Post reply
Original Message:
Legal concerns... (by KC):
susanb533 stated in relevant part: >> I'm pretty sure that the resort supervisor, Amanda wasn't deceiving me when she said that they would not, even with a contract inforce the agreement. That's my issue with this whole situation. They literally cater to this visitor/non-owner, by not assisting with even a little nudge to get them to leave, I feel Marriott is passive on this because this renter is a potential purchaser at the resort or some other Marriott property.<< ===============================================
I certainly won't defend Marriott's inaction in this matter, but I DO believe that their position is likely motivated by something entirely different than what you express above...
I offered previously (and I believe correctly) that the facility would never consider intervening in a private contractual matter in which they had absolutely NO part, involvement, or participation at any time --- until or unless the legitimate access of the next valid, subsequent occupant became impeded. Being a "very deep pockets" corporation, Marriott is (with good cause, in this litigious society) ever mindful of the prospect of a lawsuit on its hands, filed by an evicted "guest" crying foul, wrongful treatment, emotional duress, etc., etc. Right or wrong, even a frivolous suit is potentially bad press and also involves incurring legal expenses to defend against it. It is my belief that this concern likely far outweighs any concern about the consequences of turning away from involvement in what THEY view as being entirely YOUR problem (not theirs, not in any way). The lawsuit concern almost certainly also fars outweighs any view they might have of (or any particular interest in) the "squatter" as a potential future Marriott buyer.
Once again, I am NOT defending the Marriott inaction on your behalf, but I can certainly and fully understand it --- when viewed solely from their own legal perspective.