TravelTalkOnline Forums People Talk Caravanserai Now Alegria Caravanserai now Alegria

Interesting take on it Wendell. But we own a cemetery here in the states. If we sold it the law would protect those who have purchased lots there and any future owner of the property would have to honor that regardless of what the bank wants. People were led to believe that timeshare law on St Maarten would similarly protect them in the sale of a property being openly used to solicit timeshare purchases.

All valid points. Will see what happens.

Thing that seems, at this point in time, might be??????? Is is only those "sales" that took place "after" the bank took control.

So many variables, and some seem to be getting emails and others not. This is not that hard to blast out to everybody. But evidently that did not happen??? So think there is more to the story than we know at this point.

I sort of agree with your assumption. But a cemetary lot is not a time share... Not sure I even want to go there .. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/jester.gif" alt="" /> Just kidding, so do not take offense.

But there are better laws in the US vs SXM. But even so, there have been many horror stories even in the US about time shares.

I think at this point, people are seeing what has been posted. Maybe that does effect everybody, maybe it does not. The complication of the bank and the foreclosure is a wild kicker is the entire mix.

Not sure at this point anybody really knows?

Since the letter is dated Sep 30th and says RCI is shut off, I think others are getting the letter when the mail backlog clears.

Right on Wendell.

The details differ but the same thing is going on with the old Fairmont Hot Springs time shares in BC, Canada. The whole mess wound-up in the courts there with the new owners winning the first round but loosing on appeal. The decision was on the law so the case is back to square one.

Remember Pelican was not that long ago. It closed at the last minute for 2 weeks. With no warning to the Leasee's.

SXM??? Wendell

Sure seems like not many have received this, it was sent via email. They certainly have my email address. I know that they have my phone number as well, and my address. I am sure they have most others as well, so I do not get the why on this.

As for his team of lawyers, this gets to opinions of what should be able to be done vs. who will fight against it.

As for the property, you can bet it is going to get nicer and nicer there, especially if they intend to run as a hotel. I do not see this Ray as a guy that wants to own something unless it is nice, something he can be proud of. Think about that statement, in the end that may be key.

I hope we are able to get some clarity this next week.
Cheers,
Todd

Sorry, it seems like there is some fairly scary clarity right now--the t/s 'owners' are going to take it in the tookus.

No offense taken Eric. Not a perfect analogy. But just making the point that sometimes properties have certain obligations that transfer with them even might not be profitable for future owners.

Yes, as a hotel you have to be competitive in all aspects so this is a big plus. Wonder what the daily room rates will be?

SXM??? Wendell

Things are different on the island. It's not like the US or Canada. If the timeshare was originally affiliated with a US or Canadian company like Diamond, Marriot, etc than maybe there could be some recourse. This doesn't sound like that's the case in this situation. Going to be interesting to see how this plays out.

I would think (in order of security of purchase) that units purchased that are "deeded" are more secure than "right to use" units and definitely more secure than "points" which are not attached to any specific unit.

I do still think "right to use" just cannot be erased by a new buyer but the legal backup of that concept is what should be questioned....

I have zero confidence in any points ownership being honored by a new buyer.

Guess that is the question? At this point we do not know that anwser. Does it sound really really bad, yes. But at this point I do not know, nor do any of the timeshare owners know. Some evidenly have gotten emails and others have not. Is it that the ones that bought "after" the bank took over are effeted or is it everybody.

Not sure of the anwser as of now. Not downplaying it whatsoever, but we simply do not know what is what at this point. Will next week shed some lite on the situation.... hopefully so.

If everybody had gotten the email ....... then that says something, but because a whole lot have not gotten the email what does that say.. have no clue at this point.

Like I think there is more than what we may know right now. Hopefully for all concerned it will work out the best, hopefully that will be the case. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Yikes.gif" alt="" />

But it is better to be prepared for bad news than not. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" />

Not sticking up for the t/s industy at all, but just seems that there is a lot missing at this point.

I'm not sure that the points explanation is correct. As a points user and purchaser of week 44 (the week we purchased is stated in our lease agreement)we have the option to immediately tell RCI upon our return to the U.S that we will be staying in our unit for week 44 the following year (in this case lets say 2015). If we are not sure, RCI does not open up our unit to a points trade until 10 months out so in our case if we don't notify RCI by January 1st of 2015 that we intend to stay in our home base unit they can put our unit "in the pot" of units available. In our case, the unit is all three, deeded first under the sales contract, right to use under the lease agreement and a points unit under RCI. A separate fee is paid to RCI for the points each year so I'm not sure that points are really related to the ownership. But this being the only T/S that I own, I could be wrong.

...and don't you think that a letter of "annulment" of a persons' vacation ownership would be sent by some sort of certified mail rather than a simple email? Email out of SXM is really not that reliable...

I think there is more than we are seeing right now....something smells of skunk here

"Point" being (sorry) that RCI has dropped the resort so the points agreement would be null and void. They are out of the picture...

I do not understand how a unit can be "deeded" and be a "right to use" which is limited by x years....

Obviously if you have a deeded unit then you have a right to use it but there is a difference between a defined RTU ownership and a deeded one.

The points discussion is pertinent when the deeded or RTU agreement is changed to a points only ownership by agreement owner and resort (like SBR is trying to do)

I am saddened beyond belief but not surprised that this has happened.

We "owned" a one bedroom at Caravanserai for two weeks in March...

We received our letter this morning by email and it appears legit.

Is there any government agency which oversees the Timeshare industry on St. Maarten? If so, could someone post their phone# or email address so that the Caravanserai TS owners can contact them. I have the same agreement as DebNLena so it must be quite common. It states that the contract is valid for x amount of years, specific time of year and what unit that I would get. Also, gives the value of the points.

Ok, don't have the any idea about that. But anything is possible.

Could there email have gotten hacked?? Not sure that I beleve that, but then do not know either.

Just know that all kinds of emails comes in to my various email accounts that are not legit also. But that is not saying that this is legit, just don't know??

One thing I am sure of, is that there is more to follow! <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Grin.gif" alt="" />

And unfortunately the spammers will follow, so be careful out there. Even if it mean checking the header informaton, etc! And NEVER open up a zip file as attachment! <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/duh.gif" alt="" /> Bad things are there! <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Yikes.gif" alt="" />

Just got my letter today - as I read this; I paid over $13,000 back in 2006 for what is now use of a hotel room if and when it's available but I must pay $800.00 a year if I want to use the hotel and I have no use of any other RCI property for trade. I'd be happy to sell my timeshare back to them for what I paid for it but to get this letter is unacceptable to me.

Directed to no one in particular. But if a timeshare goes out of business/bankrupt/etc aren't owners basically out? I look at it like if I own stock in a company and it goes belly up. I'm out? That's how I have always looked at my "investment" at the Towers. If they fold tomorrow what recourse do I have? SXM government is not set up to protect timeshare interval owners. There is no guarantee they stay affiliated with RCI or II. The legalities of this should be very interesting.

You could try Ted Richardson, the Minister of Tourism, Economic Affairs, Traffic and Telecommunication at Ted.Richardson@sintmaartengov.org to start.

Kim, you are right on the money. A bankruptcy or closing of a business cancelled your RTU. Might be why the name change as it was a bank foreclosure sale to a new enterprise under a new ownership. Hence the RTU is done.

i kinda agree with Scuba on this one. Since the resort was purchased from the Bank.....and the Caravanserai was totally bust and millions in debt, legally i believe that the corporation does no longer exist, and the monies paid into it are probably long gone.(or in this case in Mr. Manek's personal off shore bank account somewhere) I don't beleive the new owners of the property have to live up to any type of agreement made by the previous owner UNLESS the individual units purchased are actually recorded in some land bank (ie a SXM registry of deeds), but I do not beleive that Timeshares in Saint Maarten get recorded into something like this. I bet that the new owners are trying to ''appease'' the current individual timeshare owners by offering them a weekly rate for a hotel room the ''special rate'' of whatever the maintenance fee would've been on one's individual unit. of course, it sounds like people that owned a higher floor, or a larger unit (ie 2-3 bedroom or penthouse) could be subject to paying higher room rates for a lower standard size hotel room. Honestly, I can't see how the government will be able to help in this case...they sure aren't going to miraculously give millions of dollars to ''tourists'' that got swindled over the years. It's going to take years and years for this new named venture to remove the stink of it' previous ownership. Seems like since its early inception this particular property has been doomed. Someone walked away with millions....and the new venture starts off ''clean''. SMH

Todd & others the way I read the loan agreement from the bank is that it pertains to the actual property on which they had their liens. That would mean that the buildings in whole could not be sold & that parcels of the land could not be sold. The court ruled in the banks favor about the sale of some parcels of the actual land to the casino & two others. The court voided those sales because Manek did not have the banks permission to sell off pieces of the property to which they held a lien on. I had followed the court case involving Manek & the bank & the sale of timeshares was never brought up. The loan was given for the building of additional units for timeshare & condos. Additionally there are people who have had timeshare there way before Scotia Bank got involved.

I think this is a ploy by the new owner to try to get people to give up their units so they can sell them over again. He way overpaid for the property & figured this is how he will make his money back.

Anyone who wants to put a group together to speak with an attorney I can recommend the firm & lawyer that has been handling our case at RP. We are whole owners as opposed to TS owners but the TS group at RP that lost the first time around has also now gone to our attorney. PM me if you would like the names & contact info. Todd when I get to the island I can take you to see if him if you would like but I think action is needed before then.

I know that our leases at Pelican & RP have a guarantee of continued use by the government of The Netherlands regardless of who owns the property but I do not know if the ones from Caravanserai have that in them.

Good luck to everyone who owns there & anything I can do to help I am there for you.....

<img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Thumbsup.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Thumbsup.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Clapping.gif" alt="" />

Yes, there are a whole lot of things going on here. You have the foreclosure, not sure there was actaully a bankruptcy. But the bank owned the property for sure at some point. You have the sale.... are/was there any conditions to that sale?? Probably not, but we do not know.

Are ther ramifications to the curretn t/s owners, that is a given. Are there reasons that the new owner will do anything, again who knows. Is there a difference between owners that bought before the foreclosure and those that bought after the foreclosure... no clue and don't think anybody has a clue at this point in time.

Was there actually a deed, was there actually .............. whatever. Seems that everybody is speculating and what I find is strange (but not unrealistic at all) is that anybody so far that bought before the "foreclosure" has not received anything. Has anybody that bought before the foreclose recieve anything?? So far from the responses so far, that does not appear to be the case, but maybe I have missed some??? Previous owners, have you as of NOW recieved an email or letter? Not that it makes any difference, but maybe it does?

That does not mean your investment is not "toast", just curious. What does that mean? Don't have a clue, but jumping to conclusions might be correct but they also maybe incorrect. This just broke on basically this weekend, correct??

This could easily be a really bad thing. But .... not going there. <img src="http://www.traveltalkonline.com/forums/images/graemlins/Yikes.gif" alt="" />

Yep. We have "owned" since pre-construction. Received the letter LAST Wednesday by email...

Thanks for the reply, at least now people know that "previous" owners (meaning before the bank ownership) are getting letters. Think you are the first to confirm that. Thanks for posting.

While you may have owned since pre-construction, are you still using the original room or did you "upgrade" to a unit in a new building?

Not knowing. Is there a possible difference and what would that be?

Just courious? Maybe there is a difference based on a simple date, have no clue? That is why I am asking.

Upgraded and purchased additional weeks...

Thank you Sharon.

I am hoping that we hear more this week, and that the TS owners are able to get organized in the fight. My stake in this is small, to the extent that financially the loss of the $675 for AMF's for my week 49 that they now want me to pay again to use the unit is basically it. I consider myself ahead based on what I put into the place. I will not be paying another $675 to stay there week 49.

My major stake in this place is all those that I care about that have a lot more invested. Starting with all those that lost their jobs, the businesses associated that depend on this for income and then all of you have a bunch of money into the place and deserve better. With this in mind I am here to support all of those people.

I hope that even though there is a limited time to deal with this, I hope that people will show some patience for this next week so we as a group can acquire more information.

Cheers,
Todd

Doesn't that mean that you cancelled the pre-constuction contracts and replaced them with new?
Is not Alegria stating that the new contracts are void? Does that mean the original contract is still in place, even though the building may not be there?
I'm not a lawyer and certainly am not skilled in SXM law, but am not liking what is happening one bit.

I purchased pre-construction and received the letter via email today. Have not been offered any kind of settlement or buy back ever of my unit. This is all around pretty unfortunate. I really hope they step up and do good by their owners in hopes of keeping us coming back in the future. As of right now this just leaves a bad taste.......

BobDot....amended original contracts to new building

I have no idea whether there is any record of or registry of deeds. I do remember quite clearly having a long conversation with Ray when we were buying about this unit being deeded. I was very surprised because my parents have owned t/s in 2 countries(Mexico & SXM) and florida but each t/s is for a specific term. Their Royal Islander La Plage timeshare is for 55 years. The T/S in Cancun was only for 30 years and they are currently waiting for a buyout offer from the resort as they are also converting the units into hotel space. The first t/s in Mexico for this group of resorts paid the owners 60% of their original investment. My parents were there this past February and went to a meeting & were told that they would get at least 60% but could get up to 75%.

I believe Ray explained that the deed was for 99 years because Caravanserai did not own the land, only the building and the lease on the land to the building owners renews every 99 years. We didn't put much thought into it because we knew we would be long gone, however, we did like the fact that we could transfer ownership to our children and that it wasn't structured like RI LaPlage. We would have bought either way but it certainly made the decision easier. My parents are in their late 70's and still have about 25 years left on their t/s agreement at Royal Islander, so if this whole thing goes bust, I am very lucky to still have a place for 2 weeks a year to go to, however we are obviously very disappointed in how this whole thing has been handled from the very beginning.

Looking at my paperwork, Endless Vacation, N.V. is acting on behalf of Caravanserai. Endless Vacation is also the name associated with RCI on its website. RCI has US connections, right? If RCI was driving these sales and using their reputation to give legitimacy to the Caravanseri sales, can't they have liability as well as Caravanserai? Seems like they all worked together here. And the bank was allowing them to utilize space in the Caravanseria to do this work while the property was in auction.

Our original agreement reads:"...shall terminate after the last day in 2020." That is followed by some language that we would be granted 1/52nd ownership rights for each week we have leased the apartment.