RCI Weeks Class Action Settlement Decision Required by Nov. 20, 2009

RCI recently distributed a postcard regarding the class action settlement for the RCI Weeks timeshare program. The text from that postcard is provided below.

You May be a Member of a Class Action Settlement Regarding RCI Weeks Timeshare Program and Entitled to Benefits

A Settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit that claims that RCI, LLC unlawfully rented or otherwise disposed of timeshare inventory deposited by members of the RCI Weeks Exchange Program. RCI denies and wrongdoing.

The Settlement affects anyone who was a member of the RCI Weeks Exchange Program at any time from January 1, 2000 through August 31, 2009. If the Settlement is approved, Settlement Class Members who submit Claim Forums may receive monetary, travel-related or program benefits. Claim Forms must be submitted to the Settlement Administrator by November 20, 2009. If you previously submitted a Claim Form, you do not need to submit a new Claim Form.

* If you wish to exclude yourself from the lawsuit and keep your right to sue RCI on your own, you must send a written request for exclusion to Davide Herman, P.C., P.O. Box 111, Morristown, NH 07963-0111 by November 20, 2009. If you do not exclude yourself , you will be bound by the Court's ruling in the case.

* If you do not exclude yourself , you can enter an appearance in Court through your own attorney at your own cost. You may also object to or comment on the Settlement. Objections and/or notices of appearance must be filed with the Clerk of the Court by November 20, 2009 and mailed to Class Counsel and counsel for the Defendant.

The Court will determine whether to approve the Settlement at a Fairness Hearing on November 30, 2009 at 2:30 p.m. at the United States District Court, 402 East State Street, Trenton, New Jersey 08608.

For Detailed Information and a Claim Form Visit: http://www.weeksprogramsettlement.com, call 1-866-7835876, or Write: Settlement Administrator, P.O. Box 1966, Faribault, MN 55021-6162. Questions may also be directed to Class Counsel by email at rcisettlement@njlawyer.com

In the interests of factual accuracy, the title of the original post above should have included the word PROPOSED.

Until and unless this PROPOSED class action settlement is approved by the Court, it is nothing more than a PROPOSAL under discussion.

Personally, I hope that Judge Sheridan rejects the PROPOSED settlement outright, since the proposal is a completely empty and meaningless farce in its current form, letting RCI "off the hook" in a way which is clearly just a pain--free joke to RCI. Just my opinion (...as already clearly expressed in great detail, in writing, in a multi-page submission to the Court).

Attorney Disclaimer Ordered by the United States District Court: I am an attorney who was admitted to represent some of the objectors in a class action pending in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Any statements by an attorney, including myself, should be considered to be the personal opinion of the attorney and are not approved by the Court. As such, my statements contained herein are not approved by the Court. More information is available at www.weeeksprogramsettlement.com, the Court-approved website.

Any statements by an attorney, including myself, should be considered to be the personal opinion and are not approved by the Court. As such, my statements contained herein are not approved by the Court. More information is available at www.weeeksprogramsettlement.com, the Court-approved website.

Summary of Settlement and Proposed Responses I am thoroughly familiar with the proposed Settlement because I am an attorney for some objectors in the RCI Weeks Class Action lawsuit. As an attorney that has an interest in this case, I have a legal duty to present a fair representation of the Settlement, thus I believe the length of this statement is required.

In summary, the Settlement provides benefits, but each has limitations such as: (1) your Week’s Trading Power (quality) is disclosed, BUT not Week’s Trading Powers (quality) you may exchange to compare them; (2) balancing of rental exchanges within three Trading Power (quality) Segments, BUT many more Segments should be required based on Member exchange standards; (3) numerous quantities involving the number of Weeks exchanged, BUT no data comparing the quality of exchanges between Member Weeks and RCI Weeks Rented quantified with Trading Power (quality) values; and (4) priority for Member Week exchanges over RCI Week rental exchanges made within 31 days of deposits more than a year in advance, or for pending searches, BUT Members who can not meet these requirements enable RCI to rent the Weeks if they are exchanged within only three Trading Power (quality) Segments. I feel the most relevant consideration is the balancing of exchanges of RCI Week rentals for Member Weeks within only three Trading Power (quality) Segments, and then WHY will RCI NOT disclose the difference in quality between the RCI Week rentals exchanged for Member Weeks? Basically, members who can not plan their vacations and/or deposit their Weeks a year in advance or do not happen to have an active search pending when a Member Week is deposited will probably lose that Member Week to RCI who will rent the Member Week.

RCI Class Weeks Members that subscribed with RCI at any time since January 1, 2000 who feel the terms above and further described below do not provide sufficient fairness and disclosures regarding Member’s Weeks exchanged to enable RCI to rent those Weeks should submit a LETTER objection with reasons and signature referencing "In re RCI, Civil Act. No. 06-cv-1222" by November 20, 2009 to the court address below. For further details and information about the Settlement go to http://www.weeksprogramsettlement.com/index.htm, and learn how to electronically file with RCI a Settlement claim form for $15-$100, etc., or how to make a stronger statement by opting-out, and/or read further.

Most Important Term in Settlement: “Trading Power [quality] Segments” The main goal of the RCI Weeks Settlement is to allegedly stop RCI from making unfair exchanges in RCI’s favor. Renting of Weeks by RCI and/or by Members can not be reasonably prohibited, thus the solution to the present lawsuit is to stop unfair exchanges from being made in RCI’s favor for the Weeks that members deposit with RCI. I have carefully analyzed the RCI Settlement and feel that Section 2 relative to “balancing” is the most relevant to achieving Fair exchanges for RCI members. I feel this section is misleadingly deceptive due to its indefinite terms, thus there is very little assurance that Weeks deposited by RCI and exchanged for Member Weeks will be done fairly. The Settlement is suppose to achieve this goal by requiring RCI to make exchanges of the Weeks that RCI deposits or “owns” so to speak (hereafter “RCI Weeks”) by “balancing” exchanges within “Trading Power [quality] Segments”.

Trading Power (quality) Segments in the Settlement have been overlooked by members since its definitions and explanations are very nebulous. For brevity and due to this section’s overbearing importance, I explain only this section from the Settlement in detail.

The Settlement requires RCI to only use “three” segments for RCI “owned” Weeks to be exchanged for Member Weeks. Three segments are less than the four segments or categories (Gold, Silver, Hospitality, and other) that resort’s Weeks are presently rated or segmented. In addition, these Member Weeks are further segmented into Red, Blue, White, and None, for a total of sixteen (16) different segments for Member exchanges.

In summary, RCI is required to only use 3 segments when exchanging their or RCI Weeks, but 16 segments or more can be used to exchange Members’ Weeks. Thus, exchanges between Members’ Weeks may be held to a higher threshold than exchanges between RCI Weeks and Members’ Weeks, and we have NO quality disclosures since this information is NOT provided in the Settlement. The present Settlement does NOT require RCI to identify the number of segments, the value ranges of the segments, or whether a Week’s Trading Power (quality) value will be provided as a numerical rating.

What Can Class Members Do? Based on the foregoing, it is my opinion that Members should object WITH REASONS to the settlement AND file a claim form, BOTH which require written submissions. If you would like to make a stronger statement to the court, you can forgive your right to claim a benefit and choose to opt-out of the Settlement which allows you and others to pursue independent settlements with RCI.

An objection OR opt-out LETTER referencing "In re RCI, Civil Act. No. 06-cv-1222" with signature should be postmarked by November 20, 2009 to:

Clerk of the Court, USDC DNJ 402 East State Street Trenton, NJ 08608

(I believe only one mailing is necessary based on stipulations agreed in court, etc.) A claim form can be submitted electronically to RCI by going to the RCI website at http://www.weeksprogramsettlement.com/index.htm or by US Mail to collect Settlement benefits worth $15 to $100, etc.(remember if you opt-out you can not file a claim form). In addition, any member that can attend the Fairness Hearing on November 30, 2009 at 2:30PM in Trenton, NJ should attend to show their opposition to the Settlement. I encourage you to have other RCI Weeks class members evaluate the Settlement and let their and your opinions be known to the court by either objecting or opting out. Many more RCI class Members’ opinions are needed by the court to possibly achieve better terms in a Settlement.

Additional Considerations to Understand the Settlement The relief provided consumers in class actions is usually cents on the dollar. However, satisfaction in such lawsuits is usually achieved since the deceptive and/or fraudulent conduct is eliminated, or at least curtailed. I would usually not publicly voice my opinion on a class action settlement I am involved, except that I feel the Settlement provides a very little undefined benefit to RCI members.

The Settlement does provide a member priority if they have started an ongoing search or search for a Week more than a year in advance. However, the best Weeks can be still taken away by RCI to rent immediately upon your deposit when the above two prerequisites are not met. Thus, if you can not begin a search before member deposits a Week and/or more than a year in advance, then RCI will not hold the Week until your travel plans are conceived, and RCI can rent the Week immediately while you plan your vacation! Basically, RCI knows the majority of Weeks are deposited by Members less than a year in advance and the chances of a search to be started before a Member happens to deposit their Week AND the search meets the Member's search are low. RCI knows the deposit and search patterns of their Members since that is what RCI tabulates and they know human nature. RCI can predict that the majority of Weeks deposited will not meet the two above requirements. RCI knows they can still take a majority the Member Weeks deposited for rentals under the present Settlement, as long as they are within three (3) undefined Trading Power (quality)Segements.

If you are not sure of the benefits provided by the Settlement you might ask yourself: (1) WHY is RCI not disclosing the Trading Power (quality) of the RCI Weeks and Member Weeks they exchange to be rented; and (2) WHY will RCI not disclose the Trading Power (quality) INDIVIDUALLY for each Week that a member can exchange their Week. The Settlement states RCI will disclose “quantity” or “number” of Weeks, but never the quantity of Trading Power(quality), or in other words the quality of Weeks exchanged. Some of the reasons for this are described below.

Explanations for RCI’s Reluctance to Disclose Further Information Regarding the Fairness of RCI’s Rental Weeks Exchanged Based on my study of the RCI case, I recognized RCI can take so-called “developer” Weeks as RCI advertises them and deposit these into the bank, exchange these Weeks for better Weeks, and then RCI can rent the better Weeks. Recognize I stated “so-called” above since RCI will not disclose what percentage of Weeks are from developers versus Weeks that are leftover or junk Weeks from resorts. RCI advertises developer Weeks since this characterization gives the Weeks the impression they are higher quality Weeks than the junk Weeks.

Also, RCI will not disclose the approximate number of Weeks RCI rents BEFORE the Settlement is approved. Resorts have leftover or junk Weeks from various sources such as foreclosure, non-owned, off-season, and unwanted Weeks which can be provided to RCI who can deposit them into the RCI bank. RCI can take these leftover Weeks and exchange them for better Weeks that RCI should know they can rent since they know the Trading Powers (quality) of all deposited Weeks.

In addition, the leftover Weeks do not have to pay or can not pay maintenance or exchange fees, and this is how RCI can rent exchanged Weeks for less than market and/or your cost! Incredulously, RCI can do even more with your Weeks when banked under the present Settlement. Specifically, I believe RCI can and does advertise the Week that you deposit for rent on its Website called Extra Vacations and when a renter is found, THEN RCI can exchange one of its leftover Weeks for the rental Week, and then rent the Week. RCI’s software can do all this automatically with computers to process, exchange, and rent the Week while you wait a few seconds for the rental approval! If RCI is not doing all the above, then RCI would simply provide and/or add up the difference in Trading Power (quality) values of all Weeks that RCI deposits, exchanges, and then rents.

More Detailed Summary of Settlement Terms The major benefits of the Settlement as they were briefed to the court are outlined below:

Disclosure of Trading Power (quality) (1) RCI will be required to disclose the Trading Power (quality) of a member’s deposited Week, in other words the relative value of a member’s Week compared to other vacation Weeks. However, RCI does not have to disclose the value as a number, thus RCI can chose a vague quantifier that is harder for members to compare between Weeks. In addition, the Trading Power (quality) of Weeks that a member’s deposited Week qualifies to be exchanged will be disclosed, but RCI does not have to disclose the Trading Power (quality)individually for each Week.

Balancing Quality of RCI Weeks with Members’ Week (2) The number of Weeks withdrawn by RCI, for example to rent, will be less annually than the number of Weeks deposited by RCI, but within at least three Trading Power (quality) Segments or ranges. In other words, within the three Trading Power (quality) ranges, the weeks withdrawn by RCI have to be in the same comparative Trading Power (quality) range of the weeks RCI deposits. For example, Weeks within a Trading Power (quality) Segment of a range from 2000 to 3000 enable RCI to rent a member Week with a 3000 value in exchange for a 2000 value deposited by RCI. RCI does not have to disclose the range of Trading Power (quality) values within each segment, the number of segments used, and value ranges used by RCI to rate Weeks.

General Exchange Statistics (3) RCI will disclose: (a) the total number of Weeks’ deposited by members and the total number of Weeks deposited and owned by RCI; (b) the number of exchanges made between Weeks’ members; and (c) the number of RCI Weeks rented exchanged for member Weeks. This information does not include the individual or overall comparative quality or fairness of exchanges based on assigned Trading Power (quality) values assigned to Weeks. The Trading Power (quality) exchange histories disclosed by RCI do not have to include information for exchanges between (a) members’ Weeks and other members’ Weeks, and/or (b) between members’ Weeks and RCI owned Weeks. The Settlement states “RCI will provide information to any Member regarding (a) Member Exchanges over the prior two years by region and subregion (if applicable), calendar month, average Trading Power [quality] of confirmed Exchanges and average historical supply”. The information provided does not include information individually by Week.

31 Day Priority for Member Exchanges (4) Weeks that are deposited more than one year in advance of the Week’s start date require that RCI wait 31 days after the Week is deposited before withdrawing a Week to enable timely member requests to be fulfilled. Week deposits made less than one year from their start date and that do not satisfy a member’s current search may be withdrawn immediately upon deposit by RCI for whatever purpose RCI chooses.

Pending Exchange Searches are Prioritized over RCI Owned Weeks Exchanges (5) All member Weeks deposited will be used to satisfy active exchange searches pending at the time of deposit. If there is not an active exchange search or a member has not planned their vacation yet when a member deposits a Week, RCI has the right to withdraw the Week immediately upon deposit.

Deposits Made Less Than a Year In Advance May Immediately be Exchanged with Other Exchange Systems (6) Weeks from other exchange systems could be used to enhance the quality of Weeks in the RCI bank, however there is potential for abuse. First, Weeks in other exchange systems can not be assigned a fair Trading Power (quality), thus RCI can use this process to skew Trading Power (quality) value for other Weeks to achieve the promised quality balance for RCI rental Weeks.

Week Deposits Not Exchanged Ninety (90) Days Before They Start May Be Rented (7) Weeks that have not been exchanged ninety (90) days before they start may be rented by RCI without requiring a comparative RCI Week deposit. Presently RCI rents weeks not exchanged forty five (45) days before the start date under their Last Call program. There is no reason to allow RCI to rent additional units, especially when these same Weeks may be desired by Members who have active searches but the Member does not have sufficient Trading Power (quality) to qualify for the exchange.

(Important note) RCI agrees to supply some of the above benefits for 2 years, thereafter RCI could terminate the benefits but this is unlikely. There are 5-6 additional privileges that you may benefit, but you MUST file a claim form. Above is only a summary of the major Settlement terms and there are limitations that apply, thus you must consult the 291 page Settlement if further details are desired. I feel am required to disclose that there are many more terms in the Settlement that benefit members beyond the ones briefly discussed above, and you should obtain your own legal opinion of the Settlement.

Background of Attorney Stephan Willett I provide an opinion on the RCI Class Action Settlement because in early, 2007 I began investigating the unfair exchanges RCI makes for members to file a related class action lawsuit that is now encompassed by this Settlement. Finally in September, 2009 I became an attorney for some of the objectors in this case which I had originally requested in April, 2009. I have investigated and filed plaintiff class action consumer lawsuits. I am a patent attorney that has worked extensively with Computer Networks. Based on my knowledge of software and the present capabilities of the Weeks’ exchange software used by RCI, I understand the RCI exchange process software.

I provide my email at stevefwillett@gmail.com to review comments from readers. Based on my time constraints I will not be able to respond to most questions, but I would like to provide posts to relevant and select questions to further explain important issues.

The above post by Stephan Willett contains several serious factual errors. It is being forwarded to Judge Sheridan for whatever action he deems appropriate.

My husband and I are very experienced long-time timeshare owner (not an attorney). We own 19 timeshares and have completed over 100 exchanges, traveling all over the U.S., Mexico, the Caribbean, and Europe. Mr. Willett doesn't even own a timeshare and as far as court records show, he represents only one client in this case.

Hubby and I have been actively involved in trying to obtain a better settlement. Shep Altshuler, publisher of Timesharing Today Magazine, my husband and I, and Susan Collins, an attorney from western New York State went to the Federal Court in Trenton, New Jersey on June 12, 2009 to testify as to why we believe the proposed settlement of the class action lawsuit against RCI is grossly unfair and inadequate.

We pointed out that most of the Weeks (not Points) owners did not see the legal notice buried on page 94 of Endless Vacations Magazine. The Judge agreed that members had not received adequate notice and ordered RCI to provide better notice by mailing postcards, and sending Email information to close to 2 Million members. This is why you have been receiving those postcards recently.

You may opt out of this lawsuit which will preserve your right to bring your own lawsuit. It's highly unlikely that opting out will bring any change..

Most of us have chosen to file an objection with the court. It can be as simple as one sentence stating that you object to the terms of the proposed settlement. Or you can write a whole lot more if you wish. Your letter must be signed and postmarked by November 20, 2009. The more objections the court receives, the more likely it is that the Judge wll refuse to accept the settlement. This could lead to more negotiations between the attorneys who brought the case (Plaintiffs) and RCI (the Defendant). Or the case may be sent to trial.

You may also fill out an application, choosing one of five specified benefits worth under $100. You can fill out the application on line or send it by mail. (However, anyone "opting out" of the case is not eligible to receive any of the five specified benefits). All others, whether you object or not, may request a benefit.

I have chosen to object to the settlement AND request a benefit, as have hundreds of other RCI members. Many more objection letters are piling into the court since the postcards came and let many members know, for the first time, that RCI has been rampantly removing weeks deposited in the spacebank and renting them to the general public. Here's instructions for how to do object. Send it directly to the court. There is no need to go through an attorney: http://www.weeksprogramsettlement.com/

To read an accurate, factual, understandable account of what this case is about and what has been happening, from n attorney/timeshare owner (9 weeks, dozens of exchanges) go to: http://tinyurl.com/yhbglhl

And for another excellent summary with FAQ http://tinyurl.com/yhfu6le

To read the actual terms of the proposed settlement (38 pages) go to: http://www.weeksprogramsettlement.com/pdf's/Settlement%20Agreement.pdf

:For a claim form go to: http://www.weeksprogramsettlement.com/pdf's/ClaimForm4.pdf

NOTE: When filling out the forms, if you own more than one timeshare week, you should fill in the info requested for any ONE week in your RCI Weeks account. The signature of only one of the owners is needed.

I too felt that there were a number of substantial factual inaccuracies in Mr. Willett's lengthy discourse above.

I have already filed my own multi page objection with the Court --- and personally, I won't be insulted by even *considering* acceptance of ANY of the worthless little trinkets being offered by RCI. However, I am genuinely fearful that far too many people can't even be bothered to study and fully comprehend just how useless the PROPOSED settlement truly is, and are instead just mindlessly lining up to collect their ONE worthless little trinket from RCI.

I have noticed (and very much appreciate) your efforts on this matter over on TUG and I applaud your tireless efforts. I just hope that, in the end, there will be enough articulate objectors in this matter that Judge Sheridan will ultimately HAVE to take note of the fact that the PROPOSED "settlement" is absolutely nothing but a one-sided FARCE which ultimately benefits ONLY RCI and, if adopted, allows RCI to just return to unacceptable "business as usual" in 24 months anyhow...

Are Canadians allowed to take part in this lawsuit? I also found out that RCI had negotiated with DND and offers our weeks to Government Employees (Canadian and American - Provincial, Federal and Municipal). Some weeks can be purchased 12 months in advance for as little as $329.00 per week US. When one checks the GETO site and then extra vacations, the same weeks appear. For RCI members, the cost is significantly more. I suppose that is because we pay membership dues and government employees do not have to. Anyway I have approached RCI with this inequity and only received their standard answers.

JM

I am concerned about the constant delays and most likely appeals that will drag this lawsuit and claim on for many years without any real value coming to RCI weeks membership that we must continue to pay our yearly dues to even partake in this settlement...I stopped depositing my 3 timeshares I own with RCI because even putting a search over a year in advance gave me nothing and I had to settle for timeshares I really did not want to exchange for just to get the usage of my deposit. I have since started using Red weeks, joined DAE( which you can search prior to deposit), Trading Places and Platinum Interchange...If more of us would use these free or minimal cost excahnge opportunities RCI wouldn't have the grasp of the industry they control now and might have to rethink their exchange and rental programs to be useful again to timeshare owners and not the monopoly they have now as owners of timeshares, exchanger and rental conglomerate they have become.

I have felt the same thing to be true of Interval International. Going on-line to find suitable exchanges has proven fruitless for me in the past and I have, in fact, let a couple of my banked weeks expire because of it. I have felt that better units for exchange might not show up on their web page as "available" but if one would call them and get a sympathetic rep and explain that you've been a good customer (even if it's not entirely true) one MIGHT find more possibilities. I have vowed not to bank weeks with II anymore if I can help it because it just puts them in the position of control and costs me money everytime I make a move. Fees to bank, fees to extend, and fees to exchange - if one can even get something suitable. If I'm going to forfeit a week I might as well take the risk and try to rent it myself rather than PAY A FEE to risk it with an exchange company.

To maintain my statements on these public web pages the court has placed a condition on my speech, thus I have chosen to remove some of them and not speak.

jane281 wrote:

Are Canadians allowed to take part in this lawsuit? I also found out that RCI had negotiated with DND and offers our weeks to Government Employees (Canadian and American - Provincial, Federal and Municipal). Some weeks can be purchased 12 months in advance for as little as $329.00 per week US. When one checks the GETO site and then extra vacations, the same weeks appear. For RCI members, the cost is significantly more. I suppose that is because we pay membership dues and government employees do not have to. Anyway I have approached RCI with this inequity and only received their standard answers.

JM

YES! Canadians and any Member of RCI regardless of where they reside or their citizenship can and should OBJECT to the proposed Settlement!

Hi, my name is Dave and I am a timeshare owner who resides in Virginia.

I am an avid member of the Timeshare Users Group (TUG), and I am also a member of Timeshare Forums.

Just recently I started posting here within Redweek.com.

I go by the same USERNAME: Goofyhobbie at all sites.

I have been working closely as a volunteer with fellow TUGgers on a project that many consider to be vitally important to all timeshare owners, and indeed the future of timesharing.

If you have been an RCI Weeks member at any time between January 1, 2000 and August 31, 2009 regardless of where you live and even if you are not a member now, you are automatically a member of a class action lawsuit pending in the U. S. Federal Court in Trenton, New Jersey.

RCI is accused of removing highly desirable weeks that were deposited by members into the Spacebank® , and RENTING them to the general public, often times at a price that is lower than what the owner pays in annual maintenance fees. RCI admits to doing this but claims it has the right to do so.

The attorneys who started the lawsuit in 2006 have made an agreement with RCI's attorneys to settle the case, but it must be approved by Judge Peter G. Sheridan at a "Fairness" Hearing to be held on November 30, 2009.

The proposed settlement is considered by many RCI Weeks members to be very unfair.

If you are a member of the class and do not like the proposed settlement, you are urged to send an objection letter to the Court.

It can be as simple as one sentence e.g. “I object to the terms of the proposed settlement.”

BUT, YOUR OBJECTION MUST BE Postmarked by November 20, 2009.

For information about how to file an objection go to:

http://rciclassactionlawsuit.com/TUG_member_information_and_instructions_for_RCI_class_action_settlement.html

Look for Informational Instruction # 6 to access a Form Letter to make your objection.

WE DO NOT AS YET HAVE WHAT I CONSIDER A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF OBJECTORS. PLEASE DO NOT LEAVE IT UP TO THE OTHER GUY TO OBJECT FOR YOU. IF YOU DO NOT OBJECT WE MAY END UP WITH THE CURRENT SETTLEMENT WHICH WOULD BE A TERRIBLE OUTCOME!!

If a large number of objection letters are received by the Court, we are hopeful that the Court will either force a trial or force the parties back to the negotiating table.

You have the right to separately file a claim for ONE of five special one-time benefits being offered in the Settlement. YOU CAN BOTH OBJECT and File a Claim for one of the benefits; but you must do both on or before November 20th.

You can file a claim on-line at:

http://www.weeksprogramsettlement.com/

Or

You can do so by mail no later than November 20, 2009.

You may apply for the special benefit whether or not you choose to file an objection to the settlement. It is not an either/or situation.

If you are no longer an RCI member, you may claim a $15 payment. Current members have other options.

For additional information about this lawsuit, there is a long discussion going on at the Timeshare Users Group Online Community Forum for Exchanging:

www.tugbbs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100107

The subject of the thread: UPDATE: RCI CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT - must read for all RCI members.

Please consider passing this information on to any other timeshare owners you know.

Many TUG members are printing out the Form Letter and instructions at http://rciclassactionlawsuit.com and offering it to people they know who are timeshare owners.

Best Regards

Dave

Attorney Disclaimer Ordered by the United States District Court: I am an attorney who was admitted to represent some of the objectors in a class action pending in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Any statements by an attorney, including myself, should be considered to be the personal opinion of the attorney and are not approved by the Court. As such, my statements contained herein are not approved by the Court. More information is available at www.weeksprogramsettlement.com, the Court-approved website.

Statement RCI individuals that would still like to object and missed their Postal deadline or are located outside America (the last one received was from England) you may fax your objection LETTER to (703)323-5658, or even email it stevefwillett@gmail.com until about 10:00PM EST this evening. Thank you RedWeek and its members! Do not forget you can still file a claim form online until 12:00PM, I assume EST but again that is a legality or technicality.