[2009] Why Do We Shame People Out Of Walking Away?

[e.bram]

For off season holders liquidation is the best(only) chance for them to get any value from their TS.

 

[DeniseM]

e.bram - I noticed you haven't answered TUGBrian's question in post #231 about your actual experience with taking TS resorts to court?

 

[rickandcindy23]

It's called "directors and officers liabilility insurance" usually shortened to "D&O" coverage.

Cindy, I've seen your posts on this subject before. I disagree with you on what the board should be doing about it. Notice that I also own at a ski resort.

I think we both agree that a timeshare has a long term problem when a significant portion of the units are valued by the market at zero or less. Unfortunately, many deep seasonal resorts are now in this situation because virtually all timeshares are set up so that maintenance depends on unit size, not rental value. Once the maintenance rises above the rental value, the only thing supporting people's long term willingness to pay is the tenuous ability to trade "up" through exchange companies.

I personally think boards should be much more proactive in offering to take back units that are at risk from going delinquent and either renting or RTUing them. Yes, I know it accelerates the process of the ski week owners (I am one) owning and having to fund the entire resort. However, I think it is much less expensive in the long run to get control of the process rather than wait for weeks to go delinquent and bemoaning the "evil" mud week owners who are acting in their own self interest.

All states offer substantial protection from liability to boards which make a diligent and good faith business decision. If anything, I think your board is more exposed to liability when it is aware of this long term problem and deliberately decides to do nothing about it but hope it goes away.

Tell me where we disagree. I think you and I are in agreement on everything. I don't think the mud week owners are evil, and I even feel badly that they bought from the developer at outrageous prices to own those weeks that are now worth <$0. Just as I think we were swindled, but that was a long time ago. I just think the mud week owners should use their weeks in the exchange system and be flexible. That would be the ideal. I would love to see owners use our inventory weeks as additional deposits to the exchange companies on a one-time basis, whenever they want an extra week. We take every week back from any owner who wants out, and that won't change. We have had several ski week owners that have asked to give their weeks back, and we have had no problem finding owners for those.

Prime summer is still valuable, and so is the ski season. The weeks worth < $0 are a total of ten weeks per year, with two of the weeks between 15-20 and 40-46 being maintenance weeks that were never sold as such. The shoulder weeks have low maintenance fees and are worth 53,500 points for a 3 bedroom as PFD. The two bedrooms are worth 38,000 points, so they are more expensive as PFD. The fees for those 3 bed weeks make them a decent deal as PFD. We are at 1 cent per point for PFD at $510 fees for the 3 beds. Add in the $26 PFD fee, and you are right at 1 cent. I think that is the way to market shoulder weeks that are still red in RCI. We have no white weeks at Twin Rivers.

 

[RLG]

Absolutely, if that is what it takes to deliver on the "value proposition" why not openly offer to take back weeks.

This is asking for more problems, as though we don't have enough already...

There are ramifications for a board that openly takes back weeks; owners could hold us liable for announcing it in a newsletter, like an open invitation. I don't think people get that, and you should at least try to put yourself in the place of a board member at a resort that is indepedent of the developer before you suggest such a thing is the "right" thing to do. Right for the people who walk away? What about the people who are left to hold the bills?

I guess I misunderstood you. I got the impression from the above that you think it's a bad idea for the board to openly take back unwanted weeks.

If so, that's where we disagree.

I think the weeks with no value will eventually come back anyway. It's a lot better for everyone to get them back in an orderly and inexpensive process.

My suggestion would be that every resort give every owner the option to pay the current year maintenance and forfeit their ownership and current year use back to the resort. They should then ebay any that have positive value, and rent or RTU the rest.

 

[rickandcindy23]

I guess I misunderstood you. I got the impression from the above that you think it's a bad idea for the board to openly take back unwanted weeks.

If so, that's where we disagree.

I think the weeks with no value will eventually come back anyway. It's a lot better for everyone to get them back in an orderly and inexpensive process.

My suggestion would be that every resort give every owner the option to pay the current year maintenance and forfeit their ownership and current year use back to the resort. They should then ebay any that have positive value, and rent or RTU the rest.

We aren't going to announce in the newsletter that we will take back any weeks people don't want. This is not something we should do. That was what JMaes suggested, basically. We will take back weeks from anyone who asks. We just don't invite people to give the weeks back, which makes some owners vulnerable to Postcard Companies (crooks).

The thing with Twin Rivers that makes us unique is we communicate with owners and tell them not to believe anything they hear from companies that are trying to get their money. Most owners don't go that far, and thank goodness for that! Still, many have gone that route in the past, because our former board and management company were refusing to take back their weeks.

 

[theo]

Don't hold your breath...

e.bram - I noticed you haven't answered TUGBrian's question in post #231 about your actual experience with taking TS resorts to court?

I too await the reply, anticipating confirmation of a wide gap between empty bluster and factual reality.

 

[DanCali]

This doesn't spell well to the future of timeshare resorts:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/story/print?guid=7A6F64F7-7350-46A8-8C61-19135A514CF4

 

[theo]

Huh?

This doesn't spell well to the future of timeshare resorts:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/story/print?guid=7A6F64F7-7350-46A8-8C61-19135A514CF4

The cited article addresses folks defaulting on home mortgage loans, many of whom are in an "upside down" situation with their home values / loan amounts.

No disrespect intended, but how do you figure that this relates to "the future of timeshare resorts"?

 

[timeos2]

It's nearly universal that owners lost money if they bought retail

The cited article addresses folks defaulting on home mortgage loans, many of whom are in an "upside down" situation with their home values / loan amounts.

No disrespect intended, but how do you figure that this relates to "the future of timeshare resorts"?

EVERYONE who bought/buys from the developer is upside down on a timeshare. Its just that many don't realize it until well after the rescind period is over. When they wake up to that fact there is a good chance they may choose to default on the loan (if they have one) and/or the annual fees. That is a serious issues for timeshares. If everyone bought resale and aware of the ongoing fee commitment then it wouldn't be as likely but...

 

[theo]

You're right...

EVERYONE who bought/buys from the developer is upside down on a timeshare. Its just that many don't realize it until well after the rescind period is over. When they wake up to that fact there is a good chance they may choose to default on the loan (if they have one) and/or the annual fees. That is a serious issues for timeshares. If everyone bought resale and aware of the ongoing fee commitment then it wouldn't be as likely but...

The article cited pertained specifically (and only) to a home mortgage default situation, but the analogy certainly still applies equally well to a financed timeshare purchase.

I guess I had failed to consider or acknowledge that there may indeed be a significant number of "financed" timeshare purchases. That possibility / fact temporarily escaped me, since my own personal logic and thought process about a timeshare purchase would be that if you have to finance it to buy it, it's not a purchase you should even be considering in the first place. After all, a timeshare is not at all like the "need" for a roof over one's head. That said, I acknowledge that different folks have (and are certainly entitled to) entirely different logic and thought processes....

 

[John Cummings]

If everyone bought resale and aware of the ongoing fee commitment then it wouldn't be as likely but...

If everyone bought resale, there would be no timeshare resorts.

 

[James1975NY]

If everyone bought resale, there would be no timeshare resorts.

Resale would not be available if the resort was not developed in the first place.

 

[AwayWeGo]

Mox Nix.

If everyone bought resale, there would be no timeshare resorts.

Resale would not be available if the resort was not developed in the first place.

True & true -- but so what ?

If no timeshare company ever builds another timeshare resort or timeshare unit, not ever, starting right now, there still will be plenty enough of them out there that are already existing to keep the current timeshare resorts going indefinitely -- with resales & trades & rentals & I-I & RCI & TUG & everything.

Buy timeshares resale.

Save thousands of dollars on exactly the same thing as full-freight timeshares, or the equivalent, or something even better.

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

 

[rickandcindy23]

I agree with Alan, developers could stop building, and timeshare would go on just fine. There is no shortage of timeshares. Wouldn't it be nice for all of us, if developers just stopped?

Already some developers see no reason to build more timeshare. The Westin on Maui has land, oceanfront land, that is just sitting there, because sales have slowed so much.

 

[timeos2]

Buy what you want still makes sense. Pay more if you wish as it is your money

Resale would not be available if the resort was not developed in the first place.

If there were never another timeshare developed there would still never be a shortage of units/weeks available for resale. The available inventory exceeds demand by tens of thousands or more. Yes someone paid retail at some point but that really isn't our worry. The educated timeshare buyer should realize that buying retail represents a guaranteed loss of value when the rescind period ends. Not to say someone shouldn't buy it if that is what they really want and know that it is costing them a hefty premium - we can all (thankfully) spend our money as we please. But to avoid that loss of initial capital expense resale is the only route for purchase.

Those who support the new resorts with those costly retail purchases - resale buyers thank you!

 

[James1975NY]

I agree with Alan, developers could stop building, and timeshare would go on just fine. There is no shortage of timeshares. Wouldn't it be nice for all of us, if developers just stopped?

Already some developers see no reason to build more timeshare. The Westin on Maui has land, oceanfront land, that is just sitting there, because sales have slowed so much.

I concur. With 5k+ resorts in existence resales will always be there. Even if all timeshare owners were happy, at some point, the owner will want to sell.

 

[e.bram]

Returning to the original topic. If "The Donald" is not ashamed why should anyone. (It doesn't seem to be hurting his credit rating)

 

[AwayWeGo]

Donald Trump Is Not Defaulting On His Timeshare(s).

If "The Donald" is not ashamed why should anyone. (It doesn't seem to be hurting his credit rating)

If Mr. Trump decides to renege on his mortgage & to go ahead & default on the money he owes, that's just between him & his lender.

By contrast, if some underwater timeshare owner stiffs the resort on maintenance fees, that person's bad debt affects all the other owners at the resort, whose fees go up to cover the deadbeat's shortfall.

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

 

[e.bram]

How about the contractors, vendors, stockholders and bondholders that weren't paid?

 

[alexadeparis]

If Mr. Trump decides to renege on his mortgage & to go ahead & default on the money he owes, that's just between him & his lender.

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

Technically speaking, Donald Trump has never filed for personal bankruptcy. His corporations have.

Staying on topic, I don't know why people shame others into not walking away. Yes, it's true that the other owners will be left holding the bag. But if that individual truly cannot afford it, and can't sell it, or deed it back, what are their other real options?

If giving up that payment and defaulting on it allows them to otherwise stay afloat and pay the rest of their debt obligations, then overall, that is better for the economy than going by the "moralists" advice on this board that you should only default on your ts if you are going to let everything go downhill and file for bankruptcy.

A timeshare foreclosure is NOT, repeat NOT going to be looked at the same way as a foreclosure on a residence. NEVER! It is going to be looked at as a default on an installment loan, just like a car or student loan. It is not the same animal at all. Is it great for your credit to default on it? NO. Is it far superior to let that one go rather than filing a bankruptcy? YES.

And for those that say, you had time to rescind so, tough luck to you: that's true, they did. It's not like the salesperson is going to heavily tout that to you though. Most people don't realize the short amountof time that they have to rescind, unless they get lucky and stumble upon TUG.

Remember folks, judge not, lest ye be judged. I doubt anyone on this board is perfect, having never made any mistakes at all. The people in this situation, have made a mistake, or perhaps multiple mistakes, but that doesn't mean they are automatically worthy or your derision and holier than thou attitude.

 

[John Cummings]

Resale would not be available if the resort was not developed in the first place.

Exactly. The resort would not be developed if there were not developer sales.

 

[John Cummings]

I agree with Alan, developers could stop building, and timeshare would go on just fine. There is no shortage of timeshares. Wouldn't it be nice for all of us, if developers just stopped?

Already some developers see no reason to build more timeshare. The Westin on Maui has land, oceanfront land, that is just sitting there, because sales have slowed so much.

I was not referring to just the current situation. We had these same discussions on TUG years ago before many of the current timeshares like Wyndham, etc. existed.

I agree that buying resale is the way to go and that the supply of timeshares today exceeds the demand. I was just stating that there had to be developer sales before there were resales.

I can't believe how seriously some people take this stuff.

 

[PerryM]

I'm a loser, you're a loser, everyone's a loser loser...

Can we be honest here 99.99999999% of timeshare owners are losers in the past few years - big deal! I'm a loser, you're a loser, everyone's a loser loser.

I'm talking market wide - here's the proof:

Doesn't matter if they bought from the developer or resale, real estate prices are falling to this very second - timeshares are real estate.

Everything cycles and eventually real estate will turn around and make new highs and timeshares will probably follow - so then folks will show a profit - either in terms of actual money or in "Found opportunity" that I keep talking about. So then everyone's a winner years from now?

My car is a loser - I have 4 of them - whoopee!

My TVs are losers too - whoopee!

I won't even talk about the stock market right now - whoopee!


So, the vast majority of us are fall-down losers - if that makes you happy, which seems to be the plight of many here, then pat yourself on the back; this chat room is infested with losers.

It is what it is - timeshares, for the most part, are bought to go on vacation.

Now as to walking away from your commitments.

This all stems back to how America got it's wheels caught in a rut and we are driving the country in circles - you decide if it's to the left or right.

America hasn't begun to straighten itself out and that includes folks who decide that they don't have to pull their weight and folks like me carry dozens of fellow Americans on their back all day long.

Personally it sucks....

 

[ace2000]

Now as to walking away from your commitments.

This all stems back to how America got it's wheels caught in a rut and we are driving the country in circles - you decide if it's to the left or right.

America hasn't begun to straighten itself out and that includes folks who decide that they don't have to pull their weight and folks like me carry dozens of fellow Americans on their back all day long.

Personally it sucks....

What would you do if your house lost 50% of its value since the day you bought it 3 years ago, and you had to move or had to sell for some reason? What would you do if your medical expenses wiped out your savings? Have you ever been in a business that declared bankruptcy? etc. etc. etc.

Everyone's got to live according to their own conscience... and everyone loves to play the 'holier than thou' role... we have a lot of those on this thread, and I'll leave it at that. And on the internet, everyone can be anyone they want to pretend to be.

 

[PerryM]

What would you do if your house lost 50% of its value since the day you bought it 3 years ago, and you had to move or had to sell for some reason? What would you do if your medical expenses wiped out your savings? Have you ever been in a business that declared bankruptcy? etc. etc. etc.

Everyone's got to live according to their own conscience... and everyone loves to play the 'holier than thou' role... we have a lot of those on this thread, and I'll leave it at that. And on the internet, everyone can be anyone they want to pretend to be.

I really have no interest in knowing all the grizzly details of folks that cost me money - that is better left to churches, mosks, synagogues, and other charitable organizations.

All I know is that we can NOT build a society based on folks not keeping their word.

Demanding that I take on others' responsibilities and obligations will simply hurt everyone in the long run.

In the case of deadbeat owners - they got to that position based upon thousands and thousands of decisions - they must take responsibility for all those decisions and not me.

That's what our society is now debating - who is responsible for their decisions they make in life - themselves or "other folks".

So put me down in the column of owner who want's to let loose the credit agencies and collection agencies and get the money owed the resort I am an owner in.

But that's just me....