Note: Please do not post ads in the timeshare forums. If you want to add a timeshare posting, go here.

Original Message:

ATTORNEY'S STATEMENT ON RCI WEEKS CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT (by Stephan W.):

Attorney Disclaimer Ordered by the United States District Court: I am an attorney who was admitted to represent some of the objectors in a class action pending in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Any statements by an attorney, including myself, should be considered to be the personal opinion of the attorney and are not approved by the Court. As such, my statements contained herein are not approved by the Court. More information is available at www.weeeksprogramsettlement.com, the Court-approved website.

Any statements by an attorney, including myself, should be considered to be the personal opinion and are not approved by the Court. As such, my statements contained herein are not approved by the Court. More information is available at www.weeeksprogramsettlement.com, the Court-approved website.

Summary of Settlement and Proposed Responses I am thoroughly familiar with the proposed Settlement because I am an attorney for some objectors in the RCI Weeks Class Action lawsuit. As an attorney that has an interest in this case, I have a legal duty to present a fair representation of the Settlement, thus I believe the length of this statement is required.

In summary, the Settlement provides benefits, but each has limitations such as: (1) your Week’s Trading Power (quality) is disclosed, BUT not Week’s Trading Powers (quality) you may exchange to compare them; (2) balancing of rental exchanges within three Trading Power (quality) Segments, BUT many more Segments should be required based on Member exchange standards; (3) numerous quantities involving the number of Weeks exchanged, BUT no data comparing the quality of exchanges between Member Weeks and RCI Weeks Rented quantified with Trading Power (quality) values; and (4) priority for Member Week exchanges over RCI Week rental exchanges made within 31 days of deposits more than a year in advance, or for pending searches, BUT Members who can not meet these requirements enable RCI to rent the Weeks if they are exchanged within only three Trading Power (quality) Segments. I feel the most relevant consideration is the balancing of exchanges of RCI Week rentals for Member Weeks within only three Trading Power (quality) Segments, and then WHY will RCI NOT disclose the difference in quality between the RCI Week rentals exchanged for Member Weeks? Basically, members who can not plan their vacations and/or deposit their Weeks a year in advance or do not happen to have an active search pending when a Member Week is deposited will probably lose that Member Week to RCI who will rent the Member Week.

RCI Class Weeks Members that subscribed with RCI at any time since January 1, 2000 who feel the terms above and further described below do not provide sufficient fairness and disclosures regarding Member’s Weeks exchanged to enable RCI to rent those Weeks should submit a LETTER objection with reasons and signature referencing "In re RCI, Civil Act. No. 06-cv-1222" by November 20, 2009 to the court address below. For further details and information about the Settlement go to http://www.weeksprogramsettlement.com/index.htm, and learn how to electronically file with RCI a Settlement claim form for $15-$100, etc., or how to make a stronger statement by opting-out, and/or read further.

Most Important Term in Settlement: “Trading Power [quality] Segments” The main goal of the RCI Weeks Settlement is to allegedly stop RCI from making unfair exchanges in RCI’s favor. Renting of Weeks by RCI and/or by Members can not be reasonably prohibited, thus the solution to the present lawsuit is to stop unfair exchanges from being made in RCI’s favor for the Weeks that members deposit with RCI. I have carefully analyzed the RCI Settlement and feel that Section 2 relative to “balancing” is the most relevant to achieving Fair exchanges for RCI members. I feel this section is misleadingly deceptive due to its indefinite terms, thus there is very little assurance that Weeks deposited by RCI and exchanged for Member Weeks will be done fairly. The Settlement is suppose to achieve this goal by requiring RCI to make exchanges of the Weeks that RCI deposits or “owns” so to speak (hereafter “RCI Weeks”) by “balancing” exchanges within “Trading Power [quality] Segments”.

Trading Power (quality) Segments in the Settlement have been overlooked by members since its definitions and explanations are very nebulous. For brevity and due to this section’s overbearing importance, I explain only this section from the Settlement in detail.

The Settlement requires RCI to only use “three” segments for RCI “owned” Weeks to be exchanged for Member Weeks. Three segments are less than the four segments or categories (Gold, Silver, Hospitality, and other) that resort’s Weeks are presently rated or segmented. In addition, these Member Weeks are further segmented into Red, Blue, White, and None, for a total of sixteen (16) different segments for Member exchanges.

In summary, RCI is required to only use 3 segments when exchanging their or RCI Weeks, but 16 segments or more can be used to exchange Members’ Weeks. Thus, exchanges between Members’ Weeks may be held to a higher threshold than exchanges between RCI Weeks and Members’ Weeks, and we have NO quality disclosures since this information is NOT provided in the Settlement. The present Settlement does NOT require RCI to identify the number of segments, the value ranges of the segments, or whether a Week’s Trading Power (quality) value will be provided as a numerical rating.

What Can Class Members Do? Based on the foregoing, it is my opinion that Members should object WITH REASONS to the settlement AND file a claim form, BOTH which require written submissions. If you would like to make a stronger statement to the court, you can forgive your right to claim a benefit and choose to opt-out of the Settlement which allows you and others to pursue independent settlements with RCI.

An objection OR opt-out LETTER referencing "In re RCI, Civil Act. No. 06-cv-1222" with signature should be postmarked by November 20, 2009 to:

Clerk of the Court, USDC DNJ 402 East State Street Trenton, NJ 08608

(I believe only one mailing is necessary based on stipulations agreed in court, etc.) A claim form can be submitted electronically to RCI by going to the RCI website at http://www.weeksprogramsettlement.com/index.htm or by US Mail to collect Settlement benefits worth $15 to $100, etc.(remember if you opt-out you can not file a claim form). In addition, any member that can attend the Fairness Hearing on November 30, 2009 at 2:30PM in Trenton, NJ should attend to show their opposition to the Settlement. I encourage you to have other RCI Weeks class members evaluate the Settlement and let their and your opinions be known to the court by either objecting or opting out. Many more RCI class Members’ opinions are needed by the court to possibly achieve better terms in a Settlement.

Additional Considerations to Understand the Settlement The relief provided consumers in class actions is usually cents on the dollar. However, satisfaction in such lawsuits is usually achieved since the deceptive and/or fraudulent conduct is eliminated, or at least curtailed. I would usually not publicly voice my opinion on a class action settlement I am involved, except that I feel the Settlement provides a very little undefined benefit to RCI members.

The Settlement does provide a member priority if they have started an ongoing search or search for a Week more than a year in advance. However, the best Weeks can be still taken away by RCI to rent immediately upon your deposit when the above two prerequisites are not met. Thus, if you can not begin a search before member deposits a Week and/or more than a year in advance, then RCI will not hold the Week until your travel plans are conceived, and RCI can rent the Week immediately while you plan your vacation! Basically, RCI knows the majority of Weeks are deposited by Members less than a year in advance and the chances of a search to be started before a Member happens to deposit their Week AND the search meets the Member's search are low. RCI knows the deposit and search patterns of their Members since that is what RCI tabulates and they know human nature. RCI can predict that the majority of Weeks deposited will not meet the two above requirements. RCI knows they can still take a majority the Member Weeks deposited for rentals under the present Settlement, as long as they are within three (3) undefined Trading Power (quality)Segements.

If you are not sure of the benefits provided by the Settlement you might ask yourself: (1) WHY is RCI not disclosing the Trading Power (quality) of the RCI Weeks and Member Weeks they exchange to be rented; and (2) WHY will RCI not disclose the Trading Power (quality) INDIVIDUALLY for each Week that a member can exchange their Week. The Settlement states RCI will disclose “quantity” or “number” of Weeks, but never the quantity of Trading Power(quality), or in other words the quality of Weeks exchanged. Some of the reasons for this are described below.

Explanations for RCI’s Reluctance to Disclose Further Information Regarding the Fairness of RCI’s Rental Weeks Exchanged Based on my study of the RCI case, I recognized RCI can take so-called “developer” Weeks as RCI advertises them and deposit these into the bank, exchange these Weeks for better Weeks, and then RCI can rent the better Weeks. Recognize I stated “so-called” above since RCI will not disclose what percentage of Weeks are from developers versus Weeks that are leftover or junk Weeks from resorts. RCI advertises developer Weeks since this characterization gives the Weeks the impression they are higher quality Weeks than the junk Weeks.

Also, RCI will not disclose the approximate number of Weeks RCI rents BEFORE the Settlement is approved. Resorts have leftover or junk Weeks from various sources such as foreclosure, non-owned, off-season, and unwanted Weeks which can be provided to RCI who can deposit them into the RCI bank. RCI can take these leftover Weeks and exchange them for better Weeks that RCI should know they can rent since they know the Trading Powers (quality) of all deposited Weeks.

In addition, the leftover Weeks do not have to pay or can not pay maintenance or exchange fees, and this is how RCI can rent exchanged Weeks for less than market and/or your cost! Incredulously, RCI can do even more with your Weeks when banked under the present Settlement. Specifically, I believe RCI can and does advertise the Week that you deposit for rent on its Website called Extra Vacations and when a renter is found, THEN RCI can exchange one of its leftover Weeks for the rental Week, and then rent the Week. RCI’s software can do all this automatically with computers to process, exchange, and rent the Week while you wait a few seconds for the rental approval! If RCI is not doing all the above, then RCI would simply provide and/or add up the difference in Trading Power (quality) values of all Weeks that RCI deposits, exchanges, and then rents.

More Detailed Summary of Settlement Terms The major benefits of the Settlement as they were briefed to the court are outlined below:

Disclosure of Trading Power (quality) (1) RCI will be required to disclose the Trading Power (quality) of a member’s deposited Week, in other words the relative value of a member’s Week compared to other vacation Weeks. However, RCI does not have to disclose the value as a number, thus RCI can chose a vague quantifier that is harder for members to compare between Weeks. In addition, the Trading Power (quality) of Weeks that a member’s deposited Week qualifies to be exchanged will be disclosed, but RCI does not have to disclose the Trading Power (quality)individually for each Week.

Balancing Quality of RCI Weeks with Members’ Week (2) The number of Weeks withdrawn by RCI, for example to rent, will be less annually than the number of Weeks deposited by RCI, but within at least three Trading Power (quality) Segments or ranges. In other words, within the three Trading Power (quality) ranges, the weeks withdrawn by RCI have to be in the same comparative Trading Power (quality) range of the weeks RCI deposits. For example, Weeks within a Trading Power (quality) Segment of a range from 2000 to 3000 enable RCI to rent a member Week with a 3000 value in exchange for a 2000 value deposited by RCI. RCI does not have to disclose the range of Trading Power (quality) values within each segment, the number of segments used, and value ranges used by RCI to rate Weeks.

General Exchange Statistics (3) RCI will disclose: (a) the total number of Weeks’ deposited by members and the total number of Weeks deposited and owned by RCI; (b) the number of exchanges made between Weeks’ members; and (c) the number of RCI Weeks rented exchanged for member Weeks. This information does not include the individual or overall comparative quality or fairness of exchanges based on assigned Trading Power (quality) values assigned to Weeks. The Trading Power (quality) exchange histories disclosed by RCI do not have to include information for exchanges between (a) members’ Weeks and other members’ Weeks, and/or (b) between members’ Weeks and RCI owned Weeks. The Settlement states “RCI will provide information to any Member regarding (a) Member Exchanges over the prior two years by region and subregion (if applicable), calendar month, average Trading Power [quality] of confirmed Exchanges and average historical supply”. The information provided does not include information individually by Week.

31 Day Priority for Member Exchanges (4) Weeks that are deposited more than one year in advance of the Week’s start date require that RCI wait 31 days after the Week is deposited before withdrawing a Week to enable timely member requests to be fulfilled. Week deposits made less than one year from their start date and that do not satisfy a member’s current search may be withdrawn immediately upon deposit by RCI for whatever purpose RCI chooses.

Pending Exchange Searches are Prioritized over RCI Owned Weeks Exchanges (5) All member Weeks deposited will be used to satisfy active exchange searches pending at the time of deposit. If there is not an active exchange search or a member has not planned their vacation yet when a member deposits a Week, RCI has the right to withdraw the Week immediately upon deposit.

Deposits Made Less Than a Year In Advance May Immediately be Exchanged with Other Exchange Systems (6) Weeks from other exchange systems could be used to enhance the quality of Weeks in the RCI bank, however there is potential for abuse. First, Weeks in other exchange systems can not be assigned a fair Trading Power (quality), thus RCI can use this process to skew Trading Power (quality) value for other Weeks to achieve the promised quality balance for RCI rental Weeks.

Week Deposits Not Exchanged Ninety (90) Days Before They Start May Be Rented (7) Weeks that have not been exchanged ninety (90) days before they start may be rented by RCI without requiring a comparative RCI Week deposit. Presently RCI rents weeks not exchanged forty five (45) days before the start date under their Last Call program. There is no reason to allow RCI to rent additional units, especially when these same Weeks may be desired by Members who have active searches but the Member does not have sufficient Trading Power (quality) to qualify for the exchange.

(Important note) RCI agrees to supply some of the above benefits for 2 years, thereafter RCI could terminate the benefits but this is unlikely. There are 5-6 additional privileges that you may benefit, but you MUST file a claim form. Above is only a summary of the major Settlement terms and there are limitations that apply, thus you must consult the 291 page Settlement if further details are desired. I feel am required to disclose that there are many more terms in the Settlement that benefit members beyond the ones briefly discussed above, and you should obtain your own legal opinion of the Settlement.

Background of Attorney Stephan Willett I provide an opinion on the RCI Class Action Settlement because in early, 2007 I began investigating the unfair exchanges RCI makes for members to file a related class action lawsuit that is now encompassed by this Settlement. Finally in September, 2009 I became an attorney for some of the objectors in this case which I had originally requested in April, 2009. I have investigated and filed plaintiff class action consumer lawsuits. I am a patent attorney that has worked extensively with Computer Networks. Based on my knowledge of software and the present capabilities of the Weeks’ exchange software used by RCI, I understand the RCI exchange process software.

I provide my email at stevefwillett@gmail.com to review comments from readers. Based on my time constraints I will not be able to respond to most questions, but I would like to provide posts to relevant and select questions to further explain important issues.