In spite of the legal effort at Southcape, to right the wrongs being perpetrated on it's unit owners, the suspected takeover has happened. This legal effort has hardly gotten off the ground in spite of it being active for a considerable time. Attempts to hold management accountable have been successfully blocked or delayed.
Just as many suspected, Festiva now manages and controls the resort.
You will remember that Southcape and Sandcastle were involved in ownership transfers/purchases at the same time, and apparently linked by a single purchase loan, in September '08.
So, how long now before the same news is announced for Sandcastle?
Sandcastle unit owners need to continue to exercise their rights to assemble and talk to each other, anywhere ; to write their grievances and complaints to all possible public officials; and to mount a legal offensive.
Any unit owner who is working with an attorney or who knows of one who can help, can leave a private comment here for me. I will not post any comments publicly unless the writer tells me to.
As time goes by, the situation will deteriorate. However, there is a basic principal in the law: there is no statute of limitations where fraud is involved.
Friday, July 9, 2010
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Festiva speaks out? What did they say?
Pre-ramble
I do have opinions, but I try to primarily post facts and information here that will help us understand what is going on in a complex situation. If you know of an error in any post in this blog, please leave a comment. I will post it if it can be verified.
Please know that unless you leave your contact information in the comment, I cannot respond to you personally. If you do not wish your contact info to be public, tell me, and I will not post it. By leaving a comment you can get connected to a group of unit owners who are trying to do the right thing, just ask me.
Now for the juice:
-------------------------------------
The Posting
Jeff Berger puts out a great newsletter and has a terrific site about everything St Maarten. http://www.everythingstmaarten.com/
Excerpts from his newsletters and email forum here are included with his permission and are copyrighted.
Earlier this month, in the email forum there, Festiva was mentioned for it's involvement in the Atrium takeover on the Dutch side of the island.
I have spoken with Rowie Percoco (mentioned below), a unit owner there who hired a lawyer, and their fight against Festiva was successful. Festiva agreed to abide by the Master Deed which did not allow the assessment, and withdrew the illegal assessments just before the matter went to court.
Did you just understand what was written there? They had to be sued in order to behave legally. What were they doing? Breaking the contract knowingly, trying to see how much they could get away with? Or can you think they didn't know what was in the contract? The latter is a bit hard to believe. So that leaves us with the understanding that they knew what they were doing, and only just before they would get thrashed in court did they back down.
Not only did they have to refund monies, but it was found that payments of assessments had gone to Festiva general funds and not to improvements at the resort that was paying the bill!!!
Same story, different resort.
Here is what was written in the email forum:
------------------------------------
More Problems for Festiva Resorts
========
Based on conversations with a number of timeshare owners at Atrium, the consensus about Festiva appears to be that they took over Atrium at a vulnerable time, then socked it to owners with huge AMFs which timeshare owners contend violate their contracts. (Please tell us if you think this is an incorrect interpretation.)
Apparently timeshare owners at Festiva Atrium aren't the only ones who are seething about the way Festiva Resorts is treating them. Look at this: http://sandcastleowners.blogspot.com/
On a different note, we're still awaiting word from Rowie Percoco on the outcome of their (Atrium timeshare owners') litigation against Festiva.
We'll keep you posted.
----------------------------------
Then Jeff included a piece I had previously posted here in the blog, which was actually an alert put out by TimeSharing today about the industry-wide pattern of abuse to unit owners by big companies that take over resorts:
http://sandcastleowners.blogspot.com/2009/09/its-not-right-indeed.html
You will not find Festiva mentioned in that blog posting.
The next day, the following response came in from Sara Bader of Festiva Resorts. She must be keeping an eye on the forum!
Maybe you can translate it for me. I know what double-speak is. Perhaps there is such a thing as half-speak. Or double-half speak , with a twist!! Shaken and stirred.
Here are her remarks and contact info, again, thanks to Jeff Berger and this submission is copyrighted by JMB Communications and is reprinted with permission:
-------------------------------------
Festiva replied and we are publishing their reply today:
Unfortunately there is some misleading information in yesterday's
newsletter about Festiva Resorts as it's related to the Sandcastle
Resort. Festiva Resorts is not the developer or management company for
Sandcastle Resort in Provincetown, Mass., therefore we have no control
of the day to day operations, the actions of the board of directors or
the maintenance fees/assessments at that resort. It is simply a part of
our Adventure Club network of resorts as we own units there that
previously belonged to weeks owners who have upgraded to our
points-based Adventure Club. Like any other owner, Festiva Resorts pays
maintenance fees and assessments for the units owned at the Sandcastle.
Please let me know if you have any questions about this topic.
Sara Bader
Director of Corporate Communications
Festiva Resorts
One Vance Gap Road Asheville, NC 28805
sbader@festivaresorts.com
--------------------------------
Cliff Hagberg will have an opportunity this weekend to show some Sandcastle unit owners at the upcoming meeting there, just how much he, and Festiva pay in Maintenance fees and assessments.
He may be able to explain the full nature of the "Affiliation" (his word) of Festiva to Sandcastle. He will help us understand the documents filed in Barnstable on Sept 25, 2008 linking Festiva to Sandcastle.
Look back at the recent post here for the definition of the word Affiliation in the timeshare laws. How it relates to control. Then explain what the Festiva remarks above mean.(or don't mean) What isn't being said?
Like Sara above, I think we should keep it simple. Cliff should simply abide by Mass Laws and the trust instruments and provide us with the owners list and let us view all financial information we have rights to see and copy.
Or the courts can be invited to the game.(the St Maarten shuffle...)
Any questions?
I do have opinions, but I try to primarily post facts and information here that will help us understand what is going on in a complex situation. If you know of an error in any post in this blog, please leave a comment. I will post it if it can be verified.
Please know that unless you leave your contact information in the comment, I cannot respond to you personally. If you do not wish your contact info to be public, tell me, and I will not post it. By leaving a comment you can get connected to a group of unit owners who are trying to do the right thing, just ask me.
Now for the juice:
-------------------------------------
The Posting
Jeff Berger puts out a great newsletter and has a terrific site about everything St Maarten. http://www.everythingstmaarten.com/
Excerpts from his newsletters and email forum here are included with his permission and are copyrighted.
Earlier this month, in the email forum there, Festiva was mentioned for it's involvement in the Atrium takeover on the Dutch side of the island.
I have spoken with Rowie Percoco (mentioned below), a unit owner there who hired a lawyer, and their fight against Festiva was successful. Festiva agreed to abide by the Master Deed which did not allow the assessment, and withdrew the illegal assessments just before the matter went to court.
Did you just understand what was written there? They had to be sued in order to behave legally. What were they doing? Breaking the contract knowingly, trying to see how much they could get away with? Or can you think they didn't know what was in the contract? The latter is a bit hard to believe. So that leaves us with the understanding that they knew what they were doing, and only just before they would get thrashed in court did they back down.
Not only did they have to refund monies, but it was found that payments of assessments had gone to Festiva general funds and not to improvements at the resort that was paying the bill!!!
Same story, different resort.
Here is what was written in the email forum:
------------------------------------
More Problems for Festiva Resorts
========
Based on conversations with a number of timeshare owners at Atrium, the consensus about Festiva appears to be that they took over Atrium at a vulnerable time, then socked it to owners with huge AMFs which timeshare owners contend violate their contracts. (Please tell us if you think this is an incorrect interpretation.)
Apparently timeshare owners at Festiva Atrium aren't the only ones who are seething about the way Festiva Resorts is treating them. Look at this: http://sandcastleowners.blogspot.com/
On a different note, we're still awaiting word from Rowie Percoco on the outcome of their (Atrium timeshare owners') litigation against Festiva.
We'll keep you posted.
----------------------------------
Then Jeff included a piece I had previously posted here in the blog, which was actually an alert put out by TimeSharing today about the industry-wide pattern of abuse to unit owners by big companies that take over resorts:
http://sandcastleowners.blogspot.com/2009/09/its-not-right-indeed.html
You will not find Festiva mentioned in that blog posting.
The next day, the following response came in from Sara Bader of Festiva Resorts. She must be keeping an eye on the forum!
Maybe you can translate it for me. I know what double-speak is. Perhaps there is such a thing as half-speak. Or double-half speak , with a twist!! Shaken and stirred.
Here are her remarks and contact info, again, thanks to Jeff Berger and this submission is copyrighted by JMB Communications and is reprinted with permission:
-------------------------------------
Festiva replied and we are publishing their reply today:
Unfortunately there is some misleading information in yesterday's
newsletter about Festiva Resorts as it's related to the Sandcastle
Resort. Festiva Resorts is not the developer or management company for
Sandcastle Resort in Provincetown, Mass., therefore we have no control
of the day to day operations, the actions of the board of directors or
the maintenance fees/assessments at that resort. It is simply a part of
our Adventure Club network of resorts as we own units there that
previously belonged to weeks owners who have upgraded to our
points-based Adventure Club. Like any other owner, Festiva Resorts pays
maintenance fees and assessments for the units owned at the Sandcastle.
Please let me know if you have any questions about this topic.
Sara Bader
Director of Corporate Communications
Festiva Resorts
One Vance Gap Road Asheville, NC 28805
sbader@festivaresorts.com
--------------------------------
Cliff Hagberg will have an opportunity this weekend to show some Sandcastle unit owners at the upcoming meeting there, just how much he, and Festiva pay in Maintenance fees and assessments.
He may be able to explain the full nature of the "Affiliation" (his word) of Festiva to Sandcastle. He will help us understand the documents filed in Barnstable on Sept 25, 2008 linking Festiva to Sandcastle.
Look back at the recent post here for the definition of the word Affiliation in the timeshare laws. How it relates to control. Then explain what the Festiva remarks above mean.(or don't mean) What isn't being said?
Like Sara above, I think we should keep it simple. Cliff should simply abide by Mass Laws and the trust instruments and provide us with the owners list and let us view all financial information we have rights to see and copy.
Or the courts can be invited to the game.(the St Maarten shuffle...)
Any questions?
Pertinenet excerpts from MGL 183a and 183b
As we do our research, we read the governing documents and try to figure out who's who and who can do what legally. While the language is more for the lawyers to fully understand, a reading of the Trusts, Mass Laws and all is helpful for all of us to get the gist of the relationships, duties and obligations each player has, in this complex thing called the Time Share.
The first following parts are Definitions for terms in Mass General Law 183b. Understanding these words can help you decipher what is really being said in the documents. The second should give us pause as to who runs the resort.
183a and 183b can be found at : http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/mgllink.htm
Just fill in the number in the chapter number box. Then you can read the sections.
You may remember last year Cliff Hagberg told us that Festiva was "affiliated" with Sandcastle. It has been written by Festiva that "we have no control over day-to-day operations...". And that "Like any other owner, Festiva Resorts pays
maintenance fees and assessments for the units owned at the Sandcastle"
No control? Really? Let us see the Sept 08 contracts.
And we would like proof that Festiva is paying MF's and SA's. As unit owners we have the right to inspect the books. So far we have been denied access.
---------------------------------------
PART II. REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS
TITLE I. TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY
CHAPTER 183B. REAL ESTATE TIME-SHARES
Chapter 183B: Section 2. Definitions
Section 2. As used in this chapter, the following words shall, unless the context otherwise requires, have the following meanings:—
“Affiliate of a developer”, any person who controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with a developer. A person controls a developer if the person is (i) a general partner, officer, director, or employer of the developer, (ii) directly or indirectly or acting in concert with one or more other persons, or through one or more subsidiaries, owns, controls, holds with power to vote, or holds proxies representing, more than twenty per cent of the voting interest in the developer, (iii) controls in any manner the election of a majority of the directors of the developer, or (iv) has contributed more than twenty per cent of the capital of the developer. A person is controlled by a developer if the developer is (i) a general partner, officer, director, or employer of the person, (ii) directly or indirectly or acting in concert with one or more other persons, or through one or more subsidiaries, owns, controls, holds with power to vote, or holds proxies representing more than twenty per cent of the voting interest in the person, (iii) controls in any manner the election of a majority of the directors of the person, or (iv) has contributed more than twenty per cent of the capital of the person. Control does not exist if the powers described in this paragraph are held solely as security for an obligation and are not exercised.
“Association”, the association organized under the provisions of subsection (a) of section nineteen.
“Person”, a natural person, corporation, government, governmental subdivision or agency, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association, joint venture, or other legal or commercial entity. In the case of a nominee trust, however, “person” means the beneficiary of the trust as well as the trust and the trustee.
“Purchaser”, any person, other than a developer, who by means of a voluntary transfer acquires a legal or equitable interest in a time-share other than as security for an obligation.
Chapter 183B: Section 19. Managing entity
Section 19. (a) If the number of time-shares in a time-share property is more than twelve, the developer, before the first transfer of a time-share, shall create or provide a managing entity to manage the time-share property. The managing entity may be (i) a manager, who may be the developer, or (ii) an association, which shall be a profit or nonprofit corporation or an unincorporated association, the membership of which shall at all times consist exclusively of all the time-share owners. If the time-share property is part of a project containing time-share units and other units, the manager may be the entity that governs the project. If the number of time-shares in the time-share property is twelve or fewer and there is no managing entity, the time-share owners may form an association meeting the requirements specified above.
(b) In the absence of a managing entity required by this section, a court upon application of a party in interest, including a time-share owner or a lien holder, may appoint and prescribe the powers of a managing entity.
------------------------------------------------
Although we may read sections that do not seem to empower us as we'd like, there are other parts of the laws and trusts that give us, as unit owners, all we need.
The first following parts are Definitions for terms in Mass General Law 183b. Understanding these words can help you decipher what is really being said in the documents. The second should give us pause as to who runs the resort.
183a and 183b can be found at : http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/mgllink.htm
Just fill in the number in the chapter number box. Then you can read the sections.
You may remember last year Cliff Hagberg told us that Festiva was "affiliated" with Sandcastle. It has been written by Festiva that "we have no control over day-to-day operations...". And that "Like any other owner, Festiva Resorts pays
maintenance fees and assessments for the units owned at the Sandcastle"
No control? Really? Let us see the Sept 08 contracts.
And we would like proof that Festiva is paying MF's and SA's. As unit owners we have the right to inspect the books. So far we have been denied access.
---------------------------------------
PART II. REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS
TITLE I. TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY
CHAPTER 183B. REAL ESTATE TIME-SHARES
Chapter 183B: Section 2. Definitions
Section 2. As used in this chapter, the following words shall, unless the context otherwise requires, have the following meanings:—
“Affiliate of a developer”, any person who controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with a developer. A person controls a developer if the person is (i) a general partner, officer, director, or employer of the developer, (ii) directly or indirectly or acting in concert with one or more other persons, or through one or more subsidiaries, owns, controls, holds with power to vote, or holds proxies representing, more than twenty per cent of the voting interest in the developer, (iii) controls in any manner the election of a majority of the directors of the developer, or (iv) has contributed more than twenty per cent of the capital of the developer. A person is controlled by a developer if the developer is (i) a general partner, officer, director, or employer of the person, (ii) directly or indirectly or acting in concert with one or more other persons, or through one or more subsidiaries, owns, controls, holds with power to vote, or holds proxies representing more than twenty per cent of the voting interest in the person, (iii) controls in any manner the election of a majority of the directors of the person, or (iv) has contributed more than twenty per cent of the capital of the person. Control does not exist if the powers described in this paragraph are held solely as security for an obligation and are not exercised.
“Association”, the association organized under the provisions of subsection (a) of section nineteen.
“Person”, a natural person, corporation, government, governmental subdivision or agency, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association, joint venture, or other legal or commercial entity. In the case of a nominee trust, however, “person” means the beneficiary of the trust as well as the trust and the trustee.
“Purchaser”, any person, other than a developer, who by means of a voluntary transfer acquires a legal or equitable interest in a time-share other than as security for an obligation.
Chapter 183B: Section 19. Managing entity
Section 19. (a) If the number of time-shares in a time-share property is more than twelve, the developer, before the first transfer of a time-share, shall create or provide a managing entity to manage the time-share property. The managing entity may be (i) a manager, who may be the developer, or (ii) an association, which shall be a profit or nonprofit corporation or an unincorporated association, the membership of which shall at all times consist exclusively of all the time-share owners. If the time-share property is part of a project containing time-share units and other units, the manager may be the entity that governs the project. If the number of time-shares in the time-share property is twelve or fewer and there is no managing entity, the time-share owners may form an association meeting the requirements specified above.
(b) In the absence of a managing entity required by this section, a court upon application of a party in interest, including a time-share owner or a lien holder, may appoint and prescribe the powers of a managing entity.
------------------------------------------------
Although we may read sections that do not seem to empower us as we'd like, there are other parts of the laws and trusts that give us, as unit owners, all we need.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Letter to the Editor, Assessment, Manhattan Club "furious"
Once more TimeSharing Today carries helpful information for unit week owners.
In their Sept/Oct 2009 issue is the following letter to the editor.
I will also include a clipping from an article on page 38 about problems at the Manhattan Club. Tell me if something is familiar!
You can leave a comment for me here on this blog, it's easy, and it is seen by me only. I can then connect you, if you are a Sandcastle unit week owner, to a group of concerned owners who are working on issues on behalf of all owners at the resort.
Here's the letter to the editor:
Provincetown problems.
I am an owner at Sandcastles in
Provincetown MA, where Festiva is trying
to get folks to exchange their deeded
units and buy points. The new manager is
a trustee and an owner with three of his
business associates. Maintenance fees are
increasing 26% and there is a special assessment
of $700 -1500 per week without
any clear intent of what is to be done with
this assessment. Also, there is no reserve
fund from the monies we have been paying
yearly. We are contacting the Attorney
General in MA, but management says we
cannot get a list of owners. Some owners
are canvassing during their weeks.
How do I get this information into
TimeSharing Today with a link to http://
sandcastleowners.blogspot.com/
Thanks for any help you can give.
Also do you have a list of timeshare
attorneys?
E.W.
Editor’s reply: You’ve gotten the
information into TimeSharing Today and
we have included your email address so
that attorneys interested in this matter can
contact you.
-------------------------------end of letter----------------------
For the time being I have edited out the email address of the author in case he does not want to be contacted from here.
The assessment at Sandcastle has come out since the writing of this and is $883.94 per unit week, no matter how big the room, or where it is located, and we expect that not all owners are being billed. More on this later.
Now for the clipping from the article in the magazine by manhattanclubowners@yahoogroups.com
from: Manhattan Club Owners “furious”
"....The high maintenance
fees and the economy have made a sale
of their timeshare impossible. The only
way out is foreclosure. Of course, if they
are foreclosed on management will get
the timeshare back for free.
Management has refused to give a
list of current Manhattan Club timeshare
owners. The timeshare owners are trying
to get organized and urge all owners to
join other timeshare owners at their site:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/manhattanclubowners/
If the owners get united, they can
make the Manhattan Club shine again.
Under the current structure the
owners have little say about how the
timeshare is run. The seven member
board consists of the owner and three of
has appointees. The other three are timeshare
owners. Obviously the owner has
total control of the board of directors."
--------------------------------------------------------
The road may be long, take a deep breath and place one foot after the other.
We'll get there.
In their Sept/Oct 2009 issue is the following letter to the editor.
I will also include a clipping from an article on page 38 about problems at the Manhattan Club. Tell me if something is familiar!
You can leave a comment for me here on this blog, it's easy, and it is seen by me only. I can then connect you, if you are a Sandcastle unit week owner, to a group of concerned owners who are working on issues on behalf of all owners at the resort.
Here's the letter to the editor:
Provincetown problems.
I am an owner at Sandcastles in
Provincetown MA, where Festiva is trying
to get folks to exchange their deeded
units and buy points. The new manager is
a trustee and an owner with three of his
business associates. Maintenance fees are
increasing 26% and there is a special assessment
of $700 -1500 per week without
any clear intent of what is to be done with
this assessment. Also, there is no reserve
fund from the monies we have been paying
yearly. We are contacting the Attorney
General in MA, but management says we
cannot get a list of owners. Some owners
are canvassing during their weeks.
How do I get this information into
TimeSharing Today with a link to http://
sandcastleowners.blogspot.com/
Thanks for any help you can give.
Also do you have a list of timeshare
attorneys?
E.W.
Editor’s reply: You’ve gotten the
information into TimeSharing Today and
we have included your email address so
that attorneys interested in this matter can
contact you.
-------------------------------end of letter----------------------
For the time being I have edited out the email address of the author in case he does not want to be contacted from here.
The assessment at Sandcastle has come out since the writing of this and is $883.94 per unit week, no matter how big the room, or where it is located, and we expect that not all owners are being billed. More on this later.
Now for the clipping from the article in the magazine by manhattanclubowners@yahoogroups.com
from: Manhattan Club Owners “furious”
"....The high maintenance
fees and the economy have made a sale
of their timeshare impossible. The only
way out is foreclosure. Of course, if they
are foreclosed on management will get
the timeshare back for free.
Management has refused to give a
list of current Manhattan Club timeshare
owners. The timeshare owners are trying
to get organized and urge all owners to
join other timeshare owners at their site:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/manhattanclubowners/
If the owners get united, they can
make the Manhattan Club shine again.
Under the current structure the
owners have little say about how the
timeshare is run. The seven member
board consists of the owner and three of
has appointees. The other three are timeshare
owners. Obviously the owner has
total control of the board of directors."
--------------------------------------------------------
The road may be long, take a deep breath and place one foot after the other.
We'll get there.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
"Ethics" for ARDA Members, really!?
Who is ARDA? You will find it throughout the timeshare industry websites. The acronym stands for American Resort Development Association.
Take a look and see how organized the corporate side of Timesharing is.
http://www.arda.org//AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home
They are big time into government lobbying.
Now, keep in mind what your experiences have been with those at the resort who have aligned themselves with FESTIVA (an ARDA member).
Now think of what you think the word "ethics" means.
Read the short insert on a page from the website, included below.
If you are up for a longer, quite a bit longer read, click on the hyperlink to view the "Ethics Code" document.
Now consider writing your thoughts to the ARDA and any other industry organization you can find. Let's find out where they stand on what is happening at our resort and all the others that suffer the same ethical dilemmas.
From the website:
ETHICS
ARDA and its members are committed to the highest standards and ethics in resort, vacation, recreational, residential and community development for the benefit of the public. To demonstrate that commitment, ARDA has adopted a Code of Ethics. All members of ARDA and all those who use ARDA services agree to comply with this Code.
The Ethics Code of the American Resort Development Association consists of general requirements, solicitation requirements, and sales requirements, as well as administrative procedures for interpretation and enforcement of the Code. All activities subject to this Code shall be designed to be honest and fair, and to be conducted with integrity, dignity and propriety.
Failure to cooperate with the ARDA Standards & Ethics Committee, the Administrator, or the Appellate Board in an investigation or a proceeding on a Challenge may be considered by the Committee according to the same procedures and with the same sanctions as a Determination of Failure to Comply with the Code.
Read this ethics code and tell me if Festiva is operating it's business in compliance or not.
If the hyperlink doesn't work go to http://www.arda.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Site_Map&Template=/CM/SiteMap.cfm.
From the menu on the left, choose Consumer Information, and then Ethics, then click the "Ethics Code" hyperlink in the short article quoted above, and download the 31 page guide. It's a fascinating read.
Tell me what you think!
Tell them what you think.
Tell the Attorney General in your state what you think!
Take a look and see how organized the corporate side of Timesharing is.
http://www.arda.org//AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home
They are big time into government lobbying.
Now, keep in mind what your experiences have been with those at the resort who have aligned themselves with FESTIVA (an ARDA member).
Now think of what you think the word "ethics" means.
Read the short insert on a page from the website, included below.
If you are up for a longer, quite a bit longer read, click on the hyperlink to view the "Ethics Code" document.
Now consider writing your thoughts to the ARDA and any other industry organization you can find. Let's find out where they stand on what is happening at our resort and all the others that suffer the same ethical dilemmas.
From the website:
ETHICS
ARDA and its members are committed to the highest standards and ethics in resort, vacation, recreational, residential and community development for the benefit of the public. To demonstrate that commitment, ARDA has adopted a Code of Ethics. All members of ARDA and all those who use ARDA services agree to comply with this Code.
The Ethics Code of the American Resort Development Association consists of general requirements, solicitation requirements, and sales requirements, as well as administrative procedures for interpretation and enforcement of the Code. All activities subject to this Code shall be designed to be honest and fair, and to be conducted with integrity, dignity and propriety.
Failure to cooperate with the ARDA Standards & Ethics Committee, the Administrator, or the Appellate Board in an investigation or a proceeding on a Challenge may be considered by the Committee according to the same procedures and with the same sanctions as a Determination of Failure to Comply with the Code.
Read this ethics code and tell me if Festiva is operating it's business in compliance or not.
If the hyperlink doesn't work go to http://www.arda.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Site_Map&Template=/CM/SiteMap.cfm.
From the menu on the left, choose Consumer Information, and then Ethics, then click the "Ethics Code" hyperlink in the short article quoted above, and download the 31 page guide. It's a fascinating read.
Tell me what you think!
Tell them what you think.
Tell the Attorney General in your state what you think!
It's not right indeed!
Thanks to the publication TimeSharing Today, self proclaimed advocate of Timeshare week owners, the following alert has hit the internet. Many of you will recognize your resort in the story.
The "takeover playbook" has been written some years ago and is being followed throughout this country and, in fact, internationally, at numerous resorts.
We are not alone; others have fought and won against these "forces".
The alert:
"
The "takeover playbook" has been written some years ago and is being followed throughout this country and, in fact, internationally, at numerous resorts.
We are not alone; others have fought and won against these "forces".
The alert:
"
It ain't fair
Since we mentioned our intentions of providing enhanced services to our members, a few owners from various resorts have been in touch with us. We are seeing some worrisome patterns emerging. A developer gains control of the board, bylaws are ignored, notices of meeting are not being sent, special assessments to cover questionable expenses are imposed, maintenance fees are raised and owner objections are ignored.
Anytime there is a situation where the Developer controls the Association funds by controlling the Board and owning or controlling the management company, the owners will have concerns that some how the Developer may use Association funds to overcome its own financial problems.
The concerns we hear are not so much that the Developer would flat out steal the Associations funds but that they would use their position to make charges to the Association that are unreasonable or unnecessary either for services provided by the Developer or its management company or that they could pay from the Association funds for goods or services that were more appropriately the Developers.
There are reports of developers/managers preventing an owner elected board member from reviewing and/or disseminating financial information about expenditures, while allowing non-board members to participate in meetings where finances are discussed. In other cases, developers appear to have used Association funds to pay down developer created debt and legal fees for properties or units unrelated to the units for which assessments and maintenance fees are being collected. There are, reportedly, situations in which family members with questionable qualifications are being employed at exorbitant salaries.
As one owner said, "It just ain't fair."
Through its advocacy efforts, TimeSharing Today is looking into these situations. Ultimately, the owners may have no choice but to seek legal counsel to protect their interests.
Email staff@tstoday.com Subject: Advocacy
Monday, August 24, 2009
Festiva sued by owners, backs down, regroups to try again!
Sandcastle owners, you are not alone. The more one looks, the more one finds that shows a pattern of behavior repeated in one resort after another.
TimeSharing Today Magazine has been quoted here before. With their permission I am reprinting contributions to their Mar/April 07, and May/June 08 issues.
TimeSharing Today Magazine has been quoted here before. With their permission I am reprinting contributions to their Mar/April 07, and May/June 08 issues.
In the Mar/April 07 issue:
Owners unite!
Festiva Resorts recently purchased the Atrium in Sint Maarten and proceeded
to ask timeshare owners for a huge special assessment. Festiva owners have a
very unique contract that does not allow Festiva to take these actions,
but the corporation tried to just ignore it and impose excessive fees without
any prior communication with owners.
The contracts only allow maintenance fee increases up the island’s CPI (4%
in 2006) and do not permit any special assessments. Currently, approximately
200owners have refused to pay anything in excess of the contract allowance
and have taken Festiva to court on the island.
As the court date approached, the resort attorney informed us that Festiva
agreed to abide by the contracts as written and we do not need to pay the
special assessment or fees above the island CPI. Nor will Festiva attempt
to prevent anyone from using the resort. To fight this battle we contributed
$50 and still have around $11,000 in the account for further legal action,
if necessary, as it appears Festiva will try to get the island court system to
amend the contract at some future date.
Other owners can still join this action and avoid paying the extra
monies and help increase owner input to resort improvements.
For further details, contact Rowie Percoco at RowieP@aol.com.
Dan and Terri Shields
And in the May/June 08 issue:
Call to Atrium owners
Timeshare owners of the Atrium in St Maarten continue to battle with Festiva
management over special assessments. Since Festiva purchased the Atrium
several years ago they are claiming very large operating losses and have
reduced expenditures to improvements. They then issued bills with very large
increases in the yearly maintenance fee and added a large special assessment
completely ignoring the owners contracts that limit maintenance fee increases
to the island CPI (approximately 4%) and do not allow special assessments.
Now Festiva is trying to collect large daily fees per person from
all those who visit the Atrium. These fees are not allowed in the contract either.
There are now over 500 owners who refuse to pay the special assessments.
When the owners went to court, Festiva signed documents agreeing owners
needed to pay only the amounts required in their contracts. After more than a
year of fighting, our legal fees have amounted to about $20 per owner and we
have not paid any of the special assessments or the elevated maintenance fees
beyond the island CPI.
Our use of the facilities remains the same. We are also asking the
courts to return the extra monies collected from those people who joined our
group after paying the higher fees. But Dutch courts do not allow class action
suits so we only represent those owners who join our group.”
However, while our actions have forced Festiva to form an advisory
committee, that committee has no power and has been ignored. We seek
some veto power regarding expenditures and collections.
A review of Festiva’s financial documents has revealed that much of the
special assessment money has gone to Festiva’s operating account and not
into the capital improvement fund for the Atrium. Now Festiva has entered
the Dutch courts to try to amend our contracts and claiming only a small
minority are fighting management direction. Of course, we have no way
of contacting other owners for their support as we do not know who
they are. The larger the number of owners who are in
our group the greater the odds of success so we are renewing our efforts to
contact all owners. Please join us.
For additional information, contact Rowie Percoco at
rowiep@aol.com.
Dan Shields
Editor’s note: We have not received any response from Festiva to our
request for comment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
