Browse Tag

Court of First Instance

letter-from-america

Friday’s Letter from America

It’s Fridayyyyyyyy! So welcome to another Friday’s Letter from America, Irene once again looks at Customer Service, this time with a positive outcome. But as usual a quick round up on timeshare news in Europe.

One of our long standing readers has sent in the following information, it concerns a long running dispute many owners have been having at Club Jardines del Puerto in Puerto Banus. Costafield Management have pulled the plug on the club 3 years early. It will close on 31 December 2017, after this no members will have any right to occupy.

It looks as though FNTC will be selling off the properties, they will also have to comply with the constitution which demands a 50/50 split between members and the developer.

Our reader also asks this question, How can a small thriving club in the centre of one of the most popular prestigious resorts in Europe become “financially unsustainable”?

More on this as we get the news.

The same reader also asked if we knew anything about MRL (MacDonald Resorts Ltd) taking owners to court for alleged unpaid maintenances fees in Manchester. At present we have found no reference to this in the press, although it must be said that cases of this nature do not tend to be publicised. But knowing the reputation of MacDonald Resorts, we would not be surprised in the least.

Further to the article about Anfi, yesterday saw 2 new sentences from the courts against Anfi.

At the Court of First Instance No 2 in Maspalomas, the judge declared the Anfi contract null and void. He also ordered the return of over 32,000€ plus legal interest.

The second sentence from the Court of First Instance No 1 in Maspalomas, also declared the contract null and void with the return of over 19,000€ plus legal interest.

So contrary to what Anfi say, the courts are finding against them, invoking the Supreme Court rulings, of which there are now 77, 32 against Anfi.

On the story of Los Claveles, there are now some very interesting comments being posted. These are measured and put forward opposing arguments in a sensible manner. Inside Timeshare welcomes these, but will not tolerate abuse or accusations against named people, especially ones of a criminal nature. Inside Timeshare has given a neutral forum for this debate, in the hope that an agreement can be reached. It is up to you the members to come to this agreement.

Now for this weeks Article from Irene Parker.

Grandview at Las Vegas – a Vacation Village Resort

A Positive Customer Service Outcome

cust serv

By Irene Parker

December 8, 2017

Was this a customer service representative showing compassion towards a former Marine, or a willingness on the part of Grandview at Las Vegas to support their customer over their own sales agent? Either way, it was a first for me in the way Grandview handled a timeshare owner alleging they were victimized by deceit and “bait and switch”, which may allow this timeshare buyer to put a wrong decision in the rear view mirror. Grandview is part of Vacation Village/Eldorado Corporation owned by The Berkley Group.

Jeff Diehl contacted Inside Timeshare asking for advice concerning his two bedroom unit at Grandview in Las Vegas purchased January 2017, alleging he was fraudulently sold by a sales agent making exaggerated claims. What was unusual about Jeff’s report is the specificity. Many complain saying they were told they can rent their unit or points for income, but Jeff knew the name of the sales agent, Marylou G, the specific amount promised – $2,000 to $2,500 per week for his fixed week and for eight more weeks using their equivalent 80,000 points. Jeff had told Marylou this was the only way the family could afford the week.

Rather than leave it at what Jeff had been told about renting, I advised Jeff to do a little research by checking TUG Timeshare Users Group to find out what a Grandview week would bring in rental income. Jeff found only one rental ad for $525 that had been listed since March 26, 2017, with no response.

After Jeff wrote out his complaint, I called the number listed on Grandview’s Better Business Bureau’s report and spoke to a Grandview representative. At this point, I am usually told the resort cannot talk to me so I was surprised the agent asked if I had a loan number and a phone number for the owner. I did. When I explained all of the above to the representative, she said she would call Jeff. I emailed Jeff and told him the name of the representative who said she would call. What usually happens next is one or two weeks of being ignored passes, prompting Better Business Bureau and other regulatory filings.

wow

A first! The representative called Jeff the next day informing him his loan would be cancelled.

As I mentioned, Jeff is a former Marine. He is also disabled. The specific data Jeff provided made it difficult to deny the sales agent told him something that was not true. This would not have prevented any timeshare resort from pointing to the oral representation clause found in the fine print of a volume of documents that allows a sales agent to say anything under the sun to close a deal. To soften the blow, some are told, “If something was important to you, you should have had it added to the contract,” perpetuating the hamster wheel called recycled inventory, as described by one former timeshare sales agent.

Jeff should not have to proceed to the next step which would have involved filing complaints with any or all of the following:

Jeff had initially included predatory lending in his complaint saying,

“Just a quick note to say that the reason I included predatory lending in my complaint, is that the definition of this type of lending says, that when a lender makes a loan to a consumer who cannot afford the loan, in order to benefit themselves, but harms the consumer in the process, this is predatory lending. So, I believe you misunderstood why I included the 17.9 % loan rate.”

I informed Jeff that all timeshare sales agents sell timeshare in this fashion so making this part of his complaint was meaningless.

Jeff also is demanding monies paid be refunded as he alleges the timeshare was sold by deceit, violation of trust, and “bait and switch” meeting the FBI’s definition of White Collar Crime Financial Institution Fraud. At the time of publication, Jeff had not yet heard if his monies paid would be returned, as he would have to contact the corporate office, which Jeff plans to do.  

Before we place Vacation Village up there with Inside Timeshare’s favorite timeshare, Disney, more due diligence is required.

Vacation Village has a Better Business Bureau rating of F. Two sources tell us The Berkley Group is being investigated by the Florida Attorney General’s office. According to Berkley’s LinkedIn page, “The Berkley Group is a private timeshare resort development firm owned by more than 2,000 company employees. Under its Vacation Village Resorts and Affiliates brand, The Berkley Group has generated a worldwide owner base that exceeds 500,000 families.”

https://www.bbb.org/south-east-florida/business-reviews/timeshare-companies/vacation-village-resorts-in-fort-lauderdale-fl-4003645/reviews-and-complaints

Grandview at Las Vegas, owned by Eldorado/Vacation Village has a BBB rating of B, so maybe this resort is trying to improve its customer service.

https://www.bbb.org/southern-nevada/business-reviews/resorts/grandview-at-las-vegas-in-las-vegas-nv-66863/reviews-and-complaints

Remember: BBB ratings are not a guarantee of a business’s reliability or performance.  BBB recommends that consumers consider a business’s BBB rating in addition to all other available information about the business.

https://www.bbb.org/council/overview-of-bbb-grade/

Inside Timeshare has heard from 227 timeshare member readers, of which 212 allege they were sold a timeshare by deceit and bait and switch. If you need help or just the support of others in your situation, here are some member sponsored self-help groups:

https://www.facebook.com/timeshareadvocategroup/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/DiamondResortsOwnersAdvocacy/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/180578055325962/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/465692163568779/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1639958046252175/

roundabout

Thank you Irene, at least this is one family that has had a positive outcome.

On Tuesday we will publish another article from Irene, this is titled:

Another Military Family Wages War against Timeshare

Will Bluegreen Honor those whose sacrifice is so great?

This is a short but hard hitting article, it shows the disgusting lengths sales agent will go just to “close a deal”. For those who are ex-serviceman or those who support them, you will find this article will make your blood boil.

That’s it for this week, if you have any comment about this or any other article published, Inside Timeshare invites you to send it in.

If you need help with any timeshare matter, or just need to know which firms you can trust, Inside Timeshare will be pleased to help.

Have a great weekend and see you next week.

friday dog

 

justice

Eze Group in Trouble

It has just been announced that Dominic O’Reilly and his daughter Stephanie O’Reilly have pleaded guilty at Birmingham Magistrates Court on 17 November 2017. The guilty pleas are in respect of aggressive sales practices and coercion, contrary to the The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

The magistrates court have deferred sentence to the Crown Court in January 2018, this is an indication of the severity of the case as the magistrates court is limited in what sentence they can impose. Magistrates can only sentence to a maximum of 12 months imprisonment and a maximum fine of £5,000.

birmingham court

Eze Group and their Tenerife based company Regency Shores SL are well known for their Eze credits scheme, which they claim gives huge discounts on holidays, theater tickets and many other goods.

They are also known for their sponsorship of Birmingham City FC and the EZE wishes scheme, there is even a stand called the Eze Group Stand. Their “Foundation” also has an impressive list of sponsorships which include Celtic FC, Aston Villa Former Players Association along with other sponsorships of individuals.

So by and large the image they portray is one of respectability, but for many of their clients this is not the case and this latest news would appear to back that up.

But it does not end there, only yesterday 22 November, Canarian Legal Alliance published the result of a case in Tenerife against Eze Group Europe and Regency Shores SL.

The Court of First Instance in Tenerife ordered the return of over £52,000 plus legal interest, with the contract being declared null and void. In this case the Spanish Timeshare Law 42/98 was used. It looks like their “Eze Credits” may have been seen by the Spanish courts as “Points” which have been deemed illegal by the Supreme Court.

tribunal supremo

Could this be the first of many more cases in the Spanish courts and could this open up many legal proceedings in the UK?

Only time will tell.

Once the Crown Court issues its sentence in the New year, we will bring you the news, all that can be said is when they appear, they should take their toothbrushes with them!

If you have any questions about this or any other article published, contact Inside Timeshare and we will point you in the right direction.

letter-from-america

Friday’s Letter from America

It’s that time of the week again, so welcome to this week’s Friday’s Letter from America, this week we publish Part II of Timeshare Debt and Hedge Funds. This article is from Justin Morgan and Michael Nuwer, with the introduction from our very own Irene Parker. But as usual a roundup from Europe.

It has been a very busy week in the courts again with many case being heard, with sentence still to be issued by the judge but there have been a few announced.

gavela

On Monday there were two announcements, the first was the judge of the Court of First Instance in Maspalomas found against Anfi, once again the contract was declared null and void, the client in this case will be returned over 12,000€ plus legal interest. The courts are certainly sticking to the letter of the law.

In the second case that was announced, the Court of First Instance in Tenerife found against Silverpoint (Resort Properties). In this case the judge found that the contract was in breach of the timeshare law 42/98 in that it exceeded the 50 years that is allowed, this should have also been explained to the customer before signing.

The judge declared the contract null and void, ordering Silverpoint to pay the client over £59,000 plus legal interest.

The following day, Tuesday, another sentence against Anfi was announced by the Judge of the Court of First Instance in Maspalomas. Another contract was declared null and void, with Anfi being ordered to return over 26,000€ plus legal interest.

Back in September Petchey Leisure (now MGM Muthu) was ordered to repay over 16,000€ and declared the contract null and void, by the High Court in Tenerife. The client in that case has now had the money transferred to their bank account.

On Thursday, there were three court sentences announced, Once again Anfi have been ordered to return over 20.000€ plus legal interest, this was by the Court of First Instance in Maspalomas. The judge also declared the contract null and void.

In Tenerife the Court of First Instance declared a Silverpoint contract null and void, ordering the return of over 30,000€ plus legal interest.

In the High Court in Tenerife, Regency Resorts was ordered to return £35,200 plus an extra £35,200 as double the deposit taken in the cooling off period, which is forbidden by law. This particular client will now be receiving £70,400 plus legal fees and legal interest. A nice Christmas present for this client!

Today as we this article was being prepared for publishing the following news was issued in a press release:

The Supreme Court in Madrid issued another damning sentence against Silverpoint, the Court ordered the return of the full purchase price plus double the deposit and all legal fees. The contract was also declared null and void. In this case the client will be receiving over £105,000.

All these cases have been brought on behalf of clients by the Arguineguin law firm Canarian Legal Alliance, who are certainly at the forefront in the field of timeshare law.

cla-brochure

Inside Timeshare is still receiving many enquiries regarding “claims” companies and “law firms” contacting owners with the promise that they have cases and can get their money back. Many of these readers don’t even own in Spain, or even upgraded in Spain since the law came into place in 1999, so how can these cases go to the Spanish Courts?

Some of these are also being told that they pay for a relinquishment, then the claim will be filed on a no win no fee basis. This can only mean one thing, an attempt to claim under Section 75 of the Credit Consumer Act 1974. Another aspect to this is the client will also be told at the meeting the only way they can do this is by purchasing another product! Sounds like the classic “bait and switch”!

There is also more news which at present we cannot publish as it has not been verified, so that is it from Europe, now on with our Letter from America.

Timeshare Debt and Hedge Funds – The Developer vs the Member

wall st

By Justin Morgan and Michael Nuwer

November 17, 2017

On Monday Inside Timeshare published an article comparing hedge fund involvement in Puerto Rico to hedge fund involvement in timeshare. Today we examine further how debt affects timeshare with help from Economics Professor Michael Nuwer and private equity investor Justin Morgan.

http://insidetimeshare.com/tuesday-slot-american-perspective-comparison/

Introduction by Irene Parker

As a Diamond Resorts member, I have access to information I would not have about other timeshare companies, so once again Diamond is used as an example with help from Michael Nuwer, also a DRI member, and Justin Morgan, a former DRI member, to explain the mechanics of timeshare inventory valuation and timeshare debt.

I asked Inside Timeshare Australian Contributor Justin Morgan how a company like Diamond can have a $2.2 billion dollar valuation when the entire inventory of points is worthless to the members, given so many complaints about the lack of a secondary market. Of course, there is value to staying at a property, but for discussion purposes, timeshares are a liability on an individual member’s net worth statement. Inside Timeshare has received 196 timeshare complaints from our readers against four major developers. The majority allege they were sold or upsold by deceit and bait and switch. I have interviewed many families devastated, sometimes just weeks after purchase.

In an article I wrote for TheStreet, I expressed concern over inventory valuation irregularities that delayed DRI’s second quarter 2016 earnings report, the last public report before being taken private. Diamond previously reported 11 quarters of consecutive robust earnings growth. After announcing the delay, just after the Apollo acquisition announcement, earnings had to be restated from 2014 going forward.

“After the correction, the change resulted in a decrease in net income of $5.6 million for 2015 and a $1.3 million decrease for the first quarter, in each case from amounts originally reported, according to the second-quarter release. Significantly, second-quarter net income decreased $10.1 million or 28.5% to $25.5 million year over year, compared with a first quarter increase of $8.4% or 32.6% to $34.4 million, prior to the restatement.”

https://www.thestreet.com/story/13702895/1/diamond-resorts-international-s-second-quarter-earnings-reversal-is-worrisome.html

Justin Morgan’s analysis

The whole industry itself uses some quite questionable inventory valuation methods that may be designed, according to some, to target more the financing arrangements that were the traditional model in the industry when GMAC and others were underwriting timeshare sales departments. This is why private hedge fund equity in the industry has somewhat caused a shift in thinking. If private equity is funding the model based upon equity vs loan models, the capital structures underneath begin to change. The same accounting reports will still be drawn upon to make sense of the numbers, but let’s not forget that inventory valuations do have a bit of leeway to move. Even financial reporting itself can diverge from standard reporting models, but it usually is flagged as a change in accounting methodology that would have otherwise tipped off Apollo.

Like Enron, it depends upon who’s looking, and who might be wanting to look away to get a deal done. Even if Apollo did know, it doesn’t mean they’d fess to the knowledge of spotting an irregularity if they believed they were able to profit in the end, and I believe that Michael Nuwer showed the sort of cap structure that Apollo introduced. It largely turned the debt into the membership, so whilst Apollo may have even noticed non-standard valuations, it might have only forced a better price to come from Diamond vs flagging the issue or walking away from the overall deal. Clearly, Apollo are their own beast in these type of private equity deals which reap profits and shift debt restructuring unwittingly into club members. This is a bigger issue. It’s like taking a loan out in someone else’s name and handing them the bill after you’ve taken what you want for the deal. Club members were only ever at Apollo-DRI’s mercy after this.

There are definitely some important and significant value-implied shifts from these numbers since the street uses earnings to make their valuations, but the valuation of inventory is an area that is somewhat suitable itself. The industry bodies know how to make it work and actually fought to use non-standard inventory models. But I’ve not gauged for differences between the pre-order hedge fund industry and the one we’re seeing rise out of the seas today.

I have looked with horror upon the entry of these private hedge funds because I know that they have little interest in the product itself. They are only in it to devour the membership of as much as they can get, and given the legal models, that could be the scariest evolution to date. At least cryptocurrencies attempt to establish some monetary supply rules, but timeshare clubs know that they can just keep raising budgets legally to cover their required rates of returns.

In an industry that generally looks for 30% per annum returns as a rule of thumb, that’s going to cause some high maintenance fee jokes in the future. But I remember the old DRI hiking maintenance close to 25% circa 2007 and then again in 2009. They first blamed a strong economy, whilst the second blamed the weak economy. More like a satyr blowing hot and cold in the one breath! But the disturbing thing to me is how Apollo financed this whole arrangement. They shifted the debt onto the members. They made their money from the start…The rest is just cream…The debt which now pays the Apollonian entities is the debt Apollo created and lumped into the membership at the financing stage.

We must be clear. They created the debt specifically to land it on membership; so really, it is as if the DRI members paid a good chunk of the deal. If the Attorneys General don’t see this, then they’ll miss what chicanery has been done here.

Michael Nuwer

Diamond reports show increasing levels of bad debt accompanied by decreasing membership since the peak in 2013.

chart1

Membership is down 9% since 2013

chart2

One thing that is not clear to me is the economic value of points. It often appears that a developer sells the points (say 10,000 points) for, say, $20,000. But, the next day, if I (the owner) try to sell those points in the secondary market, they are worth, maybe, $1,000. (If Bluegreen points; DRI points are worth $0.) The economist in me thinks the developer originally sold me points for $1,000 plus a club membership for the remaining $19,000. Thus, if my points are foreclosed and resold for the full $20,000, only $1,000 is the value of the points.

So, the question here is: what is the developer selling. Is the sale just vacation points or is the sale a bundle that includes points plus other stuff? I’ve read my DRI contract many times and still can’t tell what it specifically covers.

So what happens when someone buys timeshare points?

Let’s look at this example:

Say Diamond makes a sale for $30,000. The buyer might make a down payment of 20% or $6,000. The remaining $24,000 is a loan. Diamond now has a short term financing problem. They have $6,000 in cash and $24,000 in a non-liquid asset. But Diamond has immediate operating costs. A bit more than $15,000 from the sale is needed for advertising, marketing, and commission expenses. The carrying cost of the inventory must also be paid. Additionally, Diamond faces G&A costs (general and administrative) which need to be paid. All of these are current expenses, but Diamond only has the cash down-payments to cover them.

To pay current expenses, Diamond borrows money from a bank (the jargon is a “warehouse facility”). This facility is a credit line agreement, and, just like my credit card, Diamond’s credit line has a limit. Before Apollo, Diamond’s credit line was $100 million with Capital One.

In short: Diamond must borrow money from a bank to cover the current year’s expenses while it waits 7-10 years to get re-paid on the outstanding loans made to members.

Securitization of the outstanding loans is a way to oil, and thereby speed-up, the lending machine. Once Diamond reaches its $100 million credit limit, it will not be able to offer more loans for the purchase of points. Thus, to overcome this limit, the company bundles outstanding loans into a trust fund and sells shares in that fund as an Asset-Backed Security. The proceeds from selling these shares are used to pay down the credit line and Diamond’s perpetual loan machine continues.

Irene asked how Apollo Global Management will fare in their purchase of DRI. Will the restatement of inventory valuation have an impact?

DRI EBITDA in 2015 was $385 million and thus the valuation multiple ($2200/385) is a mere 5.7. Apollo got the company for a steal. If they can spruce it up and get 10x, the valuation will be $3.8 billion. There’s Apollo’s 30% profit.

trust earned

Thank you to Michael Nuwer and Justin Morgan for their analysis. I have nothing against private equity, but extraordinary investment returns at the expense of timeshare members or Puerto Ricans is not acceptable if so many complaint allegations are true. In addition to 192 Inside Timeshare readers who are timeshare members, I have interviewed ten current and former timeshare sales agents that all confirm predatory sales practices are widespread in this industry. There have been several recent investigations and settlements by Attorneys General including New York, Wisconsin, Missouri, Arizona, Tennessee and Colorado as well as lawsuits too numerous to mention. It is our hope developers will confront the problem and work with member complaints to improve the quality of timeshare sales today rather than continue to deny such practices exists. Contact Inside Timeshare or an Advocacy Facebook if you have timeshare concerns.   

Timeshare self-help Facebook groups

https://www.facebook.com/timeshareadvocategroup/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/DiamondResortsOwnersAdvocacy/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/180578055325962/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/465692163568779/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1639958046252175/

Thank you to Justin and Michael, also to Irene for her introduction. This week Irene has been very busy dealing with the many enquiries we have received from US owners / members. Within an hour of publishing Tuesdays article, we received 3 pleas of help, these are sent to Irene who then makes contact with the relevant advice and which of our advocacy team can help. Keep up the great work US Team.

If you need any information or help with any timeshare matter and don’t know where to turn, Inside Timeshare is here to help.

Also remember to do your homework before engaging with any company that either contacts you or you find in an advert. This last one rings very true for one UK reader, She found an advert in the Royal British Legion Magazine for a company that said it could help with a claim. Being in the British legion magazine she believed it would be genuine, well we all would! Unfortunately, adverts are not checked for authenticity, they are sold by a marketing company to pay the cost of publication, the same is also true for any newspaper or magazine. So the it proves that you need to do your homework!

On that note, Friday is here, the weekend is once again upon us, so have a great weekend and we will be back on Monday.

friday dog

 

letter from america

Friday’s Letter from America

Another week over and another Friday’s Letter from America with Irene Parker, but first a very quick look at two cases announced this week.

Silverpoint have once again been on the receiving end of another Supreme Court verdict. They have declared the client’s contract null and void, ordering the return of over £43,000 plus legal fees and legal interest.

In this verdict the court stated that the contract lacked specific information required by law, such as a specific apartment number, date and location. It is quite clear that the Supreme Court has on more than one occasion clarified the law.

In another case heard at the Court of First Instance in Palma de Mallorca, Altres Vacances have been ordered to repay the client over 58,000€  plus legal fees and interest, with the contract being declared null and void.

This court has followed the Supreme Court rulings on the length of the contract, the law is very clear on this point, the contract must be no longer than 50 years. They must also contain specific information as required by law.

abogados-ag-250

Once again, we have to warn about the “fake” law firms operating out of Tenerife, part of the Litigious Abogados family, another reader has been in contact with the new firm Abogados AG, with Armando González Areca named as the main “lawyer”.

They state that following a “groundbreaking ruling on “Tuesday 19 March 2015” (very precise date), against Diamond Resorts International SL, one of the the directors, once again Andrew Cooper, has pleaded guilty to the indictment of the Spanish Civil Code. They also state that the High Court of Santa Cruz de Tenerife have declared 28 of their clients contracts null and void, seizing all the personal assets of Mr Cooper in Spain and the Canary islands.

Now according to this “law firm” they will be lodging the case against Diamond Resorts International Sl and Mr Andrew Cooper on the 7th November 2017, this will heard on Tuesday 21st November, very quick indeed, they must be very well in with the judges!

In the case of our reader, they no longer own any timeshare with Diamond, they got rid of that years ago, so there is no basis for any claim. Beware the claims that you have a case, if you no longer own you don’t, even if you do own you may not have a valid claim. Before engaging with any company that states you do have a claim, check and check again.

See the full letter below, pdf.

Abogados AG

So now on with this week’s letter.

Another Bluegreen Member Alleges a “Bait and Switch”

Sometimes Called “Pitching Heat”

cross fingers

By Irene Parker

November 3  

Back in July, Inside Timeshare published an article by Lela Renea, a detective who alleged she was deceived by a Bluegreen timeshare sales agent. Camyell Pratt, another Bluegreen purchaser, alleges she and her husband were also deceived.

The FBI definition of White Collar Crime, Financial Institution Fraud, is “deceit, concealment, violation of trust and bait and switch.” Inside Timeshare has received 179 complaints from readers, of which 164 allege they were victims of a timeshare bait and switch. https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/white-collar-crime

Lela Renea is a detective. Camyell understands bad debt. She assists in collecting back taxes for a Virginia County government office and understands the repercussions when someone does not pay what they owe. But what if the contract agreed to was purchased under conditions of fraud?

In timeshare, that doesn’t matter thanks to the clause that appears in every timeshare contract – “I did not rely on any oral representation to make my purchase.” In other words, any complaint that begins with “The salesman says” can be conveniently dismissed.

Bluegreen is certainly not the only timeshare company Inside Timeshare has reported on concerning questionable sales tactics by some agents:

A jury awarded Trish Williams, a former Wyndham sales agent, $20 million. Ms. Williams described TAFT days – tell them any blank thing on slow sales days.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/25/business/my-soul-feels-taller-a-whistle-blowers-20-million-vindication.html

Attorney General Mark Brnovich issued an Assurance of Discontinuance against Diamond Resorts accusing the company of violating Arizona’s Consumer Fraud Act.

https://www.azag.gov/press-release/attorney-general-brnovich-announces-800000-settlement-diamond-resorts

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman issued an Assurance of Discontinuance against The Manhattan Club. Of note, The Manhattan Club admitted wrongdoing, unusual in corporate America.

NEW YORK – Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman today announced a $6.5 million settlement with the owners and operators of the Manhattan Club, a timeshare in Midtown Manhattan, over the sponsor’s repeated false promises to potential and current share owners.

The settlement is the largest in recent history for the Attorney General’s Real Estate Finance Bureau. Under the terms of the settlement, the operators of the Manhattan Club, acknowledge that they repeatedly misled shareowners about the club’s reservation process, their ability to sell back their shares, and the details of the club’s state-approved offering plan.

https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-announces-65-million-settlement-midtown-manhattan-timeshare-scammed

Colorado, Wisconsin, Tennessee, and Missouri Attorneys General took action against other timeshare companies.

As we’ve said before, the abnormal becomes normal, whether it be predatory timeshare sales or sex abuse in the Catholic Church or Hollywood. Victims are messengers to be beheaded or silenced and isolated through non-disclosure clauses. To my knowledge, except for The Manhattan Club, timeshare developers have not even acknowledged deceit on the front of the timeshare sale, despite thousands of internet complaints and lawsuits too numerous to mention.

Current and former timeshare sales agents and managers are also speaking out. As one manager explained:

I watched every day, agents selling for double and close to triple what it was supposed to be sold for but management laughed and congratulated them.  The maintenance fees statement about buying more and using that to pay your maintenance fees was a practice that was encouraged but be careful.  Some of the agents would sell the program for $98k when it was only in the 50k range.  One of the guests came back to cancel but the agent said no worries I have it packed 40k but I’ll give then 15 off and still make a killing!   It made me sick because these particular guests were in their late 70′ early 80’s.  I asked the agent if he had a conscience and he just laughed…if you can get them to pay more you’re a hero!!  They have the money!!  Deception actually goes back further than that.  We were told to pack the price for a trade in and imply that it was what they got back for their TS… we sold it for the regular price….they got nothing for their TS!

Some companies are trying to do the right thing. Bluegreen has been listening and taking appropriate action in some cases. Diamond Resorts has opened a Diamond Consumer Advocacy Department that pledges to help members from day one and has launched a program called CLARITY which promotes accountability, transparency and respect for the customer.

Instead of beheading the customer’s, legitimate attorneys, volunteer advocates and journalists, why won’t the timeshare developer not identify and drain the swamp of predatory sales agents? After receiving 179 complaints from our readers, at times we can guess the agent by the con.         

cartoon fraud

Camyel and Jayson Pratt

Camyell and her husband Jayson endured an eight hour Bluegreen timeshare sales presentation at Harbor Light in South Carolina. They were promised:

4000 points plus 6000 points plus two RCI weeks

Availability to a variety of resorts

What was delivered?

For 4000 points, according to one of our Advocates, also a Bluegreen member, the member can book a studio in winter on the wrong side of the weather report.

After filing a complaint with the Better Business Bureau, Bluegreen did offer to credit Camyell the additional 6000 points promised. Camyell declined, deciding she did not want to have anything to do with a company that would resort to such tactics. Nevertheless, Bluegreen credited the family 6000 points anyway.

Camyell said they were given no paperwork after they signed the contract, told the contract needed to be processed. They were given a booklet about Bluegreen and the timeshare exchange company RCI.

Let’s see how Camyell’s complaint compares to Lela Renea:

  • Lela was told if she purchased more points her maintenance fees would stay the same. The maintenance fees have increased from $560 a year in 2015 to about $700 a year for 2017.
  • Lela was told she would receive a free cruise, but after all the fees and charges it cost as much as if she had booked it herself.
  • Lela was told the Barclaycard had a low interest rate of 5% when in actuality it was 25%.
  • Lela was not told she was entitled to 4000 bonus points. The points expired before she was aware of them.
  • Lela was promised availability she says does not exist.
  • Lela was showed a Presidential Suite that was said to be comparable to all Bluegreen accommodations.
  • Lela was not aware she had purchased so few points it was almost impossible to find adequate availability.

http://insidetimeshare.com/fridays-letter-america-11/

Timeshare members have had enough. Timeshare has been employing tactics former timeshare sales agents call “Pitching Heat” or “No Heat No Eat” for too long.

Like so many of our readers have complained, Camyell was not allowed onto the booking site until after the contract rescission period. When she did finally gain access, she was informed she was not within the booking window and did not have enough points to book the stay she desired and says she had been promised.

Here is our advice for those not knowing where to turn:   

  • Prepare a written complaint and request for resolution. Submit to the resort.
  • If the resort denies the request, file first with the Attorneys General of the state where you signed a contract, where you live, and where the timeshare is domiciled. Some Attorneys General are influenced by lobby dollars, so don’t be discouraged if your complaint is denied. There is still merit filing “for the record” because the Attorney General’s lack of concern can be quantified and reported. Some states refer you to a different department.
  • File a complaint with the state real estate division against the agent (ID #) if you feel the sales agent is at fault.
  • File a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission because every state has incorporated some part of the FTC Consumer Fraud Act into their respective state consumer protection act.
  • Report your grievance to ARDA http://www.arda.org/ethics/ – this organization is the American Resort Development Association – Resort Owners Coalition. ARDA ROC does not resolve individual member disputes, but they do have a code of ethics that should be enforced. When the needs of the member and the developer diverge, lobby dollars go to the side of the developer, so think twice about the “voluntary” opt in or opt out donation to an organization that may not always be targeting your best interest.    
  • The FBI definition of White Collar Crime – Financial Institution Fraud – is “deceit, concealment, violation of trust and bait and switch”. File a complaint with IC3.gov if this is the case. IC stands for Internet Crime, but your complaint does not have to involve the internet. That’s just the FBI portal for complaints. https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/white-collar-crime
  • File a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, although this agency has been vastly diminished due to the rollback of the Dodd Frank Act. According to a banker I spoke with recently, they are still the regulators. File with this agency only if a credit card played a part or there is a loan outstanding.
  • Reach out to local and national media. This is by far the most important and effective tool. Typically, timeshare buyers don’t buy a timeshare in their state of residence, so state lawmakers have expressed little interest and can also be influenced by lobby dollars. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/taking-names-scott-maxwell/os-gov-rick-scott-signs-bad-timeshare-law-20150617-post.html
  • Become an Advocate for change by assisting other members with the process outlined above. Encourage others to act.
  • File a complaint with the Better Business Bureau. The ⦁ BBB does not resolve complaints. They merely report how efficiently a company responds to complaints so ratings can be misleading.

None of the above agencies will act on behalf of a specific individual, but a volume of complaints can prompt an investigation.  

chat

If you or anyone you know has a timeshare story to share, or needs help with a timeshare issue, contact Inside Timeshare or one of the following self-help Facebooks:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/DiamondResortsOwnersAdvocacy/

https://www.facebook.com/timeshareadvocategroup/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/180578055325962/

 

There we have it, Friday is here, the weekend is about to begin, have fun and don’t forget, do your homework before you deal with any company. If you are in any doubt, contact Inside Timeshare and we will point you in the right direction.

friday cat

letter from america

Friday’s Letter from America

Welcome once again to Friday’s Letter from America, the article we had planned for today by Mike Finn, has been postponed until Tuesday, the reason, some very important breaking news from the US. Inside Timeshare received the press release yesterday 26 October at 5.53pm, It was then sent to Irene Parker our US branch who prepared it for publication today.

As usual we start with Europe, Inside Timeshare has again been receiving many comments from readers regarding the Mark Rowe enterprise ABC Lawyers, all have been the same.

The timeshare owner has attended a meeting at one of their offices, enticed with the prospect of ending their timeshare and claiming compensation. Sounds good, but then comes the crunch, the “salesperson” starts to pitch the Rowe product “Jive Hippo”. Does this sound familiar. Well it should, after all sellmytimeshare.tv (another Rowe company) enticed people to their meetings with the promise of selling their timeshare, but then were pitched into the “Monster Credits” product.

It also appears that the “Jive Hippo” product is required in order to “Relinquish” then “claim compensation”. Once the contracts are signed, the client is also told there is no “cooling off period” as it does not come under timeshare regulations, there is no right to cancel and the full cost must be paid.

On Thursday we published the breaking news on a Norwegian client of Canarian Legal Alliance receiving a massive payout, involving Anfi, since then there has been more news coming in.

At the High Court in Tenerife, the judge ordered that Regency Resorts returns over £13,000 plus legal interest to another client. The contract was also declared null and void.

The same court in Tenerife has also awarded a client over £53,000 plus legal interest against Silverpoint, with again the contract declared null & void.

In one of the lower courts in Tenerife, the Court of First Instance number 5, declared another Silverpoint contract null & void, as it did not conform to the law which requires specific information to be included. In this case it did not contain information regarding a specific date or apartment. The client will be receiving over £44,000 plus legal interest and the return of legal fees.

So it has been all go in the courts on Tenerife, now on with our Letter from America.

Liberté

Breaking News from America!

Finally a Timeshare Exit Strategy with Promise!

October 27

Introduction by Irene Parker

Anything to help beleaguered timeshare members who no longer want or need their timeshare, spells relief for perpetual timeshare members.

With the launch of TARS TIMESHARE ADVISORY AND RESOLUTION SERVICES LLC new “limited term deeded” program, consumers enjoy all the “pros” of traditional timeshare, and none of the “cons”, plus even more benefits, according to TARS President and General Counsel, Martin M. Kandel. “Our program allows legacy owners to safely trade-in their existing traditional timeshare and purchase a limited 5 year term timeshare at their Resort”, Kandel said.

I spoke with TARS Chairman Dennis DiTinno. “Our program is geared toward smaller, deeded fixed week owners, but we hope the brand name resorts will take note and will consider similar exit plans that do not place undue burden on their members or the HOAs.”

Timeshare developers and Attorneys General have focused on shutting down fraudulent resale, transfer and listing scams, rather than attacking the root of the problem. A reasonable exit plan nullifies the ability for such entities to prosper. This multi-page single-spaced Department of Justice reports illustrates the depth of the problem.

https://search.justice.gov/search?affiliate=justice&query=timeshare+report

“Not only can a five year exit plan such as our put such unscrupulous entities out of business, it will ease the burden of debt collection for HOAs,” Mr. DiTinno further explained. “When we presented our exit program at the TBMA Timeshare Board Member Association in Las Vegas last weekend, we were pleased that those in attendance listened and appeared to like what they heard,” he added.

Inside Timeshare has received complaints from 176 readers who describe sometimes catastrophic financial distress unable to be released from their timeshare contract.   

hope1

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TIMESHARE ADVISORY AND RESOLUTION SERVICES LLC EXPANDS SERVICES FOR LEGACY RESORTS AND OWNERS

Timeshare Advisory and Resolution Services LLC (“TARS”) a company dedicated to promoting the interests and rights of long-time timeshare owners, homeowner associations, and consumers contemplating the purchase of timeshare, has announced the launch of unique programs designed to ease the transition of long time owners, out of their “perpetual” timeshare and also attract new consumers, seeking the benefits of timeshare ownership without the burden of increasing maintenance fees or the hassles of resale.

The program also intends to assist legacy resorts in planning for either continued use as a timeshare property or for an alternative use pursuant to an organized repurposing plan.  In addition, TARS announced the acquisition of a significant interest in the company by Liberté Management Group of the Pinellas Islands, Inc. TARS will be operated as a subsidiary of Liberté and will be jointly headquartered in Treasure Island, Florida.

With the launch of TARS new “limited term/unlimited fun” program, consumers enjoy all the “pros” of traditional timeshare, and none of the “cons”, according to TARS President and General Counsel, Martin M. Kandel. “Our program allows legacy owners to safely trade-in their existing traditional timeshare and purchase a limited 5-year term deeded timeshare at their resort”, Kandel said.  “Legacy owners will continue to be able to enjoy their resort and unit every year of the term, or rent or exchange it as they do in a traditional timeshare. However, they will no longer be billed any maintenance fees during the entire term, which terminates by going back to the resort with no further obligation. There are no worries about resales or fraudulent transfer and exit companies, and the HOA’s have a systematic and controllable, and scalable means to make certain all of their intervals are paying intervals”, Kandel concluded.

Dennis F. DiTinno, CEO and President of the Liberte’ Management Group of Companies, will serve as Chairman of TARS and oversee the close interaction between TARS and Liberte’. “As a manager of legacy resorts, I have been committed to working toward a robust resale market to benefit older resorts and their owners, particularly those resorts fighting to remain financially stable and relevant. TARS will help these sold-out resorts find new owners to enjoy their products and services. I am excited to join with Marty and devising innovative ways to fight for and protect the resort associations and owners upon whom the timeshare industry was originally built”, DiTinno said. “I sincerely believe that what we are doing is to provide ‘out of box solutions… in a box’”, DiTinno added.

In conjunction with select strategic partners, TARS will provide an á la carte menu of products and enhanced services designed exclusively for the legacy market segment. TARS will target self-managed resorts, management companies (in those instances where such a company has been previously retained by the HOA), and individuals for whom timeshare has become a burden.

TARS business objective will be to provide new ways to address old problems by enhancing TARS’ original consumer-centric mission (www.tarserv.com) to provide legacy resorts with a means to maintain their resorts for a decade or more in order to plan for robust continuation or an orderly repurposing of the resort and its timeshare program.  Along the way, TARS may more readily assist individual legacy timeshare owners in parting with their timeshare as a part of the overall HOA program.

DiTinno established Liberté Management and related entities in 1987 to address a burgeoning demand for professional, turnkey resort property management along the Florida Gulf Coast, Liberté Management provides a comprehensive array of personalized services for a wide variety of vacation properties. Services include rentals, sales and resale services for timeshares, resort condominiums and hotels.

Clients range from large developers and community associations to individual owners who expect an unparalleled level of quality and commitment. DiTinno served with distinction in Viet Nam as a member of the United States Marine Corps.

Kandel attended University of Baltimore School of Law and Rutgers University and is a member of the State Bar of Maryland. He is a former Maryland Assistant Attorney General and Counsel to that state’s Real Estate Commission and Commissioner of Consumer Credit, and is the primary author of the first Maryland Timeshare Act. Since 1984, Kandel has served as counsel to timeshare developers, lenders, builders, and a variety of other industry related clients, as well as individual consumers and consumer groups.  He has also operated timeshare development and sales and marketing entities in the US, Australia, and Europe, and has served on the Board of Directors of ARDA and ATHOC.

calm

It’s nice to be on the same side of the fence for once! Imagine a world with no Timeshare Wars with members pitted against developers like North Korea and America. There’s no reason we can’t all get along by releasing timeshare members who feel like they are being held hostage by their vacation plan. Charles Thomas and I would like nothing better than to publish articles about people and places doing things right. Thank you to Marty and Dennis for their olive branch, offering a bridge between greed and need.

Inside Timeshare will publish a monthly resale recycle report to examine how this revolutionary plan is working out. We hope to interview timeshare owners and HOAs taking advantage of this opportunity. I’ll call my favorite timeshare people, Port Elsewhere in the Missouri Ozarks and Maui Hill at Maui Lea to hear what they think.       

So that’s it for this week, two breaking news stories from both sides of the Great Lake, our apologies to Mike Finn for not publishing his article, I’m sure he will understand. We will however be publishing that on Tuesday.

Once again, if you need any information on any company that has contacted you or you are considering dealing with, but are not sure where to look, Inside Timeshare will point you in the right direction.

It’s Friday, the weekend is once again upon us, have a good one and we will be back on Monday.

friday dog

 

breaking news

Happy Days! Norwegian Client Receives Massive Payout.

Inside Timeshare has just received this latest news, the lawyers from Canarian Legal Alliance are celebrating today, along with their Norwegian client. No doubt with a few bottles of champagne.

champagne

Their Norwegian client’s original claim against Anfi was for 30,000€, but the lawyers asked the court for 108,000€ which included double the deposits including the balance, which was paid within 90 days and maintenance fees. This 90 day ruling was made by the Supreme Court for infringements where the client did not receive adequate information required by law.

Canarian Legal Alliance informed Inside Timeshare that they originally lost the case at the Court of First Instance, located in Maspalomas. then took the case to the High Court in Las Palmas on appeal. This court again invoked the Supreme Court rulings and found in favour of the client.

Court Masp
Court of First Instance Maspalomas

Anfi, then made moves to appeal that decision at the Supreme Court in Madrid, but this was rejected by Spain’s Highest Court. The court’s reasons for rejecting the appeal was very simple, they had already ruled on 66 previous occasions and there was no reason to accept this appeal as it fell within the scope of those previous decisions. In other words they believed it was a frivolous appeal.

The case was then returned to the High Court who also added a fine on top of the original award, making the amount a whopping 136,000€ which has already been paid into the relevant bank account and is about to be returned to this very happy Norwegian client. He is also now timeshare free as the contract was declared null and void.

So there it is, in black and white and direct from the courts, timeshare companies especially Anfi cannot deny they are losing cases or having to payout. Almost on a daily basis the courts are finding against them, if we were to publish every time a case is won, there would be no room for other news. For many timeshare owners who have cases pending or are just embarking on the road to litigation, this will be welcome news.

denial

Inside Timeshare congratulates the client and all the legal team at Canarian Legal Alliance on this result. We know they work hard for their clients as is shown in the many reports we receive and publish.

 

questions

The Tuesday Slot: Arbitration

Today we feature excerpts from  Chris Parker, a writer from City Pages and his article called The Plot to Kill Consumer Protection

Continuing on yesterdays topic of “Bogus” claims companies and “Fake” law firms, Mindtimeshare  has also highlighted another company, European Liquidations.

Again this company uses the @consultants.com email address, which as we have said previously it is just a free email provider just like gmail and yahoo.

europeanliquidationsltd@consultant.com

The telephone numbers provided are:

0203 384 3999 and Fax – 0872 751 6998

Unfortunately, Mindtimeshare has very little information and we have been unable trace any company with this name at company house. But it is important to inform readers of all companies that crop up along with telephone numbers and their email address, after all to be forewarned is to be forearmed!

As this article was being prepared Canarian Legal Alliance issued another court ruling, this was from the Court of First Instance in Maspalomas against Palm Oasis (Tasolan). In this judgement the court ordered the return of over 15,000€ plus all maintenance fees and legal interest, the contract was also declared null and void.

The court ruled that the contract infringed Law 42/98 in that it was for a period exceeding 50 years, Contract to be valid must be for a period of between 3 and 50 years, this should also be specified in the contract and explained to the client before the contract is signed. It is clear the Supreme Court rulings are having a severe impact on all contracts that do not follow the stipulated laws.

Now on with today’s article.

Part I – Questions a Timeshare Buyer Never Asks

Does this timeshare contract contain an arbitration clause?

arbitration

By Irene Parker

Part II – Class Action Lawsuits – Misunderstood by Timeshare Members

Friday’s Letter from America

Tuesday October 24

Excerpts from “The Plot to Kill Consumer Protection”

By Chris Parker

“Should a dispute arise, arbitration forces consumers out of the court system and into arbitration where appeals aren’t allowed, corporations historically wield a huge advantage—when not outright rigging the system—and details of misconduct are kept private,” writes Chris Parker, a reporter for City Pages

http://www.citypages.com/news/the-plot-to-kill-consumer-protection/451334393

“The right to have your dispute resolved before a jury of your peers is as American as it gets; it’s a fundamental core American democratic principle,” says Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson. “To think that millions upon millions of consumers are forfeiting their fundamental right to have their day in court because of fine print in a contract….” “Though arbitration may sound preferable to the expense and anguish of court, it hands a major advantage to companies. The costs savings aren’t much: Arbitrators usually charge $300-$400 per hour minimum, and some bill into the thousands of dollars. But arbitration clauses typically bar the consumer from joining class-action suits. The strategy has emboldened fraud on a massive scale.” “In July, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ruled that arbitration clauses can’t bar consumers from joining class-action suits. The GOP Congress intends to repeal the rule.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) told the Wall Street Journal that such clauses are “a windfall for the companies, in terms of how you settle their cheating.”

“Even when someone does challenge them, arbitration rulings are usually private, with no appeals and little documentation. Like a tree falling in a vast forest, Wells Fargo’s customers didn’t hear the millions of other victims, and the press remained none the wiser.”

“With consumer protection increasingly whittled away by keen lobbyists and cunning corporate lawyers, the idea was to build an agency whose sole mission was protecting consumers.”

cfpb1

“During its brief life, the bureau has established itself as the only Washington agency more responsive to consumers than to lobbyists. Since 2011, it’s handled 1.2 million complaints, returning over $12 billion to consumers.”

The CFPB and Timeshares

By Irene Parker

The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau has also been the first line of defense for timeshare buyers alleging they were sold or up-sold by deceit and bait and switch. Given the staggering number of reports of deceit and bait and switch on the front end of the timeshare sale, if the CFPB is regulated out of existence, widely predicted, many timeshare members feel the only court that will be left available to them is the court of public opinion, warning unsuspecting consumers as to the minefield of ways the evolution of right to use timeshare points has opened the doors for unscrupulous timeshare sales.

Our standard disclosure is that not all timeshare sales agents are deceptive and not all timeshare companies are predatory.

http://insidetimeshare.com/lesson-timeshare-companies/

I asked ever assessable timeshare attorney Mike Finn of the Finn Law Group which timeshare developers have an arbitration clause. Diamond Resorts is the only major developer that I’m aware of that has the arbitration clause,” explains Mike. I spoke with other attorneys who say the same.

Banks and other lenders can pick arbitrators. As Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson expressed –

shark

“We heard from arbitrators that were blackballed and essentially told, ‘You’re not going to be an arbitrator anymore because you’re ruling for the consumer,’” she says. “That’s one of the problems with arbitration. The court system is paid by the taxpayers. Judges are neutral and their funding comes from the public.” City Pages “The Plot to Kill Consumer Protection”

A common comment on complaint sites and from 170 Inside Timeshare readers reaching out to us for assistance is, “Let’s get a class action going!?” Timeshare members typically confuse the term and substance of a class action. We’re all used to class action ads on television say, for example, a medical device failure. The difference with timeshare is that damages are not uniform, which is necessary for a class action. Some lawyers may call a lawsuit a class action on behalf of only one or two plaintiff class representatives but they are more like individual lawsuits. Real Class Actions involve hundreds or thousands of plaintiffs. More later,

Part II – Class Action Lawsuits – Misunderstood by Timeshare Members

By Mike Finn of the Finn Law Group this Friday’s Letter from America

Why will timeshare developers not acknowledge the flawed business model?

Out of 170 complaints received, 155 of our readers allege they were sold a timeshare by deceit and bait and switch. The contract is perpetual, accompanied by rising maintenance fees. With some of the more gestapo orientated companies, the member cannot sell or give back their timeshare. The problem is magnified when the buyers succumbed to high interest rate loans and higher interest rate credit cards.

We believe Social Media and media outreach is the tortoise chasing the hare. Timeshare default rates are rising and original buyers (like me) are not getting any younger. Inside Timeshare continues to be there for members and advocacy Facebook pages and websites are on the rise – helping members through the 3Rs or F of Timeshare – resolution, when possibly the member just did not understand how to use the program, refund, relinquishment or foreclosure. In America, there is no debtors’ prison, except in the case of refusing to pay child support.

We ask timeshare developers – What would happen to the primary residential home market if home buyers could not sell their property?

think about

Self-help Facebooks

https://www.facebook.com/timeshareadvocategroup/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/DiamondResortsOwnersAdvocacy/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/180578055325962/

Thank you Irene and Chris, also a big thank you to Tammy for proof reading and editing these articles.

As always if you have any comments or would like to share your experiences, Inside Timeshare welcomes them, contact us through our contact page.

If you need help or advice on any timeshare matter do get in touch and we will point you in the right direction. Remember before engaging with any company do your due diligence and your homework, it will save you a lot of bother in the end.

diligence

letter from america

Friday’s Letter from America

Welcome to this week’s Friday’s Letter from America, it is not the article we originally planned as other events have taken over.

Firstly since Irene sent this article we have received some very sad news, Irene’s brother has sadly passed away. Inside Timeshare, along with all our readers and contributors, the staff at Canarian Legal Alliance send our deepest sympathies and condolences to Irene and all her family. Our thoughts are with you.

condolences

As we said last month, the time has come when all the new companies and some of the older ones will start to contact timeshare owners. This is usually the time it starts as the annual maintenance bills are starting to come through the post.

Inside Timeshare has been receiving many requests for information on these, most are for so called claims. It is surprising how many owners are being told that they have a claim for miss-selling, even though they purchased in places like Mexico.

Appointments at various offices around the UK are being arranged, but beware, these “claims” will result in either the purchase of another product, the offer of relinquishment and then a claim on a no win no fee basis. This will cost thousands of pounds, the claim will more than likely be under Section 75 of the Credit Consumer Act 1974. If the purchase was more than 6 years ago you cannot claim. If you have used your timeshare there is no claim, even if you have never used it you will not have a claim as it was available.

Section 75 only cover the following:

  1. You have not received the goods or services paid for
  2. The company goes into liquidation
  3. The goods are faulty
  4. The company turns out to be fraudulent

section 75At present the only successful claims have been through the Spanish Courts, where the timeshare laws are very strong. So unless you purchased in Spain since 1999, you will not have any basis for a claim and this will have to go through court.

So beware of these companies that say you have a valid claim, check and double check the facts.

On the subject of court cases, the following were announced during the course of this week.

The Court of First Instance Number 4 in Tenerife has found against EZE Group, at present we do not know what the infractions were, no doubt those will be released soon. But the court has declared the client’s contract null and void with the return of over £52,000 plus legal interest.

In another case on Gran Canaria, the High Court has found against Puerto Calma Marketing SL and Vista Amadores SL, which are all part of Holiday Club. In this case the Norwegian clients will receive over 57,000€ plus legal interest, they also have had their contract declared null and void. (The full sentences can be read in the attached PDF)

HC N2 PUERTO CALMA, sentence

These two case were brought on behalf of the clients by non other than the lawyers of Canarian Legal Alliance.

So now on with our shorter article from Irene.

Rather than rush through an article for our regular Friday Letter from America, I would like to reach out to all Inside Timeshare readers who have reached out to us burdened with timeshare loans, credit cards and maintenance fees as a result of medical and financial hardship.

Charles Thomas was not able to complete his trip to Orlando due to problems with Spain’s electronic VISA service. Little did I think the room we had booked for Charles at Diamond Resort’s Mystic Dunes would become part of a Hospice end of life plan for an immediate family member.

Life tends to throw us a few curve balls. My brother entered Hospice near his 86th birthday this month near Orlando. We were able to provide my other brother and his wife Charles’ room as my brother and I kept nightshift watch over our older brother at Good Shepherd Hospice.

The experience led me to think about all the timeshare members who have contacted me under similar circumstances burdened by cancer, a diagnosis of dementia, Bell’s palsy, concussion, loss of a spouse or loss of job or divorce leading to financial hardship. I thought about how much more difficult this family crisis would be if I had a timeshare debt collector calling on top of all this. The majority of readers allege they were deceived into buying points or more points told this would alleviate timeshare expense because of maintenance fee relief programs or selling points programs that do not exist. It is my deepest desire timeshare companies will look upon the financial devastation the lack of a secondary market and the actions of unscrupulous sales agents can cause.

The industry reaction is often to behead the messengers. All of our readers who have followed us and submitted articles as a Contributor are messengers. There has been a glimmer of regulatory action and Social Media no longer keeps victims isolated and silenced. In an earlier article, I reviewed Jay Baer’s book Hug Your Haters describing how Social Media is changing the face of Customer Service. Mr. Baer is scheduled to be keynote speaker at the upcoming Interval International Shared Ownership Conference attended by developers and private equity firms. It’s not your grandma’s timeshare anymore. Timeshare is big business and, in my opinion, for some companies it is motivated by greed. Deceit is also so ingrained it is accepted and encouraged top down. No one disputes there are honest sales agents who sell the product without misrepresentations, but with rising default rates, there is another reason for developers to listen to Mr. Baer because as he warns, “Haters are not your problem….Ignoring them is.”

jay baer
Jay Baer

As always, thank you Charles Thomas for being our voice for members who have been voiceless for too long.

http://insidetimeshare.com/hug-haters-part-ii-customer-service-message/

Thank you Irene, our appreciation for sending this article through under the circumstances, we all wish you and your family well.

Now to end this week, remember to check any company that you are dealing with, if you are not sure how to do this contact Inside Timeshare and we will point you in the right direction.

Have a good weekend.

weekend cat

hello october

First Monday of October

Welcome to the first Monday of October, if last month was anything to go by, we think that this month is going to be rather busy. Inside Timeshare will be travelling to the US at the end of the week, while there we will be meeting with our US colleagues all arranged by Irene Parker. It should prove a very interesting trip, we also hope to carry on publishing while there.

Before we continue, Irene has sent the latest update from the US on the atrocity committed in Las Vegas, the toll has risen to 50 dead and over 400 wounded. Inside Timeshare on behalf of all our readers send our sympathies to those bereaved and wish the very best and a speedy recovery to those injured. You are in our thoughts. It is a sad world we live in today and this makes our timeshare problems seem paltry in the light of these events.

with you

Last Month, we highlighted several new “claims” companies, along with the new incarnations from Litigious Abogados, no doubt there will be many more coming to light as the month progresses. We are just wondering on what the new names will be?

Over the last month we have had many emails on the articles published, especially on the fake firms, but many from the US who have watched our midweek reports and Friday’s Letter from America.

The US readers have all identified with many of the stories published, these have been passed to our Advocates who then make contact. Many of the stories are very similar, all revolving around the overselling of points and the use of the Diamond BarclayCard. It is frightening to see how many of these readers are elderly and how they are being treated by unscrupulous sales agents. Things do need to change.

Last week Canarian Legal Alliance sent in several of their latest court victories, some arrived after publishing.

On 26 September, we published their 61st win at the Supreme Court, since then there have been two more bringing the total to 63! Details have yet to be published.

They finished off last week with two more victories on behalf of their clients, the first was at the High Court Number 4 in Fuengirola, Malaga.

This was against Petchey Leisure, the contract was declared null & void, again it was in contravention of law 42/98. In this ruling the court declared that the contract did not specify certain information required by law when the contract was signed and issued. These specifics included, lack of information such as date time and location, which should be clearly indicated in the terms and conditions. The court awarded the client over £14,000 plus legal fees and legal Interest.

Just to end the week on a high note, they also announced another ruling against Silverpoint in Tenerife. The High Court Number 3, once again declared the contract null and void, awarding the client over £39,000 plus legal fees and interest.

In this ruling the judge used the timeshare law 42/98 regarding the length of the contract, which must be no longer than 50 years and must be clearly stated in the terms and conditions.

In today’s press release, they announced a verdict from the Court of First Instance in maspalomas, this was against Palm Oasis (Tasolan).

The German client has been awarded the return of 31,220 German Marks (yes you did read that correctly, it was purchased before the Euro). They have also been awarded maintenance fees and legal interest, with the contract being declared null and void.

So that is the start of this week, it just remains to be seen what other news come to light as the days pass.

It only goes for us to say as usual, be careful on who you do business with, if you do not know how to check out the validity of a company, contact Inside Timeshare and we will point you in the right direction.

 

letter from america

Friday’s Letter from America

This week’s Friday’s Letter from America is not the one we originally planned from Michael Kosor, this will be published in due course.

First a little news from Europe, only last week we told of the calls from HMRC informing people that they have money from the Spanish courts, one reader has sent us this information.

They were called by a Kipp Stuart from HMRC Accounting, this was with reference to a ruling at the Malaga courts, Kipp informed them that they were holding over £22,000 on their behalf, unfortunately as there was no paperwork then the funds could not be released. They were given reference numbers along with the following telephone numbers:

08713 581033 to confirm with HMRC

0034 602489947 for the Malaga Court

Wonderful, only problem, the 08713 number is not used by HMRC and also carries rather hefty charges.

The 0034 number is a Spanish mobile number and no court will issue mobile numbers for confirmation.

As we published before

HMRC DO NOT CALL PEOPLE WITH NEWS THEY ARE HOLDING MONEY ISSUED BY THE SPANISH COURTS!

On the subject of courts, it has been a rather busy, that lot at CLA have announced six more wins. There have been five in Tenerife, four of these against Silverpoint, with one of the largest awards we have seen for sometime. In this case the client was awarded over 67,000€ including legal interest and second instance legal fees with the contract being declared null & void.

The other case involved European Coast & sun Holidays SL, the judge of the Court of First Instance declared the client’s contract null & void, along with the return of over 15,000€, then as a double whammy he also ordered back payment of over 16,000€  double the deposit paid.

Then in Fuengirola at the High Court the judges reaffirmed a sentence from the Court of First Instance against Petchey Leisure, by awarding over 14,000€ plus interest and legal fees.

Back to Gran Canaria and the Court of First Instance in Maspalomas once again declared an Anfi contract null & void with the return of 21,000€ plus legal interest.

These are just some of the cases announced this week, it is certainly an expensive one for those companies.

Now on with this week’s letter.

The Deep, Dark, Dank, Obscured From View, But Very Lucrative Timeshare Developer Revenue Stream: Are Its Days Numbered?

money tree

By Mike Finn, Finn Law Group

Originally published by Inside the Gate

https://www.finnlawgroup.com/learning-center/timeshare-developer-revenue-stream-days-numbered

Clarifications in blue added by Irene Parker for non-legal minds (like mine)

September 14, 2017

We as consumers, with a certain level of understanding of business, probably attribute the lion’s share of timeshare resort revenue to two central factors: timeshare sales and timeshare rentals. As it turns out, there is a third major revenue stream that’s related to sales, but is an entirely separate source of revenue, and it’s a significant one. Depending on the nature of the initial purchase, whether it was a deeded interest, or more commonly over the past fifteen years or so, a “right to use” amalgamation of points, this shrouded revenue source may indeed also be in violation of certain state consumer rights statutes, including the Uniform Commercial Code.

I’m speaking to the universally accepted resort practice of the resort retaining every dollar received from a defaulting purchaser, even if the entire purchase price or an amount close to the total was paid over to the resort prior to the owner’s default. This would include a cessation of paying the purchase price, maintenance fees or capital assessments.

It’s not considered relevant, at least if one believes the purchase contract, to factor in the sometimes quite significant amount paid in up to the moment of default, in terms of any form of accounting back to the sum of money paid by the defaulting purchaser. It’s all retained by the resort pursuant to the purchase contract, as “liquidated damages”.

In other words, an unwitting purchaser could have paid in say $18,000 of his/her $20,000 purchase price (not to mention the additional payments of interest and annual maintenance fees), defaulted for any number of reasons and still be pursued by the resort as a debtor for the unpaid balance! Well, isn’t that appropriate, you may retort! After all, the purchaser has defaulted on a perfectly legal (on its face) promissory note obligation of $20,000 when only $18,000 has been paid? Well maybe, but let’s examine what happens next.

Foreclosure of real property and disposition of personal property are governed by different bodies of law. Real property foreclosure sale varies dramatically among the states. Personal property disposition is governed by each state’s versions of Article Nine commercially reasonable disposition.

I found this explanation of the difference in real property foreclosure compared to personal property distribution in Texas helpful:

Texas Real Property Foreclosure

Section 51.002, et seq. of the Texas Property Code defines the minimum statutory procedure that must be satisfied to properly foreclose upon real property. In addition to the minimum statutory requirements, the deed of trust executed by the debtor-mortgagor details the agreed contractual terms and conditions for foreclosure of real property.

Personal Property Disposition in Texas

Article Nine of the Texas Business and Commerce Code defines the minimum statutory procedures that must be satisfied to foreclose upon personal property. In addition to the Article Nine requirements, the security agreement executed by the debtor-mortgagor defines the contractual terms and conditions for foreclosure of personal property. Generally, personal property disposition must be commercially reasonable.

Commercially reasonable is the key concept here. We can all relate to selling a car. According to NOLO, there is no hard and fast rule on what “commercially reasonable” means. What is commercially reasonable depends on a number of factors.

The procedure, not the price, ultimately determines whether the sale is commercially reasonable. Whether a sale is commercially reasonable depends on four factors, the:

  • manner
  • time
  • place
  • terms of the sale.

Perhaps Mike’s concern as it pertains to timeshare foreclosure being commercially reasonable, as it applies to car sales, also applies to timeshare.

“There are times, however, when a private or “dealer only” sale may not be commercially reasonable”, such as in the following instances provided by NOLO. Two of the six points they mention seem to apply to timeshare:

  • the creditor has the ability to sell the car on the retail market
  • the creditor buys back the vehicle then resells it a significantly higher price.

What If I Believe the Sale Was Not Commercially Reasonable?

If you can demonstrate that the creditor did not sell your car in a commercially reasonable manner, you can raise that as a defense against any lawsuit brought by a creditor looking to collect on the deficiency balance. In some instances, if you can prove the sale was not commercially reasonable, the court may reduce or even eliminate your obligation on the deficiency balance.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/car-repo-sale-was-commercially-reasonable.html

Back to Texas

Comparison of Texas Foreclosure Procedures for Real property and Personal Property

Real property and personal property foreclosures are dramatically different. Real property foreclosures are conducted on the first Tuesday of each month between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. at the courthouse door in the county in which the real property is located, with a notice posted at the courthouse door, personal notice to the debtor, and filing of the notice with the county clerk, all 21 days before the foreclosure sale. These requirements are defined by § 52.001 of the Property Code and are unique to Texas law. Personal property foreclosures are conducted under § 9.504 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code, which generally requires a commercially reasonable sale. The requirements of Article Nine of the Texas Business and Commerce Code are followed, with some minor variations, by all states except Louisiana.

Thus, real property foreclosures in Texas are very defined and structured procedures unique to Texas law which do not require the sale to be commercially reasonable. On the other hand, personal property foreclosure sales are not structured by statute, but they must be commercially reasonable as to every aspect of the disposition, including method, manner, time, place, and terms. The apparent conclusion is that although the legislature has specifically defined the procedures that must be followed to dispose of real property, personal property may be disposed of in any manner the secured party elects, as long as the sale is in all respects commercially reasonable.

The differences between real and personal property foreclosure procedures and requirements have had interesting effects upon lenders and borrowers. The notice provisions for real property foreclosures mandate procedures known to both the lender and the borrower. The procedures provide certainty as to the mechanics of the sale. Both lender and borrower are offered an opportunity to dispose of property, with each fully understanding when, where, and how the sale or purchase will occur.

In contrast, the nebulous standard of a commercially reasonable sale leaves both the lender and the borrower uncertain as to the ultimate and satisfactory sale or purchase procedure for personal property. Article Nine attempts to place the burden on the secured lender seeking a deficiency to sell in a commercially reasonable manner, whatever that may be in the particular circumstances found by the lender. Likewise, the debtor has no knowledge of how the lender will proceed with foreclosure and has the burden of proof, if attacking the sale, to show that the sale was not commercially reasonable. The more certain real property foreclosure procedures seem to work more effectively for both the lender and the borrower.

http://www.lenders360blog.com/2008/10/real-estate-foreclosure-vs-ucc-personal-property-commercially-reasonable-disposition/

Commercially reasonable according to Cornell Law School: A disposition of collateral is made in a commercially reasonable manner if the disposition is made:

(1) In the usual manner on any recognized market;

(2) At the price current in any recognized market at the time of the disposition; or

Wait a minute here!

face

“At the price current in any recognized market at the time of disposition” means my Diamond Resorts points should be sold for nothing. Not one of the 64 members of the Licensed Timeshare Resale Broker Association will even accept a DRI listing and even Howard Nusbaum, CEO of the timeshare lobby ARDA, has been quoted as saying modern timeshare is a right to use product so the member should not expect any value back. I think Mike really is onto something!  

Other timeshare companies may argue that they do have a secondary market, but even those fortunate to be able to sell their timeshare, frequently sell them for pennies on the dollar of their original investment.

(3) Otherwise in conformity with reasonable commercial practices among dealers in the type of property that was the subject of the disposition.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/9/9-627

Now on the edge of my seat, we continue with Mike’s narration:

In our original example, is the developer out the missing $2,000?  Ask what happened to the object of the $20,000 purchase? Well look at that, the actual property never, even for a moment, left the possession of the developer! My goodness, the developer just re-sold the interest to another brand-new buyer for a fresh new $20,000! So now are you still comfortable with the original purchaser being pursued for the missing $2,000? Perhaps sued, almost definitely having derogatory credit reporting, not to mention harassment from bill collectors? So what exactly happened to the first purchaser’s $18,000 paid to the resort? Is any of it accounted for with maybe a portion returned to the guy who ended up with nothing except perhaps a lawsuit?

Not a chance in Hades! The so-called ‘extra revenue stream’ is now actually an extension of the existing stream to the developer from sales, and sales, and maybe still more sales. How many times can the same unit interest (or bloc of points) be resold over the life of the project?

The distinction (and thus a portion of the reason for my overly dramatic title) is that typically sales revenue in say a condominium project is recorded once, and the revenue is, of course, offset by the cost of acquisition of land, construction costs, marketing costs, etc. and the net amount remaining after those costs is the developer’s profit. However, in the case of the timeshare developer, the original buyer covered those costs in their initial transaction, therefore the new additional piggy-back to back transactions didn’t come with any more land acquisition or construction costs, and therefore essentially came only with very little new or fresh costs of sale beyond the re-marketing costs.

light bulb

Well wait, you might say, this can’t be right! You sure this practice is universal? Yes? Well then, are you sure this unconscionable practice is even legal? Good question, and one wherein the answer to that question may be evolving and it’s not necessarily the laws in place that are changing, it’s the timeshare product changeover, the newer form of the property that is being marketed by the developer that is creating a change in which already existing laws are now perhaps becoming relevant to the timeshare purchase, and by doing so may be enforced by the previously out of luck defaulting purchaser. In fact, it may well be that the same old existing law pendulum may be swinging back in favor of the consumer!

I reference the fact that over the past decade plus a few years, there has been a change in the product that the timeshare industry is selling. Just after the turn of the century, the industry has backed off of selling of the deeded weekly timeshare product, which was indisputably a real estate product, in favor of a product they tout as being more user flexible: a product called a “right to use” product. Setting aside the differences in the actual ability to use the two very different types of timeshare “ownership,” the focus of this article is on the migration of the timeshare product from a real estate based product, morphing into what we attorneys refer to as “personalty”.

In our lawyer’s world, everything not legally defined as real estate is personalty (the only other option in the law). Presumably a ‘right to use’ timeshare product (points based) is not considered by the law as real estate, (if it no longer possesses any attributes of real estate and therefore as ‘personalty’, is subject to differing state laws particularly including the universally adopted, in some form in every state, Uniform Commercial Code).

Additionally, state laws regulating the real estate within its boundaries, do vary from state to state. Personalty, however, is a commodity of a different color. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), as its title suggests, is nearly uniform in its textual content, and from an applicability standpoint, every state in the Union has adopted, with minimum exceptions not applicable to this article, a version of the UCC almost identical with its neighboring states. In other words, as we discuss the law of personality (again, all that is not deemed real estate) we can speak to it across the board. These laws apply everywhere within the USA.

As a Florida lawyer, you may have seen other articles where I either cite specific Florida statutes or have issued a cautionary statement that the principles I was espousing may not apply in other jurisdictions. Contrast this article where I do not constrain my statements. Also, rather than cite state specific portions of the UCC, I, in places, simply refer to Articles within the UCC and in others the ‘pure code provision’.

Further, this article is not intended for an audience of lawyers or jurists. It’s intended for consumers to get a grasp of a relatively new set of laws, including the Uniform Commercial Code, that now may begin to play a much greater role in the laws governing timeshare projects and correspondingly, the developers who operate these projects.

I would like to ask Mike at this point about another universally accepted practice – advising borrowers to go home after purchasing their dream vacation plan and arrange financing with their bank or credit union. Perhaps it’s the subject of another article, but the majority of complaints received by Inside Timeshare say their sales agent advised them to seek a home equity loan to lower timeshares usury type timeshare lending rates. Many have done just that. My husband and I were told we could get lower rate financing, “No one should finance at our rates,” warned Donna. (Grand Beach, FL July 2015) I guess buyers that follow that advice are just out of luck, like Sylvia Saldana, now stuck with a $30,000 home equity loan after Diamond Resorts “took back” $60,000 worth of timeshare points. To make matters worse, Sylvia said she was aggressively encouraged to open Barclaycards, told buying more points would lower their maintenance fees. Had she succumbed to that suggestion, Sylvia and her husband would have lost even more money.

http://insidetimeshare.com/irene-parker-write-barclay-card-usa/

Back to Mike

Consumer rights may also get a major boost by the applicability of the UCC as well, since, to the extent that a contract provision contradicts an applicable statute, that contractual provision will be rendered null and void.

So, for example take the typical contractual provision that, “all monies paid will be retained by the developer as ‘liquidated damages.’’’ Essentially, the amount of damages fixed must be reasonable ‘in light of actual or anticipated harm’ and a term fixing an ‘unreasonably large amount’ is void as a penalty.

Therefore taking a contract, say with a 10% down payment and then adding subsequent monthly payments, the sum total could easily become ‘unreasonably large’, particularly in light of the quick turnaround on the “use rights” for which there has been a default, assuming which I think is fair with on-site sales team (ARDA’s Mr. Nusbaum calls them forever sales centers), that the interest will be promptly re-sold.

Another example of a UCC provision that may well change the way defaulted buyers are treated is as follows. The included reference to the specific UCC provision is the actual textbook unadulterated Code provision number, and may well differ from numbered state specific statutes. The developer or secured party is under a duty to notify debtors of the disposition of collateral under UCC Section 9-611. Further, the disposition must be done in a commercially reasonable manner.

Of particular importance, the secured party/lender is required to apply proceeds of any disposition to the underlying debt once expenses have been taken.

Is this where we end up with money back to the debtor? Can we go back to our original example?

I paid $20,000 and default at $18,000. For sake of discussion I am current on maintenance fees (which is probably not the case). The developer sells to the next hamster my forfeited points for $20,000. I am relieved of the $2,000 still owed, but if the developer sells for $23,000, I will be relieved of the $2,000 owed plus get $3,000 from the surplus amount? This next sentence sounds like the answer?

Also of notable significance is the duty of the secured party to pay the debtor any surplus which results from the disposition of collateral.

Additionally, the secured party/developer is liable for any damages caused by its failure to comply with Article 9.

In summary, a new day in the life of an unhappy timeshare owner is dawning. Existing laws never before applied to timeshare purchases may well now apply and particularly those timeshare interests that are non-real estate based like the ‘right to use’ interests that are now the mainstream of the timeshare community! Stay tuned for future developments on our website as we begin to apply the theories and applicable state statutes referenced hereinabove.

Respectfully submitted,

Michael D. Finn, Esq.

www.finnlawgroup.com

michaeldfinn@finnlawgroup.com

work desk

Whew! That was exhausting. It’s a good thing we have legal eagles to figure these things out because Charles Thomas and I get pretty depressed at times listening to “Nightmare on Timeshare Street” stories. We have heard enough to fund a series. The question I am most frequently asked is, “How can they sleep at night?”

Thank you to Mike Finn for the chance to publish this and also to Irene to add her clarifications for those without legal minds.

It now only remains to say be careful who you do business with, check and check again, if you need help, then contact Inside Timeshare. Have a good weekend.

weekend02