• The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 30 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other Owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 30 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 30th anniversary: Happy 30th Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    Free memberships for every 50 subscribers!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $21,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $21 Million dollars
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    60,000+ subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

[ 2012 ] How we FINALLY got rid of our timeshare

AwayWeGo

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
1,630
Points
699
Location
McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.
Resorts Owned
Grandview At Las Vegas

[triennial - points]
You Use Your On-Line Dictionary & I'll Use Mine.

Dictionary dot com defines deadbeat as

1. a person who deliberately avoids paying debts.

2. a loafer; sponger.
Merriam-Webster Dot Com simply says a deadbeat is one who persistently fails to pay personal debts or expenses.

As a practical matter, whichever dictionary definition applies is mox nix.

Whether the non-payer can't pay or just won't, the responsible on-time fee-paying timeshare owners still find their maintenance fees going up because of other people's unpaid bills.

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

Rent_Share

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
5,091
Reaction score
3
Points
473
Location
SOCAL (562)
Whether the non-payer can't pay or just won't, the responsible on-time fee-paying timeshare owners still find their maintenance fees going up because of other people's unpaid bills.

There is no practical method with up to 52 owners per unit to close down the under performing projects and redevelop the land and/or buildings and provide an exit strategy for the remaining paying owners
 

AwayWeGo

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
15,687
Reaction score
1,630
Points
699
Location
McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.
Resorts Owned
Grandview At Las Vegas

[triennial - points]
You Typed A Mouthful.

There is no practical method with up to 52 owners per unit to close down the under performing projects and redevelop the land and/or buildings and provide an exit strategy for the remaining paying owners
You are correct, sir.

That's why the HOA's most important function -- collections -- is vital not just to the continued operation of the timeshare resort, but to its very existence.

When HOAs get aggressive in taking action to resolve delinquent owner accounts -- overdue notices, locking owners out of their units, canceling RCI & I-I deposits, adding interest & late fees, calling in bill collectors, & going to foreclosure -- it's nothing personal. It's just business. Sad stories are mox nix.

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

jc92869

TUG Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
337
Reaction score
1
Points
128
Location
southern california
Disagree.

Unfortunately, the current generation has learned this is the way to live. Even more unfortunately, they learned it from their government, who will take care of them no matter what stupid thing they do

Bankruptcy, foreclosure, corporations; they have been around for along time. they were here before you were born, and they will be here after you are gone. To say that it is an issue of the current generation is an oversimplification.

What i do think has been shifting generationally, is the idea that financial decisions decide who you are as an individual. There is no Moral obligation to continue with a contract that is not beneficial to ones self. As with any contract, there are consequences to breaking the contract ( fines, penalties, legal ramifications etc. ) but morality should not be one of them. We as individuals add this component of morality and ethics. Does the board of a corporation feel like they are bad people when they file ch13? no. because they treat it as a business decision not as a personal decision.
.
As a disclaimer, I do think that we should conduct business in a moral and ethical way. I'm not advocating that business should be done other wise.

The only point I'm making is that the OP made a business, financial decision. A decision which -to the best of our knowledge- was agreed, and understood by both parts. what he did is the same thing that corporations, and individuals have been doing for hundreds of years. he simply found a way to improve his situation within the confines of legality.
 

LannyPC

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
4,779
Reaction score
2,407
Points
448
Location
British Columbia
There is no practical method with up to 52 owners per unit to close down the under performing projects and redevelop the land and/or buildings and provide an exit strategy for the remaining paying owners

How about this possible suggestion subject, of course, to local and resort laws and bylaws:

Send out a letter to all up-to-date paid owners saying, in essence (but using a lot of fancy legalese vernacular), "Here's the scoop, owners. The resort/HOA is facing a lot of defaults, 'deadbeat' owners, and foreclosures. Also, a number of owners are wanting to deed their property back to the resort. This is resulting in all of you paying owners facing rising maintenance fees to cover for the non-paying owners. The trend only seems to be getting worse. So, the up-to-date owners will vote on this matter. Either keep the resort as is while being subject to rising maintenance fees due to non-paying owners or sell off all the interests of the resort with the proceeds being divided up equally among the up-to-date owners."
 

Rent_Share

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
5,091
Reaction score
3
Points
473
Location
SOCAL (562)
Does the board of a corporation feel like they are bad people when they file ch13? no. because they treat it as a business decision not as a personal decision.

Corporations File Chapter 11 for Reorganization Chapter 7 For Liquidation

Individuals (Wage Earners) file Chapter 13 for Reorganization Chapter 7 For Liquidation [Occasionally an Individual can file Chapter 11 depending o the amount of assets and liabilities

Municipalities file Chapter 9


The Debtors' Act of 1869 abolished imprisonment for debt, although debtors who had the means to pay their debt, but did not do so, could still be incarcerated for up to six weeks.
 
Last edited:

jc92869

TUG Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
337
Reaction score
1
Points
128
Location
southern california
thanks.

Corporations File Chapter 11 for Reorganization Chapter 7 For Liquidation

Individuals (Wage Earners) file Chapter 13 for Reorganization Chapter 7 For Liquidation [Occasionally an Individual can file Chapter 11 depending o the amount of assets and liabilities

Municipalities file Chapter 9


The Debtors' Act of 1869 abolished imprisonment for debt, although debtors who had the means to pay their debt, but did not do so, could still be incarcerated for up to six weeks.

Thanks for the correction. Point still stands.
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
936
Points
598
Location
eastern Europe
Yes that is a possibility, but requires a super majority and if the timeshare was organized under the laws preceding the Uniform Condominium Act, then it requires unanimous consent. Even the super majority is a super majority of all owners, not just a super majority of a quorum, and the upshot is that it is often virtually impossible to obtain.


How about this possible suggestion subject, of course, to local and resort laws and bylaws:

Send out a letter to all up-to-date paid owners saying, in essence (but using a lot of fancy legalese vernacular), "Here's the scoop, owners. The resort/HOA is facing a lot of defaults, 'deadbeat' owners, and foreclosures. Also, a number of owners are wanting to deed their property back to the resort. This is resulting in all of you paying owners facing rising maintenance fees to cover for the non-paying owners. The trend only seems to be getting worse. So, the up-to-date owners will vote on this matter. Either keep the resort as is while being subject to rising maintenance fees due to non-paying owners or sell off all the interests of the resort with the proceeds being divided up equally among the up-to-date owners."
 

Carolinian

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
936
Points
598
Location
eastern Europe
But debtors can have their other property seized and sold to pay the debt and in many states (not North Carolina or a few others) also have their wages garnished.

And there still is a procedure for imprisoning people indefinitely until they pay. It is called a ''body execution'' and is a judicial order to seize the debtor and hold his body in jail until he pays. I am not sure how many states have it, but NC does. It is rarely used as it requires more than just owing money. The most recent time I have heard of it being used was in the Tally case ~30 years ago in eastern North Carolina where one of two very wealthy brothers who were business partners died with the surviving brother as his executor looting his estate of the dead brother of millions of dollars. The local sheriff was slack about prosecuting him criminally, so the heirs sued him in civil court and recovered a very large judgment. The surviving brother meanwhile had hidden all his money and after the judgment went into hiding himself. The presiding judge issued a rare ''body execution'' in that case directing that the judgment debtor's person be seized to secure payment of the judgment. Although they put private detectives on his trail, he avoided them for several years and died without being brought in on the body execution.


Corporations File Chapter 11 for Reorganization Chapter 7 For Liquidation

Individuals (Wage Earners) file Chapter 13 for Reorganization Chapter 7 For Liquidation [Occasionally an Individual can file Chapter 11 depending o the amount of assets and liabilities

Municipalities file Chapter 9


The Debtors' Act of 1869 abolished imprisonment for debt, although debtors who had the means to pay their debt, but did not do so, could still be incarcerated for up to six weeks.
 

pacodemountainside

TUG Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
2,865
Reaction score
4
Points
36
Location
Aurora, Colorado
How about this possible suggestion subject, of course, to local and resort laws and bylaws:

Send out a letter to all up-to-date paid owners saying, in essence (but using a lot of fancy legalese vernacular), "Here's the scoop, owners. The resort/HOA is facing a lot of defaults, 'deadbeat' owners, and foreclosures. Also, a number of owners are wanting to deed their property back to the resort. This is resulting in all of you paying owners facing rising maintenance fees to cover for the non-paying owners. The trend only seems to be getting worse. So, the up-to-date owners will vote on this matter. Either keep the resort as is while being subject to rising maintenance fees due to non-paying owners or sell off all the interests of the resort with the proceeds being divided up equally among the up-to-date owners."

Why not a more simplistic and realistic approach?

The BOD recognizes defaults are a fact of life today for time shares, condos, houses, etc. We can be stupid and ignore resulting in thousands in lost MF fees and foreclosure costs when salvaging from a sunken Viking Ship.

Instead, we recommend a special assesment of say $200 per owner so we can set up reserve fund and can take deed backs. This way we get immediate good title and can rent and subsequently sell. To accept a deed we will require one years MF at closing. Cheaper than PCC and guaranteed.

We reserve right to limit to say two a month or require 2 years MF.

No deragatory info will be filed with credit agencies.

We will advertise in mailings to owners, employees, bulletin boards, etc. for say $1K for 1 BR negotiable net to purchaser. Set up an e-bay auction account!

We can give a quiet week to employee of the month or donate to school, etc. fund raiser.

We have cut a deal with local transfer/title company to do paperwork for say $300.
 

timeos2

Tug Review Crew: Rookie
TUG Lifetime Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
11,183
Reaction score
5
Points
36
Location
Rochester, NY
While this would be very likely to scare more owners into a rash dump of time it is unlikely to cause a mad rush to vote to disband - just create more disillusioned owners worried about what they bought to enjoy.

What percentage would trigger such an announcement? Certainly not 5 0r 10% as at worst that means 90% are satisfied. 80 70? 60? If the numbers are that bad there are serious problems and the Association had better be taking serious steps to correct them. The announcement then might make some sense but would it really be needed?

Not a workable answer. Far more potential of harm than good. IF it's needed the Association Board can authorize it. No previous owner vote required.

How about this possible suggestion subject, of course, to local and resort laws and bylaws:

Send out a letter to all up-to-date paid owners saying, in essence (but using a lot of fancy legalese vernacular), "Here's the scoop, owners. The resort/HOA is facing a lot of defaults, 'deadbeat' owners, and foreclosures. Also, a number of owners are wanting to deed their property back to the resort. This is resulting in all of you paying owners facing rising maintenance fees to cover for the non-paying owners. The trend only seems to be getting worse. So, the up-to-date owners will vote on this matter. Either keep the resort as is while being subject to rising maintenance fees due to non-paying owners or sell off all the interests of the resort with the proceeds being divided up equally among the up-to-date owners."
 

timeos2

Tug Review Crew: Rookie
TUG Lifetime Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
11,183
Reaction score
5
Points
36
Location
Rochester, NY
Obviously written by someone that has no understanding of the legalities an Association faces & has to enforce.

Why not a more simplistic and realistic approach?

The BOD recognizes defaults are a fact of life today for time shares, condos, houses, etc. We can be stupid and ignore resulting in thousands in lost MF fees and foreclosure costs when salvaging from a sunken Viking Ship.

Instead, we recommend a special assesment of say $200 per owner so we can set up reserve fund and can take deed backs. This way we get immediate good title and can rent and subsequently sell. To accept a deed we will require one years MF at closing. Cheaper than PCC and guaranteed.

What existing owner is going to say "Sure" to a $200+ assessment to pay for other owners to get out unscathed? The Association has NO authority to pass such a special assessment - it does NOT meet the criteria for an SA. Rentals can be done the moment an owner is officially delinquent (usually 30-90 days max after fees are due). The Association can (and should!) RENT without the cost of foreclosure or the risk of deed back. They have an absolute right to do so with proper notice to the owner. Easily done.


We reserve right to limit to say two a month or require 2 years MF.

If the offer is made to one or more owners it must be made to all. It cannot be applied to a select group.


No deragatory info will be filed with credit agencies.

This fails to meet the fiduciary requirements of the Association & Board to owners.


We will advertise in mailings to owners, employees, bulletin boards, etc. for say $1K for 1 BR negotiable net to purchaser. Set up an e-bay auction account!

They can do that with weeks foreclosed or for owners. No need to accept back deeds outside of the prescribed process that exists.


We can give a quiet week to employee of the month or donate to school, etc. fund raiser.

The Association/Management/Board has NO right to give away time. They are charged specifically to MAXIMIZE income from all sources.


We have cut a deal with local transfer/title company to do paperwork for say $300.

They can do this without needing to take back deeds.

3/4 of what is proposed is possible without any type of new action by the Association. The other 1/4 may not even be allowed under law. This type of uninformed approach gets Associations into deep legal problems. Be happy if your Association has good legal advice that would advise against this type of risky or illegal moves. Learn the rules before you take up causes that cannot be implemented.
 

DeniseM

Moderator
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
57,672
Reaction score
9,092
Points
1,849
Resorts Owned
WKORV, WKV, 2-SDO, 4-Kauai Beach Villas, Island Park Village (Yellowstone), Hyatt High Sierra, Dolphin's Cove (Anaheim)
Instead, we recommend a special assesment of say $200 per owner so we can set up reserve fund and can take deed backs. This way we get immediate good title and can rent and subsequently sell. To accept a deed we will require one years MF at closing. Cheaper than PCC and guaranteed.

I would be furious if I was asked to pay $200 per timeshare to enable people who want to default on the timeshares - let them pay for the costs involved, or if they are truly bankrupt - let them declare bankruptcy. I am not interested in subsidizing other people's buyer's remorse...
 
Last edited:

Ridewithme38

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
3,325
Reaction score
4
Points
273
Location
Long Island, NY
What percentage would trigger such an announcement? Certainly not 5 0r 10% as at worst that means 90% are satisfied. 80 70? 60?

I don't think its fair to assume that because someone is paying their MF's that they are 'satisfied' with their ownership...Or even that they can afford to be paying
 

pacodemountainside

TUG Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
2,865
Reaction score
4
Points
36
Location
Aurora, Colorado
Obviously written by someone that has no understanding of the legalities an Association faces & has to enforce.



What existing owner is going to say "Sure" to a $200+ assessment to pay for other owners to get out unscathed? The Association has NO authority to pass such a special assessment - it does NOT meet the criteria for an SA. Rentals can be done the moment an owner is officially delinquent (usually 30-90 days max after fees are due). The Association can (and should!) RENT without the cost of foreclosure or the risk of deed back. They have an absolute right to do so with proper notice to the owner. Easily done.




If the offer is made to one or more owners it must be made to all. It cannot be applied to a select group.




This fails to meet the fiduciary requirements of the Association & Board to owners.




They can do that with weeks foreclosed or for owners. No need to accept back deeds outside of the prescribed process that exists.




The Association/Management/Board has NO right to give away time. They are charged specifically to MAXIMIZE income from all sources.




They can do this without needing to take back deeds.

3/4 of what is proposed is possible without any type of new action by the Association. The other 1/4 may not even be allowed under law. This type of uninformed approach gets Associations into deep legal problems. Be happy if your Association has good legal advice that would advise against this type of risky or illegal moves. Learn the rules before you take up causes that cannot be implemented.





*******Too the contrary , I think you have been inhaling too much loco weed and and need to return to reality. First off, post was offered as alternative to prior post which I did not feel was viable!

Obviously written by someone that has no understanding of the legalities an Association faces & has to enforce.

Quote:


Originally Posted by pacodemountainside

Why not a more simplistic and realistic approach?

The BOD recognizes defaults are a fact of life today for time shares, condos, houses, etc. We can be stupid and ignore resulting in thousands in lost MF fees and foreclosure costs when salvaging from a sunken Viking Ship.

Instead, we recommend a special assessment of say $200 per owner so we can set up reserve fund and can take deed backs. This way we get immediate good title and can rent and subsequently sell. To accept a deed we will require one years MF at closing. Cheaper than PCC and guaranteed.

What existing owner is going to say "Sure" to a $200+ assessment to pay for other owners to get out unscathed? The Association has NO authority to pass such a special assessment - it does NOT meet the criteria for an SA. Rentals can be done the moment an owner is officially delinquent (usually 30-90 days max after fees are due). The Association can (and should!) RENT without the cost of foreclosure or the risk of deed back. They have an absolute right to do so with proper notice to the owner. Easily done.


*****Someones ox is going to be gored by forclosures as discussed many times here. Whether BOD raises MF or does a SA to cover foreclosures is academic. Kindly cite your legal reference.

While BOD/reservations can freeze account for non-payment kindly cite any legal reference where creditor can size ones deeded property and rent, occupy or use with out due process!

Quote:




Originally Posted by pacodemountainside

We reserve right to limit to say two a month or require 2 years MF.

If the offer is made to one or more owners it must be made to all. It cannot be applied to a select group.


*****BOD can make different offers based on facts and circumstances. One for immediate processing, one for future offerings, etc. Again cite your documentable legal reference

Quote:




Originally Posted by pacodemountainside

No deragatory info will be filed with credit agencies.

This fails to meet the fiduciary requirements of the Association & Board to owners.


****BODs have very wide latitude in what they can do and Courts side with absent fraud, personal dealing, corruption , etc. Reasonable business judgment is very hard to disprove or win a lawsuit over. Again cite your legal references.

Quote:




Originally Posted by pacodemountainside

We will advertise in mailings to owners, employees, bulletin boards, etc. for say $1K for 1 BR negotiable net to purchaser. Set up an e-bay auction account!

They can do that with weeks foreclosed or for owners.



*******Fully agree!




No need to accept back deeds outside of the prescribed process that exists.




********What is this process?

Quote:




Originally Posted by pacodemountainside

We can give a quiet week to employee of the month or donate to school, etc. fund raiser.

The Association/Management/Board has NO right to give away time. They are charged specifically to MAXIMIZE income from all sources.

***********Reread my comments on BODs authority. Instead of giving employee HOA cash , give worthless week. Instead of leaving vacant get a tax deduction!




Quote:




Originally Posted by pacodemountainside

We have cut a deal with local transfer/title company to do paperwork for say $300.

They can do this without needing to take back deeds.

************Agreed

3/4 of what is proposed is possible without any type of new action by the Association. The other 1/4 may not even be allowed under law. This type of uninformed approach gets Associations into deep legal problems. Be happy if your Association has good legal advice that would advise against this type of risky or illegal moves. Learn the rules before you take up causes that cannot be implemented.





*****Thinking back to my GE days when some asshole jumped up in meeting and said this sucks, won't work, etc. my simple response was , what is your solution? As Judge Judy would say, I have my listening ears and glasses on!
__________________
John Chase


ADOPT A TIMESHARE! There are many owners looking for a good home for great places to enjoy!


BUY RESALE!



Proudly Microsoft & Apple free with WebOS, Droid Bionic & Verizon Wireless
 

DeniseM

Moderator
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
57,672
Reaction score
9,092
Points
1,849
Resorts Owned
WKORV, WKV, 2-SDO, 4-Kauai Beach Villas, Island Park Village (Yellowstone), Hyatt High Sierra, Dolphin's Cove (Anaheim)
I don't think its fair to assume that because someone is paying their MF's that they are 'satisfied' with their ownership...Or even that they can afford to be paying

So we should stop paying for everything we are dissatisfied with?

That's great, because my car isn't nearly as bright and shiny as it was when I first bought it, the windshield has a lot of chips, and I snagged the bumper on a cyclone fence - I'm tired of making the payments - can I stop?

I'm pretty dissatisfied with my house too - it needs new carpet, and paint, and it really needs to be redecorated - can I stop paying for it?

And then there is my husband.... :D
 
Last edited:

Cheryl20772

TUG Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
867
Reaction score
16
Points
228
Location
Maryland, USA
This obviously happens. We just had to pay $97.28 special assessment to Grand Seas Resort. This summer there was a special meeting of the board of directors who voted to impose the fee to cover bad debt from defaults and we have no choice (if we want to use the resort) but to pay up.

I don't see how it fixes the problem. What it will do is cause further defaults as people refuse to pay this fee and things just further slide down while the resort owners still try to sell unit weeks at developer prices. They need to face reality and try to find cheap/free new homes for the stray dog weeks they are foreclosing on.

Somehow this seems to have met the requirements for a SA. They did it and we had to pay or lose our use of our week.
 

pacodemountainside

TUG Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
2,865
Reaction score
4
Points
36
Location
Aurora, Colorado
I would be furious if I was asked to pay $200 per timeshare to enable people who want to default on the timeshares - let them pay for the costs involved, or if they are truly bankrupt - let them declare bankruptcy. I am not interested in subsidizing other people's buyer's remorse...

Let's not excerpt, leave that to politicans!

If a person wants out of timeshare MF why not be realistic and do what is best for all owners.

Whether HOA pays for foreclosures via MF increase or SA a buck is a buck.

Sure there may be some remorses but most cannot pay. So does resort take back with one year MF payment and get rid of for little if any cost? Or, do they take your approach and let get put with Viking Ship or bankruptcy and HOA loses a couple grand. Think the "Senior Advisor" or whatever his name was, 3 years MF and at least $1K for HOA to do quiet title search and get valid deed. Who do you think ends up paying this?

Yes, I am a pragmatic Accounting type and know sunk costs are just that and cutting ones losses generally beats proving something.

If you and stupid resorts want to go with we are tough let things go where sun does not shine, more power to you.
 

DeniseM

Moderator
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
57,672
Reaction score
9,092
Points
1,849
Resorts Owned
WKORV, WKV, 2-SDO, 4-Kauai Beach Villas, Island Park Village (Yellowstone), Hyatt High Sierra, Dolphin's Cove (Anaheim)
I think you missed my point - I didn't say that HOA's shouldn't take timeshares back for a fee, I said that dues paying owners should not have to pay an additional $200 per week, so other people can default. TS owners that want to default, should cover all the costs of their decision - not the remaining owners who are paying their maintenance fees.

Sure there may be some remorses but most cannot pay.

I don't believe this - most of the people who come to TUG and want out of their timeshare can pay - they just don't want the timeshare any more. I am not willing to subsidize that.

Someone who truly cannot make their payments does not have the money to pay an extra year's maintenance fees upfront, anyway.

But someone who can pay - should pay for ALL the costs to get rid of their TS - I am not coughing up $200 per timeshare.
 
Last edited:

timeos2

Tug Review Crew: Rookie
TUG Lifetime Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
11,183
Reaction score
5
Points
36
Location
Rochester, NY
This obviously happens. We just had to pay $97.28 special assessment to Grand Seas Resort. This summer there was a special meeting of the board of directors who voted to impose the fee to cover bad debt from defaults and we have no choice (if we want to use the resort) but to pay up.

I don't see how it fixes the problem. What it will do is cause further defaults as people refuse to pay this fee and things just further slide down while the resort owners still try to sell unit weeks at developer prices. They need to face reality and try to find cheap/free new homes for the stray dog weeks they are foreclosing on.

Somehow this seems to have met the requirements for a SA. They did it and we had to pay or lose our use of our week.

To answer both this question & the one Paco posed a Special Assessment must be for a specific purchase with a budget and proven basis. So if there is an existing shortfall (ie, unpaid,delinquent fees or bad debt) the Association can create a budget to cover those needs and assess the owners. If a renovation or upgrade project is needed they can develop a plan, a budget and special assess for the cost. What they cannot do is anticipate a future cost or propose a benefit to a select group or groups - especially one with no known cost (the more that wanted in the higher the budget would have to be) and assess the owners for it.

Each and every statement I made in response to Paco's post has a basis in condominium and/or timeshare law. It reminds me of the all too well known first time Board candidates that tout "lowering fees" as their platform. A great one for sure and one that often can get them elected. Then they are shocked to learn that cutting costs means giving things up - there is no magic savings to be found in most cases. And they are even more shocked to discover the laws, rules and regulations that Associations & non-profits are under as well as the limitations of the governing documents for their Association (many will have never read them! That is so often the case that the State of Florida now requires new Board members to certify that they have read & understand the Association documents within 3 months of being elected to the Board).

I'm never against an original idea or one that is out of the norm - those are the ways we get new solutions. But they have to be within the rules regs and laws or they simply aren't an option.

As for the right to rent it is in the collection rules. Once a property is delinquent it is up to the Association/management to lock the owner out and to maximize the income for the time through rental. (The owner DOES get credit for any rental but minus any commissions & other fees due). If the owner later pays they cannot demand that the time be returned to them - it may be forfeited for the use period if the fees were late & a rental occurred. Read your documents - it's in there as a standard clause and many States have it in their Condo/timeshare regulations as well. It is NOT taking property without due process - it is using all available options to collect fees due. If they remain unpaid it is a basis for foreclosure when they DO lose their ownership rights.

The process I referred to is that collection/lockout/foreclosure one. If followed as written then any timeshare can be "disposed of" but the owner rightfully suffers the economic consequences. That is called a contract and what every owner agrees to when they buy. You break the contract, you pay one way or another. Far easier to simply handle things properly but finding a willing taker even if that costs a little. Simply saying others must pick up the cost of your now unwanted (but once enjoyed) ownership will never be the answer.
 

pacodemountainside

TUG Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
2,865
Reaction score
4
Points
36
Location
Aurora, Colorado
So we should stop paying for everything we are dissatisfied with?

That's great, because my car isn't nearly as bright and shiny as it was when I first bought it, the windshield has a lot of chips, and I snagged the bumper on a cyclone fence - I'm tired of making the payments - can I stop?

I'm pretty dissatisfied with my house too - it needs new carpet, and paint, and it really needs to be redecorated - can I stop paying for it?

And then there is my husband.... :D


Denise:

Sometimes I think you have a dry Western sense of humor!

As you must realize, a car is generally necessary to get to work and a house to sleep in.

If these are repossed/foreclosed you are in deep shit!

A time share is a luxury, sales pitches not with standing. Like a $50 electric ass scrathcer.

As far as olde man goes, have year supply of Vigara pills, two condos, two cars( 6 speed Corvette that will do 150 mph), great pensions and 401Ks, cat and 5 timeshares.
 

ampaholic

TUG Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
2,305
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Spokane
I think you missed my point - I didn't say that HOA's shouldn't take timeshares back for a fee, I said that dues paying owners should not have to pay $200 per week, so other people can default. TS owners that want to default, should cover all the costs of their decision - not faithful owners who are paying their maintenance fees.



I don't believe this - most of the people who come to TUG and want out of their timeshare can pay - they just don't want the timeshare any more. I am not willing to subsidize that.

Someone who truly cannot make their payments does not have the money to pay an extra year's maintenance fees upfront, anyway.

But someone who can pay - should pay for ALL the costs to get rid of their TS - I am not coughing up $200 per timeshare.

+1 -- I agree that many who buy might want out but that is a very long shot from "can't afford it".

Let the "can't afford it" crowd file bankruptcy then there is a system already in place to cure their problem.
 

DeniseM

Moderator
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
57,672
Reaction score
9,092
Points
1,849
Resorts Owned
WKORV, WKV, 2-SDO, 4-Kauai Beach Villas, Island Park Village (Yellowstone), Hyatt High Sierra, Dolphin's Cove (Anaheim)
A time share is a luxury, sales pitches not with standing. Like a $50 electric ass scrathcer.

I don't care if it is a luxury or not - "I" am not willing to subsidize other owners' bad decisions and buyer's remorse. If they want out - they should pay for the privilege - not responsible owners.

I own 9 weeks of timeshare - are you really telling me I should come up with another $1,800 a year to pay for other people's mistakes? I don't think so!
 

csxjohn

TUG Review Crew: Expert
TUG Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2012
Messages
6,551
Reaction score
134
Points
348
Location
North East Ohio
Resorts Owned
Tropic Shores Resort, Bluegreen points
So we should stop paying for everything we are dissatisfied with?

That's great, because my car isn't nearly as bright and shiny as it was when I first bought it, the windshield has a lot of chips, and I snagged the bumper on a cyclone fence - I'm tired of making the payments - can I stop?

I'm pretty dissatisfied with my house too - it needs new carpet, and paint, and it really needs to be redecorated - can I stop paying for it?

And then there is my husband.... :D

Please Denise, we are not talking about money owed to buy the timeshare.

If you no longer like your car you can sell it and the fees to maintain it will stop. Of course you still have to pay off your note. If you can't afford to put a roof on your house or pay the utilities, you sell it or if you are under water on it you walk away from it.

This is not the situation that is being discussed here.

None of us like the idea of paying more because some will not or can not pay. It is partially our own fault for buying into a property that cannot maintain a near capacity owner rate.
 

DeniseM

Moderator
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
57,672
Reaction score
9,092
Points
1,849
Resorts Owned
WKORV, WKV, 2-SDO, 4-Kauai Beach Villas, Island Park Village (Yellowstone), Hyatt High Sierra, Dolphin's Cove (Anaheim)
None of us like the idea of paying more because some will not or can not pay. It is partially our own fault for buying into a property that cannot maintain a near capacity owner rate.

I have every sympathy for people who have REAL financial problems, and that is a different situation, but I have no interest in enabling people who want other owners to subsidize their mistakes.

I have no problem with resorts developing an exit plan for owners who want out - but don't ask me to pay an additional $200 per week for it - that is what I object to. Owners who want out, should pay all the costs involved. YMMV
 
Top