Barrier Island Station Duck - Effort to Improve Communications and Satisfaction

[Fayeoctober]

I have to admit to not posting here in a number of months. It seemed that everytime I checked the Eastern States board, I didn't see anything about BIS Duck so I started to come less often. Anyway, for some updates. My husband was re-elected to the Home Owners Association and one of the long-time HOA Board members decided not to continue, so since 2014, there has been some change in Board membership. At the annual Owners Meeting in October, a detailed presentation on the financial position of BIS Duck was made. Basically, there was nothing left from the assessment to cover Interior Upgrades. In addition because maintenance fees were kept low for so many years, there wasn't any type of reserve account. For 2017, a $200 Assessment was made with the main purpose of becoming more financially solvent. The HOA decided to do a survey of all the Owners to find out what they were interested in as far as Interior Upgrades and how much they were willing to pay. While they have some preliminary results, owners have until the end of February to make their views known. So instead of just going ahead with things, there has been much more attempt to get Owner buy-in. There is a greater focus on Communications and as a result, there will be three newsletters this year and more up-to-date news is getting pushed out via the SPM web-site. The Termination issue is still a concern but it is being worked on. In addition some funding was included in the 2017 budget to start the process of Foreclosures later this year. It is likely that Limited Liability Corps. (LLC s or in timeshare terms "Viking Ships") who haven't paid fees in years will be one of the first groups to go after.

 

[RonB]

Thanx for the update Faye. I think things are looking up at BIS with the exteriors done and at least the possibility of interior remodels. Our unit is a mess, but I'm hoping the interiors will be addressed over the next year or two. I don't mind paying a reasonable amount to get it done either ~ Ron

BTW - do you know if they resolved the wifi problem?

 

[pedro47]

The location of this resort is awesome in OBX. However, poor mgt and low m/f has left this resort in a total mess. We have not visited BIS/Duck in over five years. The furnishings was in eighties and very outdated. The plus side was you can enjoy walking along the beach, the ocean was at your door and BIS has some gorgeous sunrises and sunsets. Staying in Duck is a double plus in itself with the Duck Village and the many great restaurants. A triple plus are the people residing in Duck they are very, very friendly.

I pray your new management board and give this resort new life. This could/should be the #1resort in OBX. Good luck.

 

[RLS50]

Faye, I wish you and your husband success in getting this resort updated. We agree with Pedro that the location in Duck is excellent. In recent years we had interest in staying at BIS because we wanted to stay in Duck, but it was just a little too rustic for us. I definitely think that increased transparency and communications goes a long way towards getting owner buy in and support.

A Place at the Beach was kind of dump before SPM turned it around and renovated it and now it is really nice (in our opinion). I am not sure what happened to the GM at A Place at the Beach when they changed ownership, and not sure if he was an SPM employee, but that guy seemed really good at his job and successfully oversaw the transformation of the resort there.

 

[Egret1986]

Thank you, Faye, for the update. I'm sorry that I had to miss this year's meeting due to conflicting HOA meetings elsewhere on the Outer Banks.

As you stated, the maintenance fees have been kept unrealistically low over many, many years; thus, not allowing for a reserve fund. I see that for 2017, this has not changed. I understand that all these special assessments (past, current and future), along with raising the maintenance fee could be overwhelming to the owners. Obviously, there will still be no funding for reserves. To me, this, along with seriously outdated interiors that will require yet a third round of SA's, the Termination issue, and other issues facing the resort, makes me wonder how much money put into Barrier Island Station will be enough. Many of the long-time owners cannot access units due to all the stairs up to most of them. There simply is no way to provide elevators due to the layouts of the buildings and lack of funding.

I have owned at BIS since 1984. I hope for the improvements to the interiors. I hope the Termination clauses are resolved. I just don't know how many more assessments it's going to take for all this to happen. Will the remaining owners keep putting money up, with other owners walking away and delinquencies piling up, only in the end to have the Termination clauses end the timeshare status in a few years? I personally don't wish to endure yet another special assessment at a resort with no reserves and the distinct possibility that the timeshare will terminate. I'm down to one last unit. The future for the resort makes me very nervous.

Funding for stepping up the foreclosure process is great. However, under the circumstances, this will also be a never-ending money drain on the budget. I only see defaults going up with timeshares since most timeshares have not provided for an exit strategy. No exit strategy = defaults = foreclosures.

Barrier Island Station has a beautiful location and is a very desirable piece of property on the Outer Banks. Even with it's warts, I still enjoy going there because of its proximity to Duck Village, and its ocean-to-sound location.

The exterior work that was completed is very attractive and a real positive.

However, there's still so much work left to be done and issues to work through.

 

[RLS50]

Egret,

Do you foresee the possibility that BIS-Duck could be updated and transformed like APATBIII was? No doubts the elevator issue seems important, but is something that may not be able to ever be resolved since the building layout would almost require an elevator in each one?

It is a real shame, because the layout of the resort at BIS-Duck, the overall amenities (the outdoor pool looks great), and it's location have always been appealing to us and we have thought about purchasing or staying there over the years on our drive past on our way to various rental homes in Corolla or Whalehead. It always seemed really nice to have access to both the ocean and the sound on pretty much the same property and be so close to the village of Duck.

The topic of MF's are an interesting one. We all sometimes complain about MF's but really the complaints should not necessarily be about the total, but where the money is going. Marriott has some of the highest MF's around, but they seem to also put a higher percentage of annual MF's towards reserves than many places. Low reserves seems like a ticking time bomb that will always catch up to owners in the end.

 

[Fayeoctober]

RonB - the WiFi issue was addressed and completed as of the end of October. So far there have been no complaints and when we were there for a meeting last weekend it worked fine. It hasn't been tested yet with peak season usage but all indications are that it will do well.
RLS50 and maybe others - I think I can say without any threat of libel since it is true - that up until 2014 when my husband was elected to the Interval Owners Association there could have been some mismanagement of funds (although that stopped when SPM came on Board) and some actions that weren't in the best interests of the owners. The President of the Interval Owners Association was a part of the original Developer's team and until 2014, the voting was such that the long-term interests of the Resort were not always kept in mind or however, I can safely say it. SPM controls all the funds in and out and the Interval Owners Assocation is not involved in terms of receiving any funds.
The SPM web-site (which is accessible to all owners with computers) provides detailed information on how funds were spent and how they are budgeted. Maintenance fees were kept much too low and the IOA has started the catch-up process. For 2017 maintenance fees were kept the same but a $200 assessment was billed. Owners are being given the opportunity to vote on what they want in the way of interior upgrades, how much they are willing to pay for them and over what time period. If owners are willing to put up with a number of years of maintenance fee increases (maybe in the vicinity of 7%) starting in 2018, the IOA hopes to be able to start building a reserve. Admittedly, the issue of delinquent owners is a problem but SPM is doing more work with the Collection agencies as far as that is concerned. The IOAis also doing mailings with regard to the termination issue.
In the future the IOA may be looking at a strategy for Owners who are current with their fees to turn back their units in they desire. If this goes through, some cost to the owner is likely to be involved but it will be less than the cost of paying an upfront fee to a LLC.
We hope to see BIS get into good financial footing.
I do want to mention that all of this is my opinion and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Interval Owners Association.

 

[dougrm3]

Hello,
Hope you don't mind a non-owner commenting. Love that your HOA board is reaching out to improve communications and satisfaction.

Our family has been owner at Barrier Island Station Kitty hawk (Now Beachwoods) until a week ago (Just sold our July week on TUG marketplace). We liked the "old" feeling of Barrier Island Station and are looking at BIS Duck for a future resale. We'll be down this summer in a rental at BIS Duck to see the resort.

 

[Fayeoctober]

I wanted to provide a few updates regarding BIS Duck. First I want to mention that all the information below is my opinion and doesn't represent the opinion of the Board.

With regard to communications, there is now a bi-weekly update on what is going on at BIS Duck. This is a big step and is available on the web-site and through Email for those owners who have provided Email addresses.

With regard to the Termination issue - less than half of the owners have voted. Not voting is the same as a "No Vote." All the buildings except for 500-800 require a 75% "For" so that the timeshare can continue as a timeshare. The 500-800 buildings require 67%. This will not become an issue for another 7 years, but we currently have at least 22% delinquencies and it is my understanding that even the delinquent owners are entitled to a vote. I don't know where the attorney is seeing this, but it has been accepted as a fact by the Board. One owner has already commented that with a 75% vote required, and a 22% delinquency rate, that the owner doesn't see how this can become a "go" given that some owners not in arrears have already voted "Against." As the spouse of a Board Member, I know some information but I can only share information that has already been made public. My husband has tried to stress the importance of do something on the Delinquency rates as they impact the Termination vote, but it doesn't seem like some of the other Board members are getting it.

The Exteriors of our Buildings really look nice, but most the the Interiors haven't been updated in years. I think this is because maintenance fees weren't adequate; while the Developer was still trying to sell unit weeks, the Developer wanted to keep fees as low as possible; and whatever reserve once was available, was used for Operating expenses. I think that most of the owners who responded to a survey regarding Interior updates indicated they wanted them, but that will cost money. Some owners probably didn't respond until the Terminations issue is resolved because why spend money on something may not be viable in 10 years?

It is my understanding that the first time the current Board was made aware of the extent and amount of the delinquent weeks was a little more than a year ago. I don't know if the prior president (who was part of the original Developers team) told the management company not to share this information, or if she didn't say anything and the management company just didn't provide the information? Something seems not right to me about this. For example more than 25% of the current delinquent owner weeks owe in excess of $7,000. I don't know how much of that is interest but given the assessment and the maintenance fees, it seems this represents at least 7 years worth of being delinquent. Why wasn't this information provided to the Board earlier or was it provided to the former President and she chose not to share it? I don't know and I really can't ask the management company questions about this - only the Board can and I don't know why they haven't?

The 2017 Budget included additional funds set aside for Legal Fees. It was supposed to provide for seed money for some foreclosures this year. Instead for a number of reasons, legal fees are going over the Budget without any foreclosures. I personally think the base amount for legal fees was too low and that the 2018 Budget needs to be increased significantly to have at least 60 foreclosures. Assuming nothing else changes, this alone would require an increase in maintenance fees.

Any advice or comments are appreciated. Thank you in advance.

 

[RLS50]

Faye,

Just some thoughts on your comments...

- The level of communications being shared with the owners is outstanding. Email, SPM Resorts website, and the BIS Facebook page are all being updated or monitored or responded to.

- The current response rate is not surprising. It is a common feature of any by mail / email campaign. There is a wide range of factors for this. People get too much mail already, people get distracted and forget, or emails get lost because of spam filters, or because email addresses haven't been updated with the new one, etc, etc.

IMO this effort was always going to require contracting with a company that specializes in these types of efforts. This company would have a staff that would be provided a list of every week, every unit, and every owner and then working that list to make contact with every owner and get a response. They keep working the lists until they reach and get a response from everyone. I have heard this effort might be started for a very minimal cost. The sooner it gets started the better. Ideally it will be started before end of 2017.

- As far as delinquent accounts having the same voting rights, while I am no lawyer and I guess that could be true in the legal sense, being delinquent pretty much takes away most of the rights an owner has in relation to having usage. They still technically own the property so maybe they continue to own the voting rights? Not sure but there would seem to potentially be an opening there for arguing against their rights to retain a vote while in arrears. I suspect the confusion is because there is no clear language in the master documents dealing with the situation?

I would push the attorneys for potential contingency strategies around this group of delinquent owners, most certainly the owners delinquent over 90-180 days. That suggests an abdication of their ownership and all corresponding voting rights. At the very least one would think this group of units/weeks/owners in limbo would/should be removed from the voting pool entirely and no longer count towards the overall percentage (until at such time their unit was foreclosed upon and a new active owner was in place).

Those owners who have abdicated their ownership should not be allowed to negatively impact the vote of active owners. From a legal perspective if hypothetically the vote eventually failed due to these delinquent owners, I would think this would open the resort to legal action from real owners who voted Yes only to see their vote negated by phantom owners. I would think the lawyers should focus the risk mitigation strategy around the owners who are present and accounted for, not the owners who disappeared (for whatever reason) long ago. JMO.

 

[Fayeoctober]

RLS50 - thank you for your response. When I mentioned our 22% delinquency rate, I am including only those owners who owe more than just this year's maintenance fees, so they are all delinquent for a at least a year. Yes there is no clear language in the master documents, but the lawyer/s all seem sure - or at least that is my understanding - that the delinquent voters need to be able to vote. I personally have no problem with their being allowed to vote; I just don't want those who are seriously delinquent and who chose not to vote, to be counted. I am not sure how to challenge the lawyer/s opinion, and it seems to me that the Board isn't thinking of doing so. As it is, the legal fees this year have gone significantly over budget, and the budget included some money for foreclosures which haven't begun. Finally do you know if the term "Phantom Owners" is generally understood to also include individuals who don't pay maintenance fees or does it just apply to LLCs or "Viking Ship" type owners? I wanted to have our timeshare not allow sales to any LLC that doesn't have a proven record of paying maintenance fees but I was told that would be putting a restriction on the owners. I don't understand why North Carolina doesn't have more legislation going to protect against those why buy a timeshare and never don't pay fees?

 

[Maple_Leaf]

I wanted to provide a few updates regarding BIS Duck. First I want to mention that all the information below is my opinion and doesn't represent the opinion of the Board.

With regard to communications, there is now a bi-weekly update on what is going on at BIS Duck. This is a big step and is available on the web-site and through Email for those owners who have provided Email addresses.

With regard to the Termination issue - less than half of the owners have voted. Not voting is the same as a "No Vote." All the buildings except for 500-800 require a 75% "For" so that the timeshare can continue as a timeshare. The 500-800 buildings require 67%. This will not become an issue for another 7 years, but we currently have at least 22% delinquencies and it is my understanding that even the delinquent owners are entitled to a vote. I don't know where the attorney is seeing this, but it has been accepted as a fact by the Board. One owner has already commented that with a 75% vote required, and a 22% delinquency rate, that the owner doesn't see how this can become a "go" given that some owners not in arrears have already voted "Against." As the spouse of a Board Member, I know some information but I can only share information that has already been made public. My husband has tried to stress the importance of do something on the Delinquency rates as they impact the Termination vote, but it doesn't seem like some of the other Board members are getting it.

The Exteriors of our Buildings really look nice, but most the the Interiors haven't been updated in years. I think this is because maintenance fees weren't adequate; while the Developer was still trying to sell unit weeks, the Developer wanted to keep fees as low as possible; and whatever reserve once was available, was used for Operating expenses. I think that most of the owners who responded to a survey regarding Interior updates indicated they wanted them, but that will cost money. Some owners probably didn't respond until the Terminations issue is resolved because why spend money on something may not be viable in 10 years?

It is my understanding that the first time the current Board was made aware of the extent and amount of the delinquent weeks was a little more than a year ago. I don't know if the prior president (who was part of the original Developers team) told the management company not to share this information, or if she didn't say anything and the management company just didn't provide the information? Something seems not right to me about this. For example more than 25% of the current delinquent owner weeks owe in excess of $7,000. I don't know how much of that is interest but given the assessment and the maintenance fees, it seems this represents at least 7 years worth of being delinquent. Why wasn't this information provided to the Board earlier or was it provided to the former President and she chose not to share it? I don't know and I really can't ask the management company questions about this - only the Board can and I don't know why they haven't?

The 2017 Budget included additional funds set aside for Legal Fees. It was supposed to provide for seed money for some foreclosures this year. Instead for a number of reasons, legal fees are going over the Budget without any foreclosures. I personally think the base amount for legal fees was too low and that the 2018 Budget needs to be increased significantly to have at least 60 foreclosures. Assuming nothing else changes, this alone would require an increase in maintenance fees.

Any advice or comments are appreciated. Thank you in advance.

Many of those delinquent owners will never respond. An owner 7 years in arrears is just hoping you'll forget about him. He's not likely to break radio silence by voting to continue the timeshare. You need to get those voting rights away from him through some type of foreclosure or amnesty. Perhaps a deed back program will bring those delinquent owners out of the shadows and allow the Board to take possession of those units without a lot of legal drama and expense.

 

[RLS50]

Many of those delinquent owners will never respond. An owner 7 years in arrears is just hoping you'll forget about him. He's not likely to break radio silence by voting to continue the timeshare. You need to get those voting rights away from him through some type of foreclosure or amnesty. Perhaps a deed back program will bring those delinquent owners out of the shadows and allow the Board to take possession of those units without a lot of legal drama and expense.

I also believe this to be true. IMO trying to track down delinquent owners for a vote that are past due for longer than 6-12 months is a waste of time and resources. I would think the time and money would be better spent developing a legally defensible strategy to "reclaim" their voting rights since they are delinquent (I seriously doubt any of these delinquent owners are going to challenge it in court in the future since that would expose them to a past due judgment). Or find the money to just accelerate forecloses and take the property back from them and reclaim the voting rights.

 

[Gregory F. Sullivan]

Does anyone remember or know the history of Barrier Island Station at Duck with regards to the VIP Building or Building 200? I was just curious as to why these two buildings were different from the remainder of the buildings at the resort. Thanks in advance for the information.

 

[Fayeoctober]

The 200 building was built as condos and was never part of the timeshare regime. I am not sure why it was done that way, but since the building was one of the two closest to the beach, maybe the developer thought they could get their money quicker by not having to sell 51 weeks for each unit. I don't know what the 200 building units originally sold for but I think they are selling in the high $200s now. It is my understanding that the 100 building also started out that way but later owners were given the opportunity to convert to timeshares and all but one owner chose to do that. Finally in terms of the VIP building, I don't know much about it but it sleeps a larger number of people and is not subject to the termination issue. One of the original developers was President of the Interval Owners Association for years, and I think that under her tenure, information sharing may not have occurred as much as now.

 

[rfuruta]

Hello, thanks in advance for any thoughts...my family is considering purchasing a unit in the 400 building for week 29. I am brand new to timeshares and it sounds like the owners are working through some issues now. What should I be aware of?

 

[Maple_Leaf]

Hello, thanks in advance for any thoughts...my family is considering purchasing a unit in the 400 building for week 29. I am brand new to timeshares and it sounds like the owners are working through some issues now. What should I be aware of?

It's a mess. You have a good chance of losing your money when the HOA fails to get the required votes to continue the timeshare regime. In the interim, you have a good chance of having to pay additional special assessments for proposed interior renovations.

On a positive note...location, location, location.

 

[Egret1986]

It's a mess. You have a good chance of losing your money when the HOA fails to get the required votes to continue the timeshare regime. In the interim, you have a good chance of having to pay additional special assessments for proposed interior renovations.

On a positive note...location, location, location.

Agreed. I was an owner at this resort since pre-construction of most of the buildings there (32 years). I love the location and it has had a special place in my heart. It was our first timeshare purchase and we have enjoyed many vacations there. I sold my last ownership at BIS recently. I'm not willing to pay more special assessments, which I think will happen. I personally don't believe that they will ever get the required votes to continue. The interior renovations would be nice and maybe worth the cost of special assessments if that was the only issue. It's not. As stated, "it's a mess." I wish all the owners and Board members well.

 

[Fayeoctober]

Egret1986 - I am really sorry to hear you say this. I do agree that if interior renovations are to be done, a special assessment/maintenance fee increase will be necessary. I think the Board members are working really hard and SPM at least doesn't seem to be too concerned right now about the termination vote. They feel we shouldn't worry that much for another couple years. My husband and I are very concerned but feel a number of the buildings have a good chance of making it - what we don't know is how it will work if some make it and some don't? Anyway, I am sorry you no longer own a unit there.

rfuruta - I don't know what is the price of the Week 29 in the 400 building that your family is considering. Week 29 is an excellent week and if you are getting a good price - you can send me a private message on what I think that is - I think you will greatly enjoy BIS Duck. I would be prepared for some additional funds to go toward renovating the interiors but I suspect you might be able to get that money by renting the unit out for one year. This is just my opinion and I have to admit to being biased.

 

[pedro47]

The very best thing about this resort is it Location, Location & Waterfront Location. Waterfront land on OBX is priceless on OBX This resort ocean front land must be worth million of dollars to someone.

 

[Egret1986]

SPM at least doesn't seem to be too concerned right now about the termination vote. They feel we shouldn't worry that much for another couple years.

Yes, the Board is working very hard. However, SPM not being too concerned right now and suggesting owners should not worry that much for another couple of years is a scary prospect for me. SPM's lack of concern concerns me, personally. My statements are my personal opinion based on being an owner, seeing what's happened at the resort over the years (32), attending HOA meetings, and knowing the obstacles facing the resort in the not too distant future. If I'm wrong; I can live with that.

Again, I wish the owners and Board members well.

 

[RLS50]

From my conversations with Board members (I think there are some excellent and qualified people on the Board at BIS-Duck) and reviewing the status reports on the termination issue, I am actually cautiously optimistic they will get this done. However, in this situation failure should not be an option. Not even for one building. In my view success requires that the termination clause is successfully resolved for all buildings. I think the Board is correct to remain hyper vigilant on this issue and even though we are talking 2024 and 2027 I do not think it is "too early" to address it.

Worst case scenario, I think that SPM and the Board should do whatever is required from a legal perspective to make sure the sunset clause is resolved successfully. Even if that eventually requires playing hardball. For example, I still believe there is a valid legal argument that those owners in delinquency (20% +/-) have lost voting rights (just like they lost their usage rights) and those voting rights are now owned by the Board and SPM.

One other comment as to worst case scenario options, there have been statements already made about the great resort location. BIS-Duck might be the single best piece of resort real estate in all of OBX. This property is unique and special. So the real estate here really is worth many millions of dollars. I have to believe that one of the bigger systems would be interested in owning and operating this. A Marriott, a Wyndham, or should I even dare utter the name...a Diamond (of these hypothetical options I would prefer Marriott). So another option the Board has in the future is to approach one of these bigger companies who could buy up all the delinquent weeks in one single action and the problem would be resolved immediately. Quite frankly, if I worked in M&A (strategic acquisitions) for one of these companies and wanted to establish a presence in OBX or expand my presence in OBX (i.e. Diamond), I would already be targeting this resort and buying up these delinquent weeks to establish a large ownership / voting block position. I am not advocating for that, I only lay the option out there because again, I do not believe failure is or should be an option.

As to the resort itself, we have had guests and friends use some of our weeks this year. All the reports we have received have been very positive and everybody has really enjoyed themselves. In fact we have friends staying here this very week and they are loving the place and already want to go back next year. Another positive of this resort that may not get mentioned enough is the resort staff. They are one of the most well trained and knowledgeable resort staffs we deal with, and I am including the Marriott properties we are owners at in that statement.

JMO.

 

[Fayeoctober]

I recently posted on the Beachwoods thread - in at least one post BIS Duck was mentioned - but didn't get much in the way of comments so I thought I would post this here since it is really about BIS Duck. My husband is on the Board at BIS Duck. He gets to read all or most of the comment cards submitted especially those which come in via RCI. The comments are generally not good and in addition to those about the interiors - which we will be dealing with hopefully this year - a significant area of concern seems to be the starter packs and the number of towels we provide. It seems like RCI traders expect more in the starter pack - more dishwashing detergent,soap, toilet paper, towels, etc. In my mind starter packs should be just that starter packs. (When BIS Duck was just providing a few coffee filters which were folded, I had a problem with that given the extremely low price of filters and the folding ruined them, but it is my understanding that has been corrected.) Since the Board wants to consider adding to the starter packs (we are working with SPM on this) as well as some other things that will increase costs (again for now forget about the interior issue) I am wondering if BIS Duck should consider implementing a daily fee for resort amenities in the Summertime for RCI Traders as well as renters other than those renting from an Owner? I have not discussed this at all with my husband but if people are expecting more, maybe they should be willing to pay for it. By the way when the lack of good WiFi was one of the main concerns, BIS spent a fair amount of money for that, so in addition to our great location, we do have excellent WiFi which it sounds like Beachwood doesn't. Some thoughts on implementing a daily fee for RCI traders and renters not renting from Owners is appreciated? Along with my husband, I am looking for ways to increase our revenues, and if RCI traders have these expectations, which will cost additional funds to fulfill, then maybe they need to help pay for them. Finally I noticed a Question Mark appears above my name. I don't know how to get rid of it although I admit I started this thread with a question.

 

[RLS50]

Faye,

IMO BIS-Duck has as strong, or maybe even a stronger argument, for a summer peak season amenity fee for renters and traders as Beachwoods does. Beachwoods has updated units, and a very nice outdoor and indoor pool (kiddie water park), but still has projects not completely finished, especially the beach access portion of the project, and the individual units still don't have WiFi. BIS-Duck has dated interiors (soon to be addressed), but nice indoor and outdoor pools, (now) strong WiFi in each unit, a fully staffed, functioning, and successful Snack Shack, and excellent direct beachfront access.

I am not strongly for or against amenity fees. We recently stayed in some JW Marriott's at different locations and they charged us daily amenity fees of about $18-$22. It didn't bother me though because we got daily housekeeping, parking, great WiFi, great pool complexes, and discounts to onsite dining. So it isn't the fee so much as what you are getting for the fee.

IMO Diamond didn't do themselves any favors when they rapidly implemented daily amenity fees at the former Gold Key resorts, but couldn't even provide renters and traders decent WiFi in their unit. With non-functioning WiFi and so many uncompleted projects it made people feel like they were getting ripped off to pay a daily amenity fee for amenities that either didn't actually exist (i.e. WiFi) or weren't yet ready for prime time.

I am usually not one to advocate for amenity fees, but if BIS-Duck could raise additional revenue by implementing a summer peak season amenity fee, I think it should be considered. One thing for sure that will help give BIS-Duck a fighting chance of making a complete comeback is continuing to provide and maintain great amenities. If a daily fee for non-owner rentals and traders during summer can help provide additional revenue in that regard it should be considered. JMO.

 

[Egret1986]

I recently posted on the Beachwoods thread - in at least one post BIS Duck was mentioned - but didn't get much in the way of comments so I thought I would post this here since it is really about BIS Duck. My husband is on the Board at BIS Duck. He gets to read all or most of the comment cards submitted especially those which come in via RCI. The comments are generally not good and in addition to those about the interiors - which we will be dealing with hopefully this year - a significant area of concern seems to be the starter packs and the number of towels we provide. It seems like RCI traders expect more in the starter pack - more dishwashing detergent,soap, toilet paper, towels, etc. In my mind starter packs should be just that starter packs. (When BIS Duck was just providing a few coffee filters which were folded, I had a problem with that given the extremely low price of filters and the folding ruined them, but it is my understanding that has been corrected.) Since the Board wants to consider adding to the starter packs (we are working with SPM on this) as well as some other things that will increase costs (again for now forget about the interior issue) I am wondering if BIS Duck should consider implementing a daily fee for resort amenities in the Summertime for RCI Traders as well as renters other than those renting from an Owner? I have not discussed this at all with my husband but if people are expecting more, maybe they should be willing to pay for it. By the way when the lack of good WiFi was one of the main concerns, BIS spent a fair amount of money for that, so in addition to our great location, we do have excellent WiFi which it sounds like Beachwood doesn't. Some thoughts on implementing a daily fee for RCI traders and renters not renting from Owners is appreciated? Along with my husband, I am looking for ways to increase our revenues, and if RCI traders have these expectations, which will cost additional funds to fulfill, then maybe they need to help pay for them. Finally I noticed a Question Mark appears above my name. I don't know how to get rid of it although I admit I started this thread with a question.

Well, I was just notified by RCI that Barrier Island Station Duck and Barrier Island's Ocean Pines will now have a $125 "cleaning/linen fee" for incoming exchangers. I haven't exchanged in, but simply have a reservation for my "home week" through RCI Points for my Ocean Pines week. I plan to contact the resort to find out if by utilizing my home (deeded) week if I, too, will have to pay this fee. I don't feel that I should since this is my deeded week. However, I'll have to find out what the resort says and go from there.

It states that no matter if it's for 1 night or more nights that there will be a $125 fee for "exchangers".

While I have for many years enjoyed owning and exchanging into both Barrier Island Station Duck and Barrier Island's Ocean Pines, I now know that exchanging in to these resorts will no longer interest me due to what I consider an unreasonable fee. I am currently looking for an exchange during March for the OBX Taste of the Beach. However, these two resorts will no longer be a consideration.

Over the years, I have seen the argument on other threads that as a timeshare owner, I am already paying "cleaning/linen" or amenity fees that are part of my maintenance fee. Why should those exchanging in to use my week have an added fee tacked on?

Location, location, location is great. However, in considering that I'm being charged such a high fee for cleaning and linens (which should be a part of any timeshare stay), I'll opt out for exchanging back in when I need different dates from which I own. BIS and Ocean Pines timeshare exchanges aren't the only "game in town" when staying on the Outer Banks.

A $125 add-on fee for cleaning and linens is ridiculous. Any add-on cleaning fee for exchanging back in would have been questionable, but $125; that's ridiculous. I look forward to hearing how such a fee is justifiable. My gosh, it seems like those responsible for this fee are really "grasping at straws". It's very telling to me. Maintenance fee + RCI membership fee + exchange fee + resort cleaning fee = too much to even consider an exchange into either resort, especially during the off or shoulder seasons.

I bet it was a tough one to name this new fee. It couldn't be called an amenity fee since the amenities, especially at Ocean Pines, couldn't justify such a high fee. But "cleaning/linen" fee....? It seems quite obnoxious to me, whatever you call it.

Also obnoxious, RCI stating that their same cancellation rules apply if you cancel due to this newly created fee. One should be able to cancel an exchange when a fee is added after an exchange has been made or it should be waived if it did not exist at the time of exchange.