Why do you think timeshares were kept exempt from this new Florida law?

[richardm]

A new condo association law takes effect in Florida mid-year, however timeshares are specifically exempt. Many resorts have at least some of this available- so it seems a pretty easy transition if timeshares were included. Why do you think the industry was exempted?

A summary of the new law is below:

718.111(12)(g), Florida Statutes


By July 1, 2018, an association with 150 or more units which does not manage timeshare units shall post digital copies of the following official records on its website:

• The recorded declaration of condominium of each condominium operated by the association and each amendment to each declaration.
• The recorded bylaws of the association and each amendment to the bylaws.
• The articles of incorporation of the association, or other documents creating the association, and each amendment thereto. The copy posted pursuant to this sub-subparagraph must be a copy of the articles of incorporation filed with the Department of State.
• The rules of the association.
• Any management agreement, lease, or other contract to which the association is a party or under which the association or the unit owners have an obligation or responsibility. Summaries of bids for materials, equipment, or services must be maintained on the website for 1 year.
• The annual budget required by s. 718.112(2)(f) and any proposed budget to be considered at the annual meeting.
• The financial report required by subsection (13) and any proposed financial report to be considered at a meeting.
• The certification of each director required by s.718.112(2)(d)4.b.
• All contracts or transactions between the association and any director, officer, corporation, firm, or association that is not an affiliated condominium association or any other entity in which an association director is also a director or officer and financially interested.
• Any contract or document regarding a conflict of interest or possible conflict of interest as provided in ss. 468.436(2) and 718.3026(3).
• The notice of any unit owner meeting and the agenda for the meeting, as required by s. 718.112(2)(d)3., no later than 14 days before the meeting. The notice must be posted in plain view on the front page of the website, or on a separate subpage of the website labeled “Notices” which is conspicuously visible and linked from the front page. The association must also post on its website any document to be considered and voted on by the owners during the meeting or any document listed on the agenda at least 7 days before the meeting at which the document or the information within the document will be considered.
• Notice of any board meeting, the agenda, and any other document required for the meeting as required by s.718.112(2)(c), which must be posted no later than the date required for notice pursuant to s. 718.112(2)(c).

 

[x3 skier]

The excuse. “Too many owners”.

The truth. Payoff

Cheers

 

[CanuckTravlr]

As a former president and treasurer of two condominium corporations, I have always been amazed at the minimal consumer protection for timeshare owners when compared to condominium law. There are so many timeshares in Florida that I suspect any change to that is doomed to failure due to political pressure by the developers/managers, who can carry a lot of sway in the state. And that applies to most other jurisdictions as well, IMHO. I suspect most timeshare owners are out-of-state, so have zero political sway, compared to condo owners who tend to live in their units and are therefore eligible voters. Also, most condo boards are filled by owners, not reps of the developer/manager.

When I look at the items listed by richardm about the details of the new law, it deals mostly with full and proper disclosure, transparency and conflict-of-interest issues. Most of these would be anathema to any timeshare developer and developer-managed boards. Can you imagine if we, as owners, had full disclosure and access to the details of all management contracts, outside contracts and equipment purchases? They really do not want us to know most of that, as it would severely hamper their freedom of action and day-to-day operations. Also, full disclosure of the backgrounds and connections of all board members could be problematic. Most developer-managed boards could potentially automatically be in a conflict-of-interest position. Again, a danger to being able to conduct "business-as-usual" in today's timeshare marketplace. Unfortunately, I don't see any changes to the status quo any time soon.

 

[tschwa2]

ARDA dollars (lobbyist) hard at work to protect developers interests.

 

[theo]

Thanks for posting this interesting information Richard, disheartening though it may be for timeshare owners.

The "150 units or more" criterion is an interesting "bar". That figure would eliminate many (most?) independent (i.e., non-chain") timeshares anyhow, even if this statute applied to timeshares at all, which it plainly (and surely very deliberately) does not.

I share the belief already expressed above that the clear and specific exclusion of timeshares reflects the influence, foul aroma and fingerprints of ARDA.