Sheraton Vistana Resort Special Assessment[MERGED]

Nothing in that letter says they can or cannot have a special assessment to cover refubishing units. It says that they have to charge everyone relatively the same amount (they have to have a good explanation for why some units have higher MFs than others). If this is the relevant part of the statues, it is silent on this issue. And silence means they can do whatever they want.

Why keep questioning theright to assess? It is absolute in the law.

clsmit said:

Nothing in that letter says they can or cannot have a special assessment to cover refubishing units. It says that they have to charge everyone relatively the same amount (they have to have a good explanation for why some units have higher MFs than others). If this is the relevant part of the statues, it is silent on this issue. And silence means they can do whatever they want.

Click to expand...

Most of that message deals with the early days of a timeshare when the developer may be subsidizing the fees. As you say above the absolute right for a legally constituted Board of Directors in FL to assess owners annual fees and/or Special Assessments, provided they follow the rules of notification and proper accounting, is not in question. If owners try to challenge the SA as being "illegal" they will be wasting their time and money. If there were technical problems with how the SA was noticed and approved or if the proper documentation and budget hasn't been presented to owners THEN they may have a case. But even those are tough items to prove and will need costly legal help to do. How many owners are willing to pay up for the fight vs simply paying the fees or walking away/selling? Not too many I'll bet.

vistana assessment fees

well we own 2 wks in the Spas and we received our assessment fees last month.........$1626.00 per unit !!!!! This is rediculous. We would be interested in any feedback on this as to a class action or something. From what I can see most are paying it or just selling out. without a list of owners to contact what else can we do? gumbert2@aol.com

Whoa -- That Sounds Like Big Bux For Sure.

gumbert 2 said:

well we own 2 wks in the Spas and we received our assessment fees last month.........$1626.00 per unit !

Click to expand...

$1,626 (per unit) just for the Special Assessment ?

Or a bill of $1,626 per unit for the regular annual fees and the Special Assessment combined ?

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

AwayWeGo said:

$1,626 (per unit) just for the Special Assessment ?

Or a bill of $1,626 per unit for the regular annual fees and the Special Assessment combined ?

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

Click to expand...

I believe it's just for the assessment. The Cascades is similar (approx. $1500) to be paid over 3 installments.

Glorian

Joshadelic said:

Maybe some of the expenses, but who is using toilet paper, paper towels, linens, soap, etc. in the units if they aren't being occupied...what about water for showers, laundry and dishes. They don't need housekeepers to come in weekly and make the beds...it's not like the construction guys vacationing there.

Click to expand...

While I'm not happy about the assessment, and have doubts about costs, we are getting our week use for the year. I'm sure they'll plan the work to be in and out as quickly as possible, so I don't think any given unit will out of commission for too long. As long as one gets their use year, I don't see how you cannot expect to pay mf. Now, whether or not they ought to have been building a bigger reserve in the mf for this kind of work is certainly a very good question.

Glorian

Can you give us the name of the law firm that you used and some information about how you went about it? Thanks, Marijalas

Complain to Florida Regulation Division & Petition

There are many on this thread who have given us great information and advice. One of the major steps is simple, comtact the Florida Department of Business & Regulation, Division of Florida Condominiums, Timeshares & Mobile Homes - cut & paste use the link below, supplied by Nodge:

http://www.myflorida.com/dbpr/lsc/documents/complaint_english.pdf

It is apparent that Starwood is not interested in speaking to its owner, nor is the Board. This refusal makes one question the legality of their actions. We all know at this juncture that big business takes many actions that are questionable and that if they are not held accountable will proceed.
I have spoken to a lawyer on a conversational basis and that person told me that even if we do pay the assessment, that will not prevent us from starting a class action suit.

I have set up a separate email: mariatimeshare@yahoo.com to track who wants to be involved. If you give me your Section, Week & Unit #, we can start a list. For your information, my husband & I are Courts, D27 week 21 & 22.

Westin Kierland Villa's Special Assessments capped at 20%

Hey Gang,

I was reading the Westin Kierland Villas “Vacation Ownership Declaration For Scottsdale Senoran Villas Vacation Ownership Plan” (a/k/a the CC&R’s for WKV) and stumbled onto the following paragraph:

On page 24, Section 10.9 “Limit on Special Assessments” it says . . . ..

“The total of all Special Assessments charged to a Vacation Ownership Interest in a Fiscal Year may not exceed 20% of the Regular Assessment for that Fiscal Year. The limit, however, is 50% for Special Assessments to pay the costs to repair or rebuild a damaged or destroyed Vacation Unit or its Common Furnishings. The Board may exceed the limit if approved by the Developer, and by the vote or written consent of a Majority of the Owners Voting (not counting Vacation Ownership Interests owned by the Developer). No vote or written consent is required if (a) the Special Assessment for a Vacation Ownership Interest would not have exceeded the limit except for an increase in taxes or other governmental assessments (for example real property taxes) or utility expenses, or (b) if the funds are needed to pay the cost to comply with a court order or the requirements of the Condominium Documents or the Master Project Documents or the Declaration of Use Rights, (c) if the funds are necessary for an emergency situation such as repairs or maintenance necessary for personal or public safety, or (d) if the funds are necessary for repairs or maintenance that could not reasonably be foreseen by the Board in preparing its Budget.”

If any Vistana Resort owners have access to the recorded “ownership plan” for their own VR Phases, it may be worth your time to weed through it and see if a similar paragraph is present. If so, SVO’s crony-controlled boards at VR are in big, big trouble.

Good Luck,
-nodge

If anyone wants to read the full WKV “Ownership Plan” recorded with Maricopa County (which is something you orange eating, lurking WKV board members may want peruse once in a while), click on this link, and enter document number 2002 0790610 in the “Recording No.” field.

FYI, the “Ownership Plan” for WKV includes in section 10.6 (page 24) a requirement that “[t]he Board may not adopt a Budget that increases the Regular Assessment of any Vacation Ownership Interest by more than 20% over the Regular Assessment of the previous year unless approved by the Developer and by vote or written consent of a Majority of the Owners Voting . . . ..”

It’s nice to know that some, albeit small, limits are in place to keep SVO in check at least at some resorts. VR owners do a little digging through your VR recorded “Ownership Plan” documents, and you may be pleasantly surprised with what you find. –n

Very interesting and thanks for posting the link, nodge.

FWIW, in California all HOAs (at least, non-timeshare types) cannot by law increase assessments more than 20% without a vote by the membership. This may be similar with timeshare in Arizona (and elsewhere, one hopes).

This document also clarifies the nature of Kierland's "mandatory" membership in SVN (page 14):

6.4 Nature of Membership. Membership in the club is a condition of ownership of each and every Vacation Ownership Interest. If a Vacation Ownership Interest is owned by more than one person, they will all be members of the Club. An Owner will continue to be a member of the Club so long as he or she remains an Owner. A person's membership in the Club cannot be separated from his or her Vacation Ownership Interest. If a person is no longer an "Owner" then his or her membership in the Club will end automatically. If the Plan is no longer part of the Club, then each Owner's membership in the Club will end automatically.

Click to expand...

And, on page 23:

"10.2 Allocation of Plan Expenses" divides expenses by:

1 bed premium = 61.6%
1 bed = 38.4%
2 bed = 100%

And, on page 29:

"12.3 Unreserved and Unused Use Periods" basically states that the developer may use any unreserved unit that is not reserved as of 60 days before check-in day, and may dispose of that unit in any way they choose.

More interesting tidbids in this document. I encourage all of you to download and review it.

Received the special assessment of $1626 per unit (we have 2) for the SPAS today; perfect ending to a perfect day! Looking into giving away our units...along with more than a few Vistana owners I suspect. I am missing something; these villas are being upgraded at exhorbitant cost; $96,200 per villa for whom? Though I'm not usually prone to believing there is a conspiracy; this stinks.

OK gang, it appears you may need a little help with your paper chase through VR’s recorded documents:

Here is a link to access Florida’s Orange Country recorded documents.

I typed in “Vistana” in the “Grantee” field (and selected "wild card search") and it pulled up a bazillion recorded documents. I click on the first ‘Deed” and looked at it. It turned out to be a deed recording a “Spas” purchase by someone back in 1988. That deed refers to a “Declaration of Condominium of Vistana Spa Condominium as recorded in Official Records Book 3677, Page 335 . . ..”

I then went back to the recorded documents link and entered “3577 in the “Book” field, and “335” in the “page” field, and behold, the secrets of Vistana Resort unfolded.

From what I was able to read regarding the SPA’s section, there is no cap on maintenance fee increases, BUT there is also no express right set forth that allows the Board to establish a special assessment for purely cosmetic improvements. (At least in the original SPAS declaration recorded. I didn’t check to see if that declaration has been amended, etc.) The only mention of any right to impose special assessments in the original declaration is to rebuild the units after a disaster should insurance not be sufficient to fix everything.

It seems to me that if this language hasn’t been modified since inception, an effective argument could be made that the SPA’s board wasn’t authorized by the original declaration to implement this recent and massive “Special Assessment” for the reasons that it did.

Of course, I could be wrong, but you now have the tools to find and root through the documents more thoroughly yourselves for the answers.

Good Luck!
-nodge

nodge said:

From what I was able to read regarding the SPA’s section, there is no cap on maintenance fee increases, BUT there is also no express right set forth that allows the Board to establish a special assessment for purely cosmetic improvements. (At least in the original SPAS declaration recorded. I didn’t check to see if that declaration has been amended, etc.) The only mention of any right to impose special assessments in the original declaration is to rebuild the units after a disaster should insurance not be sufficient to fix everything.

It seems to me that if this language hasn’t been modified since inception, an effective argument could be made that the SPA’s board wasn’t authorized by the original declaration to implement this recent and massive “Special Assessment” for the reasons that it did.

Of course, I could be wrong, but you now have the tools to find and root through the documents more thoroughly yourselves for the answers.

Good Luck!
-nodge

Click to expand...

Florida timeshare laws - which supersede the documents as every Association is finding out since October 1, 2008 when the Legislature unilaterally imposed new term restrictions - allows for special assessments. No limits. Doesn't matter what the documents say (and the Spa's don't seem to address it anyway). The Board has the right to impose the assessment. That is a dead end argument with no legal basis.

Do The H. O. A. - B. O. D.s Stand Pat ? Or Do They Amend To Conform ?

timeos2 said:

Florida timeshare laws - which supersede the documents as every Association is finding out since October 1, 2008 when the Legislature unilaterally imposed new term restrictions - allows for special assessments.

Click to expand...

With the provisions of Florida law superseding the basic timeshare condo documents, can the various timeshare HOA-BODs just keep chugging along as before, going by their familiar established condo documents except where some specific provisions are overridden ?

Or are the timeshare HOA-BOD's obliged to rewrite their basic condo documents so that the documents conform with state law ?

What about condo-doc provisions requiring action by a majority of owners, rather than just a vote by the HOA-BOD ?

It's always something, eh ?

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

Get it in writing.It MAY actually turn out that way

AwayWeGo said:

With the provisions of Florida law superseding the basic timeshare condo documents, can the various timeshare HOA-BODs just keep chugging along as before, going by their familiar established condo documents except where some specific provisions are overridden ?

Or are the timeshare HOA-BOD's obliged to rewrite their basic condo documents so that the documents conform with state law ?

What about condo-doc provisions requiring action by a majority of owners, rather than just a vote by the HOA-BOD ?

It's always something, eh ?

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

Click to expand...

They can live with the restrictions imposed by the State rules and ignore (by necessity) the documents OR choose to alter the documents to conform. Sometimes (such as the Board terms) there is an option to accept different rules if the documents are changed vs the default of the State mandates.

Even the rules regarding the type of majority required to alter the docs - a simple 50% or a "super majority" type rule where for example a 70% total vote is required with at least 51% of the 70% voting yes for it to pass - can be overridden by the Legislature. In fact the new term limit rule came with a specific 50% owner vote allowed for altering the documents regardless of what the resort documents may say. Even in writing things aren't always guaranteed, are they?

timeos2 said:

Florida timeshare laws - which supersede the documents as every Association is finding out since October 1, 2008 when the Legislature unilaterally imposed new term restrictions - allows for special assessments. No limits.

Click to expand...

I don’t claim to know anything about Florida or its laws. All I know about Florida is that the Ft. Myers (RSW) airport has these three 15 foot giant bug wall sculptures climbing the wall in the main terminal:



I assumed that they were there as some sort of warning about the area given to us new vistors. (I digress, but I would have loved to have been a "fly on the wall" (Get it) in the meetings that led to mounting these giant bugs at the airport . . . . "We need something to jazz up the main lobby area." "How about something that showcases something unique to our part of the world?" "Great Idea, but what?" "I know . . . Bugs . . . Giant Bugs!" "Excellent! Order 3, because we have lots of 'em here and we should convey that notion to vistors too . . . and make 'em flying bugs, because we are an airport after all" "Genius! Pure Genius!")

I did a little Google searching for new Florida timeshare laws, and found this link that summarizes the changes to Florida’s timeshare laws implemented on Oct 1, 2008.

Which one of these changes gives HOB’s the right to impose massive “special assessments” for purely cosmetic reasons when the original recorded condo documents only allow special assessments to rebuild following an uninsured disaster? Did the folks preparing this summary hide this “special assessment” nugget?

This summary is written to suggest that the new laws PROTECT homeowners, rather than allow board’s to screw-em better. For example, Sec 18 requires disclosure of BOD self-dealing, and Sec 19 requires 2/3 majority vote among homeowners for approval of such self-dealing transactions.

It would appear that SVO announced all the VR special assessments before Oct 1, 2008, even though it plans to implement some of them years from now, in order to avoid these new board disclosure obligations. Given the amount of the assessments in light of the work being performed, could it be that SVO pre-announced them to beat these new disclosure laws? More or less, one last gotcha before being forced to be held accountable?

Note to self. Do not buy a timeshare in Florida.

-nodge

not new

Those rules are not new. They date back to at least the early 90's. But after the Vistana docs were written.

timeos2 said:

Those rules are not new. They date back to at least the early 90's. But after the Vistana docs were written.

Click to expand...

So the "Pre-HB 995" columns for those sections in that state issued chart that say "no provision" is wrong too?

Hmmmm. Very strange laws (and notice of them) in Florida indeed.

Where does one go to learn of these laws without having to resort to posting things here on TUG and being flamed as being wrong of course?

-nodge

The real problem is the management

nodge said:

So the "Pre-HB 995" columns for those sections in that state issued chart that say "no provision" is wrong too?

Hmmmm. Very strange laws (and notice of them) in Florida indeed.

Where does one go to learn of these laws without having to resort to posting things here on TUG and being flamed as being wrong of course?

-nodge

Click to expand...

Not flaming you (far from it - glad you're here to learn!). There is just no basis to try to challenge the Board's right to impose a special assessment (assuming they followed the rules to do so) for any legitimate need at a resort/condo. Why waste time and effort as if that was an option? Challenge the proper notice, the quorum, the budget (they have to present one or it's illegal) but don't waste effort challenging the right to impose it.

Here is a small sample of one place it's mentioned in 718.503 (many of the 718 condo rules also apply to timeshare which has it's own set of rules under 721)

9. The responsibility of owners with regard to payment of regular or special assessments necessary for the operation of the property and the potential consequences of failure to pay such assessments.

Just one minor place it shows up stating if it's imposed you owe. There is also a spot - can't put my hands on it quickly - where it states the Board is under obligation to impose fees - including special assessments - for maintenance, repair or budget shortfalls once they are known. It's not even an option. If they don't the Board is violating it's fiduciary duties.

I hope the owners keep after this as it is an outrageous amount that reflects a long period of time where things must have been let go. The real problem here is common to far too many resorts. The developer has held on to management rather than turning it over to the owners and an independent management. No matter what the name - Wyndham, Marriott, DVC, Vistana - having the developer run things means the owners come last. Not a good way to operate.

From the summary of Florida's new laws posted by Nodge:

Section 17
Requires the developer to provide an architect or
engineer’s turnover inspection report stating required
maintenance, useful life & replacement costs of various
common elements.

Click to expand...

I wonder if they have filed this, and if so what it says. Might be worth looking up for someone facing thousands of dollars of special assessment.

Michael

Math Fun!

Hey Gang,

This thread informed us of a recently announced special assessment at Westin St. John. It totals $3114, payable over 3 years, for one of those fancypants 3 bedroom villas with its own private pool.

Back here on the mainland, from reading the present thread I understand that the “special assessment” at Vistana Resort is about $1700 for some sections, payable over the next year or so for each 2 bedroom villa.

At first glance, it appears that the WSJ folks are getting soaked even worse than you VR folks, but look what happens when we apply a little something that I like to call “math” to the mix.


Westin St. John Special Assessment (3 Bedroom Villa (2850 Square Feet))

50 weeks sold x $3114 = $155,700.00 (Total refurbishment money collected per villa)

$155,700.00 / 2850 Square Feet = $54.64 per square foot



Vistana Resort Special Assessment (2 Bedroom Villa (1025 Square Feet)

50 weeks sold x $1700.00 = $85,000.00 (Total refurbishment money collected per villa)

$85,000.00 / 1025 Square Feet = $82.93 per square foot ($28/SF more expensive than at WSJ)


Now here’s the fun math part:

($28 increased cost per SF / $54.64) X 100 = VR’s refurbishment costs per square foot are 51.24% higher than WSJ’s refurbishment costs!

I guess this all makes sense, what with WSJ being on a remote island far away from building materials so that everything must be shipped in and only having a relative handful of villas to refurbish vs. say, Orlando here on the mainland, with a Home Depot just down the street and having economies of scale associated with refurbishing hundreds upon hundreds of villas . . . . . Sheesh.

If you look at this link again, sec 6 of Florida’s new timeshare laws impose a duty that BOD’s “are required to adhere to a good faith and reasonably prudent person standard and provides for monetary damages and criminal penalties [That’s right baby, CRIMINAL penalties] for breach of this standard.”

So what say you Florida legal naysayers, in light of this data can a claim be made against the VR’s boards for violating this new Sec. 6?

VR board members: I recommend using some of those "costs and fees" (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) collected from your recent VR "special assessment" towards buying a copy of this book.

-nodge

Darn it nodge!

You know perfectly well timeshare developers have ALWAYS counted on the general public to be atrocious at math. They're entire business model depends on it. Why would you want to spoil all there fun! :hysterical:

Michael

PS. According to my wife's observations about her incoming high school math class, that assumption seems unlikely to become less valid in the future.

Proxy for Starwood Assessment and Renovation

Is there anyone going to Vistana for the Board Meeting or the Annual Meeting? Perhaps we should give them our Proxy vote. The lack of ability to communicate with our own Board of Directors makes it clear they do not have the owners best interests in mind.
Part of my letter to the Florida Dept of Business and Professional Regulation Division of Florida Condominiums, Tiemshares, and Mobile Homes:
1.Excessive and punitive renovation fees suggests poor management of funds.

2. Inability to reach anyone at Starwoods Vistana regarding these changes:

Requests by owners to access information regarding the refurbishment have gone unheeded or have received a form letter response. Owners are unable to reach anyone, except two Senior Collectors, Donald Maerz & Anna Perez, at the general 800 telephone number and an anonymous email address. The owners cannot reach their own Board of Directors in any way, yet they are asking us give them proxy to vote for us. The information provided in the Complete Makeover for Vistana Courts and the Vistana Condominium Association Refurbishment Project Frequently Asked Questions leaflets is insufficient because it only provides an estimate of the fees, which “will vary depending on future increases to labor and the cost of goods being replaced” and it does not demonstrate how the fees were arrived at nor how the money will be used.

3. Lack of Transparency
a. Brochures and letters extolling the changes have presented as if it the decision had been made. When we asked Mr,. Maerz for the Minutes of the Board Meeting where this was voted he replied that they hadn’t been transcribed yet. In fact, the Meeting has not been held yet.
b. Detail regarding future information will only be posted on site, when many timeshare owners are unable to view them until their assigned times at the timeshare.
c. Starwoods methods in dealing with owners creates an atmosphere of distrust and serious concern that the future meeting Board of Directors Meeting on November 21 and Annual meeting on December 8 does not have the owners best interests in mind.

Owners Listing

Again, I am compiling a list of owners of all areas of Vistana for future action:
For convenience I have created an email to receive information regarding your week and unit information to mariatimeshare@yaoo.com.