Catastrophic Insurance Coverage Required by State ls Lowered by New Florida State Law

[TiggerFreak]

Looks like DVC/DVD, Marriot and other members of ARDA sucessfully lobbied to have the state of Florida remove the requirement that insurance must cover replacement if a development is destroyed by say a huricane.

Funny thing is that I asked about this very issue during our sales presentation in 2000 and was lead to believe we as members are covered.
Time to break out the ol-Pile-O-Documents.
Betcha it says something like Insurance as required by current law.

Here is a link to an Orlando Sentinal article:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/custom/tourism/orl-timeshare3107aug31,0,1623793.story

 

[JimC]

I have some sympathy on the insurance issue. The premiums are escalating rapidly and carriers are leaving or are reducing their exposure to the market. It could make owning beach front property prohibitively expensive.

On the other issues -- this is why I do not support ARDA -- it represents the developer's interests to the detriment of the owner (IMO).

 

[snappy]

So this means our management fees will decrease, right???

 

[Mike©]

So this means our management fees will decrease, right???

You bet !

 

[JimC]

I doubt that Disney is interested in a major change to its risk management position. I do not know how they manage risks such as this, but suspect they have a corporate approach to this issue.

 

[DebbieB]

I think the key point is they are no longer required to cover "replacement cost" but rather "adequate" limits. I work in insurance and my guess is this gives them the option to insure the actual cash value of the resort rather than replacement cost. The ACV would be a lower limit. In the case of a total loss, they could just distribute the ACV payment rather than actually reconstructing the resort. Again, just my guess.

When I bought in 1999, I was confused by the catastrophic loss clause in the contract. I don't have the contract handy but I think it basiscally said members would be out of the DVC system after a total loss. I questioned my guide on it and he said "don't worry, you could use your points elsewhere". Since the chance of a total loss at BWV is very small, I just let it go.

 

[CarolMN]

...(snip)....When I bought in 1999, I was confused by the catastrophic loss clause in the contract. I don't have the contract handy but I think it basically said members would be out of the DVC system after a total loss. I questioned my guide on it and he said "don't worry, you could use your points elsewhere". Since the chance of a total loss at BWV is very small, I just let it go.

I would have let it go, too, but I think the guide's response comes under the "I'll say anything to get you to buy" category.

It can't be right - allowing points from a destroyed resort to be used elsewhere would throw the whole system out of balance and probably isn't even legal. But I'm sure you already knew that or you wouldn't have asked, LOL.

 

[DebbieB]

I would have let it go, too, but I think the guide's response comes under the "I'll say anything to get you to buy" category.

It can't be right - allowing points from a destroyed resort to be used elsewhere would throw the whole system out of balance and probably isn't even legal. But I'm sure you already knew that or you wouldn't have asked, LOL.

I knew he was bs'ing me, I think it threw him off that someone even read that deep into the contract!