Post reply

Mariner's Pointe Resort Ongoing Lawsuit (by Dave B.):

josephf98 wrote:

Our family purchased a timeshare some 15-16 years from this resort after spending a week there. We enjoyed going there for many years with our two young teenage sons. There was much for the boys to do, we were welcomed with a Wine & Cheese Party, they had a Restaurant connected at that time, it was a guarded community, and everything was always clean and nice. Over the years, however, things declined quite a bit.

Little did we know what was in store when this resort got into and stayed in litigation over the lake for some 10+ years and even to the present maybe. We had obtained additional units before the law suit and were motortified when we received a SECOND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT of almost $500.00 per unit to help pay for the law suit.

By that time we owned four weeks, I had retired, our sons had left home, and my wife had been forced to leave her job for medical reasons......we then contacted the resort and advised them that it was impossible for us to pay that amount of money for, what we considered THEIR irresponsibilities, in handling the law suit. My wife then wrote Mr. Dave Burgess, Manager of the Management Firm handling the resort and explained our circumstances, and that we in no uncertain terms were going to pay all the assessment. (We never even used the lake.) We ended up turning back in three of our timeshares, getting nothing in return and kept only one. To this day we have not been back....although it is a lovely resort and we have many fond memories during our first few years of ownership. That's not to say we will never go back there - we just have not been for the last couple years. Before then, we went every single year!

Personally, I would not advise anyone to purchase there! Visit and have a good time, but do not buy!

With kindest regards, Joseph F. Adt, Sr. VA

In response to Adt, from VA: As with every story, there's always two sides and where 'sour-grapes' are concerned, there are usually significantly different views regarding what the facts really are. With both marriage and timeshare ownership, money is usually at the root of all problems. First, ALL of the Adt's units were off-season weeks. They owned three Blue weeks and one White week, and averaged around $900 invested in the purchase prices (their White week unit was only $1).

The 'law-suit' they're talking about was by the lake's owner (Plaintiff), and brought against the association (Defendant) in an effort to prevent the association members from using the lake, or building more units on the association's own property. The association had no choice but to defend its right to use the waters of the lake surrounding its property, in as much as the developer had sold all the units with such rights to our members. Additionally, the association was attempting to buiild more units for sale to increase the owner base, and hopefully reduce fees as a result. The association financed the suit internally by cutting operations and a few services for almost five years. The suit lasted a total of six years. The assessment was to cover the deficit which occurred in the suit process. The association spent almost $750,000 in defending itself. The Adt's were billed for their share based upon the number of units they owned, but they couldn't afford it, so I advised them that only under hardship cases, we would allow them to deed-back all their units. After they agreed, and the paperwork was prepared, then they wanted to keep one unit (the unit purchased for $1) & let the other units go back to the association in lieu of foreclosure. Contrary to policy, I allowed this to happen.

In their letter explaining hardship, the last paragraph stated "Also, we truly thought our sons would have been more interested in using the timeshares once they were grown, but that just hasn't been the case. We've enjoyed Mariner's Pointe for the past 15 years, and hopefully we can make it back there a few more times before we get too old to drive!" This comment regarding their sons not being interested in taking over ownership of two of the units is on point to the problem in this case. The Adt's are aware of the suit being complete, and that we are in a very strong position as a result of the battle. Regards, Dave Burgess, President Universal Services Corporation Agent for MPIOA