Unconfigured Ad Widget

JLB · 03-01-2012, 11:00 AM

Please, don't rely I things strangers say on the Internet, but, if I was a creditor, and I knew someone was struggling with their finances, I would hold it against them for not doing everything they could to relieve their obligation on something as frivilous as a timeshare, especially in light of how the general public regards them.

I can see the meeting with the debt counselor . . . "Why the (*^$ did you keep paying on that?"

If the timeshare is the first thing someone struggling lets go, why do you think that is?

I can't help but keep going back to the home mortgage crises, and how it took three or four years and trillions of dollars for the lenders to learn that being a hardass was not in their best interest.

&, since I was saying this to the industry 20 years ago, that they need to be responsible to all their owners, all the way in and all the way out, it's not like I am suddenly singing a different tune.

JMHO

timeos2 · 03-01-2012, 11:51 AM

Maybe "non-issue" was a bit too strong as there is no question there are owners/resorts with serious problems that involve a perceived problem with undoing a timeshare ownership. It is being fed not by actual performance but the very groups that are trying to take even more from owners with often false promises of ways out, based on extremely misleading "fact" presentations that even out do the timeshare developer pitches, that in reality are simply moving the issue to other owners and taking big money for themselves.

It seems that the call for simple solutions are also single minded proposals that are likely to have extreme but perhaps unanticipated results. They are certainly well intentioned, seem to address an issue but fall short when laced into real world context. They may not be legal, they may cause further erosion of the very large group that actually uses their purchase as intended and pay for that, and impact owners rights in an extremely negative way.

I'm all for fresh ideas and an open, vibrant resale marketplace for existing timeshares. I also think we as the owners of the very properties in question need to be proactive in finding new approaches. It seems the market has shifted from a forever ownership / single resort / trade based / fixed fee model toward one that is far more flexible and fits the more time and income restrained lifestyle of the 30-55 crowd that needs to be the primary focus of resorts. The younger crowd can't afford premium vacations yet and the older crowd has limited time & ability to utilize it. It is that middle age family type with 10-20 years of enjoyment that has traditionally been the bread & butter market for resorts. That group isn't biting on a fixed week ownership or the dwindling value of week for week trades as once appealed to us old folk.

There needs to be a model change and a new value found to attract the younger buyers / owners. I feel it will evolve rather quickly for those resorts that recognize the sea change and act to supply the product. Those that insist on the old ways being maintained & don't adapt are destined to be potential financial failures. Depending on the old ways will be the death of Boards/ Resorts / Management that refuse to adapt & change. What I don't see is a blanket OK of deed backs or a law requiring that to be any type of real answer.

JLB · 03-01-2012, 12:12 PM

I believe people are calling for the powers-that-be to be open-minded, not single-minded.

I sense a small crevice, maybe enough for a really experienced rock climber.

If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you always got, until you don't.

Will · 03-01-2012, 01:25 PM

I do agree that all proposals put forward to address the problem need to be thoroughly analyzed, especially in terms of the law of unintended consequences. There is of course a difference between analyzing them thoroughly and rejecting them out of hand without really analyzing them at all. I do not wish to hurt the 90%. I am one of that group. But I think that the law of unintended consequences is already at work particularly in the the resolve to essentially maintain the status quo. But insisting that we stay there, and locking all the exits, a tremendous amount of unintended damage has been done. Well intentioned yes, thinking that people should fulfill their obligations sounds good. But the unintended consequence is that the market is locked in a state of frozen illiquidity. The 90% have seen the market value of their units drop below zero. If this has not occurred in every case yet, it will eventually if the exits remain locked. This is the real unintended consequence we should be talking about. Efforts to restore market confidence also need to be thoroughly analyzed, but the process should start. I hope better solutions than what I have proposed come along. But the process of thinking our way out of this mess should start.

I do not think it helps to over react to every proposal that is put forth, essentially suggesting that it will mean the end of timesharing as we know it. The end of timesharing as we know it has already occurred. I know we seem to be awfully hard on you John. It is done with respect because you are the most articulate spokesman on the other side. And like JLB, I thought I sensed a slight shift in your last post.

JLB · 03-01-2012, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by Will

I do not wish to hurt the 90%. I am one of that group.

I'm seeing sit-ins in the near future, an Occupy movement.

JLB · 03-02-2012, 11:20 AM

I see some wiggle-room in our docs.

Also, docs were written when timeshares when generally held in favor, or, more in favor than they are today, at least by the owners, and the idea of dissolution did not exist, much as the idea of an exit strategy did not exist.

The docs allow for amendment as necessarily, subject to majority approval of course.

It could be argued that if the use of ugliness does not provide positive results, the use of that ugliness is detrimental or injurious to other owners.

In a perfect world, the expense of maintaining the facility would be borne by those wishing to use the facility, or those wishing to maintin ownership in the facility.

Article 14
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

14.1 Variance. The Board of Directors or its designee may grant variances or adjustments from any conditions and restrictions imposed by this Declaration or the Rules, if it determines, in its sole discretion, that such variance is reasonable and necessary in order to overcome practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships arising by reason of the application of such Restrictions and Covenants. Such variances or adjustments shall be granted only in the case the granting thereof shall not be materially detrimental or injurious to other owners, other units, or any common element, shall not militate against the general intent and purpose of this Declaration or the Rules. Granting a variance in a particular situation does not require the granting of another variance in the same or similar circumstance.

14.4 Interpretation. The interpretation of this Declaration shall be liberally construed to effectuate their purposes . . .

- - - - - -
4.2 Powers and Duties. The Board of Directors shall have the powers and duties necessary for the administration of the affairs of the Corporation, and may do all such acts and things that are not by law or by these bylaws directed to be exercised and done by the members . . . And shall also include the power to promulgate such rules and regulations pertaining to such rights and duties as may be deemed proper.
- - - - - -
Article VIII: Rules and Regulations

Rules and regulations concerning the use, restrictions and requirements respecting the use and maintenance of the units and the use of the General and Limited Common Elements may be promulgated, modified and amended by the Board of Directors. A majority vote of the Interval owners at a regular meeting may overrule the Board of Directors.
- - - - - -
13.4 The Board of Directors shall have the power to determine when dues and special assessments shall be paid and when non-payment constitutes delinquency. The Board of Directors shall have the power to take actions against Owners who are delinquent in payment of dues and special assessments. Such power shall include but not be limited to employment of collection agencies or pursuit of collection through legal proceedings.
- - - - - -

JLB · 03-03-2012, 12:19 PM

Some say getting out of something.

Some say giving back something, or giving up something.

As one who has never tried to get out of any financial obligation, including more than 20 years of timeshare obligation, I could be offended by the former, especially when asking for something that is reasonable, that should have been provided for by the industry, if they cared, in the first place.

But, since I understand the Internet, how it can sometimes be unintentionally ugly and disrespectful, I am not.
- - - - - -
If employing ugliness costs more than it produces, is that not detrimental to the other owners, and a violation of the powers and duties of the Association? If the end result of ugliness is to get a week back, and a lot of money is expended to do that, is it not injurious and detrimental to the other owners not to just take it back for free?

Will · 03-03-2012, 01:21 PM

Elegant and accurate. If the future of timesharing needs to be built on such a base, count me out. People like us have always been able to get great value because other people have paid for things that they did not get (like paying retail, or paying MF's without using). It is one thing when this just happens. Its another when we go out of our way to make it happen. JLB is right when he says that the expenses of the resort should be borne by those who wish to use it or continue their association with it. This keeps everyone honest and sends accurate economic signals about the health of the resort.

I also have a problem with John's dual position where on the one hand, he tells people they should rent instead of buy because it is cheaper and less risky, and on the other hand, tells owners who want out that their only option is to try to sell. In other words, find a greater fool or keep paying, and in the meantime, the rest of us who use timeshares, especially those who rent, can continue to be subsidized by those who were sold a sleazy bill of goods and now have no exit.

JLB · 03-03-2012, 02:22 PM

Originally posted by Will

the rest of us who use timeshares, especially those who rent, can continue to be subsidized by those who were sold a sleazy bill of goods and now have no exit.

and those who rent to those who rent

JLB · 03-06-2012, 08:01 AM

If it is not a problem, an insignificant portion of deadbeat owners, why is the media so full of stories about it? Why are timeshare owner resources devoting so much to the topic?

These are just samples:

http://tug2.net/timeshare_advice/tim...andonment.html

Timeshare Sales | Owners of time shares find few willing to buy - Los Angeles Times

http://www.lindermyers.co.uk/how-to-...share_965.html

Owners find they can't unload timeshare vacation baggage | StarTribune.com

http://wesrespartners.com/wp-content..._Timeshare.pdf

Timeshare Trap - How To Pay Off Your Timeshare Loan

No Time Out for Timeshares

Timeshares are the worst real estate investment OC Housing News

A quote worth posting:

"But rather than justifying an emotional decision with delusions of appreciation and HELOC riches, these buyers know they are paying a price, a consumptive price to the degree they were paying over rental parity. And that’s okay as long as they know that going in."

IMHO, something that should be required to be presented to all prospects, in big, bold print.

Could it be that the lying has caught up with then liars?

JLB · 03-07-2012, 09:16 AM

Some think there has to be existing marketing for the association to take weeks back, or, provide for a program selling owners' weeks. One of our resorts has not has marketing at least since our first purchase in 1992. We have bought three weeks from them, two via quiet title with the original developer. Presently there is a combined effort of collections and sales.

Although recent reports of delinquencies and collection expense has been ominous, and there was a small special assessment, the 2011 annual meeting said the biggest deliquencies have been or will be cleared, and many units are being purchased by new owners.

Similar to many of the same-era, sold-out resorts of SW FL, this resort has a close working relationship with a local realtor. Also similar to many of the SW FL resorts, the realtor has an office on-site.

So, anyone saying it is not the job of an Association, or someone working in concert with an Association, to handle resales, it is within their Powers and Duties, and it can be done.

From the 2011 Annual Meeting:

. . . Over the last two years *** ***** has sold 90 units and other owners have sold about 15 units.
. . . The Association has had to deal with rising delinquencies over the last 3 years. However, the good news is there is resolution that will be finalized in December for the largest delinquent account and others are in progress with a resolution expected in the first half of 2012.
. . . The Association struggles with ongoing delinquencies and that has always been an issue for the IOA. The IOA is currently meeting its financial obligation; however, it cannot continue to do so indefinitely without some resolution to the delinquent owner status.
. . . over 100 sales occurring in 2011 . . .

The resort is 30 years old.

JLB · 03-09-2012, 09:47 AM

GrayFal
Super Moderator
Silver Contributor
TS4MS Master - 3000+ Posts! Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The Hamptons, NY
Posts: 18,294
TS4MS Points: 410,281 [Donate]

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterE
i see, it was just a question. i dont need to know if he sold it. thanks, ill need the luck. i just heard the resort doesn't take deeds back from owners.

It is a good question and could be helpful if answered for you.
Most resorts do not take a deed back, very unfortunate .

JLB · 03-09-2012, 09:50 AM

mdurette
Posting Member
500+ Posts Club Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 698
TS4MS Points: 29,642 [Donate]

Yeah know..... I always wondered why resorts (especially will ongoing sales) don't just take the weeks back for no cost. Heck they can resell them at a huge profit. Good to know some actually do.

JLB · 03-09-2012, 09:52 AM

timeos2
Super Moderator
1000+ Posts Club Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,211
TS4MS Points: 231,551 [Donate]

They haven't been scammed unless you consider taking nearly $2,000 based on false verbal promises and no intention of selling their timeshare a scam. IMO it is.

As for Diamond resorts - they are NOT taking back ownerships for resale at the present time according to reports. They have occasionally done so in the past but there is no guarantee that will ever again be offered.

5000 DRI Club points are virtually worthless at resale due to use restrictions and low use value.

JLB · 03-09-2012, 09:54 AM

stan2u
Member Join Date: May 2011
Location: seabeck, wa
Posts: 22
TS4MS Points: 1,461 [Donate]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdurette
Yeah know..... I always wondered why resorts (especially will ongoing sales) don't just take the weeks back for no cost. Heck they can resell them at a huge profit. Good to know some actually do.
- - - - - -

We did exactly that a couple of years ago with our two weeks of Florida Time Shares (Ocean Landings). I called them and told them we were no longer in a position to either use them or pay maintenance fees, but if they wanted them I would sign them over. The lady on the phone had us sign a quit claim on it, and that was that.

If the resorts don't take them back they can try to force you to pay the fees, but their options a very limited. If they want to re-sell them, they have to go to court to get title, which takes quite a bit of time and money. So it is in their best interest to accept it free and clear.

By the way, you know the companies that offer to take your time share off your hands for a fee (thousands)? Most of the time after collecting your money that's exactly what they do.

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Announcement

Deed-Backs

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment