Thread was Closed over yonder(TUG)

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

Ethically speaking, what is the diference between recinding a developer purchase and bailing out of a TS you no longer want and has no(maybe negative) value? Going back on a committment in both cases.

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

Were you banned?

I think they closed your discussion because rather than being constructive it was argumentative.

Am I mistaken? Were you actually banned?

--> I'm editing this because the title of the thread has been edited and I now look like a mean harpy. The original title that I referred to was Banned over yonder (TUG).

Fern

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

I didn't indicate I was banned, the discussion was.

[Spence Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Spence]

I didn't indicate I was banned, the discussion was.

anyone with 75 posts or more would assume the person was banned because that term does not apply to threads/posts which get closed or removed/deleted.

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

Ethically speaking, what is the diference between recinding a developer purchase and bailing out of a TS you no longer want and has no(maybe negative) value? Going back on a committment in both cases.

Your comparison is not a good one. It would be like saying that "ethically speaking, a white lie is the same as murder since they are both sins."

When you rescind a developer purchase, you are cancelling within a statutory cooling off period. This is provided to ensure a new owner can perform due diligence to determine if the deal was as it was made out to be. Recission for any reason is completely ethical. The owner is merely checking out what the sales guy said and whether or not any of it was a lie.

Bailing out on a timeshare by simply defaulting is different. After you own a timeshare, you are obligated to pay the fees. If you don't and you default, you hurt other owners by not meeting your obligations.

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

Boca:
But the others take control of the TS and deminish its value as they operate with self and conflict of interest I have a right to protect myself in any legal manner. These legal means are statuatory(although not specifically defined for every case but dertermined by case law),it is my right to use them without being accused of acting in an unethical manner.

[lawren2 Malibu Beach Barbie & A Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close lawren2]

Boca:
But the others take control of the TS and deminish its value as they operate with self and conflict of interest I have a right to protect myself in any legal manner. These legal means are statuatory(although not specifically defined for every case but dertermined by case law),it is my right to use them without being accused of acting in an unethical manner.

Of course they are...

Think of it this way, breaking off an engagement to your girlfriend as opposed to divorcing your wife.

Both would be breaking commitments.

Which is more socially acceptable?
Which costs you more?

[rikkis_playpen Diamond Club Contributor Find all posts View Profile Close rikkis_playpen]

Live up to your responsibilities!

I strongly agree with Boca (imagine that Jim!!!)!

If you are a timeshare owner- live up to your responsibilities and pay your share! If you don't want to pay any longer- sell it or give it away.. Yes, this process may require alot of effort- but that is part of being an owner in a shared community..

If you made a mistake and should have never purchased- it was your mistake! Don't expect others to bail you out now....

Personal responsiblity..... What a concept!

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

MY first responsibility is to my family and myself. If I am treated unfairly or defrauded, I(and urge others) will do what is legally necessary to protect.
If the BOD acts in their own self interest I will bail out rather than bail them out. I will feel no regrets only, satisfaction I limited their ability to take advantage of me.

[Jya-Ning Silver Contributor Find all posts View Profile Close Jya-Ning]

Ethically speaking, what is the diference between recinding a developer purchase and bailing out of a TS you no longer want and has no(maybe negative) value? Going back on a committment in both cases.

This is case by case thing. The only difference most people look at is the way you take to bail out of a TS. So, if you are within rescind period, there is no issue. If you try to bail out from developer purchase after rescind period, the developer can take any action law give them to proceed. Same as bailing out of a TS. If you give to a charity, ask HOA and they take it back, sell on eBay and someone take it, there is no issue. All other way try to manipulate it, or just abandon it, the law gives the HOA all kinds of way to proceed.

And if you can afford and just walk out, the majority people will look unfavorable on you. If you can not afford it financially, although the major people may feel you are stupid, but majority will sympath with you, thus make anyone try to use harsh action on you very difficulty.

If there are a lot of people like you that can not handle TS responsibility, then the society will have different feeling about responsibility, there will be more chance you could get a whole government effort to bail you out, like the current effort on sub-prime.

Ethically speaking, people do understand sometimes you have to part. Nobody live forever. How you part and what kind of mess you left will determine if people feel you did right thing or wrong thing ethically.

Most countries do allow you change the law or in some country, they allow you to ignore the law. The more the country allows you to ignore the law, the bad the country will be. I believe USA does realtively easy to change the law. In that case, I can hardly see your point.

Yes, you can try form all kinds of legal entities to try to avoid the MF. If people feel you set them up just for that purpose, you will still be drag to court for that, no matter how you call it. If the judge feel you do it just for the purpose of it, you will still be hold responsibile no matter what.

Whatever legal entity you try to form, if they are legal, it will have all the papaer trace. If they are not legal, you will still be responsible.

Much easier if you don't have anything, then nobady can or want to continue push you. But it will be a long walk before people know you don't have anything.

Jya-Ning

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

MY first responsibility is to my family and myself. If I am treated unfairly or defrauded, I(and urge others) will do what is legally necessary to protect.
If the BOD acts in their own self interest I will bail out rather than bail them out. I will feel no regrets only, satisfaction I limited their ability to take advantage of me.

The BOD by definition acts for the owners - that would include you if you own there. While you may not agree with their actions it is done in your behalf. You, the BOD and Association are all one. If you simply bail you are foisting costs onto your fellow owners not some mystical third party. If you are one of the remaining owners who has someone else's obligations fall to you you would be upset. Why should you walking away from yours make the other owners happy? Buying/rescinding is a choice as any other purchase like a house. You can decide to buy and back out if the contract terms aren't met but once you buy its yours until you sell it off. No different with a timeshare or a condo.

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

MY first responsibility is to my family and myself. If I am treated unfairly or defrauded, I(and urge others) will do what is legally necessary to protect.
If the BOD acts in their own self interest I will bail out rather than bail them out. I will feel no regrets only, satisfaction I limited their ability to take advantage of me.

And, if you are act illegally to protect your family based on a legal agreement you have entered into under your own free will and someone with sufficient power and resources comes after you, you will be foolish to fight it and you will be getting exactly what you deserve.

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

Hypothetically speaking, of course, . . . what if one owner was able to take control of a resort, and the BOD, by purchasing the controlling interest in a resort, running the rest of the BOD and the management company off.

Then, that person became/is the BOD.

Would the BOD then be representing all owners, including the minority interest owners, just because it says so in the By Laws or Articles of Incorporation, by doing things with the resort only in the own interest of the majority owner?

When is a BOD not a BOD?

The BOD by definition acts for the owners - that would include you if you own there. While you may not agree with their actions it is done in your behalf.

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

Except for Wastegate rules and laws apply

Hypothetically speaking, of course, . . . what if one owner was able to take control of a resort, and the BOD, by purchasing the controlling interest in a resort, running the rest of the BOD and the management company off.

Then, that person became/is the BOD.

Would the BOD then be representing all owners, including the minority interest owners, just because it says so in the By Laws or Articles of Incorporation, by doing things with the resort only in the own interest of the majority owner?

When is a BOD not a BOD?

That's why a BOD isn't one person. Now if one person/company holds enough votes to control all the seats then it still technically represents all owners but, as one of the powerless, an owner may wish to sell rather than be in the position of having no say. Of course, unless its Wastegate, the resort/BOD still has to act within the laws and in the best interests of owners. It shouls never be a Monarchy unless the King David pulls the strings. Then mere laws, rules and ethics are out the window and owners will do as the King wishes and pay for the privilege. Why Wastegate is exempt isn't clear but eventually that will change I'm sure. All empires fall eventually. Especially evil ones.

[bigfrank Administrator Find all posts View Profile Close bigfrank]

I didn't indicate I was banned, the discussion was.

I am changing the titlle so it is correct