Not a good day

[carolina_yankee]

You don't have to produce a deed because in many cases people still have loans on the points therefor they do not have a deed yet.

At least that is my guess as to why it doesn't have to be produced

I have a loan and part of the paperwork I received was a notarized copy of the deed recorded in Orange County stamped with the Comprtoller's stamp. This should be something every member has regardless of loan status.

Also, the purchase agreement states clearly the point value and the percentage interest. These are two documents every owner should have on hand and be able to produce as verification of the size and legitimacy of the contract they are trying to sell.

Given Jason's explanation of the due diligence TTS did, I think it's obvious this was a DVC mistake, not a broker mistake.

When a broker gets a points activity statement directly from DVC -- which shows not only the size of the contract, but also all points usage, status, etc -- I don't know what more anyone could reasonably expect. That is a LOT more information than they would get from the Orange County site, and it protects the buyer much more because it verifies banked and borrowed points, etc, etc.

Unfortunately, DVC was wrong. Mistakes do occur.

Indeed they do, and I'm not blaming the broker for this mistake, but there are two active threads on this board indicating problems with actual point availability or contract size through resale brokers. It would seem that in this instance, if the Broker had asked for the deed copy, investigated the Orange County records, or asked for a copy of the Purchase Agreement, the problem would have never come up.

So, clearly mistakes to happen and they are happening with annoying frequency right now, which indicates that policies and procedures might need to be revised all the way around to increase confidence in information conveyed. The broker has a role to play in that.

Given these two threads, if I were a purchaser looking for a resale contract, I would be reluctant to put down a deposit without knowing the broker has seen more than a computer printout from Disney . . .

Dirk

 

[Delaware Mike]

So, clearly mistakes to happen and they are happening with annoying frequency right now, which indicates that policies and procedures might need to be revised all the way around to increase confidence in information conveyed. The broker has a role to play in that.

Given these two threads, if I were a purchaser looking for a resale contract, I would be reluctant to put down a deposit without knowing the broker has seen more than a computer printout from Disney . . .

Dirk

...what he said. This is the due diligence to which I referred. The resales agency has a fiduciary duty to both seller and buyer when engaged in Florida timeshare resales. In this situation, I don't think either were served.

Given all the known problems with Disney's point accounting lately, a little more than simply relying upon Disney's computer printout was in order. Afterall, isn't this the same computer system (from which the printout would be obtained) causing point glitches?

Acting primarily for the benefit of others, in my opinion, takes a little more than looking at a printout.

 

[castleri]

Is it at all possible that the seller had a 150 point contract and a 50 point add on and throught it was all one when put up for sale but when the contract was sent to Disney it did not have both listed so only the 150 point one showed up? A long shot but you never know if you don't ask.

 

[jarestel]

Sounds like the seller noticed 50 extra points in the account and decided this would be an excellent time to sell. TTS & the OP were evidently victims of a less than truthful seller.

 

[deedeetoo]

Sounds like the seller noticed 50 extra points in the account and decided this would be an excellent time to sell. TTS & the OP were evidently victims of a less than truthful seller.

I agree with this. If the seller had a 150 pt contract, why would he have even attempted to see 200 pts unless he knew the Disney system was showing it incorrectly. He must have noticed the mistake and decided to take advantage of it.

 

[Slakk]

I sold a contract thru TTS and because of a DVC screw up (we have multiple contracts) our closing is delayed because the printout shows our June trip uses the SSR points we are selling (which is not the case). While frustrating for us as the seller, I commend TTS' committment to have transactions fair for all parties.

It sucks when people try to bend the rules but the blame lies on the head of a bad seed seller and for every one bad seed their are literally HUNDREDS of sellers like me who try to be fair.

 

[ssdelaney]

We made it. I just found out today that our second contract with TTS went through and Disney waived their ROFR. I am so excited.
Sheryl

 

[JudyS]

Glad it worked out!

And remember, even if the first contract had been as described, Disney might have exercised ROFR on it. So, you might have lost that deal anyway -- it's a risk you have to take when buying DVC resale, unfortunately.

 

[NJOYURLIFE]

Glad to hear your second contract went through. I couldn't believe what I was reading here. It was obvious that the original seller on the first contract was trying to get away with something because why would they say 200 when it was actually 150.

Glad everything worked out for you in the end.

 

[disneynutt1225]

You don't have to produce a deed because in many cases people still have loans on the points therefor they do not have a deed yet.

At least that is my guess as to why it doesn't have to be produced

I have loans on both of my contracts and I have both deeds.

Glad to see it worked out for the OP - Welcome Home!