An interesting note in a deed

[dmunsil]

This deed was being sold as part of a bankruptcy proceeding, where the person had 8 different chunks of DVC points, mostly at Saratoga Springs. The bankruptcy attorney included an addendum that detailed the court approval to sell, including this paragraph:

I am also requesting approval of the sale without overbids as I have learned that these Disney timeshares are almost like shares of public stock. The prices of the timeshares depend on how many Disney "points" are offered. These points have a set market value, which Disney effectively controls by mandating the use of Fidelity Real Estate Agency and imposing a right of refusal to purchase these points. Once sellers notify Disney that they wish to sell their points, Disney directs them to Fidelity Real Estate Agency who finds buyers, presents the offer to Disney for its right of first refusal. Then upon rejection or lapse of time to exercise the right of first refusal, the points are allowed to be sold. For this service, Fidelity Real Estate Agency takes a commission of 10%. As I do not have a choice or control over this entity, I do not consider it to be a professional of the estate. Based on such an established market (while not as sophisticated as the NYSE or NASDAQ), I do not believe an overbid will be in the best interest of the estate. Anyone that wishes to purchase these points for more can simply contact Fidelity Real Estate Agency and purchase them for the same price without waiting on court approval.

Two things strike me:

1. This lawyer thought that Disney required the use of Fidelity. I assume he just misunderstood what he was told by Disney and didn't do any investigation. I wonder what Fidelity pays Disney to be their exclusive real estate referral?

2. He also thought that DVC points were like a stock that was only sold on one market (Fidelity), and thus the estate could just take the first offer and they'd get what the market was offering at that time.

Oh well. His misunderstanding led to 8 people getting screaming deals on Saratoga, and one pretty darn good deal on VGC.

This is why lowballing can work - the seller could be a clueless LA Bankruptcy attorney with no real interest in getting the best deal for the client.

 

[BestDadEver]

This deed was being sold as part of a bankruptcy proceeding, where the person had 8 different chunks of DVC points, mostly at Saratoga Springs. The bankruptcy attorney included an addendum that detailed the court approval to sell, including this paragraph:



Two things strike me:

1. This lawyer thought that Disney required the use of Fidelity. I assume he just misunderstood what he was told by Disney and didn't do any investigation. I wonder what Fidelity pays Disney to be their exclusive real estate referral?

2. He also thought that DVC points were like a stock that was only sold on one market (Fidelity), and thus the estate could just take the first offer and they'd get what the market was offering at that time.

Oh well. His misunderstanding led to 8 people getting screaming deals on Saratoga, and one pretty darn good deal on VGC.

This is why lowballing can work - the seller could be a clueless LA Bankruptcy attorney with no real interest in getting the best deal for the client.

Sounds like the lawyer manipulated the situation the way he want . Without details it's hard to tell that's not what he was trying to do .

He either has no knowledge of the situation or spinning it a way to confuse someone with no knowledge of DVC .

 

[ELMC]

Oh well. His misunderstanding led to 8 people getting screaming deals on Saratoga, and one pretty darn good deal on VGC.

This is why lowballing can work - the seller could be a clueless LA Bankruptcy attorney with no real interest in getting the best deal for the client.

You left out the best part. What were the deals?

 

[dmunsil]

You left out the best part. What were the deals?

$45/point for SSR, $98 for VGC.

You can see two of the SSR deals in my SSR post.

 

[ptlohmysoul]

This deed was being sold as part of a bankruptcy proceeding, where the person had 8 different chunks of DVC points, mostly at Saratoga Springs. The bankruptcy attorney included an addendum that detailed the court approval to sell, including this paragraph:



Two things strike me:

1. This lawyer thought that Disney required the use of Fidelity. I assume he just misunderstood what he was told by Disney and didn't do any investigation. I wonder what Fidelity pays Disney to be their exclusive real estate referral?

2. He also thought that DVC points were like a stock that was only sold on one market (Fidelity), and thus the estate could just take the first offer and they'd get what the market was offering at that time.

Oh well. His misunderstanding led to 8 people getting screaming deals on Saratoga, and one pretty darn good deal on VGC.

This is why lowballing can work - the seller could be a clueless LA Bankruptcy attorney with no real interest in getting the best deal for the client.

Where's the banging my head against the wall icon? I missed out!

 

[Dean]

This deed was being sold as part of a bankruptcy proceeding, where the person had 8 different chunks of DVC points, mostly at Saratoga Springs. The bankruptcy attorney included an addendum that detailed the court approval to sell, including this paragraph:



Two things strike me:

1. This lawyer thought that Disney required the use of Fidelity. I assume he just misunderstood what he was told by Disney and didn't do any investigation. I wonder what Fidelity pays Disney to be their exclusive real estate referral?

2. He also thought that DVC points were like a stock that was only sold on one market (Fidelity), and thus the estate could just take the first offer and they'd get what the market was offering at that time.

Oh well. His misunderstanding led to 8 people getting screaming deals on Saratoga, and one pretty darn good deal on VGC.

This is why lowballing can work - the seller could be a clueless LA Bankruptcy attorney with no real interest in getting the best deal for the client.

I wouldn't want to use that attorney. Either they were seriously ill informed and ignorant or trying to direct the sale to a specific entity (or both) it doesn't make any sense to include the wording in the deed.