Reviews on Resorts

Back to reviews .... I always check Redweek reviews and www.tripadvisor.com for reviews on hotels and timeshares.

jayjay bryan, what confuses me is that the lawsuit (from the little I've read) is mainly concerning RCI renting out surplus weeks. Weeks that RCI rents that are considered surplus are weeks that are deposited for cruises, airline tickets (and other non-timeshare transactions) and perhaps points deposits.

Many of the weeks RCI rents are from developers and resorts themselves. Madge has explained this time and time again on Tug, but many people just don't get it. ======================================== I have to agree with jayjay on this and ten years from now you will still be hearing about this law suit!

To much talk about this when the only way to stop Rci from doing this type of lack of service to its members is to leave!

We did that years ago and have friends that have left Rci in last few years because of their dealings.

You want to hurt Rci then leave them. If all these people that signed on to this law suit thinking it cost them nothing to sign on would just cancel with Rci things would happen!

For the thousands that became fed up with Rci and left another new group of owners signs on so Rci loses nothing and just keeps doing what they do!

I signed on years ago to one one of these law suits toward a airline and after eight years the company lost and we were paid! The law firm received over eighty million dollars and I received a fifty dollar discount on two different flights which we never used!

Just seems if Rci loses then law firm makes money!

phill12

jayjay wrote:

bryan, what confuses me is that the lawsuit (from the little I've read) is mainly concerning RCI renting out surplus weeks. Weeks that RCI rents that are considered surplus are weeks that are deposited for cruises, airline tickets (and other non-timeshare transactions) and perhaps points deposits.

Many of the weeks RCI rents are from developers and resorts themselves. Madge has explained this time and time again on Tug, but many people just don't get it. ======================================== I have to agree with jayjay on this and ten years from now you will still be hearing about this law suit!

To much talk about this when the only way to stop Rci from doing this type of lack of service to its members is to leave!

We did that years ago and have friends that have left Rci in last few years because of their dealings.

You want to hurt Rci then leave them. If all these people that signed on to this law suit thinking it cost them nothing to sign on would just cancel with Rci things would happen!

For the thousands that became fed up with Rci and left another new group of owners signs on so Rci loses nothing and just keeps doing what they do!

I signed on years ago to one one of these law suits toward a airline and after eight years the company lost and we were paid! The law firm received over eighty million dollars and I received a fifty dollar discount on two different flights which we never used!

Just seems if Rci loses then law firm makes money!

When I (and I am sure many others who signed with RCI) signed up and paid for RCI, I really wanted to try to make the RCI program work. If they only did what they claim to be doiing, their service would be great. Rather than try to destroy them, I would much prefer that they deliver on their promises and clean up their act. For that reason, I would rather they stay solvent, but less devious. My gut feeling is that they have more loyalty to the developers than they do to the members, but that is my opinion only.

As you point out, for all those that leave, there are new members that continue to feed their system. So, by that logic, it is useless to just leave and do nothing. If they continue to abuse people, and the people don't want to just roll over, but want them to stop the abuse, how else can they do it?

For an individual to try to take on RCI, they would not be able to afford the legal bills alone, and only a foolish lawyer would take something so small on contingency. For a law firm to take on the same cause, only representing 1000's of clients, it unfortunately becomes a good business decision for the law firm. If RCI were to be hit with a fraction of the number of plaintiffs suing individually, they would be sunk by legal fees, because the that many more lawyers will have their hand out. So, as obscene as the legal fees are, they are actually LESS than they would be if everybody tried to sue RCI on their own over the same violation. Just as your own airline class action paid off, you risked nothing in the process and got a small payoff. Most of the legal fees were probably paid from their insurance carrier anyway, just as RCI's insurance will pay for their defense.

I am an RCI member but will not bank my exchange because I can't seem to get anything that I ask for, even after doing everything that has been suggested. I will probably offer it up on Redweek instead. I have an exchange that I will lose at the end of this month and I can't do anything about it, I can't sell it.

There are some people on this board that are patriotic RCI flag wavers, brag about how they do well with RCI exchanges but never really "reveal" the secrets of how they get the "RCI system" to work for them. I don't think there really are any "secrets", as I have asked for and have never received anything of substance that I had not already tried.

In summary: If you don't like the system you have two choices, 1. do something to change the system or 2. leave and go somewhere else. You chose #2.

bryan, I'm definitely not an RCI patriot. We sold all of our timeshare weeks due to steadily rising RCI fees ... membership fees, exchange fees (from $129 to $169), guest certificate fees, and rising maintenance fees at our resorts along with a couple of special assessments. Timesharing was just not cost effective for us any longer as it had been in the earlier years.

However, I never had any trouble getting any exchanges I desired from RCI, BECAUSE I banked early and started my searches early (you HAVE to learn to do that with timesharing). Where many disgruntled RCI members make their mistake is waiting until the last minute to deposit and search for an exchange, especially hard to get exchanges. Exchanges are driven by supply and demand, period and the most popular demanded locations and seasons will fill up fast. Depositing and searching early (sometimes a year in advance) was how RCI worked for us.

Many people don't desire to plan vacations a year or more in advance, but we had to learn to do so in order to get the exchanges we desired. Timesharing and the exchanging process is probably not for them.

You have to remember that a large percentage of timeshare owners don't even belong to an exchange company. They buy where they like to go each year, so those weeks are never deposited. Someone has to deposit a week in order for it to be exchanged. Demand (for hard to get places) is greater than supply, that's for sure.

The above is the reason I believe the lawsuit is frivilous (and my former post concerning RCI surplus weeks). You have to learn to play the system concerning exchanges. A timeshare salesperson may tell you that you can exchange your week for anywhere in the RCI wishbook anytime you want to. This is the reason that so many people become disgruntled when they can't get a desirable exchange after they have been lied to by a salesperson.

Many people buy just to exchange and that's the very worst reason to buy any timeshare. Exchanging is merely an extra perk of timesharing, especially if you are flexible in your choices, but belonging to any exchange company is not mandatory for timeshare ownership.

bryanw21 wrote:

There are some people on this board that are patriotic RCI flag wavers, brag about how they do well with RCI exchanges but never really "reveal" the secrets of how they get the "RCI system" to work for them. I don't think there really are any "secrets", as I have asked for and have never received anything of substance that I had not already tried.

In summary: If you don't like the system you have two choices, 1. do something to change the system or 2. leave and go somewhere else. You chose #2.

Re: >> what confuses me is that the lawsuit (from the little I've read) is mainly concerning RCI renting out surplus weeks <<

I'm not sure that this is entirely correct. My own understanding, perhaps flawed, is that the plaintiffs contend that RCI is actually renting out PRIME weeks (which were deposited by the owners of those weeks), for RCI's own profit, and that in so doing RCI is then making those PRIME weeks unavailable for any exchange by the paid RCI membership, contrary to the entire point and purpose of "depositing for exchange". Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I don't think it has much (if anything at all) to do with "surplus" weeks, which are of little interest or value to plaintiffs (or to anyone else, for that matter) in the first place.

Re: >> RCI would be cutting off their nose to spite their face to rent member deposits. <<

How so??? Making money hand over fist can hardly be regarded as being against their OWN interests.....

Re: >> RCI attorneys have crossed all the t's and dotted all the i's. <<

Well, we shall see, I guess. That's what a courtroom is for. At the very least, the RCI attorneys will likely have the opportunity to openly explain how/where/why so many decent deposited weeks have somehow become completely invisible and completely unavailable for dues paying RCI members to exchange into in recent years.

Re: >> The attorneys that represent RCI, both in litigation and in contractual matters have only one alliegiance, to their client, who is the Cendant Corporation that owns RCI....<<

I'm told (yesterday, in fact, by an RCI points rep) that RCI is no longer owned by Cendant Corporation at all. Whether that's true or not will have little or no bearing on the outcome of the class action suit in which RCI is the named defendant.

To be clear here, aside for being an RCI member I have no horse in this race and I am not a participant in the legal action. That said, it has still become clear to all in recent years that RCI "exchanges" are far less available than they were formerly. Why??? Whether that has something to do with RCI adopting "points" practices back in 2000, or whether it's due to any (or all) of the underlying claims within the lawsuit remains to be seen. In any event, I am personally not at all displeased to see RCI practices put under the spotlight and/or be subjected to the test of "bright sunlight". Let the facts become known -- and may the truth (somehow) prevail.

phill12 wrote:

I have to agree with jayjay on this and ten years from now you will still be hearing about this law suit!

To much talk about this when the only way to stop Rci from doing this type of lack of service to its members is to leave!

------------------------------------------------------------------------ bryanw21 wrote: When I (and I am sure many others who signed with RCI) signed up and paid for RCI, I really wanted to try to make the RCI program work. If they only did what they claim to be doiing, their service would be great. Rather than try to destroy them, I would much prefer that they deliver on their promises and clean up their act. For that reason, I would rather they stay solvent, but less devious. My gut feeling is that they have more loyalty to the developers than they do to the members, but that is my opinion only.

As you point out, for all those that leave, there are new members that continue to feed their system. So, by that logic, it is useless to just leave and do nothing. If they continue to abuse people, and the people don't want to just roll over, but want them to stop the abuse, how else can they do it?

In summary: If you don't like the system you have two choices, 1. do something to change the system or 2. leave and go somewhere else. You chose #2.

phill12 wrote: What I was trying to say and guess I didn't word it well was for the members that are very unhappy as we were then its better to leave.

Many of these people complain about Rci screwing the members and expect this law suit to fix the problem! This is not going to happen and if anything the law firms will make money and Rci will just keep rolling!

I agree with you that it would be nice if Rci cleaned up their act toward members and I felt this way in 1987 when we finally dumped our timeshare just to get away from Rci.

We would still own that timeshare if we could have moved over to II with it. Back in 1983 when we bought you had Rci and that was it and take it or leave and we left! We bought five star resort that dealt with II at that point!

I feel that if all the unhappy members left and with all these sites we now have new buyers have ways of learning what we never had in early eightys.

Hopefully enough of the new people will read these sites and be smart enough not to join Rci and then and only then will they change or close!

Re: >> I have to agree with jayjay on this and ten years from now you will still be hearing about this law suit! <<

I have neither time for nor interest in an argument on the point, but I AM willing to bet (short money, anyhow) that this matter will be completely resolved within 18 months (or less) from right now. RCI does not want the stink of this matter lingering in the air for years on end. That simply "ain't gonna happen", at least imho.

As far as "leaving" RCI, membership is a revolving door, with lots more new (unsuspecting?) members joining all the time. To "leave" on principle alone and then have to be limited to the much smaller exchange companies like II, DAE, etc. seems to me to be a noble act in principle, but one ultimately offering even fewer choices and options than SHOULD exist with RCI right now. I'm all for holding RCI feet to the fire instead, in open court if necessary, and have a judgement tell them to "get with the program" --- their OWN program, by the way!

I think the problem starts with developer timeshare salespeople telling prospective buyers that they can trade their possible future timeshare for anywhere, anytime that's in the RCI Wishbook. This is just not so .... it's like a snake eating it's tail.

Until the timeshare industry is cleaned up from the top down (including lies told by developer salespeople, upfront fee resale company scams etc.) then timesharing will always be a dirty word to many people, especially those that have bought and have become disenchanted with the product after the lies they have been told.

A class action lawsuit should be developed for ALL timeshare scams as there are many.

As far as RCI goes, it states in their Terms and Conditions that when you deposit a week with them then it's their's to do with as they wish (or similar words). The week is no longer yours. I'm not condoning this policy, it's just the way it is.

The simple solution is to buy where you like to go (or rent) and not depend on any exchange company. Many people have stated that they wouldn't have bought a timeshare in the first place if not for the opportunity to exchange (again, back to developer salespeople and their lies) ..... but the possiblity of exchanging is the very worst reason to buy any timeshare as you're at the mercy of the exchange companies and their limited inventory.

DO NOT BUY A TIMESHARE JUST FOR EXCHANGING (you will more than likely be very disappointed in your options for exchanges you desire as many people want the same desirable resorts/times as you do). It's all a crapshoot.

ken1193 wrote:

I have neither time for nor interest in an argument on the point, but I AM willing to bet (short money, anyhow) that this matter will be completely resolved within 18 months (or less) from right now. RCI does not want the stink of this matter lingering in the air for years on end. That simply "ain't gonna happen", at least imho.

As far as "leaving" RCI, membership is a revolving door, with lots more new (unsuspecting?) members joining all the time. To "leave" on principle alone and then have to be limited to the much smaller exchange companies like II, DAE, etc. seems to me to be a noble act in principle, but one ultimately offering even fewer choices and options than SHOULD exist with RCI right now. I'm all for holding RCI feet to the fire instead, in open court if necessary, and have a judgement tell them to "get with the program" --- their OWN program, by the way!

Re: >> As far as RCI goes, it states in their Terms and Conditions that when you deposit a week with them then it's their's to do with as they wish (or similar words). The week is no longer yours. I'm not condoning this policy, it's just the way it is. <<

Let's not just conveniently overlook here the fact that a deposit is NOT a "gift" or a "donation" to RCI coffers. It is an item of value, for which RCI has a responsibility to provide to their fee paying membership at least an *opportunity* for something of comparable value in return --- which just doesn't seem to happen anymore.

Re: >> DO NOT BUY A TIMESHARE JUST FOR EXCHANGING (you will more than likely be very disappointed in your options for exchanges you desire as many people want the same desirable resorts/times as you do). It's all a crapshoot. <<

Good advice and true -- at least in part. The point of contention with alleged RCI practices is NOT competing with others for a limited inventory of desirable weeks. The perceived RCI practice which is objectionable is RCI keeping (or shall I say "hiding") good deposits from exchange availability to ANYONE, utilizing them instead for more profit than a mere exchange fee provides. I'm willing to play "long odds" on occasion, but having odds of winning being ZERO is really not acceptable (to me).

This would have to be proven in the lawsuit, which I don't see happening. The only people getting any benefit out of this lawsuit are all the attorneys involved.

ken1193 wrote:

The perceived RCI practice which is objectionable is RCI keeping (or shall I say "hiding") good deposits from exchange availability to ANYONE, utilizing them instead for more profit than a mere exchange fee provides. I'm willing to play "long odds" on occasion, but having odds of winning being ZERO is really not acceptable (to me).

Re: >> This would have to be proven in the lawsuit, which I don't see happening. The only people getting any benefit out of this lawsuit are all the attorneys involved. <<

Well, although you "don't see it happening", with all due respect you're not in the courtroom (and nor am I). Even if nothing more comes out of the class action suit than RCI having felt the glare of bright sunlight and open revelation of their internal practices and a lot of unwelcome exposure, I don't personally see that as a particularly bad thing. Unchecked, RCI would (and will) otherwise just continue to march on unrestrained.

I generally have no use for lawyers, but I can't help but feel that RCI is running amok and is just out of control. We'll see (and just maybe we'll ALL benefit from) the outcome.

The problem here is that 99.99% of RCI members have never and will never hear anything about this lawsuit. It's only the timeshare educated that know about it and the cost of the lawsuit will merely be passed on to RCI members in much higher fees.

ken1193 wrote:

Re: >> This would have to be proven in the lawsuit, which I don't see happening. The only people getting any benefit out of this lawsuit are all the attorneys involved. <<

Well, although you "don't see it happening", with all due respect you're not in the courtroom (and nor am I). Even if nothing more comes out of the class action suit than RCI having felt the glare of bright sunlight and open revelation of their internal practices and a lot of unwelcome exposure, I don't personally see that as a particularly bad thing. Unchecked, RCI would (and will) otherwise just continue to march on unrestrained.

I generally have no use for lawyers, but I can't help but feel that RCI is running amok and is just out of control. We'll see (and just maybe we'll ALL benefit from) the outcome.

jayjay wrote:

The problem here is that 99.99% of RCI members have never and will never hear anything about this lawsuit. It's only the timeshare educated that know about it and the cost of the lawsuit will merely be passed on to RCI members in much higher fees.

ken1193 wrote:

Re: >> This would have to be proven in the lawsuit, which I don't see happening. The only people getting any benefit out of this lawsuit are all the attorneys involved. <<

Well, although you "don't see it happening", with all due respect you're not in the courtroom (and nor am I). Even if nothing more comes out of the class action suit than RCI having felt the glare of bright sunlight and open revelation of their internal practices and a lot of unwelcome exposure, I don't personally see that as a particularly bad thing. Unchecked, RCI would (and will) otherwise just continue to march on unrestrained.

I generally have no use for lawyers, but I can't help but feel that RCI is running amok and is just out of control. We'll see (and just maybe we'll ALL benefit from) the outcome.

Just what is a "timeshare educated" person? Are these the few that seem to intimately know how RCI's exchange program really works? Most of us don't give a damn how it works as long as it works. When it does not work as promised, then it is time to find out why.

All the members should expect RCI to follow through with their promises of performance whether or not they know about the lawsuit. Just as RCI imposes terms and conditions on how the members are to use RCI's services, there are expected performance and fiduciary responsibilities either implied or expressly stated that RCI is to abide by. Membership is a contract, both for the members and RCI.

If RCI is accused of abuses to their own benefit at the expnse of the members, they should have to either prove they did nothing wrong when challenged, or change their methods. Either way it is to the benefit of the members. If RCI is in fact doing what the lawsuit claims, then they are basically stealing from the members. If RCI is doing nothing wrong, then they have nothing to worry about, because the plaintiff attorneys will not get any fees and the costs (other than defense of the suit, which may require the plaintiffs to pay the legal fees of RCI) will not be passed on to the members.

To believe that only the planitiff attorneys are benefitting is akin to analyzing the problem in a vacuum with flawed data. Sure, the attorneys may get their fees, but the alternative is to have the hundreds of thousands of members pour their money into false promises and not get what is being promised.

What is more painful to a member, to be personally ripped off by the system, or to pay a slightly higher fee and know that you are being treated fairly? It shouldn't have to come to this, but then again, we didn't buy into the RCI management trying to screw its members (if that is proven in the lawsuit)

For you to think that there will be much higher fees passed on to the members, are you conceding that RCI is guilty as charged? It sure sounds like it.

I'm not conceding anything. I'm saying that no matter if RCI wins the lawsuit or not they will pass the defense costs on to their members - win or lose.

bryanw21 wrote:

For you to think that there will be much higher fees passed on to the members, are you conceding that RCI is guilty as charged? It sure sounds like it.

I find the same type of reviews that vary from person to person and I sometimes wonder if they are reviewing the same resort. People have different standards and some people are always expecting the Ritz. Also if there is a single problem with an employee or any issue at the timeshare, the person writing the review will not be happy with anything.

I agree with you that the best approach is to average the reviews and ignore the ones that were written in anger.

whaack wrote:

I own at a few resorts and am generally happy with my ownerships, but do like to try new areas as often as possible. I will typically rely on RCI to do my exchanges but have purchased off the web on occasion. The thing that gets me is the Varied reviews you can read on the resorts. Red Week .com tends to have limited reviews mostly of which I would think are put in by the owners, who of course will make the resort sound great. Trip Advisor. Com tends to have many more reviews on each resort and they can Vary Wildly, from The greatest place on earth ,to this this is a dump all within the same week. I sometimes wonder if other Resorts send in some of these reviews to try and Poison there compitition. For the most part I think you have to try and take an avg. on all the reviews and hope your gut feeling is right.

RCI is now a part of one of the four companies that Cendant split up into.

HI, I've been exchanging through Interval international for 18 years and found exchanging to be fun and a way to see the world. I have always gotten what I wanted but I learned to plan my vacations in advance and try to be patient. I've also found in the past years to go to www.tripadvisor.com and read there reviews. I throw out the worst and the best review and look at the rest. Usually it's the same complaint in bad reviews so see if that problem would bother you and remember food is a person preference so I ignore food problems. I also call Interval International for there customer satisfaction numbers on that resort to see how other owners liked that exchange. I do not know if RCI has this service but if they do try to use it since they come from surveys given to the members a day or so after there vacation when it's still fresh in there minds. If your not the pickest person alive and you see on tripadvisor that there's a lot of good reviews (try Yahoo reviews also) with bad mixed in I bet you will find the place to be a good place to spend a week. I also think if so many did like it how bad could it really be and it's only a week :o). Good Luck and have fun exchanging!

whaack wrote:

I own at a few resorts and am generally happy with my ownerships, but do like to try new areas as often as possible. I will typically rely on RCI to do my exchanges but have purchased off the web on occasion. The thing that gets me is the Varied reviews you can read on the resorts. Red Week .com tends to have limited reviews mostly of which I would think are put in by the owners, who of course will make the resort sound great. Trip Advisor. Com tends to have many more reviews on each resort and they can Vary Wildly, from The greatest place on earth ,to this this is a dump all within the same week. I sometimes wonder if other Resorts send in some of these reviews to try and Poison there compitition. For the most part I think you have to try and take an avg. on all the reviews and hope your gut feeling is right.

phill12 wrote:

Jayjay, I didn't keep the e-mail! It was from one of the people I have dealt with on Tug and had some help from changing my password!

I just thought it was nice of them for my review and they don't give this out to everyone who writes a review!

I was told I didn't need to make my choice now and they would let me know when I would be ready to renew. Said I could have free renewed membership or a week at a RCI resort.

That is all there was but I did know the man because of past dealings with him and he does work for Tug but I just don't remember his name off hand!

As far as Rci being bad mouth on Tug I think you better look around. Tug is not the only site bad mouthing Rci and their actions with members. They are getting many owners ticked off last few years. We left them 15-18 years ago and know of three families that have left Rci in last couple of years for bad service.

Redweek is no different and I have read post about Rci on here too!

========= Might Tug be trying to encourage more reviews by giving an occasional prize to a reviewer? If the Tug moderator (or whatever) had a week banked with RCI, there is nothing to prevent him from gifting it. Maybe more sites should try something to encourage reviews. I have noticed a derth of recent ones. Any more than 4 years old should be ditched, if newer reviews are available. Things change a LOT in a few years. The shabbiest building in a resort may be the best one now because it was due for refurbishing! MD

ken1193 wrote:

Re: >> As far as RCI goes, it states in their Terms and Conditions that when you deposit a week with them then it's their's to do with as they wish (or similar words). The week is no longer yours. I'm not condoning this policy, it's just the way it is. <<

Let's not just conveniently overlook here the fact that a deposit is NOT a "gift" or a "donation" to RCI coffers. It is an item of value, for which RCI has a responsibility to provide to their fee paying membership at least an *opportunity* for something of comparable value in return --- which just doesn't seem to happen anymore.

Re: >> DO NOT BUY A TIMESHARE JUST FOR EXCHANGING (you will more than likely be very disappointed in your options for exchanges you desire as many people want the same desirable resorts/times as you do). It's all a crapshoot. <<

Good advice and true -- at least in part. The point of contention with alleged RCI practices is NOT competing with others for a limited inventory of desirable weeks. The perceived RCI practice which is objectionable is RCI keeping (or shall I say "hiding") good deposits from exchange availability to ANYONE, utilizing them instead for more profit than a mere exchange fee provides. I'm willing to play "long odds" on occasion, but having odds of winning being ZERO is really not acceptable (to me).

adahiscout has asked, quoted in pertinent part: >> Don't understand what you mean by "hiding" deposits, Ken. Are you referring to the generic/invisible deposits? << =======================================

The lawsuit allegations against RCI contend (in relevant part) that RCI accepts prime weeks deposited by the owner(s) of said prime weeks, but then never makes them available (or even viewable) for exchange by the RCI membership. Instead, the allegations contend, RCI holds (personally, I like "HIDES" as being a more appropriately descriptive allegation) those prime weeks from view and/or exchange by any and all hopeful exchangers, with RCI choosing instead to just "hide" and then rent out those prime weeks directly to the public themselves, thereby ensuring a profit which is obviously much more money than a mere $169 exchange fee.

I'm not a party to this suit, but I've been following it closely, having both a legal background and a keen interest in RCI's downward plunge in quality, honesty and ethical practices (...that's just my own personal opinion) over about the past decade.

Right now in the lawsuit, there are matters pending regarding class certification, with both sides having specific filing deadlines, all of which actually end soon (within a few weeks from right now). Once class certification is resolved, the case either then moves forward (if certification is granted) or is thrown out and terminated (if class certification is denied by the court). I have no crystal ball -- and I know enough not to second guess the thought processes of sitting judges, but I am nonetheless very interested in these particular proceedings.