Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A way out of a timeshare-especially at the 30 year ‘‘extension of the term" meeting ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A way out of a timeshare-especially at the 30 year ‘‘extension of the term" meeting ?

    See if you have a similar situation...
    Short story... In a timeshare, time matters.
    My grandmother bought a timeshare at Hot Springs Village Coopershares on 8/30/1983 with her husband. I went there once around 1984. I think it was used 3 or 4 times in the next 3 or 4 years until her husband died. From that time until now (roughly 27 years) I don't think it has been used. My father, during a weak mental moment, transferred the title from grandma to himself on her demise per their agreement on 11/11/1999. Dad passed away in 12/24/2011. The expiration of the original contract terms explicitly states that it expired on 1/5/13 at 4:00 PM, unless extended as provided in such declaration. The time, per the original contract seems to matter.

    Longer story...
    There was a meeting of the ‘Association’ on November 6, 2012 as there probably is every November for the purpose of discussing things like the “2013 ‘it’s time to continue to screw over the timeshare holders that have no desire to own the timeshare that has been hung around there neck like an albatross, that is worth $0’ issue”, and have the majority vote to continue this evil scheme, since the minority has no recourse.
    We did not receive notice of the November 6th 2012 meeting and were not a party involved in the consideration of the ‘extension of the term of the Declaration’ and it is not legally binding.
    It was also forced on us without recourse.. Regardless, it is a moot point knowing that the 731 heartless members that are happy with their timeshare arrangements, voted yes, to locking the 70 members who are very unhappy with their worthless time shares and voted no, into continuing to pay the maintenance fee for them.

    Article XIX of the Original Declaration provided that the Original Declaration would terminate and cease to encumber the real property described therein as of the first Saturday in the year 2013 unless the Association board of directors, not less than (30) days nor more than 60 days prior to the actual date of such termination, called a special meeting of all Association owners during which said owners, by majority vote of those present and voting, affirmatively voted to continue the term and enforceability of the Original Declaration for an additional ten (10) year period of time; and

    Whereas, pursuant to Article XIV, Section 1(B), the Association board of directors duly called a meeting of the association members to be convened at 10:00 a.m. on November 6, 2012, ….

    01/05/2013 16:00
    - 11/06/2012 10:05
    -----------------------
    60.24652778

    Days Hours Min
    60 5.000 0.55

    Since the meeting was called more than 60 days prior to the actual date of such termination by 1/4th of a day, it is invalid per HSVC documents. If it would’ve been convened after 11/6/2012 at 4:00:00 PM it would’ve been valid per HSVC documents. Similarly, if the meeting was conducted within HSVC documents and the members voted to not extend the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions, we would’ve owned the timeshare on 1/5/13 at 3:59 PM, but no longer own it on 1/5/13 at 4:01 PM, so time does matter.

    I have called and sent them all of this information a couple of times and they basically say to transfer the deed in my name and then transfer options back to HSVC can be discussed..... Right...

    I would gladly pay a lawyer $2,000 to bird dog this, file paper work in court to challenge the ‘extension of the term of the Declaration’, that results in the deed filed at the courthouse reverting back to HSVC.
    10
    Yes - most definitely
    20.00%
    2
    No - it's a waste of time
    50.00%
    5
    Maybe - depending on any out of pocket costs
    30.00%
    3

  • #2
    I'm tired of messing with these evil people, and considering class action lawsuit against Hot Springs Village Coopershares, if there is enough interest.

    Comment


    • #3
      I replied to your other thread, having not gotten down to this one yet.
      RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

      Comment


      • #4
        Normally, if the timeshare plan expires, it leaves the members owning the property as tenants in common (check your own situation with a local lawyer) and the property can then be sold and the proceeds divided. If you are correct and the extension is invalid, this may be the position the resort is now in. Class actions are notorious for not achieving anything of substance other than a big payout to the lawyers involved, like the one with RCI.

        You may have another legal route and one you need to check with a local attorney. If the resort is legally in a tenants in common ownership, no longer bound by the timeshare plan, then you may be able to bring a petition to partition and force sale of the property and division of the proceeds. Every week owner receives an equal share in most instances, so the high season owners would likely oppose it, while it would be a windfall to low season owners.

        Such campaigns often do not work, when you have to go through a vote of members. Some years ago, a group sought to dissolve the Swiss-based Hapimag timeshare chain, the world's oldest. The market value of the various properties far exceeded the market value of the timeshare shares (actual shares, since ownership is represented by a share of stock instead of a deed) and the proponents thought they would have an easy sale with other members, but they failed miserably when it came to a vote.

        In your case, flawed procedure in the vote may give you another bite at the apple. It also may give you leverage to negotiate a deedback of your own week to the association.

        Talk to a local lawyer who can review the documents and any quirks in the timeshare law of the state involved.

        Comment


        • #5
          I hate to reply before a first-time poster returns, because often they don't, but just for the sake of a general discussion . . .

          Even as soured as I am on timeshares, a commonly known fact here, the HOA/COA in this case did the proper thing in extending, or renewing, or whatever they did, to continue the operation of the resort as a timeshare, since that is what the overwhelming majority favored doing. They did the only thing they could do within the short-sighted confines of their position.

          The sadness is when owners who do not want to continue being owners are forced to do so by hostility, which increases the cost of operating the resort, because no one along the way considered the fact that every owner some day will not want to be, one way or another, so no one has put an orderly exit strategy in place. As I read in my annual dues letters, "We are aggressively pursuing collections and foreclosures," translates to "part of your annual dues is going to deal with owners who do not wish to be owners."

          It would not be a difficult thing to prepare for this inevitability, and it's being done some places. In some cases, industry-wide.
          RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

          Comment


          • #6
            Thank you very much Carolinian for taking the time to reply.
            I will look into it.

            I'm pretty sure it just amounts to the extension of the terms of the original agreement for 10 years
            You might be interested in the minutes of the Hot Springs Village Coopershares Owners Association 2012 meeting to Extend 'Term Declaration of Covenant and Restrictions Coopershares Subdivision’ plus the legalese of the proceedings.

            http://pages.suddenlink.net/jnspc5/d...opershares.pdf

            No one with an IQ above a golf course squirrel would knowingly buy a 30 year time share knowing that when it expired that the majority of the members could vote to extend that ownership 10 years without the agreement of the owner.

            Comment


            • #7
              JLB - 'orderly exit strategy' was never part of time share design, by design. Owners of cherry properties (good location, and/or time (high season)) don't have an issue for the most part getting rid of or selling their time shares, but those marginal or low interest time share properties (less desirable location, and/or time (low season) have trouble getting rid of them when this might not have been obvious when they were originally purchased. Maybe they thought they would just sell it someday if they decided they didn't want it anymore, never dreaming that not only would they not be able to sell it, they wouldn't be able to even give it away.
              My grandma thought it was a good idea at one time to own one.
              Her grandson didn't have a say so then, but is being demanded to pay for it now.

              They will not get as much as a dime from us, ever.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by J Mac View Post
                JLB - 'orderly exit strategy' was never part of time share design, by design. Owners of cherry properties (good location, and/or time (high season)) don't have an issue for the most part getting rid of or selling their time shares, but those marginal or low interest time share properties (less desirable location, and/or time (low season) have trouble getting rid of them when this might not have been obvious when they were originally purchased. Maybe they thought they would just sell it someday if they decided they didn't want it anymore, never dreaming that not only would they not be able to sell it, they wouldn't be able to even give it away.
                My grandma thought it was a good idea at one time to own one.
                Her grandson didn't have a say so then, but is being demanded to pay for it now.

                They will not get as much as a dime from us, ever.
                Nor should they ever hear from you again.

                Why have you thought you needed to deal with it? Is it mentioned in the Will?
                RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by J Mac View Post
                  JLB - 'orderly exit strategy' was never part of time share design, by design. Owners of cherry properties (good location, and/or time (high season)) don't have an issue for the most part getting rid of or selling their time shares, but those marginal or low interest time share properties (less desirable location, and/or time (low season) have trouble getting rid of them when this might not have been obvious when they were originally purchased. Maybe they thought they would just sell it someday if they decided they didn't want it anymore, never dreaming that not only would they not be able to sell it, they wouldn't be able to even give it away.
                  My grandma thought it was a good idea at one time to own one.
                  Her grandson didn't have a say so then, but is being demanded to pay for it now.

                  They will not get as much as a dime from us, ever.
                  Actually, it is for some.

                  The very first timeshare, the Swiss chain Hapimag, provides that any member may request a developer buyback, which the developer is obligated to do, and pay the member a set percentage of the current retail price. This buyback option can only be exercised after a certain period of ownership. There are standards as to how soon the developer has to do this and if the market happens to be slow, it can delay a year or so. There is a British resort with a similar developer buyback provision that has been regularly honored.

                  I have owned at a British resort where the timeshare itself only had a 30 year leasehold and when that leasehold expired, so did the timeshare. A former and a current London timeshare resort also have only leaseholds on the underlying property.

                  I also owned at a Dutch resort where the members could vote at any time by majority vote to terminate the timeshare, sell the property, and divide the proceeds. When several board members decided to retire and could not get volunteers to replace them, they decided to call a vote to do exactly that and it passed. Personally, I hated that because it was a tiger trader and had a very low m/f. But when it was sold, I got a lot more than what I had paid for it, and the final year had no m/f due to the sale even though I got use of my week.
                  Carolinian
                  Super Moderator
                  Last edited by Carolinian; 12-18-2015, 02:56 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    &, to repeat what I've posted before, RCI, which actually encourages resorts to deal positively with exit strategy, acknowledges that an orderly exit strategy is required of resorts in Europe that belong to RDO, the affiliation of resorts:

                    http://www.rciventures.com/rdo-stren...exit-strategy/

                    Israel has dealt with it:

                    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/p...contracts.html

                    UK acknowledges it:

                    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/n...gue-firms.html

                    We here in the Colonies are just a bit backwards.


                    - - - - - -
                    Using the OP's figure of 70 owners wanting out and 731 not wanting out, and assuming an $800 annual fee, if the resort took the 70 weeks back and spread the cost over the remaining 831, it would be $76 each.

                    Or, if the resort could rent those 70 weeks out for $76 each, or rent just 10 of the 70 weeks for $532 each, or sell a few of them, it would be a wash.

                    So, if it would be that easy to let the restless native loose, why spend thousands of dollars on collection and litigation and foreclosure?

                    OTOH, if allowing deedbacks does a resort in, what real interest was there in it to begin with?
                    RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Having discussed deed backs and foreclosures with those who do it, foreclosure is usually pretty easy in some states and those managements that hire attorneys to go after back fees usually end up spending more money than they collect. Why not do deedbacks ? Most people would be happy to pay the fees current and even and additional fee to do a deedback. If the problem is non-performing weeks, deedbacks are not going to make it any worse.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        RDO = Resort Developers Association, which is now OTE, Organization for Timeshare in Europe, and their version of exit strategies are not exactly consumer friendly.

                        I would bet that most of those voting to continue the timeshare were voting by proxies obtained by the board members. Most timeshare members proxy to board members, and some use multi-year proxies. I wonder if many of those 731 had any clue how their vote was cast on this issue.

                        Originally posted by JLB View Post
                        &, to repeat what I've posted before, RCI, which actually encourages resorts to deal positively with exit strategy, acknowledges that an orderly exit strategy is required of resorts in Europe that belong to RDO, the affiliation of resorts:

                        http://www.rciventures.com/rdo-stren...exit-strategy/

                        Israel has dealt with it:

                        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/p...contracts.html

                        UK acknowledges it:

                        http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/n...gue-firms.html

                        We here in the Colonies are just a bit backwards.


                        - - - - - -
                        Using the OP's figure of 70 owners wanting out and 731 not wanting out, and assuming an $800 annual fee, if the resort took the 70 weeks back and spread the cost over the remaining 831, it would be $76 each.

                        Or, if the resort could rent those 70 weeks out for $76 each, or rent just 10 of the 70 weeks for $532 each, or sell a few of them, it would be a wash.

                        So, if it would be that easy to let the restless native loose, why spend thousands of dollars on collection and litigation and foreclosure?

                        OTOH, if allowing deedbacks does a resort in, what real interest was there in it to begin with?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Carolinian View Post
                          RDO = Resort Developers Association, which is now OTE, Organization for Timeshare in Europe, and their version of exit strategies are not exactly consumer friendly.
                          Well, here it is, and everyone can judge for themselves how "owner-friendly" it is. The first item would have taken care of the OP's situation.
                          - - - - - -
                          ◾In the event of the death of a joint owner, the surviving owner can surrender their timeshare if they wish and additionally, the beneficiaries of a will are not obliged to take on the timeshare if they do not wish to do so.*
                          ◾A timeshare owner who has been declared bankrupt may hand back the timeshare without charge.*
                          ◾If a sole owner or either of the joint owners is suffering from a long-term illness that prevents them from travelling to their resort for the foreseeable future, the timeshare interest may be surrendered.*
                          ◾In all other cases, an owner may surrender their timeshare interest at any time, subject to the agreement of the RDO member. In such cases any surrender fee shall not exceed a sum equivalent to three years current maintenance fees.
                          RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Unlike Hapimag, and some of the others, these circumstances are extremely limited. The last one, the only one not involving a limited set of circumstances, requires agreement of the developer, meaning they can just say no.


                            Originally posted by JLB View Post
                            Well, here it is, and everyone can judge for themselves how "owner-friendly" it is. The first item would have taken care of the OP's situation.
                            - - - - - -
                            ◾In the event of the death of a joint owner, the surviving owner can surrender their timeshare if they wish and additionally, the beneficiaries of a will are not obliged to take on the timeshare if they do not wish to do so.*
                            ◾A timeshare owner who has been declared bankrupt may hand back the timeshare without charge.*
                            ◾If a sole owner or either of the joint owners is suffering from a long-term illness that prevents them from travelling to their resort for the foreseeable future, the timeshare interest may be surrendered.*
                            ◾In all other cases, an owner may surrender their timeshare interest at any time, subject to the agreement of the RDO member. In such cases any surrender fee shall not exceed a sum equivalent to three years current maintenance fees.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              My exit strategy is the same as your grandmothers. I plan to die one day and if my heirs dont want the stuff, it becomes the HOAs proble,

                              I guess I dont understand the problem the op is having.. either he took on this timeshare by choice,(in which case he has to pay the mf, default , or sell it) or the resort will have to take it back from the estate

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X