Update on Lawsuit against RCI

I just joined this site and I am totally impressed. RCI...don't get me started Ken. Ever since they were sold to Cendant years ago they have been pulling insider rentals throughout their network. It's common knowledge what they were up to and I'm sure yourself like many others would love to see them get nailed but good. I also belong to Interval International and in my opinion it's like night and day regarding service, quality and reputation. RCI...maybe it should stand for "Reprehensible Corporate Ideology!!!"

I thought RCI perhaps stood for "Rents Condos Instead", but you may also be correct. I don't actually use RCI (or II, for that matter) and I have no dog in the fight at all. My own interest in the matter is solely from an objective interest in the associated legal issues and proceedings...

Does anyone know if it is likely in this type of case that the judge will require the company to change it's practices, or will the judge simply award damages to those included in the class action lawsuit? It seems to me that if this class action lawsuit is successful, others would be as well, unless the judge requires RCI to change it's practices or for some reason limits future potential damages that may be incurred by the company. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems silly if the latter would be the case, since nothing substantive would have been accomplished by the suit. Isn't the point of "the rule of law" in part to prevent future mischief. I'm just wondering if anyone else is more knowledgeable.

andrec20 asks: >>Does anyone know if it is likely in this type of case that the judge will require the company to change it's practices, or will the judge simply award damages to those included in the class action lawsuit?<< ===============================================

A very astute question; one to which no truthful person can possibly claim to know the answer. This is a somewhat unique and complex bit of litigation. It would be foolhardy to make groundless predictions on the outcome; there is really not much in the way of "this type of case" (your words) on which to make a direct comparison. That caveat clearly stated....

1. There could be an agreed settlement. An agreed settlement could constitute just about anything from worthless to wonderful from the current and future standpoint of RCI members.

2. If there is ultimately no agreed settlement, there is simply no predicting what the court will decide.

3. "Injunctive relief" is what would constitute a "holy grail" win for the plaintiffs, particularly if such injunctive relief overtly and specifically forces RCI into permanently different and permanently corrective measures and practices. Mere compensatory damages for past wrongs (if so determined) alone would be an almost insignificant outcome if not accompanied by injunctive relief.

The whole affair is (to me) a truly fascinating matter, but its final outcome is really anyone's guess --- lawyer or not. One thing seems very clear to those who profess to be close to the plaintiff attorneys in this matter, however --- the plaintiffs mean business and seek to achieve genuine REFORM of RCI practices, not just an empty, meaningless "paper victory" in court. We shall see...

HAs anybody noticed a change at all in RCI's business practices during this lawsuit? Often when things of this nature go to court, the company in question won't admit any wrong-doing but will change things for both public opinion and customer relations. "We didn't do anything wrong, but come join us to the new and improved........." I don't belong to RCI myself, but II instead, gripe with them these days is that they want to be all things to all people...travel agent, magazine subscriptions, finacial services, apparel??? Seems they got their hands into everything, just wish they stick to what they're supposed to do.

daves250 asks: >> Has anybody noticed a change at all in RCI's business practices during this lawsuit? << =================================================

Absolutely. Just for starters:

1. SINCE the lawsuit was filed, RCI has actually acquired interests in SnapTravel and LeisureLink --- two separate entities directly involved in the RENTAL (not exchange) of timeshare weeks. In both instances, RCI trumpeted these acquisitions with actively distributed press releases. To some, it seemed almost like RCI was openly "thumbing their nose" at the lawsuit.

2. RCI "Points Partners" benefits (e.g., credit of RCI Points toward airline tickets, etc.) have been significantly reduced in dollar value (although, to be fair, this particular "change" really has nothing to do with the issue of depositing / exchanging weeks, the issue which is the actual focus of the lawsuit).

3. RCI membership rates AND exchange fees have BOTH undergone cost INCREASES since the Murillo vs. RCI lawsuit was filed back in April, 2006.

4. Unit / weeks reported by RCI as "not available" to would-be RCI "exchangers" who requested them have nonetheless been reported (by those very same disappointed prospective exchangers) as being discovered openly advertised for direct RENTAL from RCI through "RCI Extra Vacations".

I don't even use RCI and yet I've become aware of AT LEAST these above specified "changes", just by reading, listening and watching. Active RCI members may very well know of other such "changes".

In short, if you're looking for ANY evidence of ANY conciliatory behavior or positive public relations efforts by RCI since the lawsuit was filed against them in April, 2006, then I submit that you may have to keep looking...

We're recent timeshare owners, and I'm confused about the availability (to us) of other exchange programs such as II. Our contract states,

"Developer shall pay the enrollment fee in a worldwide vacation ownership exchange program, currently offered through Resorts Condominium International, LLC ("RCI"), which will allow Owner to exchange the Accomodation for accomodations at other resorts that are affiliated with the exchange company. Owner shall be responsible for all other dues, fees or expenses associated with the external vacation ownership exchange program beyond this initial enrollment fee."

The title of the contract is "Timeshare Name Vacation Ownership Agreement (RCI Points Inclusive)"

Does this mean we can only exchange our timeshare through RCI? Or can we work with a different exchange program in the future?

andrec20 asks in part: >> Does this mean we can only exchange our timeshare through RCI? Or can we work with a different exchange program in the future?<< ==================================================

The short answer is that your RESORT decides whether to be affiliated with Interval InternationaI, or with RCI ---or with both simultaneously. If the resort is affiliated with only one of the two, then you simply do NOT have the option to exchange with the other.

However, aside from these "big two" (and regardless of the affiliation of your resort with one or the other or both of them) you can still choose to exchange through RedWeek, Dial an Exchange and possibly a few others, depending on what you own. Outfits like Trading Places International and/or San Francisco Exchange (more often referred to simply as "SFX") are pretty selective about resorts.

Ok, thanks for the info.

Although not yet approved by the U.S. District Court, details of a proposed settlement agreement in Murillo vs. RCI are now available:

In terms of "injunctive relief" mandating substantive, meaningful, permanent changes in RCI's practices, it's certainly a matter of opinion whether this proposed agreement actually achieves any such thing. Personally, I am thoroughly unimpressed, since after review it seems to me that RCI is only VERY slightly constrained from just renting out the "best of the best" deposits, instead of offering those prime weeks ONLY to RCI members for exchange purposes. Any restriction on RCI "rentals" is very tiny indeed and nearly meaningless, in my opinion.

The agreement is predictably lengthy and, to those who sought real "punishment" to RCI for its' past practices, probably very disappointing. You can find the entire proposed settlement agreement on other Internet sites if you are interested in reading legal documents, but following are key highlights (not necessarily listed in an order corresponding to the order within the proposed agreement):

1. RCI agreees (for the first time) to a "disclosure of trading power" --- although WITHOUT actually revealing the internal methods by which that trading power is determined in the first place. Many will regard this change as progress, since RCI has always completely cloaked "trading power" in total darkness and mystery. Historically, exchanging through RCI could perhaps be best described as "Deposit first, then hope". Once (if?) the "change" is implemented, an owner will be able to determine trading power BEFORE depositing with RCI (but only for OWNED weeks; members won't be able to just "inquire at will" about the trading power of weeks which they don't actually own in the first place --- and non-members won't be able to make any trading power inquiries at all). Some will likely note that this particular change really constitutes nothing more than RCI finally offering a "search first" option --- an option which has already long been in place by competitor exchange company Interval International. It should be noted here as a relevant aside that RedWeek has also offered a "search first" capability since the RedWeek exchange program first began.

2. RCI agrees to achieve a "balance" between its rental and exchange inventory. RCI will apparently be allowed and able to get inventory from many sources in order to achieve this alleged "balance". Upon review of the draft agreement, however, I personally found this notion of "balance" to be very poorly defined and extremely difficult for RCI members to ever successfully monitor or verify --- but that's just my personal opinion. I'm "facts and proof" oriented and I always have been, so I'm not a big fan of performance criteria which can't be readily quantified, easily verified and routinely monitored. Also, at least as I read it, this "balance" seems to be achievable by RCI acquiring comparable "quantity" (i.e., numbers) of weeks for the exchange inventory, without any actual consideration of "quality" of those weeks. In other words, it seems to me that there could very well be 1000 undesirable "dog" weeks in the RCI exchange inventory, and 1000 highly desirable "prime" weeks in the rental inventory --- and yet that would somehow be "balanced" under this settlement agreement. That arrangement is NOT in any way, shape or form "balanced", in my view. Would YOU rather have 1000 clay bricks or 1000 gold bars?

3. Class action RCI members will be able to pick ONE of five different offered "benefits". To me, these "benefits" seem to be trivial little "trinket" items of very little actual value (or any real cost to RCI). Specifically, these "benefits" choices include choosing ONE item among a $100 cruise discount certificate, a free night's rental (...but only available with a night's PAID rental), a membership renewal credit, or a prorated refund of membership fees. Remember, it's "pick ONE" (...and ONLY one). Petty, laughable and insignificant, in my personal opinion.

I do not "exchange", least of all with RCI. I have absolutely no stake or involvement in the outcome of this case, nor have I ever had any stake or involvement at any time. I am merely reporting developments in Murillo vs. RCI here, factually and accurately, for those who might be interested in the matter but don't actually know where / how to find or follow the actual progress of the case, which clearly is now VERY close to its' formal, final...and apparently fizzling... conclusion.

============================================== Postscript info: revised on 12/09/08: The preliminary approval hearing for the settlement agreement is now scheduled for December 15, 2008. While I have no personal stake in this matter, it's certainly very easy to see how / why class action members interested in seeing RCI reform its' current "rental" practices are plainly furious about this proposed "settlement". For any potential RCI "exchanger", this proposed agreement is a farce by any possible standard or measure. It certainly appears to be just one very small step forward --- accompanied by two or three very BIG steps backward!

It is entirely possible that the court will summarily reject this proposed settlement agreement, which certainly appears to be very lopsided --- clearly benefiting RCI tremendously but, just as clearly, benefiting the plaintiffs / class action members almost not at all.

Delete

stevek242 asks about: >> ... the complaint filed in Murillo vs Resort Condominiums International (RCI) << ========================================

A summary of the plaintiff position in this matter can be viewed on the web site of the plaintiffs' attorneys at http://www.rciclassaction.com. The case was initially filed in early 2006. The web site has not been updated much (if at all) since then, but the case itself has "progressed" and now seems to be nearing a conclusion.

If it's the actual court / filing documents you want to view, be advised that the case was heard in U.S. District Court in Newark, NJ. There is also a "contact us" link on the class action web site by which you MIGHT be able to get docket number info and other pertinent details directly from the plaintiff attorneys (...if they respond to your inquiry).

I'm now becoming fed up with this whole mess of trying to exchage my 3 bedroom unit in south africa. while I have no problem depositing my week it is virtually impossible to get a week in Aruba when I request it in Jan. for a week, in say ,August.

I realize now that some sort of scam is being perportrated against RCI owners.

Anyone interested in another lawsuit, I sure that many of you are just like me and omly just finding out about this problem.

nailahm states in part: >>I'm now becoming fed up with this whole mess of trying to exchage my 3 bedroom unit in south africa. while I have no problem depositing my week it is virtually impossible to get a week in Aruba when I request it in Jan. for a week, in say ,August.

I realize now that some sort of scam is being perportrated against RCI owners.<< =============================================

With all due respect, virtually ANYTHING can be "deposited", but getting a quality exchange in return is a different matter entirely. South African timeshares have very little exchange value or demand --- not with RCI, nor with any other exchange company. In seeking to get an Aruba week for a deposited South Africa week you are, in essence, seeking to get gold bars in exchange for depositing clay bricks. While I dislike, distrust and in general just have no use for RCI, your particular situation is not at all indicative of any RCI "scam", but is instead a classic example of unrealistic and unreasonable exchange expectations. Exchange value with ANY exchange company is ultimately all about "demand". The demand for Aruba weeks is consistently high, even a year or more in advance. The value of S. Africa weeks is consistently low --- anytime and all the time. You're simply not likely to ever get Aruba "gold bars" in exchange for a deposit of S. Africa "clay bricks". I intend no offense in making this observation but, truth to tell, you really have no legitimate basis for complaint, let alone for a lawsuit...

Ken,

Can you send me an email to skitsantas@gmail.com?

Thanks,

stevek242 wrote:

Ken, Can you send me an email to skitsantas@gmail.com?

...And I would want to do that WHY, exactly? I have no idea who you are --- and you offer no explanation whatsoever regarding why you seek private communications.

These are open discussion forums; all input is "out in the open". If you want to participate, feel free to do so --- out in the open.

Ken,

You seemed pretty knowledgable about the legalities of the RCI class action lawsuit, thus I wanted to discuss solutions to the suit with you further if you had a desire to achieve a better settlement. Thus, anyone else or you that lives in CA has serious concerns about the fairness of the present settlement agreement, please send me an email.

Thanks,

stevek242 states in relevant part: >>Ken, You seemed pretty knowledgable about the legalities of the RCI class action lawsuit, thus I wanted to discuss solutions to the suit with you further if you had a desire to achieve a better settlement.<< ================================================

I know plenty about this class action lawsuit, having followed it very closely since it was initially filed back in April, 2006. Despite not personally being a RCI "exchanger" myself, I still believe that the case has genuine merit and that RCI is consistently (and increasingly) taking egregious advantage of its' "depositing" members, for no other reason or purpose than to greatly increase RCI corporate profits, to the detriment of RCI members seeking quality exchanges. That's just my personal opinion (...but it's also the underlying plaintiff claim and basis for the lawsuit).

That said (and this unsolicited advice is for ALL RedWeek readers), the ONLY appropriate place to submit objections, comments, suggestions or input regarding the proposed settlement agreement in this case is directly to the plaintiff attorneys, in writing and under signature. The web site address previously provided has their complete mail address. After the class certification process is completed (which has not yet actually occurred), any and all such written, signed material would then be submitted directly (and only) to the Court.

I would NEVER (and I certainly do NOT recommend that others ever consider doing so) send input on an ongoing legal matter to an unknown person of unknown affiliation, unknown location and unknown agenda over the Internet to an unknown "gmail" address. Knowing absolutely nothing about either the "gmail" addressees' identity or the true purpose and intent in his seeking out "private communications", to do so would be unwise, risky and nothing short of foolhardy (in my personal opinion).

I am thoughly disgusted with the rci timeshare! we have owned timeshares for about 25 years...and last year when I searched to tgo to the bahamas I searched the whole bahamas 1 year in advance and finally got the xanadu resort that needed so much work done it was unthinkable....also ddid I mention it was desserted?we paid approximately 15,000 for one and 8,000 for the other one and they are not worth it.first of all after you pay for them there are the maintenance fees which go up every year...then the exchange fees...then the huge fee to be in the directory of rci which you can never get any where in the whole directory and when we went to the bahamas you also had to pay an additional charge per person of 37.00 for occupancy tax so with our family came out to be 240.00 extra ...figure it out and that doesnt even count what you paid for the place to begin with ,it is a fraud...the only people getting to those resorts are the promotional perspective buyers.me and my husband dont argue ...but this is one topic we do fight about.its a rip off....they sell them over and over again and keep calling you to 'bank' your week so they can sell it to another sucker again....they never help you find a vacant resort they always tell you 'its not available..TIMESHARES SUCK AND I WANT TO SUE THERE BUTTS TOO!please let me know how I can sue them

we have owned for about twenty five years and i am thoughly disgusted with rci..for the same reasons how do i get in on the lawsuit?