Is anyone finding the buying process frustrating?

[Herding_Cats]

I keep running into Sellers and brokers unwilling to come down on prices at all. They seem to completely ignore the fact that the market isn’t doing what they want it to do and won’t accept any currently reasonable offer.

Anyone else experiencing this?

yes. and more recently, find a contract where they countered with a reasonable number, and then 5min after getting the "we are drawing up contracts" email, getting another email from the broker saying that the "other" seller doesn't agree with the price and here's yet another (higher) counter offer.

 

[tom1944]

I just took a break from doing some bookkeeping for a client so I will take some time to review a few of the Riviera contracts to look into the documents.

 

[JPKanks]

I could spend hours on the county search page.

BLT from January 31 to February 13 I took a sample of 5 deeds as follows:

POINTS/PRICE PER POINT
150/$136
220/$153
35/$180
100/$166
300/$161

BLT sellers seem to be correct in holding fairly firm to their price.



SSR similar time period as above
250/$102
160/$99
150/$117
150/$115
160/$115

There were several Saratoga contracts taken back by Disney, but they all looked to be subject to the foreclosure process.

Someone also purchased a 700-point Saratoga contract directly from Disney at $205 per point.

These contracts were most likely agreed to back about 45-75 days prior.

Forgive my ignorance, but where do you see the purchase price? I only see the points. Thanks!

 

[RoseGold]

As I said, there can be unavoidable financial hardships. If someone purchases a product that they can still afford, but find themselves upside down, then you continue to pay until 1. The market improves, or 2. You gain back equity. To simply allow foreclosure because you don’t want the product anymore and can’t sell it is ridiculous.

The top cause of bankruptcy in the US is medical bills. Bankruptcy would absolutely force you to let Disney foreclose an underwater contract, it wouldn't be a choice.

I don't think it's immoral to let the finance company do what they agreed to do, which is foreclose. They made out fine, as did Disney. It's the buyer who lost. There are a lot of reasons you might pay or delay or whatever to avoid foreclosing, but foreclosure is an option that would make sense in a lot of scenarios.

I'm interested if those deeds are DVC foreclosing for dues, which would be a totally different scenario than the finance companies. I wonder if they also have deeds showing foreclosure? Getting foreclosed for dues would be so sad.

 

[tom1944]

Forgive my ignorance, but where do you see the purchase price? I only see the points. Thanks!

Divide the deed tax by .007

Some contracts list the sales price but not all

 

[tom1944]

I checked one foreclosure. The contract was signed in January 2020. It was a120 points for $22,600.
That deed was recorded March 2020.

The lienholder was Palm Financial Service. I believe they are a Disney company

By October 2022 they were advertising that the foreclosure process was starting.

The foreclosure was recorded January 23, 2023.

Since January 2023 there were 237 mortgages recorded on Riviera sales.

All 5 contracts going back to Disney in February 2023 were foreclosures.

https://bisprofiles.com/fl/palm-financial-services-s13768

 

[DonMacGregor]

The top cause of bankruptcy in the US is medical bills. Bankruptcy would absolutely force you to let Disney foreclose an underwater contract, it wouldn't be a choice.

I don't think it's immoral to let the finance company do what they agreed to do, which is foreclose. They made out fine, as did Disney. It's the buyer who lost. There are a lot of reasons you might pay or delay or whatever to avoid foreclosing, but foreclosure is an option that would make sense in a lot of scenarios.

I'm interested if those deeds are DVC foreclosing for dues, which would be a totally different scenario than the finance companies. I wonder if they also have deeds showing foreclosure? Getting foreclosed for dues would be so sad.

Don't twist it around. It's too much work and it's not selling. Your very clear point was that the restrictions DVC placed on Riviera resale contracts has driven the price down to the point that those who financed those points are now underwater and are simply walking away and allowing Disney to foreclose.

This has absolutely zero to do with medical bills (unless there is a propensity for Riviera owners to have statistically poorer health as "a lot of the foreclosures seem to be at Riviera"), and everything to do with an attempt to correlate foreclosures at Riviera with the notion that Disney is forcing people to be foreclosed on because they deliberately drove the resale market down with restrictions.

I do enjoy the notion that you're "letting" the finance company foreclose though. I'm sure many are happy that they've been given permission to get back that which you have stopped paying for.

 

[RoseGold]

I do enjoy the notion that you're "letting" the finance company foreclose though. I'm sure many are happy that they've been given permission to get back that which you have stopped paying for.

Yes, this is a known thing in all kinds of real estate, in bankruptcy and in general financial planning. DVC is not special in that regard.

I'm using RIV because resale is lower than purchase price for almost everyone, like that poor example at $188/point, and because Tom said the foreclosures are mostly RIV right now. The math would currently work for a lot more direct purchases right now, I suppose, but that isn't historically true for DVC.

And I'm not sure what the point of the resale restriction is if not to restrict resale. That's the point.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Yes, this is a known thing in all kinds of real estate, in bankruptcy and in general financial planning. DVC is not special in that regard.

Yes, we're all aware of foreclosure. My point being that you aren't "letting" the finance company to do anything. It is their contractual right to do so. To use the word "let" suggests that the borrower is doing the financer some sort of favor by giving them permission to take back the asset.

"And I'm not sure what the point of the resale restriction is if not to restrict resale. That's the point." Thanks for clearing that up too.

 

[kilik64]

I checked one foreclosure. The contract was signed in January 2020. It was a120 points for $22,600.
That deed was recorded March 2020.

The lienholder was Palm Financial Service. I believe they are a Disney company

By October 2022 they were advertising that the foreclosure process was starting.

The foreclosure was recorded January 23, 2023.

Since January 2023 there were 237 mortgages recorded on Riviera sales.

All 5 contracts going back to Disney in February 2023 were foreclosures.

https://bisprofiles.com/fl/palm-financial-services-s13768

Yea Disney owns palm financial. Pretty much every foreclosure should be them as the lienholder if there is one on any direct contract thats getting foreclosed on for not paying the note.

Not to give you another rabbit hole, but you can bid yourself on foreclosures and it bypasses the ROFR process as DVD has to bid to buy it back and them not winning is basically ROFR.

 

[tom1944]

Yea Disney owns palm financial. Pretty much every foreclosure should be them as the lienholder if there is one on any direct contract thats getting foreclosed on for not paying the note.

Not to give you another rabbit hole, but you can bid yourself on foreclosures and it bypasses the ROFR process as DVD has to bid to buy it back and them not winning is basically ROFR.

I worked for a government agency that filed tax liens and I saw too many examples of people deciding to purchase foreclosures and end up not getting clear title. I will leave it to the professionals that do it for their livelihood to buy DVC foreclosures.

 

[Minniesgal]

Sellers won’t come down unless they have to sell. I think the market will stagnate soon as no one wants to sell at lower prices and will just wait it out

 

[DonMacGregor]

Sellers won’t come down unless they have to sell. I think the market will stagnate soon as no one wants to sell at lower prices and will just wait it out

I think the market will weed out those who "need" to sell, and those looking to try and make a quick buck before the market "bottoms". The remaining sellers who simply don't want their contract anymore will definitely just wait it out.

 

[tom1944]

I think the market will weed out those who "need" to sell, and those looking to try and make a quick buck before the market "bottoms". The remaining sellers who simply don't want their contract anymore will definitely just wait it out.

If you are annoyed by Disney and you purchased your contracts before the prices spiked on the high side, you may still be willing to sell it at these lower prices.

Are those members in the "need" to sell category?

 

[DonMacGregor]

If you are annoyed by Disney and you purchased your contracts before the prices spiked on the high side, you may still be willing to sell it at these lower prices.

Are those members in the "need" to sell category?

Always room to add in the whiney ones.

 

[kilik64]

Always room to add in the whiney ones.

I don’t think those ever actually sell….

 

[DonMacGregor]

I don’t think those ever actually sell….

They'd have to buy another contract to get their complainer street cred back.

 

[Chili327]

We’re talking about foreclosures. That has nothing to do with how DVC operates, and everything to do with people not paying for something they purchase, either due to unforeseen financial hardships, or simply buying something they shouldn’t have in the first place.

Fully understand the foreclosures aspect, I just meant it as an overall with the restrictions making DVC feel more and more "timeshare-y".

 

[Jlo85]

Yes, we're all aware of foreclosure. My point being that you aren't "letting" the finance company to do anything. It is their contractual right to do so. To use the word "let" suggests that the borrower is doing the financer some sort of favor by giving them permission to take back the asset.

Simply because it's contractual, doesn't mean it isn't predatory. Timeshares are predatory, and DVC is just another example.

And now that Disney uses arbitration to handle foreclosures, circumventing the courts, they literally are 'letting' Disney take back the contract. Because otherwise Disney lawyers will threaten to bankrupt them. Again, it's all predatory.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Simply because it's contractual, doesn't mean it isn't predatory. Timeshares are predatory, and DVC is just another example.

And now that Disney uses arbitration to handle foreclosures, circumventing the courts, they literally are 'letting' Disney take back the contract. Because otherwise Disney lawyers will threaten to bankrupt them. Again, it's all predatory.

Man, I’m so glad I don’t live in victim land. “Just because we spell it out in the contract we asked you to read and understand before you sign, doesn’t mean we won’t hold you to that contract”.

They’re not leasing you critical home health care equipment, they’re selling you a timeshare that under absolutely no circumstance do you need.

And, as an aside, many national home builders also have mandatory arb clauses in their sales contracts. So, better get the pitchforks out for Pulte/Center, DR Horton, KB Home et al while you’re at it.