Options upon death of an owner« Back to Questions List
Brought up at the 1st AGM, should a week revert to the Club on owner's death?
Absolutely not. It must form part of the owner's estate.
However, it would be hard for an executor or inheritor to deal with at a difficult time if they neither knew Underscar, nor had any experience of timeshares. I propose that the Club allows a week to be returned to the Club without payment but without further liability at any time following death of an owner (ie to give the inheritor time to view, experience and decide), The week then becomes part of the unsold inventory and can be rented out or sold, presumably by Fisherbeck. The new owner still has the right to sell the week themselves if they want a financial return.
I feel this approach could be offered to owners without the need to die first, as some may fall on hard times or otherwise wish to relinquish without the desire to take the trouble to sell themselves. However, where death is not involved, I would advise a published cap on the total number allowed each year and subject to indefinate suspension at the discretion of the board.
|
It would appear that since 2017 when a previous posting was made with concerns expressed about the lack of a successful sales and rental marketing ( which relates to relinquishments), that all these years on we seem to find ourselves in a similar scenario, except that now we appear to have 30% of weeks up for sale of which 86 are stock weeks owned by the club.. Until such time as sales are achieved for those owners wishing to sell their weeks, all of these weeks have the potential to rent out and earn some commission for the club in that process,. Or for those wishing to subsidise their increasing management fees in the interim, part rentals could be another mutually beneficial way forward for owners and UOCL alike. Both of these scenarios however depend upon an effective advertising campaign, but it would appear that this in turn would incur further costs for the club. Catch 22 scenario? Sadly, until such time as an effective advertising campaign is forthcoming however ( beyond reliance upon owners word of mouth to effect sales) it appears that even with the latest new options to try and sell stock weeks (to be discussed at the EGM) that concerns still remain with regard to a growing ageing population of owners still unable to sell their weeks. How many of Underscar’s owners are aware of this problem? And how will increasing numbers of owners unable to sell , result in putting off potential purchasers ? Isn’t this of sufficient concern to all owners going forward to have the opportunity to discuss and reevaluate the need for an advertising campaign before this becomes a major problem for all owners? The background complexities re SYKES and HOTL that have since become apparent and the fact that owners are now hopefully back in control of events, thanks to the best endeavours of the board, now only accentuates the need for an effective marketing and rental strategy which in turn depends upon an effective nationwide advertising campaign. Presumably increasing commissions earned in this way would also have the potential to lower management fees for all owners? Might the outlay for effective nationwide advertising subsequently pay for itself and act as reassurance for all owners, and incentivise potential purchasers going forward? |
The problem is accentuated by the apparent current marketing of sales and rentals of Underscar (not maximising its potential), and the need for greater clarity and user friendly website that should easily identify, in pictorial form, the overall layout of lodges within the development and their associated names, with ease to ”click” on lodges from this overall layout so as to make easy comparison and be further informed of costs and availability for any given week (for both purchase and rental). |
As a new owner at Underscar its clear that owners here are battling with the same issues I see at other resorts whre we own (or have owned). Whats different though, is that you are talking about it and know that it needs addressing. |
That would seem a very reasonable way forwards, giving certainty to current owners. If the Board has a viable letting / resale strategy, it could even gain income for UOCL. The same would be true of a current owner ’walk away’ offer of, say, 3 times management fee to end all liability. UOCL gets a lump sum and then letting or resale fee for the surrendered week. However, the Board have rejected any consideration of such a system |
We have purchased other timeshares via Worldwide Timeshare who we found very easy to deal with. Similar quality to Underscar for £1500 to £2000 a week, sleep 6, in UK, admittedly peak season. Obviously the seller did not receive that amount. I still feel the descendants should be protected from having to deal with the problem and that the Club could offer to take the week from them for say £1 if they want, and sell it (through Fisherbeck?) and be left in the position of continuing maintenance receipts and no significant outgoings. |
It would appear that TATOC have gone into administration https://www.timeshareconsumerassociation.org.uk/2017/05/08/tatoc-in-administration/ |
It is correct that the Club needs to repeatedly address the unfortunate reality of the deaths of members. At the moment we are considering future options including points that have been made by the Trustee. The Board will keep members advised of their thinking and welcomes comments made on the message Board. Peter Allen |
Anne Simpson’s suggestion is worth serious consideration. The time will come when every Resort will have to have a defined exit strategy. dld261 |
Sorry to repeat this response ( as this was a response to another question) but could one solution be for any given year where any property(s) falls under this unfortunate circumstance upon death of an owner, that priority be given to a closed auction where existing members could have the opportunity to bid for the timeshare week, and thus avail themselves, if affordable, of a significantly discounted week ( without impacting the prices as seen by the general public)? |
As I indicated at the AGM, sales are possible but one must be realistic about the price. Our apartments are NOT investments. There are a number of genuine resale companies out there. Talk with – or google – TATOC for some guidance. |
For information, we did have two separate weeks and for various reasons wished to get rid of one. We have successfully sold through eBay for, I have to admit, not much, but it did cover all the fees to eBay and the transfer costs, still leaving us a little extra. The message is that there probably is a way to sell, just don’t expect much! |
In response to Caroline Thompson, what would you suggest when the apartment proves to be impossible to sell? There must be sensible provisions on death and surrender during a life time without recourse to court proceedings which benefits nobody. |
The inherent problem is that there may be no resale possible (based on current evidence), so that the estate is unable to dispose of the week(s). In that case, there is a problem in that the legal costs of pursuing an estate for ongoing charges will far exceed the monies outstanding, especially as every instance will need a fresh legal case. During the potentially lengthy proceedings, the remaining owners will be having to provide funds to keep cash flow going anyway. Surely better to come up with an agreed plan in advance rather than fire fight |
on death of an owner, the property must not become the responsibility of the rest of the owners. the property should be sold when no longer wanted, whatever the circumstances |