Is Getting Rid of Timeshares a Problem?

Does anyone know of an organization that will represent the timeshare owners? We do need an advocate and I expect most of us would act to protect our interests by paying dues.

There is nothing in my suggested petition that endorses not paying fees.

Organizations I have been involved with, or have learned about, that purport to be an independent voice, do not appear to be in reality. Ones that started that way, maybe with the owner in mind, seem to have gravitated to being pro-industry.

I have not come across a group that is a true advocate for owners, that does not at least somewhat cow-tow to the industry.

Of course, there is not unanimity among owners on important topics. From your wording, I might draw the conclusion that you believe all owners should pay maintenance fees, even when they are done using their timeshares, whereas I believe forcing owners to do so with ugliness and hate and threats is detrimental to owners who wish to continue with their ownerships.

It costs money to take those actions and just prolongs the inevitable, which would be to do something positive to make unproductive weeks productive again. In addition, ugliness further tarnishes the image of timesharing with the general public.

It's enough of an insult already when owners discover that their timeshares are worth nothing, contrary to what they were told when they bought.

I believe there is a common ground somewhere between forcing blood out of a turnip and allowing people to simply walk away from their obligations.

jlb wrote:

I believe there is a common ground somewhere between forcing blood out of a turnip and allowing people to simply walk away from their obligations.

Some do have it. They might require the current owner to pay the closing costs (about $250) plus even the maintenance fees for the next year or two before the resort takes the unit back.

The timeshare industry spends million of dollars researching marketing techniques to sell their products. They also spend millions of dollars lobbying law makers for favorable legislation. They prey upon people who are in a euphoric state enjoying a vacation. By the time their vacation is over and they return home the rescission period is usually over. Then they are hit with the realization that what the sales person told them is a pack of lies geared to get them to sign on the dotted line.

The answer from the industry is " let them eat cake ". They are only concerned with the bottom line. Some developers have even discovered that they can control the HOA by getting their own people on the board and then they can make even more profit by raising maintenance fees and assessments to improve their property at the expense of the owners.

I was fortunate to unload two timeshares through deed backs but I was forceful and told them in no other terms that I was going to get them out of my name with or without their cooperation and it was in their best interest to work with me. They agreed and now I have been maintenance free since 2011.

Right now it is up to each individual to negotiate their own exit strategy like I did. Sometimes you have to be creative and sometimes it might take extreme measures like my hypothetical method. If enough people use tactics and bail out the industry might have take notice and change their ways of dealing with disgruntled owners.

Fortunately todays social media give us forums to discuss our problems and devise solutions. I encourage everyone to share their thoughts and hopefully get the attention of the industry and make them change some policies.

My view is that owners should absolutely continue to pay maintenance fees so long as they own the timeshare. Otherwise, the maintenance fee burden shifts to other timeshare owners as bad debt expense - The developer doesn't suffer any consequence.

I believe there should be an orderly and defined way for owners to sell or abandon their timeshares/points and that the current system is weighted "too heavily" in favor of the developer. No doubt the developer extracts a heavy premium upon sale and there should be an incentive for the developer to support the ongoing value of the buyer's investment. Would the abandonment of the ROFR compel fairer treatment with the threat of ownership by someone unfriendly to the developer? What if the developer was on the hook to buy back at just 25% or even 50% of the purchase price for 10 years? What if the developer was compelled to take back timeshares/points at even $0 cost? And an extreme, what if the developer rented points to you for a 5, 10, or 15 year period?

The "forever nature" of timeshare must be eliminated and the developer should share the cost of a failed ownership experience. Other maintenance fee payers should not be on the hook for this.

jlb wrote:

That is sorta in line with why I started this thread, that the organizations I have been involved with, or have learned about, that purport to be an independent voice, do not appear to be in reality.

I have not come across a group that is a true advocate for owners, that does not at least somewhat cow-tow to the industry.

Of course, there is not unanimity among owners on important topics. From your wording, I might draw the conclusion that you believe all owners should pay maintenance fees, even when they are done using their timeshares, whereas I believe forcing owners to do so with ugliness and hate and threats is detrimental to owners who wish to continue with their ownerships.

It costs money to take those actions and just prolongs the inevitable, which would be to do something positive to make unproductive weeks productive again. In addition, ugliness further tarnishes the image of timesharing with the general public.

It's enough of an insult already when owners discover that their timeshares are worth nothing, contrary to what they were told when they bought.

I believe there is a common ground somewhere between forcing blood out of a turnip and allowing people to simply walk away from their obligations.

My sense is that the developer is long gone from most of the resorts where owners want to get rid of their ownership. That is the case with our six weeks, where the developers have not been involved for any of the time we have owned . . . that's 23 years at one of them.

And sure, if an amenable exit strategy is provided, owners should have to pay their fees until they exit.

It is where there is no exit strategy and no assistance from the industry, and owners are being forced to pay for something they don't want by threats and ugliness that something needs to be done.

It's time for HOAs, the governing body in most cases, to get creative. Is forcing inactive owners to pay fees the least expensive, most productive tactic?

Hate begets hate.

(incorporated in a new post)

(incorporated in new post)

I'm doing a little housecleaning, combining some thoughts contained in several previous posts, which I have now deleted. I also see that what I have added to the petition, from ARDA/ROC was alluded to by Tracey.

Would you agree to a petition saying this?

“We, the undersigned owners, members, and participants of timeshares, vacation intervals, vacation points systems, travel clubs, vacation clubs and similar organizations acknowledge that at some time we, and all those so involved, will no longer want to be. All at some time, for a variety of reasons, will want or need to end their involvements, ownerships, and memberships.

We further acknowledge that some of the companies, resorts, and associations that market, administrate and operate resorts and other owner/member organizations in those industries have failed to provide for the fair and amenable termination of ownerships and memberships.

We further acknowledge that forcing owners and members who do not want to, need to, or cannot continue the use of those vacation plans to continue against their wishes by threats of legal or punitive actions, without providing any assistance, is not healthy for the vacation ownership industry, and in the long run is detrimental to those who desire to be involved in vacation ownership.

What we are asking is that resorts do what their own organization suggests they do:

http://www.ardaroc.org/roc/get-involved/default.aspx?id=3610

'Help Owners Resell: One way to thwart fraudulent transfer company activity is to provide your owners with timeshare resale assistance. It is obvious that many owners are looking for this kind of assistance or transfer companies wouldn’t exist. This could be as simple as giving owners the name of a licensed real estate broker that sells timeshare. Other resorts have in-house resale programs for owners. If you can’t handle an internal resale program on your own, establish a partnership with other resorts in your area that are similarly situated.

Expand Your Rental Program: Owners wanting to resell would certainly appreciate some rental income going toward paying their annual assessments. Be sure owners get the maximum benefits from rentals. In addition, rental of association-owned inventory should help bolster annual income for the association budget and help off-set delinquencies.

Create Exit Programs: While most resorts may not be able to "take back" all of the inventory that owners might wish, providing options for the most desperate owners may help. For example, if owners will pay a stranger thousands of dollars, they will probably pay the resort two or three years of maintenance fees to have their timeshare deeded back to the resort. The resort can then use the inventory as income-producing rental property, allowing time to sell it to a dues-paying buyer. There are many models available from other resorts that have exit programs. Don’t, however, go into an exit program without properly vetting its effect on your resort, the legal requirements, and your ability to resell it.'

Therefore, we ask that the industry take steps to develop and provide fair and amenable policies and procedures for an orderly termination for those who desire it. If they do not do so, we ask that regulatory agencies take action to require it.

Everyone on vacation at a Wi-Fi free resort?

:)

jlb wrote:

Everyone on vacation at a Wi-Fi free resort?

Not necessarily. It just might be that not everyone supports your petition or wants to get involved.

ya think?

Of course, that was the OP . . . is it a problem (that owners care about) or is it not.

To the nay-sayers, those who don't like this topic, even RCI admits that lack of an exit strategy detracts, that providing one would make a product 80% of owners like even better. How would providing something like is being provided in Europe hurt USA owners? Could USA be not far behind Europe?

http://www.rciventures.com/rdo-strengthens-code-of-conduct-to-include-exit-strategy/

"RDO has been aware of the problems faced by some timeshare owners who bought their timeshare in the 1980s and 90s – the so-called “legacy cases” when timeshare weeks were sold in what was called “perpetuity” and could be up to 80 years in length. RDO has therefore updated its Code of Conduct to provide more options to owners who wish to dispose of their timeshare.

"RDO’s new requirements, recently approved by the Board, go over and above those covered by law and, in addition to it now being mandatory for RDO resort members to have an overall exit programme in place . . . "

I have been a very happy timeshare owner and never thought I would be anything less. However with the ownership changing it seems the reasons I felt good about my timeshare are no longer. In spending a lot of money to update the units, charging owners a one time extra payment that is more than double the maintenance along with the steadily rising maintenance fee to do this, it appears they have removed two of the four reasons I bought there. The things they are adding are not things I am interested in and for the first time in ten years I am considering buying into another time share and selling mine. So I am left wondering, has anyone looked into protecting owners in these situations. I am paying for changes in my unit I apsolutely don't agree with. If when you bought your timeshare certain amenities were part of the selling points, doesn't it break the contract to do away with those amenities without agreement. At the very least they should offer to buy out those who don't agree when they make those kind of changes.

Every owner eventually, for one reason or another, will not want to be or not need to be an owner, will die, or all of these.

So, 100% of owners will want to, need to, or just plain get out of their timeshare one way or another.

So, why not have a system to accommodate it?

Does that make too much sense?

message deleted because previous post was deleted

I consulted an attorney who has for years represented various timeshare resorts. He shared with me one of the best methods of getting rid of a timeshare is to create an LLC ....transfer your timeshare ownership to the LLC and you are timeshare free.

Except for if the only thing the LLC does is for a place for you to transfer your timeshare and then you don't pay your fees.

That is no different than putting all your assets in a Trust and then not paying any of your debts.

Good luck finding a Court that will allow either of those. Courts find that assets treated like that just to avoid having to pay legal obligations are still personal assets.

FWIW, we did have a couple of weeks we didn't want any more titled to our LLC, but since our LLC exists for actual legal purposes, too, we paid the fees until we could get rid of them. Five or six years.

But again, going back to my premise, if THE INDUSTRY did what they should and provided an orderly exit, there would be no need for anyone to be deceitful.

jlb wrote:

<snip>....if THE INDUSTRY did what they should and provided an orderly exit, there would be no need for anyone to be deceitful.

I respect your initiative, but "orderly exit" or "return to seller" (...years later) are certainly not available options out in the real world for the purchasers of automobiles or homes or refrigerators (...or anything else that I can think of off the top of my head, for that matter).

So.....do you somehow believe that willing, voluntary purchasers of timeshares should be able to just walk away from THAT particular voluntary purchase and its' associated obligations when or if they suddenly decide years later that they don't want that particular product anymore? Any acknowledgement or acceptance of a buyer / owner personal responsibility and accountability here, or do you simply view this matter as a problem for THE INDUSTRY to unilaterally tackle and magically solve for (voluntary) timeshare buyers?

Help me to better understand the reasoning at work here...

Reasoning?

To save HOAs thousands of dollars in hateful, non-beneficial litigation.

Some HOAs are already successfully doing what I suggest.

What doesn't make sense is not having an orderly exit strategy. That's very 1990s-ish.