Wyndham is closing a handful of legacy resorts - dedicated chart/tracker located in the first post for this unfolding set of events

[comicbookman]

BB looks like a fairly large resort. If Wyndham is the minority owner there, why are they the management company?

When I looked into it, Bentley Brook (and some of the other resorts on the current "closing" list) were acquired by Cendant (predecessor to Wyndham WorldWide) from Equivest. Maybe it is just coincidence, or maybe Wyndham is "closing" and dispositioning some resorts as a package group.

I think that is just because Equivest's resorts were old even back then.

Edit to add: And most of them were poorly maintained.

 

[HitchHiker71]

Eh, Wyndham, the property management company, hired by Wyndham property owners, absolutely has a fiduciary duty to those owners.

No, it has a contractual duty to the contract owners. Timeshare owners pay annual maintenance fees to cover resort operations, which are managed by property owners’ associations or clubs, not directly by Wyndham as a fiduciary. If any fiduciary responsibilities exist, it is between the HOAs, which are separate entities, and the contract owners under that HOA.

That said, Wyndham timeshare owners are part of a homeowners’ association (HOA) or trust, such as the Fairshare Vacation Owners Association for Club Wyndham Plus members, which manages timeshare points and resort operations. If Wyndham or its subsidiaries act as trustees or managers of the HOAs or trusts, they could potentially owe fiduciary duties to timeshare owners under state law or specific contractual agreements.

However, a federal court ruling in 2022 addressed this issue directly in the case of the Fairshare Vacation Owners Association. The court found that Fairshare did not breach any fiduciary duty to its members, suggesting that no such duty was legally recognized in that context. This ruling implies that, absent specific trust or fiduciary language in the timeshare agreement, Wyndham’s relationship with timeshare owners is primarily contractual, not fiduciary.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TUGBrian]

These are not the same thing. The latter would be true even if the only thing that is happening is that Wyndham is withdrawing as the management company. The current employees would need to look for jobs, but those jobs could possibly be at the resort under a new management company.

I would not think that if all the staff at the resort were all being let go on 1/1 the resort isnt going to be open for business on 1/1...

 

[rapmarks]

Yes but those were in locations with year round warm weather. That's not FF Glade.

I understand the appeal to a certain retiree from the Midwest to move to the Glade, it's a nice community with a lot of quality amenities for residents, particularly if you golf. And the costs are very reasonable. Particularly compared with trying to find something similar further south.

And yes I think there would be a market for some of the condos there. But the older ones have terrible floorpans for an older buyer. Oak Knoll has the primary bedroom on a lower level, guest bedroom on entrance level and living area and kitchen on upper level. Most seniors aren't going to want that for a full time living situation. Pls parking isn't real close to the actual units.

I can't imagine the market value of one of those condos there is worth much, as-is. Maybe a new developer would raze them and build more suitable condos for full time residents.

You call retirees that go to Tennessee or the Carolina’s halfbacks. They move half way back to their northern home.

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

No, it has a contractual duty to the contract owners. Timeshare owners pay annual maintenance fees to cover resort operations, which are managed by property owners’ associations or clubs, not directly by Wyndham as a fiduciary. If any fiduciary responsibilities exist, it is between the HOAs, which are separate entities, and the contract owners under that HOA.

That said, Wyndham timeshare owners are part of a homeowners’ association (HOA) or trust, such as the Fairshare Vacation Owners Association for Club Wyndham Plus members, which manages timeshare points and resort operations. If Wyndham or its subsidiaries act as trustees or managers of the HOAs or trusts, they could potentially owe fiduciary duties to timeshare owners under state law or specific contractual agreements.

However, a federal court ruling in 2022 addressed this issue directly in the case of the Fairshare Vacation Owners Association. The court found that Fairshare did not breach any fiduciary duty to its members, suggesting that no such duty was legally recognized in that context. This ruling implies that, absent specific trust or fiduciary language in the timeshare agreement, Wyndham’s relationship with timeshare owners is primarily contractual, not fiduciary.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is probably a topic for another thread since I don't want to bog this thread down, but I'm assuming you're talking about Nolen v. Fairshare Vacation Owners Association, 591 F. Supp. 3d 1191? That case doesn't appear to stand for the proposition that there was no fiduciary duty, just that the FVOA didn't violate it's fiduciary duties in the narrow circumstances of that case under Arkansas law. If you read the case, the fact that the analysis is replete with references to FVOA's fiduciary duties (and how they were not violated) stands for the opposite proposition. That being that various fiduciary duties did exist. The plaintiffs just failed to establish that those duties were violated. Here are some quotes about those various fiduciary duties from the case:

While the Court agrees with Plaintiffs that the Trust Agreement cannot be read to delegate or otherwise wholly extinguish Defendant-Trustee Fairshare's fiduciary duties, Arkansas law permits a settlor to narrow the scope of the duty of loyalty through the terms of the trusts to allow for the trustee to engage in transactions that might otherwise raise conflicts of interest. See Pulliam, 485 S.W.3d at 715 Here, the terms of the Trust allow Defendant-Trustee Fairshare to transact and work in coordination with WVR, despite the potential conflicts of interest present in these relationships. Nevertheless, if Plaintiffs could demonstrate that the terms of the Trust were violated, that these potential conflicts of interest ripened into improper benefits to Defendant-Trustee Fairshare or its related entities to the detriment of the Beneficiaries, or that Defendant-Trustee Fairshare's supervisory role as trustee was abdicated due to its interactions with WVR, the provision for WVR's role as Plan Manager in the terms of the Trust could not save Defendant-Trustee Fairshare. But Plaintiffs’ proffered evidence fails to make out such showings.

Plaintiffs fail to make a showing that it violates the duties Defendant-Trustee Fairshare owed to Plaintiffs or that it caused them harm.

The Court need not credit Defendant-Trustee Fairshare's assertion that it needs $7 to $8 million in cash to keep its payables current to find that its fiduciary duties did not require it to return funds to the Beneficiaries simply because the Trust had a surplus balance.

(emphasis mine)

Anyway, this is a fascinating conversation but I'll stop the derail. Maybe this deserves a different thread.

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

I would not think that if all the staff at the resort were all being let go on 1/1 the resort isnt going to be open for business on 1/1...

I would hope not, that would cause absolute chaos for people who had reservations with a checkout date of 12/31…

 

[geist1223]

That's just not accurate (at least in most states, I'm certainly not doing a 50 state review here). And further, one of the fiduciary duties of a property management company (again in most states) is the duty to avoid conflicts of interest and to avoid engaging in self-dealing and opportunities for self-gain that would harm the interests of the property owner(s).

I'm not saying Wyndham is doing that here, but they definitely have an obligation not to do that.

But who are the actual Property Owners? If you have Points and not a Deed then you are not an "Owner" in any particular Timeshare Property. You share an interest in a Trust. The Trust has never guaranteed forever access to any particular Property. If you had "Deed" at one point but converted it to Points to have access to more locations - then so long as Wyndumb maintains the essential parameters of your access how have you been harmed?

 

[Floridaman76]

But who are the actual Property Owners? If you have Points and not a Deed then you are not an "Owner" in any particular Timeshare Property. You share an interest in a Trust. The Trust has never guaranteed forever access to any particular Property. If you had "Deed" at one point but converted it to Points to have access to more locations - then so long as Wyndumb maintains the essential parameters of your access how have you been harmed?

Converted weeks owners still have a deed I think.

And UDI owners (like myself) have a deed. In some cases multiple deeds.

CWA owners would not

 

[Floridaman76]

This is probably a topic for another thread since I don't want to bog this thread down, but I'm assuming you're talking about Nolen v. Fairshare Vacation Owners Association, 591 F. Supp. 3d 1191? That case doesn't appear to stand for the proposition that there was no fiduciary duty, just that the FVOA didn't violate it's fiduciary duties in the narrow circumstances of that case under Arkansas law. If you read the case, the fact that the analysis is replete with references to FVOA's fiduciary duties (and how they were not violated) stands for the opposite proposition. That being that various fiduciary duties did exist. The plaintiffs just failed to establish that those duties were violated. Here are some quotes about those various fiduciary duties from the case:

Anyway, this is a fascinating conversation but I'll stop the derail. Maybe this deserves a different thread.

At the very least, I was thinking that this presents a conflict of interest if the property Manager (Wyndham) is also a part, or majority owner.

"Cake and eat it too"

 

[CO skier]

At the very least, I was thinking that this presents a conflict of interest if the property Manager (Wyndham) is also a part, or majority owner.

"Cake and eat it too"

Maybe that is why the Mountain Meadows BOD hired a third party to manage the "reimagining" of the closed resort.

I do not see that Wyndham voting to terminate a timeshare is any different (in general terms) than a large stockholder voting in a corporate election.

 

[hjsweet2002]

We have always been impressed with the units and staff at Bentley Brook. They are currently renovating the main building and have done renovations periodically. BB is a great year round resort; skiing in the winter, fall foliage and summer activities nearby. Close to Albany and Boston. It’s a disservice to owners in New England and New York to close one of the few resorts in the region.

 

[Pennytx]

I have now verified with three senior people at Patriots place that it will be closing on December 31
They are stating that the HOA will be contacting people in the near future
I am still going to the walk, owner uodate etc tomorrow at noon to ask all the relevant ? that people have messaged me plus the recommendations on this thread

 

[CO skier]

I am still going to the walk, owner uodate etc tomorrow at noon to ask all the relevant ? that people have messaged me plus the recommendations on this thread

Sales has nothing to do with these "closures." Please do not think "asking" about these changes or suggesting "recommendations on this thread" will amount to a hill of beans. And, please, do not pass on any (always fake) information the sales department may spew.

But do ask them about the "fewer dots on the map" resulting from these "closures." "Why would I want to buy more points when there will no longer be a resort within x hundred miles from where I live?" The response to that would be the source of much amusement in this thread!

 

[Pennytx]

Sales has nothing to do with these "closures." Please do not think "asking" about these changes or suggesting "recommendations on this thread" will amount to a hill of beans. And, please, do not pass on any (always fake) information the sales department may spew.

But do ask them about the "fewer dots on the map" resulting from these "closures." "Why would I want to buy more points when there will no longer be a resort within x hundred miles from where I live?" The response to that would be the source of much amusement in this thread!

The responce I posted was from management here
I am trying to get information from sales also

 

[CO skier]

I have now verified with three senior people at Patriots place that it will be closing on December 31

The responce I posted was from management here
I am trying to get information from sales also

How can ANY OF THIS be "4imprint certain" without an owner vote?

 

[Pennytx]

How can ANY OF THIS be "4imprint certain" without an owner vote?

Bless your heart

 

[Arimaas]

Converted weeks owners still have a deed I think.

And UDI owners (like myself) have a deed. In some cases multiple deeds.

CWA owners would not

Yes. I have two converted fixed weeks (Fairfield glade and kingsgate) and the underlying deeds to go with it. I posted Fairfield’s 30 pages or so back.

 

[chapjim]

With The Orlando In't Resort of only 63 units ... about 3150 TS units.... and it looking like they are declaring bankruptcy..
What could an owner see in cash if they didn't take the swap deal and keep their shared ownership?
The sales price divided by 3150? Will bankruptcy affect this or even eliminate any payout? And it could be years before paid if at all...

Orlando International declaring bankruptcy is subject to a vote of the owners on August 5. If two-thirds of the voters approve, then the Resort will enter file in bankruptcy court, not because it is insolvent, rather to facilitate the sale.

There has been no mention of a swap with respect to Orlando International. The Mensas here on TUG think there won't be any residuals at all. If there are residuals, they will be divided on a pro rata basis to the interval owners.

 

[chapjim]

<snip>

But the optics of this are awful, and some might say we as owners aren't owed anything, but I disagree, because it looks like somebody is asleep at the wheel right now. Really lacking in vision and long term leadership from management.

Owners are owed something because you think somebody is asleep at the wheel? That makes no sense whatsoever.

[Edited]

 

[chapjim]

I would hope not, that would cause absolute chaos for people who had reservations with a checkout date of 12/31…

Wonder how many flat panel TVs will be missing on 1/1?

 

[gravityrules]

14 is Wyndham's definition of 'a handful'? And the official release said they 'may remove these resorts from Club Wyndham' as if they hadn't decided yet ... why so deliberately misleading?

 

[HitchHiker71]

BB looks like a fairly large resort. If Wyndham is the minority owner there, why are they the management company?

When I looked into it, Bentley Brook (and some of the other resorts on the current "closing" list) were acquired by Cendant (predecessor to Wyndham WorldWide) from Equivest. Maybe it is just coincidence, or maybe Wyndham is "closing" and dispositioning some resorts as a package group.

The BB section of Wyndham, by far, contains the majority of units at the overall resort. The attached graphic only shows one of the two main Wyndham BB buildings, there's another BB building off to the left of this map. We've walked the entire resort area multiple times while there. All of the units further up the hill to the left of the two BB buildings are privately owned homes. The only building that contains any actual units for residential resort stays is the Country Inn in the Jiminy Peak community itself, then there are the Country Village units to the right of this resort map that aren't showing in the graphic below, but again there aren't that many of them collectively, and I'm not sure if they are resort owned, privately owned or used as rentals (or both).

RCI - the largest timeshare vacation exchange network in the world

Web site created using create-react-app

www.rci.com

 

[HitchHiker71]

14 is Wyndham's definition of 'a handful'? And the official release said they 'may remove these resorts from Club Wyndham' as if they hadn't decided yet ... why so deliberately misleading?

It's not deliberately misleading given the HOA votes have not occurred yet, and there are complexities involved in executing what is transpiring - and we are early on in these processes - which is clearly indicated by the fact that a subset of the HOAs we have on our list haven't even been informed yet. They cannot make definitive statements for that which has not occurred yet, nor can they make leading statements indicating intent yet. There are legal processes that must be followed here, regardless of how much everyone wants that not to be the case. If Wyndham could and did actually make statements of intent, but then the HOA votes didn't transpire as expected or there's a legal snafu or, Heaven forbid they change their mind at some point during the process mid-flight, then everyone would accuse Wyndham of being dishonest about their intent. Sometimes the best thing to say is nothing, or as generic as possible, until the time is right. The time is not right folks, just accept it.

 

[jp10558]

Sometimes the best thing to say is nothing, or as generic as possible, until the time is right. The time is not right folks, just accept it.

What I would say is if you have anything booked even in December at any of the 14 suspected resorts - I'd consider cancelling it and trying to book somewhere else. In January there's a good chance it'd be cancelled for you, and by December I would expect everything is in that twilight stage of not refilling or repairing anything as no one's going to refill stock a couple weeks before it closes, and I'd expect staffing issues as people have left because the job is going away. In reality, I'd probably be looking to cancel anything after August or so to avoid the staffing issues when people are told their jobs are going away...

 

[T-Dot-Traveller]

Post # 1100 / reached 1000 on Sunday July 20
@TUGBrian !!!