of all, if you own them directly and not in a revocable living trust, then your executor is charged with probating your estate. When you are dead, your ownership becomes part of your estate. The estate needs to be processed so that all assets are accounted for and then distributed or sold. You can't take it with you, and you can't continue to hold ownership when you are dead. Moreover, it ends up being a form of fraud if your kids impersonate you to use your ownership. When you die, until it is probated and distributed to any heirs who may want the ownership, the timeshare cannot be used.

Now, if you put ownership in a revocable living trust, then when you die or become incapable of managing your affairs, your successor trustee steps up and manages the ownership. In that scenario, then yep, your kids just could keep using the timeshare owned by the trust (of course, if the trust requires that all assets be immediately distributed, then that is what the successor is obligated to do).

 

[easyrider]

So after I pass, would I be able to just give my kids my login info and they could continue to use my timeshare in my name, but paying MFs and using guest certificates so they get the benefit without actually having to be on the hook by being on title? Would there be any downside to that?

It might be considered fraud is the only downside.

Bill

 

[Huskerpaul]

Oh. Thanks. Thats same as my disney vacation club.

Dee

DVC is deed based. The deeds lasts 50 years starting when they first starting selling that resort. We own Boardwalk which expires in 2042.

 

[Dean]

DVC is deed based. The deeds lasts 50 years starting when they first starting selling that resort. We own Boardwalk which expires in 2042.

It's still right to use even though it's deeded. Many Real Estate RTU options are deeded.

 

[dioxide45]

It's still right to use even though it's deeded. Many Real Estate RTU options are deeded.

But by this definition, wouldn't that just make all timeshares RTU? Outside of the fixed expiration, DVC deeds are no different than Marriott deeds. DVC still deeds you a fractional percentage of a specific unit at a specific resort. That fraction is based on the number of points they sell you divided by the total number of points allocated to that unit. The points on a DVC deed are just indicated as being for administrative purposes. You aren't really buying points with DVC. The points aren't a trust like Marriott Trust Points. So one could say that Marriott Trust Points are more RTU than DVC ownership.

 

[TolmiePeak]

Do all of your heirs a favor and try to dump your timeshares before you pass.

 

[Terry D]

If you own as JTWROS there is nothing to "inherit" and thus nothing to "disclaim" as each JT is already an owner.

Thanks for your comments. What are some options I could use in estate planning so my wife could choose to accept some timeshares (Marriott, HGVC) and not others (small independent resorts that would be difficult to sell). I am trying to change my portfolio to have all of it easy to sell, but are there any other alternatives, such as a Trust?

 

[LeslieDet]

Thanks for your comments. What are some options I could use in estate planning so my wife could choose to accept some timeshares (Marriott, HGVC) and not others (small independent resorts that would be difficult to sell). I am trying to change my portfolio to have all of it easy to sell, but are there any other alternatives, such as a Trust?

A revocable living trust gives the most flexibility to the successor trustee to dispose of the properties that are not wanted. Another option is for you to dispose of the property while you are alive and competent to do so. If you and your wife own all timeshares as JTWROS then upon the death of one JT, the other owns the entirety. At that time, that person could sell or otherwise dispose of the property so long as he/she is competent. The goal is to avoid probate, because that takes time and can be costly. A trust avoids probate.

 

[LeslieDet]

It's still right to use even though it's deeded. Many Real Estate RTU options are deeded.

It seems you are confusing the different types of ownership. A RTU is not deeded. It is a license to use. That license expires, thus it is only a right to use for a fixed amount of time. What you perhaps are thinking about is the scenario when there is a long term lease. Someone actually owns the underlying real property -- ie the dirt -- and then another enters into a long term lease, say for 50 years, and under the terms of that lease, is able to build the improvements on that dirt. The owner of the dirt is still the owner of the dirt, and the long term lease is junior to that ownership. The terms of the long term lease will require the leasee to build the improvements and cover the expenses for the term of the lease, and also pay rent to the owner of the dirt, and then at the end of the lease, everything returns to the owner of the dirt, improvements and all. Some leases may have provisions that require the leasee (ie tenant) to remove certain improvements, it just depends. In that type of scenario, the lease is recorded as against the property, but it doesn't convey deeded ownership of the dirt. It really is a license to use the land for that time frame. No true deeds can be recorded conveying an ownership in the land; but licenses conveying a right to use something built on that land can be conveyed; but they will have an expiration date. Thus the term RTU. It seems you are interchanging the term "deed" with "license" as license it refers to a right to occupy certain real estate for a finite amount of time and deed refers to ultimate ownership of the real property.

 

[bazzap]

It seems you are confusing the different types of ownership. A RTU is not deeded. It is a license to use. That license expires, thus it is only a right to use for a fixed amount of time. What you perhaps are thinking about is the scenario when there is a long term lease. Someone actually owns the underlying real property -- ie the dirt -- and then another enters into a long term lease, say for 50 years, and under the terms of that lease, is able to build the improvements on that dirt. The owner of the dirt is still the owner of the dirt, and the long term lease is junior to that ownership. The terms of the long term lease will require the leasee to build the improvements and cover the expenses for the term of the lease, and also pay rent to the owner of the dirt, and then at the end of the lease, everything returns to the owner of the dirt, improvements and all. Some leases may have provisions that require the leasee (ie tenant) to remove certain improvements, it just depends. In that type of scenario, the lease is recorded as against the property, but it doesn't convey deeded ownership of the dirt. It really is a license to use the land for that time frame. No true deeds can be recorded conveying an ownership in the land; but licenses conveying a right to use something built on that land can be conveyed; but they will have an expiration date. Thus the term RTU. It seems you are interchanging the term "deed" with "license" as license it refers to a right to occupy certain real estate for a finite amount of time and deed refers to ultimate ownership of the real property.

Leslie, for the vast majority of Owners who do not have legal knowledge and experience (including me) it can be difficult to properly understand why the RTU resorts have HOPAs with multiple references to deeds when they are not actually deeded?
For example, with Marbella Beach Resort
“The covenants under Clauses 2.1 and 2.2 shall continue until the date of expiry of the last Use Period in the Use Year 2076 PROVIDED that Trustee may by deed and with the written consent of Seller and/or Management declare that the said covenants shall come to an end on an earlier date (not being a date before the execution of such deed) if by reason of a change in the laws of any part of the world or otherwise, Trustee and Seller and/or Management deem it necessary or in the interests of the Holiday Owners to do so.”
It might be helpful to clarify what these deed references mean when the resort ownership is not actually deeded.
Can this be simply explained?

 

[LeslieDet]

Leslie, for the vast majority of Owners who do not have legal knowledge and experience (including me) it can be difficult to properly understand why the RTU resorts have HOPAs with multiple references to deeds when they are not actually deeded?
For example, with Marbella Beach Resort
“The covenants under Clauses 2.1 and 2.2 shall continue until the date of expiry of the last Use Period in the Use Year 2076 PROVIDED that Trustee may by deed and with the written consent of Seller and/or Management declare that the said covenants shall come to an end on an earlier date (not being a date before the execution of such deed) if by reason of a change in the laws of any part of the world or otherwise, Trustee and Seller and/or Management deem it necessary or in the interests of the Holiday Owners to do so.”
It might be helpful to clarify what these deed references mean when the resort ownership is not actually deeded.
Can this be simply explained?

The easiest explanation is that the laws of real property ownership and resort development in Spain are different than in the USA. The references I am making to the difference between a RTU and a deed is based upon the real property law in the USA (I believe the underlying comment related to Disney timeshares).

As to Spain, I can only assume that the timeshare property was developed in some sort of trust structure, with the ownership reverting to some other entity at the expiration of the last "Use Period." It reminds me of how ownership of a home I had in Mexico was structured. The developer of that community actually purchased a 99 year lease form the Mexican government and then during that time was able to build homes and sell the homes, with each one having a "deed", but in the details, the deeds said that the ownership expired (in mine I think it was 2085) and at that time, then everything within the community reverted to the Mexican government, unless there was an agreement reached to extend it.

If you look at the HOPA for MMBR, you will find this wording:
"The Plan has been established as a pre-existing regime and has been adapted to the Spanish Timeshare Law pursuant to the terms of the adaptation deed, the extended registration being registered at the Marbella Land Registry Number 1, under Volume 1,265, Folio 202, Sheet 223, Property number 9,784, registration 6th for the purposes of public record in accordance with the Second Additional Disposition (“Disposición Transitoria Segunda”) of the Spanish Timeshare Law. The Plan will terminate at midnight, local Marbella time on the last day of the last Week in the Use Year 2076. Seller is able to grant the contractual rights comprised in the Agreement to Purchaser pursuant to a series of leases for the term of the Plan entered into with Developer. Management assumes responsibility for all aspects of the administration of the Plan for the benefit of the Purchaser pursuant to the terms of the Assignment Agreement."

 

[bazzap]

The easiest explanation is that the laws of real property ownership and resort development in Spain are different than in the USA. The references I am making to the difference between a RTU and a deed is based upon the real property law in the USA (I believe the underlying comment related to Disney timeshares).

As to Spain, I can only assume that the timeshare property was developed in some sort of trust structure, with the ownership reverting to some other entity at the expiration of the last "Use Period." It reminds me of how ownership of a home I had in Mexico was structured. The developer of that community actually purchased a 99 year lease form the Mexican government and then during that time was able to build homes and sell the homes, with each one having a "deed", but in the details, the deeds said that the ownership expired (in mine I think it was 2085) and at that time, then everything within the community reverted to the Mexican government, unless there was an agreement reached to extend it.

If you look at the HOPA for MMBR, you will find this wording:
"The Plan has been established as a pre-existing regime and has been adapted to the Spanish Timeshare Law pursuant to the terms of the adaptation deed, the extended registration being registered at the Marbella Land Registry Number 1, under Volume 1,265, Folio 202, Sheet 223, Property number 9,784, registration 6th for the purposes of public record in accordance with the Second Additional Disposition (“Disposición Transitoria Segunda”) of the Spanish Timeshare Law. The Plan will terminate at midnight, local Marbella time on the last day of the last Week in the Use Year 2076. Seller is able to grant the contractual rights comprised in the Agreement to Purchaser pursuant to a series of leases for the term of the Plan entered into with Developer. Management assumes responsibility for all aspects of the administration of the Plan for the benefit of the Purchaser pursuant to the terms of the Assignment Agreement."

Thanks Leslie
I emailed Owner Services many years ago now, after checking the HOPA, to confirm what happens at the end of the RTU period.
Their response was
at the end of term either
the property goes to the land owner and after discharging any liabilities and management charges, the net proceeds of sale are distributed to existing holiday owners in good standing
or
the plan is renewed along with the RTU ownership for existing holiday owners in good standing
Hopefully that is correct.

 

[Dean]

But by this definition, wouldn't that just make all timeshares RTU? Outside of the fixed expiration, DVC deeds are no different than Marriott deeds. DVC still deeds you a fractional percentage of a specific unit at a specific resort. That fraction is based on the number of points they sell you divided by the total number of points allocated to that unit. The points on a DVC deed are just indicated as being for administrative purposes. You aren't really buying points with DVC. The points aren't a trust like Marriott Trust Points. So one could say that Marriott Trust Points are more RTU than DVC ownership.

No, it has a defined starting and end point.

It seems you are confusing the different types of ownership. A RTU is not deeded. It is a license to use. That license expires, thus it is only a right to use for a fixed amount of time. What you perhaps are thinking about is the scenario when there is a long term lease. Someone actually owns the underlying real property -- ie the dirt -- and then another enters into a long term lease, say for 50 years, and under the terms of that lease, is able to build the improvements on that dirt. The owner of the dirt is still the owner of the dirt, and the long term lease is junior to that ownership. The terms of the long term lease will require the leasee to build the improvements and cover the expenses for the term of the lease, and also pay rent to the owner of the dirt, and then at the end of the lease, everything returns to the owner of the dirt, improvements and all. Some leases may have provisions that require the leasee (ie tenant) to remove certain improvements, it just depends. In that type of scenario, the lease is recorded as against the property, but it doesn't convey deeded ownership of the dirt. It really is a license to use the land for that time frame. No true deeds can be recorded conveying an ownership in the land; but licenses conveying a right to use something built on that land can be conveyed; but they will have an expiration date. Thus the term RTU. It seems you are interchanging the term "deed" with "license" as license it refers to a right to occupy certain real estate for a finite amount of time and deed refers to ultimate ownership of the real property.

No confusion. Technically it's closest to a leasehold property. I think most reasonable people in the timeshare world use the term RTU to signify that it has an ending date and that was the context in which I used the term. If we want to nuance the issue, technically right to use properties vary a lot as well.

 

[dioxide45]

No, it has a defined starting and end point.

But I believe by the true definition an RTU has no deed and is simply use based on contract terms.

I have Club Wyndham Access points, there is no deed. I just assumed a contract from the prior owner for a set number of points. There is no defined end date but it is probably still considered right to use.

 

[dioxide45]

It seems you are confusing the different types of ownership. A RTU is not deeded. It is a license to use. That license expires, thus it is only a right to use for a fixed amount of time. What you perhaps are thinking about is the scenario when there is a long term lease. Someone actually owns the underlying real property -- ie the dirt -- and then another enters into a long term lease, say for 50 years, and under the terms of that lease, is able to build the improvements on that dirt. The owner of the dirt is still the owner of the dirt, and the long term lease is junior to that ownership. The terms of the long term lease will require the leasee to build the improvements and cover the expenses for the term of the lease, and also pay rent to the owner of the dirt, and then at the end of the lease, everything returns to the owner of the dirt, improvements and all. Some leases may have provisions that require the leasee (ie tenant) to remove certain improvements, it just depends. In that type of scenario, the lease is recorded as against the property, but it doesn't convey deeded ownership of the dirt. It really is a license to use the land for that time frame. No true deeds can be recorded conveying an ownership in the land; but licenses conveying a right to use something built on that land can be conveyed; but they will have an expiration date. Thus the term RTU. It seems you are interchanging the term "deed" with "license" as license it refers to a right to occupy certain real estate for a finite amount of time and deed refers to ultimate ownership of the real property.

With DVC the lease is actually between Walt Disney Parks & Resorts US Inc and Disney Vacation Development Inc. There is no lease between the individual owners and DVC. DVC members are getting fractional shares of an individual unit at individual resorts (in the improvements). I don't think DVC owners own any of the common area like one might see with other deed based timeshare systems.

 

[Ctravaglia]

What if we name Marriott as heir of the deed/ points? Why would they refuse it?

 

[dioxide45]

What if we name Marriott as heir of the deed/ points? Why would they refuse it?

Past reports seem to indicate that Marriott prefers to take deeds from living persons. Someone reported they were handling an estate and Marriott told them it would need to be transferred to a living person who could then deed it back to Marriott. I am not sure of the rationale behind this, but that was what they reported.

 

[LeslieDet]

What if we name Marriott as heir of the deed/ points? Why would they refuse it?

No, you cannot name MVW as the recipient of a bequest in a will. They will not participate in individual probates.

 

[stanho2]

Good question

 

[brp]

It's still right to use even though it's deeded. Many Real Estate RTU options are deeded.

But, as DVC is a leasehold, and not a true RTU, there is real property ownership that has to be dealt with upon the passing of the Joint Owners, as opposed to a true RTU, where this is not the case. Again, this is just my lay understanding based on what I've read.

In a separate question, if we have deeded timeshares in perpetuity (HGVC) and we have no kids/heirs and no one will want them, does it make sense to exclude them from our Trust so that the Trustee doesn't have to deal with them? Theoretically, HGVC could go after assets in probate, but I don't know how realistically likely that is. I did ask this in the HGVC forum, but I understand that there are some folks on this thread who actually know something about this

(And, yes, we are going to talk with our Trust attorney before doing anything, so this is just for input from knowledgeable sources).

Cheers.

 

[LeslieDet]

But, as DVC is a leasehold, and not a true RTU, there is real property ownership that has to be dealt with upon the passing of the Joint Owners, as opposed to a true RTU, where this is not the case. Again, this is just my lay understanding based on what I've read.

In a separate question, if we have deeded timeshares in perpetuity (HGVC) and we have no kids/heirs and no one will want them, does it make sense to exclude them from our Trust so that the Trustee doesn't have to deal with them? Theoretically, HGVC could go after assets in probate, but I don't know how realistically likely that is. I did ask this in the HGVC forum, but I understand that there are some folks on this thread who actually know something about this

(And, yes, we are going to talk with our Trust attorney before doing anything, so this is just for input from knowledgeable sources).

Cheers.

No, excluding real property from your trust only creates additional cost and expense for your executor to complete probate in each jurisdiction where you own real property. Whereas, when the real property is owned by your trust, then the successor trustee can act without court intervention. There is no probate required for the successor trustee to transfer ownership to another, including the developer.

 

[TPNOVO]

No, excluding real property from your trust only creates additional cost and expense for your executor to complete probate in each jurisdiction where you own real property. Whereas, when the real property is owned by your trust, then the successor trustee can act without court intervention. There is no probate required for the successor trustee to transfer ownership to another, including the developer.

I’ve been reading posts on this topic, thank you all so much for all the helpful advice and explanations! I just wanted to clarify, no matter if the timeshare has zero or very little value, anything deeded that isn’t put in the family revocable living trust, MUST go through probate after death of the second spouse, when the TS is owned by husband/wife personally JTWROS? Would the *entire estate* have to go through probate in this case, if all the other assets were held in the family trust, or only the TS interest would be held up in probate, but Successor Trustees could distribute all the rest without court involvement? In other words, could the TS hijack the whole point of putting everything else (that actually has value) into the trust?

Any chance that a Beneficiary Deed to (in my case, Hilton, although I don’t know if HGVC or HVC is correct) would get around all this uncertainty? In AZ at least, that seems like a great tool to pass real estate title easily without probate, and is signed by owner and notarized before death. We just went this route recently to pass my parents’ house to my niece, recorded the Beneficiary Deed, then I recorded their death certificates, and voila, niece is new legal owner with no probate or court hassles in 5 weeks flat.

I’d love to just deed back the TS today, but their Transitions program is “on hold”, for who knows how much longer. We don’t want it, family doesn’t want it, and we don’t want it to be a headache or burden for anyone once we’re gone. Trying to think outside the box. Thank you!

 

[LeslieDet]

I’ve been reading posts on this topic, thank you all so much for all the helpful advice and explanations! I just wanted to clarify, no matter if the timeshare has zero or very little value, anything deeded that isn’t put in the family revocable living trust, MUST go through probate after death of the second spouse, when the TS is owned by husband/wife personally JTWROS? Would the *entire estate* have to go through probate in this case, if all the other assets were held in the family trust, or only the TS interest would be held up in probate, but Successor Trustees could distribute all the rest without court involvement? In other words, could the TS hijack the whole point of putting everything else (that actually has value) into the trust?

Any chance that a Beneficiary Deed to (in my case, Hilton, although I don’t know if HGVC or HVC is correct) would get around all this uncertainty? In AZ at least, that seems like a great tool to pass real estate title easily without probate, and is signed by owner and notarized before death. We just went this route recently to pass my parents’ house to my niece, recorded the Beneficiary Deed, then I recorded their death certificates, and voila, niece is new legal owner with no probate or court hassles in 5 weeks flat.

I’d love to just deed back the TS today, but their Transitions program is “on hold”, for who knows how much longer. We don’t want it, family doesn’t want it, and we don’t want it to be a headache or burden for anyone once we’re gone. Trying to think outside the box. Thank you!

I'm not sure I understand your question relating to the TS hijacking the trust. If a H&W own as JTWROS and one spouse dies, then as a matter of law, the remaining spouse owns 100% of the real estate. At that point in time, the surviving spouse could transfer the deeded ownership to a revocable living trust and avoid probate at the time of their death. But if title remains vested in the surviving spouse, then the executor of that person's estate has no option but to probate it in the ancillary location to deal with the TS. It would not mean that everything the surviving spouse owns in the previously created (and valid) trust would then be required to be probated; that would only happen if the trust failed. There is typically a "failsafe" written into trust that says if the trust is in anyway invalid and fails then decedent's will controls the disposition of assets.

As to the Transfer on Death deeds, they do indeed work; however, the catch is that last time I checked only 14 states had legalized a TOD deed. So, if the jurisdiction where you own a TS doesn't allow a TOD deed, you can't use it.

 

[TPNOVO]

I'm not sure I understand your question relating to the TS hijacking the trust. If a H&W own as JTWROS and one spouse dies, then as a matter of law, the remaining spouse owns 100% of the real estate. At that point in time, the surviving spouse could transfer the deeded ownership to a revocable living trust and avoid probate at the time of their death. But if title remains vested in the surviving spouse, then the executor of that person's estate has no option but to probate it in the ancillary location to deal with the TS. It would not mean that everything the surviving spouse owns in the previously created (and valid) trust would then be required to be probated; that would only happen if the trust failed. There is typically a "failsafe" written into trust that says if the trust is in anyway invalid and fails then decedent's will controls the disposition of assets.

As to the Transfer on Death deeds, they do indeed work; however, the catch is that last time I checked only 14 states had legalized a TOD deed. So, if the jurisdiction where you own a TS doesn't allow a TOD deed, you can't use it.

You answered exactly what I was wondering, thank you! The trust would avoid probate for everything except the TS, if the TS was never put into the trust. My hope is that the TS would have been disposed of before that point, but just in case it’s not, everything else in place through the trust would still work the way we intended.

I do know AZ allows Beneficiary Deeds, and it’s an AZ timeshare and I’m an AZ resident, so I think that may be our best bet if Transitions doesn’t resume soon. Thank you so much!

 

[Dean]

No, excluding real property from your trust only creates additional cost and expense for your executor to complete probate in each jurisdiction where you own real property. Whereas, when the real property is owned by your trust, then the successor trustee can act without court intervention. There is no probate required for the successor trustee to transfer ownership to another, including the developer.

I as told by a SC Lawyer that SC does allow transfer on death deeds so I am considering this for our HHI weeks. The question I don't know is how will this work with ROFR. In our case it wouldn't be an issue as this would be to my children anyway.