First Lawsuit filed against Viking Ship LLCs / PCCs

[BocaBum99]

How about covering only the HOAs of timeshare resorts that are still in sales ?

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

Because there is a huge problem in independents as well. Have you been reading this thread? If not, go back and read it.

 

[Ridewithme38]

How about covering only the HOAs of timeshare resorts that are still in sales ?

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

Then you would absolutely HAVE to get the developers involved and as Brian implied, that would make this a nearly impossible task...because all they care about is money

By working with the BOD's and the HOA's, we are just dealing with other owners who SHOULD care about each other and what is best for the resort

 

[DeniseM]

Then you would absolutely HAVE to get the developers involved and as Brian implied, that would make this a nearly impossible task...because all they care about is money

By working with the BOD's and the HOA's, we are just dealing with other owners who SHOULD care about each other and what is best for the resort

Not true AT ALL - many of the big developers have the BOD's completely under their control. Starwood is a good example....

 

[TUGBrian]

of course some developers will take back SOME weeks (ones that are valuable to them and provide a guaranteed profit in rental or resale)...

that doesnt address the problem, as those folks could easily sell their weeks on the resale market as it is (albeit at a loss...but at least they could sell).

I want to see a major resort take back weeks that are worth garbage in the resale market....i mean flat garbage $1 seller paying all closing costs and still not getting a nibble garbage.

diamond would be a fabulous example.

 

[timeos2]

I don't agree. We are not arguing that all resorts should have the same deed back program. They can design it any way they want based on the needs of the resort. By having some type of deedback program, it ensures that there is a home for any and all timeshares at a price that does not require a Viking Ship.

The same is true of the new Florida law regarding transfer companies. It requires that any upfront fee put placed into escrow. That is for ALL transfers. Not most.

Great! The deed back program is:

- If you are delinquent you are subject to collections. (Surely you don't propose no collections & just an automatic deed back upon a late payment. Late/non-payment can be reported to the credit agencies as that is a large part of the ways late payments are recovered.)
- If collections fail you get notified that the next step is foreclosure (a reasonable warning).
- If you contact the resort after the warning that the next step is foreclosure then for 3 years fees (say $3000 as Doug mentioned - but it would be 3x the current fees whatever they are) you may deed back and have no foreclosure on record (as it never occurred).

It is a plan for deed backs as you feel is needed. It could apply to everyone equally as the law requires. It allows the Association to go after delinquent owners as the documents & law allow. As agreed to in the purchase if the fees are delinquent it can (and should) be reported to the credit agencies. Finally it allows a deed back, but under terms that should prevent those just wanting an easy out / immediate sale to see as a less than perfect choice. Of course if they refuse that then there will be a foreclosure and that rather major black mark placed on the owners credit history.

Now everybody happy? It 's a deal.

So now every owner looking to deed back has to come up with $3000 or more. Why won't the scam PCC's offer their "services" for $1800? $1500? After all it's free money for them. I don't think that stops the issue of PCC's & Viking Ships.

 

[Ridewithme38]

Not true AT ALL - many of the big developers have the BOD's completely under their control. Starwood is a good example....

Umm, are you just being contradictory this week? All of those places are still under active sales....Have you been to a Starwood that DIDN'T have a sales presence?

 

[timeos2]

Because there is a huge problem in independents as well. Have you been reading this thread? If not, go back and read it.

It would solve about 1/2 of the resorts issues - and they would be the larger ones. The smaller, usually older independents would have to find a different answer.

Making Developers resell existing ownerships for owners would go a long way in solving the issue and it is a fair way to create a market.

 

[TUGBrian]

- If you are delinquent you are subject to collections. (Surely you don't propose no collections & just an automatic deed back upon a late payment. Late/non-payment can be reported to the credit agencies as that is a large part of the ways late payments are recovered.)
- If collections fail you get notified that the next step is foreclosure (a reasonable warning).
- If you contact the resort after the warning that the next step is foreclosure then for 3 years fees (say $3000 as Doug mentioned - but it would be 3x the current fees whatever they are) you may deed back and have no foreclosure on record (as it never occurred).

id add a few more stipulations on this...but its a great start! what are the "cons" to implementing this?

 

[BocaBum99]

Great! The deed back program is:

- If you are delinquent you are subject to collections. (Surely you don't propose no collections & just an automatic deed back upon a late payment. Late/non-payment can be reported to the credit agencies as that is a large part of the ways late payments are recovered.)
- If collections fail you get notified that the next step is foreclosure (a reasonable warning).
- If you contact the resort after the warning that the next step is foreclosure then for 3 years fees (say $3000 as Doug mentioned - but it would be 3x the current fees whatever they are) you may deed back and have no foreclosure on record (as it never occurred).

It is a plan for deed backs as you feel is needed. It could apply to everyone equally as the law requires. It allows the Association to go after delinquent owners as the documents & law allow. As agreed to in the purchase if the fees are delinquent it can (and should) be reported to the credit agencies. Finally it allows a deed back, but under terms that should prevent those just wanting an easy out / immediate sale to see as a less than perfect choice. Of course if they refuse that then there will be a foreclosure and that rather major black mark placed on the owners credit history.

Now everybody happy? It 's a deal.

So now every owner looking to deed back has to come up with $3000 or more. Why won't the scam PCC's offer their "services" for $1800? $1500? After all it's free money for them. I don't think that stops the issue of PCC's & Viking Ships.

That is not a deed back program. A deedback program does NOT impact the owner's credit, but you knew that. It doesn't pass the reasonable exit test. If you offer that program, the owners will just find the next PCC.

Keep it up. You will generate more sympathy for PCCs who will win because they are smarter than the HOAs. You are going to get exactly what your policies suggest. You will have lots of deeds in companies that had no intention of defaulting when they started, but are put there because of HOA policy.

It's up to you how you want it. The rest of the industry is starting to get it.

 

[timeos2]

where does the money come from when the HOA takes the unit back via foreclosure?

Usually rental of the time. The balance, if any, from the other owners.

 

[TUGBrian]

Usually rental of the time. The balance, if any, from the other owners.

forgive me, as im not on an HOA....but how do you rent the unit out if you have not yet foreclosed upon it?

its not like foreclosure is a quick or easy process one does overnight.

 

[timeos2]

sadly something forcing "all" resorts to do something wont ever get passed...again...it does no good to argue the extremes on either side....as noone will feel they are reasonable on the other side.

Exactly. Why push for a result that can never occur? Forcing HOA's to accept all deed backs is not a viable answer and will never occur.

 

[Ridewithme38]

id add a few more stipulations on this...but its a great start! what are the "cons" to implementing this?

We need a solution for those that don't want to have to be delinquent to do it also....

 

[TUGBrian]

eh...delinquent accounts are likely the first and most important selection of resort owners this would address.

again...its clear we wont get jack squat done with both sides fixated on a single target on one extreme or the other.

 

[timeos2]

So, what do you think we can get passed? Easier bankrupcy laws for Timeshares? Limited time frames before required votes for disolusion, with majority vs. supermajority for new developments? Maybe new ethics laws for timeshare sales companies?

There's got to be something done and it kinda has to be done fairly soon before the whole industry implodes on itself

The very laws you want to change are a huge impediment to any such change. Property and sales disclosure laws prohibit retroactive changes to those documents. They are used to form the rights and understanding of the property purchased thus set in stone unless the purchasers agree to such a change.

If you imposed it the application could only be for new purchases with that disclosure in those sales documents.

Not even then Legislators can impose a change like that on existing owners - it would lose in a court challenge. Yes, you cna do it for new sales (and probably should). But even that is problematic as the Developers would fight it tooth & nail.

 

[timeos2]

Maybe this is something thats needs to be started on the grass roots level...We have lawyers, economists, professors, all members of TUG, this maybe something that can start with just a properly written form letter on TUG that we can all send to the BOD's of our HOA's demanding that they take action,demanding change....giving suggestions on what methods we recommend they take

Think about it, with just under 64,000 members of TUG, that's a large group to be sending letters out to EVERY BOD...we would need to start a new thread to figure out exactly what the letter needs to say, but it can be done....I've done more with less when i was involved with an E-cigarette Consumer advocacy group...we emailed, called, faxed and sent out letters almost monthly as soon as any e-cig legislation came up and were successful in blocking a lot of it

What did your generation used to say "Power to the People"?

By all means every owner should press their BOD to insist that any on site sales group at their resort handle resales for existing owners. That is a minimum needed to help create an active market for resales.

 

[BocaBum99]

id add a few more stipulations on this...but its a great start! what are the "cons" to implementing this?

It's a horrible idea. It only address delinquent owners who are going into foreclosure anyway. This provides a solution to the HOA foreclosures and NOTHING for the loyal maintenance fee paying owner who just wants an exit. It's the equivalent of proposing in a coin toss "heads I win, tails you lose."

What moron would suggest to an owner that in order to get out of your timeshare, we want you to stop paying your maintenance fees for 3 years so we can force you into foreclosure and ruin your credit. Then, and only then, will we take it back. Fortunately, owners who want to protect their credit aren't that stupid. They are going find a PCC instead and flip you the bird.

This is an owner who WANTS to pay their maintenance fees and WANTS to pay you extra years maintenance fees to get out. You tell him to stop paying. That is some genius that I want running my board...NOT!

 

[timeos2]

forgive me, as im not on an HOA....but how do you rent the unit out if you have not yet foreclosed upon it?

its not like foreclosure is a quick or easy process one does overnight.

Any account delinquent can (and should) be rented. It is not required to be foreclosed or owned by the Association. That is a key point in this whole discussion. If the owner later pays to become current and the use was already rented it is too bad. They lost the use for that year by law.

 

[timeos2]

That is not a deed back program. A deedback program does NOT impact the owner's credit, but you knew that. It doesn't pass the reasonable exit test. If you offer that program, the owners will just find the next PCC.

Keep it up. You will generate more sympathy for PCCs who will win because they are smarter than the HOAs. You are going to get exactly what your policies suggest. You will have lots of deeds in companies that had no intention of defaulting when they started, but are put there because of HOA policy.

It's up to you how you want it. The rest of the industry is starting to get it.

Now your true colors show. You want no obligation to fees, period. That will not fly with any resort. That is not a deed back program that is a guaranteed market for the time. It would kill any resort. It doesn't pass the required "best for the Association" test required of any Board / Management action or policy. Never happen. You are being completely unreasonable.

 

[TUGBrian]

It's a horrible idea. It only address delinquent owners who are going into foreclosure anyway. This provides a solution to the HOA foreclosures and NOTHING for the loyal maintenance fee paying owner who just wants an exit. It's the equivalent of proposing in a coin toss "heads I win, tails you lose."

What moron would suggest to an owner that in order to get out of your timeshare, we want you to stop paying your maintenance fees for 3 years so we can force you into foreclosure and ruin your credit. Then, and only then, will we take it back. Fortunately, owners who want to protect their credit aren't that stupid. They are going find a PCC instead and flip you the bird.

This is an owner who WANTS to pay their maintenance fees and WANTS to pay you extra years maintenance fees to get out. You tell him to stop paying. That is some genius that I want running my board...NOT!

so we should ignore the overwhelming number of existing delinquent accounts? that seems like an even worse idea.

 

[Ridewithme38]

Any account delinquent can (and should) be rented. It is not required to be foreclosed or owned by the Association. That is a key point in this whole discussion. If the owner later pays to become current and the use was already rented it is too bad. They lost the use for that year by law.

I don't see that anywhere in my declaration and convents, is that one of those things that is a resort by resort rule, or is there a law governing that?

 

[timeos2]

It's a horrible idea. It only address delinquent owners who are going into foreclosure anyway. This provides a solution to the HOA foreclosures and NOTHING for the loyal maintenance fee paying owner who just wants an exit. It's the equivalent of proposing in a coin toss "heads I win, tails you lose."

What moron would suggest to an owner that in order to get out of your timeshare, we want you to stop paying your maintenance fees for 3 years so we can force you into foreclosure and ruin your credit. Then, and only then, will we take it back. Fortunately, owners who want to protect their credit aren't that stupid. They are going find a PCC instead and flip you the bird.

This is an owner who WANTS to pay their maintenance fees and WANTS to pay you extra years maintenance fees to get out. You tell him to stop paying. That is some genius that I want running my board...NOT!

We'd not be telling them to go delinquent. We'd be telling them if you want out find a new paying owner. Here is a bonded, licensed agent you can use. Until you sell you pay. As they agreed to when they purchased. What moron can't understand that they owe until they find a new owner?

 

[timeos2]

I don't see that anywhere in my declaration and convents, is that one of those things that is a resort by resort rule, or is there a law governing that?

What does your documents say about delinquent fees? What are the prescribed steps for the Association? If it isn't in the docs (usually it is) then default collection laws for condominiums kicks in. They prohibit use and allow rental to recover fees. Every state with a timeshare code includes those.

 

[Ridewithme38]

To be fair, i've only read two timeshare governing documents(they were both over 300 pages), but they BOTH had sections that applied to ammending the document...Some changes require a vote by ALL members, but changes to 'bring any provision into compliance with law' just required the BOD to sign off on it.

The very laws you want to change are a huge impediment to any such change. Property and sales disclosure laws prohibit retroactive changes to those documents. They are used to form the rights and understanding of the property purchased thus set in stone unless the purchasers agree to such a change.

If you imposed it the application could only be for new purchases with that disclosure in those sales documents.

Not even then Legislators can impose a change like that on existing owners - it would lose in a court challenge. Yes, you cna do it for new sales (and probably should). But even that is problematic as the Developers would fight it tooth & nail.

 

[Rent_Share]

Any account delinquent can (and should) be rented. It is not required to be foreclosed or owned by the Association. That is a key point in this whole discussion. If the owner later pays to become current and the use was already rented it is too bad. They lost the use for that year by law.

The bylaws say the HOA blocks usage by owners delinquent, they are entitled/obligated to rent and apply the rent to the delinquency.

What happens when the week cannot be rented at any price . . . .