The One Really Big Issue . . .

[Jasonb334 Member Find all posts View Profile Close Jasonb334]

People will get creative and figure out ways to get rid of their unwanted timeshare. There are ways to seperate your good assets from the losers.


FICTION or is it ?

Maybe in the near future, some guy will figure that if you want me to buy your timeshare for a dollar, you need to pay 3 years mf plus closing costs and donate $2000 to a vacation club. This would get this timeshare out of your name and into his llc or trust.

Now he is stuck with all of these vacation weeks to rent or use, so he decides to go timesharing for a few years. When he can no longer pay the mf he either goes bankrupt or insolvent and starts over colecting timeshares again with his new llc or trust.

Yes indeed. This very idea has been thought of.
One of the problems (although there are ways to overcome it) is that the developer may hold the first-right-of-refusal. But I guess in that case, John Doe rids himself of the timeshare. Some of the transfers also have to be approved and if JasonB,LLC is purchasing a number of units under the LLC, at the same resort it's likely that a TS company might catch on (although I don't think the majority of them are that smart).

Some of the timeshare resorts have hotel accommodations (developer inventory and units that were not reserved by owners) that they rent nightly and/or offer extreme discounts so they can get a newby into a normally unaffordable resort, wine & dine them, and then show them a creative way to make this possible for them to own a piece of the pie for "life".

The exit strategy currently in place results in a deed being surrendered, donated, or foreclosed on and the developer returning into inventory to be sold as points. Points owners walk away, points are resold, developer makes more money, but it will come full circle thanks to the internet and TS forums such as this one that makes everyone aware of what they are getting, not much or maybe just a headache. BTW if anyone files BK and owns a timeshare, even if it's free & clear, you can name the association and developer in your filing and they have no recourse when you stop paying! But BK is extreme, but if you have to go that route, rid yourself of your TS while you have the chance. cut your losses.

Good topic JLB --- times are changing.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

For those who think that not being being able to get rid of an unwanted timeshare does not affect you, because you plan on keeping and using yours forever, think about it little more.

It is already affecting you, your resort, your association . . .

We are all in the same boat. Each leak lowers it.
- - - - -
Words from our very first timeshare presentation:

"It is deeded real estate. Willable and billable. You can use it, trade it, rent it, and sell it".

Can you now?

[timeos2 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close timeos2]

It's in the Constitution. I doubt it will change

For those that think you can have even an authority as seemingly all powerful as Government mandate that HOA's / Owners take back weeks they don't want you may wish to reread the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution:

“the power to regulate commerce does not include the power to compel a party to take title to goods or services against its will.”

Read more: Cherokee Tribune - George Will Obamacare case the last exit on road to unlimited government

It cannot be done. It must be voluntary which means in most Associations a super majority would have to vote to alter the documents to allow it. Lets stop thinking the problems of timeshare owners is about to mean a change to the US Constitution that would force them to accept ownerships they do not want. It simply isn't a legal option.

[Ridewithme38 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Ridewithme38]

So lets try to get some constructive criticism, Timeos2, you are known to, 'know your stuff'....How would you fix the problem?

For those that think you can have even an authority as seemingly all powerful as Government mandate that HOA's / Owners take back weeks they don't want you may wish to reread the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution:

“the power to regulate commerce does not include the power to compel a party to take title to goods or services against its will.”

Read more: Cherokee Tribune - George Will Obamacare case the last exit on road to unlimited government

It cannot be done. It must be voluntary which means in most Associations a super majority would have to vote to alter the documents to allow it. Lets stop thinking the problems of timeshare owners is about to mean a change to the US Constitution that would force them to accept ownerships they do not want. It simply isn't a legal option.

[timeos2 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close timeos2]

So lets try to get some constructive criticism, Timeos2, you are known to, 'know your stuff'....How would you fix the problem?

It's actually quite easy but only on the level it belongs at - with the resort Association. It is up to them & their owners to make changes needed to give the dog times value by adding year round amenities or finding creative ways to make the fees better reflect the value of the use time or both. It may in fact be to take back weeks so bad that even the efforts can't give them value but with te support of the owners that will therefore see higher fees for the remaining time. That case can be made and should be if that is indeed the best way to handle it. Remember it is a small amount of the total owners that actually have the problem so it isn't a big deal to sell the remaining owners if it is done correctly.

How they do it without opening the floodgates to those that just want an easy way out is a touchy area. My own approach has changed over what I thought was best 5-7 years ago. I now believe the best way is to in fact let the ownership go through the process of delinquency/collections/foreclosure as a well run Association can accomplish those at little or no cost. Then if an ownership reaches the stage of foreclosure make a last offer to accept a deed back - if that isn't accepted then do the foreclosure & that will be the limited number of weeks the Association has to deal with paying for. Otherwise it is just too easy for those that really could pay to claim poverty & make no real attempt to sell/give away. No Association should have to deal with those types of deed backs.

[Ridewithme38 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Ridewithme38]

sooo....there is nothing WE can do?

It's actually quite easy but only on the level it belongs at - with the resort Association. It is up to them & their owners to make changes needed to give the dog times value by adding year round amenities or finding creative ways to make the fees better reflect the value of the use time or both. It may in fact be to take back weeks so bad that even the efforts can't give them value but with te support of the owners that will therefore see higher fees for the remaining time. That case can be made and should be if that is indeed the best way to handle it. Remember it is a small amount of the total owners that actually have the problem so it isn't a big deal to sell the remaining owners if it is done correctly.

How they do it without opening the floodgates to those that just want an easy way out is a touchy area. My own approach has changed over what I thought was best 5-7 years ago. I now believe the best way is to in fact let the ownership go through the process of delinquency/collections/foreclosure as a well run Association can accomplish those at little or no cost. Then if an ownership reaches the stage of foreclosure make a last offer to accept a deed back - if that isn't accepted then do the foreclosure & that will be the limited number of weeks the Association has to deal with paying for. Otherwise it is just too easy for those that really could pay to claim poverty & make no real attempt to sell/give away. No Association should have to deal with those types of deed backs.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

It's crazy how when you talk about some group maybe oughta think about doing something, someone comes along and translates that to the guvment forcing them to do it.

As I've already posted, our docs allow the board to do what they need to do.

I don't understand how some folks connect the dots.

[timeos2 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close timeos2]

It's crazy how when you talk about some group maybe oughta think about doing something, someone comes along and translates that to the guvment forcing them to do it.

As I've already posted, our docs allow the board to do what they need to do.

I don't understand how some folks connect the dots.

Jim - The "best interests of the Association" clause you seem to refer to isn't all powerful. It is overruled by State & Ferderal property laws that limit the power of any Board/ Association from placing "future financial liabilities" unilaterally. That means it can be done but only with approval by (usually super) majority vote of owners. Again, its standing property rights & even a Board can't do it. You have to have an answer that can be done legally or with proper approval which cannot be an edict by a Board or Management.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

At least we are having the conversation that has been a long time coming, that if you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got, may not be true much longer.

The Powers and Duties of the Board is to act in manner that is not detrimental to the owners, and if there are methods that may be less costly to reach the same end, they are remiss in not exploring them.

Yes, Boards are Boards are Boards are Boards, and they are programmed to plod along the way they always have. That is part of the industry to has got us to where we are today.

I am not only one saying that it's time to think outside the box.

[timeos2 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close timeos2]

I believe in & try to think outside the box - especially if the current thinking has created or fed a problem. But the theories have to have a legal basis.

Another example:

A far bigger problem than Blue week owners having no real market in my town - or say Detroit or Miami or LA - are the many vacant, abandoned & unsellable properties in the City. Would you think it a viable solution - out of the box thinking - to say that each resident as selected by your local Governing body must accept the deed to one of those properties or abandoned buildings no one wants? You must then fix it up, maintain it, pay the taxes and so forth. No choice - they tell you that you MUST accept it.

How far do you think that would get? On a tiny scale a timeshare deed, even an unwanted one, is that abandoned lot or old building that no Government, corporation or person is willing to buy or own. Exactly the same probelm but the "answer" seems ridiculous to even think about, no?

The answer of forcing unwilling people or Associations or Corporations to take anything isn't a remote possibility. So discussing it as if it were isn't thinking out of the box it's hoping for an answer that isn't doable.

If the Associations / ARDA / whoever wants owners to accept deedbacks - if it's truly "in the best interest of the Association" then make the case, get the owners to approve it and you're good to go. THAT is thinking differently and doing something about it that would be doable and, if you really think it would change things, help.

I see that answer as a death spiral for even the best resorts and not viable. But if the owners felt it was and voted for it I'd be sure it got done. No owner I know that is a member in good standing - not delinquent - has ever said our resorts should take any and all deeds anyone cares to give up. When they do I'll certainly consider it. Until then we need answers that can be put in place without owner vote. They don't have to be what we did yesterday but they do have to be legal.

What are the out of box ideas that DON'T include the idea of forced deed backs?

[Ridewithme38 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Ridewithme38]

What are the out of box ideas that DON'T include the idea of forced deed backs?

The only solution i see is what the PCC's are currently doing, but on a much much larger scale, we've got to get all these unwanted deeds back to the HOA/POA/BOD's in bulk....the resorts that have no value will be get thousands of deeds back and be forced to act or close the doors, the ones that still have value, won't, they will get a few dozen and will still have to make some improvements....but it won't mean death for them

Hey, i'm condemning myself i own at patriots place in good standing, half of the resort would give up that place if given the chance...they would be one of the ones that would most likely have to close their doors....but sometimes you have to sacrifice to change things for the better for everyone

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

Well, somehow this became the Deedback thread, which is elsewhere.

This thread is the One Really Big Issue thread, which is that most of the industry, all aspects of the industry, does not provide a way for owners to end their ownership.

The industry, all aspects of the industry, could do that if they wanted to. Developers could, resort staff or management companies could, even exchange companies could . . . help owners get rid of their weeks . . . if they wanted to.

Passing the buck, saying it is not "our problem" does not solve it.

I've seen some resorts assist their owners on their way out, and it does not seem unnatural. Quite the opposite, it seems natural, the way it should be.

I've been to more than one resort where owners' weeks for sale are posted, distributed, etc., and a RE agent comes in a day or two a week, and handles resales.

I answered an Escapes! ad in the Branson paper some years back, the jist of which was that they were looking for people with an entirely new way of looking at timeshare sales. I talked to the sales manager about creating a position that did nothing but market owned weeks. My heart was not in forcing a square peg into a round hole, so I did not pursue it. That manager did not do anything different. Now, there is been no marketing at all there for several years, with plenty of unsold and unwanted sold weeks.

So, it is possible to think outside the box most people are stuck in, cuz some folks are already there, and have been, outside the box.

But, even when resorts do offer help, if there are no buyers, it is the One Really Big Issue.

The way things are done now were devised when it was not even conceivable that a place like Orange Lake, or Westgate, or Vistana, could not even get a buck on eBay.

New facts need new ideas.

[Will Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Will]

Out of the box ideas that don't require forced deedbacks? How about voluntary deedback programs. These have been around for years and are completely legal. All the legalistic huffing and puffing really does not change this. And the HOA can set realistic parameters for the deedback program that will benefit everyone, including a limit on the number of deedbacks they will hold at any given time and keeping a waiting list, requiring appropriate levels of prepaid MF's as conditions to deedbacks, and using its auspices to develop a viable sales program, either in house or farmed out. Nobody anywhere is in a better position to do this than the HOA, the representative of the owners acting in the best interest of the owners.

But wait, you say that they never had to do this before and should not have to now, because they are so busy afterall? Times have changed, and the mission of the HOA must adapt to the changes or everything fails.

Sometimes it really seems like you would rather see the whole system fail rather than take the chance that one deadbeat might get away without paying his bills. There are bigger fish to fry here. What used to make sense as a stategy once does not any more, because the problem has gotten bigger. You have to look at the macro level, and fully begin to grasp that the lack of an exit is a problem for everyone, for the system as a whole and that without a viable solution the system will inevitably fail . It is really a problem without precedent, and must be resolved. All of your incessant naysaying will only perpetuate the problem and make it worse. I am sorry to have to be so frank, but right now I really believe that people like you are a big part of the problem and stand in the way of a solution. It is time for people to try to be part of the solution.

Also, on another matter, I don't know what Constitution you are reading, but in my copy the 10th Amendment has none of the language that you quote. There is a Commerce Clause, in Article I, but it has no applicability to what you are saying. It would only apply if we asked the U.S. Congress to fix the problem. That is the one idea that I don't think I have heard anyone propose. I think this foray into Constitutional Law really demonstrates that you are not a legal expert. You are obviously smart, and have a lot of experience. But it is really not appropriate to set yourself up as a legal authority for what can and cannot be done when you are not really an authority.

[bravesfan Member Find all posts View Profile Close bravesfan]

The struggle that I have is it seems this thread starts because JLB no longer wants to maintain his ownership and obligations. He then turns this into a big picture problem so it does not pertain only to him. He then says the board can fix this but, does not offer details. I believe that the board has obligations to act in the best interest of the association.

JLB when looking at the big problem how do you fix the One big problem? Again since you keep referring to deedbacks it seems that there might be more than one big problem.

I can't see a board member agreeing to reduce the overall size of a resort (provided there are owners assigned to all units) because remaining members could be impacted and the board could be liable.

I don't see a board simply allowing people to walk away from their obligations otherwise known as maintenance fees. Why don't you simply find another exchange company such as the ones that other folks are always mentioning and continue exchanging where you used to go?

From what you have said about your properties they sound desirable. Have you advertised them on-site? Enlisted the resale companies located on property etc?

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

The struggle that I have is it seems this thread starts because JLB no longer wants to maintain his ownership and obligations. He then turns this into a big picture problem so it does not pertain only to him. He then says the board can fix this but, does not offer details. I believe that the board has obligations to act in the best interest of the association.

JLB when looking at the big problem how do you fix the One big problem? Again since you keep referring to deedbacks it seems that there might be more than one big problem.

I can't see a board member agreeing to reduce the overall size of a resort (provided there are owners assigned to all units) because remaining members could be impacted and the board could be liable.

I don't see a board simply allowing people to walk away from their obligations otherwise known as maintenance fees. Why don't you simply find another exchange company such as the ones that other folks are always mentioning and continue exchanging where you used to go?

From what you have said about your properties they sound desirable. Have you advertised them on-site? Enlisted the resale companies located on property etc?

Feel better?

I just checked eBay and cl, and the glut of resales has magically disappeared. Pam Bondi just called and said all the PCCs and scam resale companies have closed their doors.

Way to go! I didn't realize it would be so easy. Where have you been all these years?