I hear these ads on CNN all the time, offering to get you out of time-shares, the implication being that they’re next to impossible to get out of without legal representation. One ad even says that “even if you die, your children are on the hook for the fees…”
I’m not a lawyer, but I know that, in almost all cases, a simple quitclaim is enough to relieve someone of inherited property that they don’t want. But if my mother were to die whilst in possession of a time-share (she is not, but let’s explore this hypothetical), I could just quitclaim my way out of it, right? I mean, I suppose the time-share company could go after her estate for the fees, but not me personally, yes? Would her estate actually need legal representation to exit the time-share? Or does it die with her unless I want it?
I don’t own a timeshare, I’m not thinking of buying one, I’m not related to anyone who does or is. You are not my lawyer, I am not your client, I am not seeking legal advice, etc.
They describe the critical limitations of quitclaiming in pretty clear and certain-sounding terms. Namely that the person you’re giving title to has to agree to take it. You need a specific named counterparty; you can’t just “give it away” to nobody. And the timeshare developer or operator is under no obligation to accept your kind offer to them of your share of your unit gratis.
I’m not competent to evaluate their explanation factually, but it smells persuasive to non-lawyer me.
I was involved a lot in practical FL condo law while I was a condo Prez. Likewise there’s no provision for a unit owner to force give-away their unit to the Condo Association. There are circumstances where the Association can foreclose and with Court approval take ownership over the unit owner’s objections. But having been in that spot and signed foreclosure orders you need to be darn sure you really want to grab that tar baby; whether for good or ill you’re stuck with it until you’ve figured out how to get rid of it again.
There would be two aspects to the timeshare that the estate would have to deal with. One, what to do with the deed. And two, what to do about any liabilities the owner had associated with the timeshare. For the deed, the executor can tell the timeshare company that the person has died and that none of the heirs are going to take ownership of it. The timeshare company would then take back the deed. For any debts, they would be considered debts that the estate will need to pay off. So if the timeshare had sent the owners a $2000 assessment, the estate would likely have pay off that $2000. If the estate didn’t have enough assets to pay off the debt, then the executor would tell the timeshare company that the estate won’t be able to pay off the debt. In general, the estate is responsible for paying off any outstanding debts, but only up to the limit of the value of the assets. The heirs don’t have to inherit any outstanding debts from the estate. Of course, if an heir accepts the timeshare, they would become responsible for making the timeshare payments.
How long does an estate keep paying off debts if nobody wants the timeshare? I think the point of executor and estate is to close things off ASAP. Can the executor give away all the money to the heirs and then when next month’s payment comes due, say “sorry, no can due”?
(I guess the same question applies to any contracted recurring payments left for the estate?)
The estate is supposed to pay off debts first. The heirs would get what is left. The estate would use the assets to pay off whatever current fees and payments are owned to the timeshare and then distribute the remainder to the heirs. I suppose the same thing would be true of things like gym memberships. Any current dues would be paid off, but the estate wouldn’t be responsible for paying off the remainder of the contract.
Do timeshares have mortgages like homes? I’m not sure what would happen in that case. I’m not sure if the estate would be responsible for paying off the mortgage.
No. The executor is on the hook to follow laws and the wishes of the deceased. This prevents the following example: Suppose the executor is a son who is also the sole beneficiary. Executor then sells all assets and pockets the money without paying the deceased’s Visa bill.
I don’t think it’s technically a mortgage- I think timeshare loans are more like personal loans. But I think the question is not so much about the timeshare loan as it is about the yearly maintenance fees. I don’t think I can be forced to pay timeshare fees in perpetuity simply because my mother left a timeshare to me. I should be able to disclaim* that part of my inheritance , just as I can disclaim the jewelry my mother might leave to me. Of course, if my name is on the deed to the timeshare , that’s another story ( and I bet the salespeople encourage that. )
* It’s different from signing a quitclaim deed - a quitclaim deed gives someone whatever interest I might have in the property, but like any other deed it must be signed by both parties.
One way to ensure the estate doesn’t have any assets is to set up beneficiaries for those assets with the asset directly. For bank and financial accounts, you can go online and specify beneficiaries for the accounts. For property, you can file a Transfer On Death Deed with the county which transfers the deed to whoever you list. These beneficiaries will get the asset directly without the asset going through the estate. This means that asset is not available to pay off debts of the estate. For instance, if the decedent listed their son as the beneficiary of their $100k retirement account, the son gets the money directly. That $100k won’t be part of the estate and can’t be used to pay off the estate’s debts. For most people, pretty much all the valuable stuff can be distributed outside of probate through beneficiaries. The assets left in the estate would be just stuff like furniture, home decor, and stuff like that which might have little value. The heirs can get most of the value of the estate since it won’t be used to pay off the estate’s debt.
Y’all are lissing the point. A person has a contract for a long term. they die, leaving an estate.
The job of the executor is to close the books on the estate and give the money to the designated heirs if any money is left over.
The timeshare, or whatever, has ongoing fees due each year. The excutor does not keep the estate “live” forever to pay these. He wants to close the books, sooner the better once the businesses are settled. How do you “settle” a timeshare?
So does a timeshare have a clause saying how to wrap up the contract if the person is no longer around to make payments? I assume simply defaulting on the payments might lead to a lawsuit against the executor or heirs for monies that come due after the estate is wrapped up. Presumably if this is like a mortgage or car loan, the solution is to let the mortgage holder foreclose if the payments are no longer being made. Does a timeshare have that option? (Similarly, what if the owner declares bankruptcy? Does a timeshare simply stop being one for that person?)
Probably doesn’t answer the question correctly but I, along with my wife, attended one of those timeshare seminars at a resort in the Caribbean. When sitting with the sales person I asked what happens when we die? The sales person said well your kids have the “privilege” to take over at minimal cost of transferring the paperwork. What if they don’t want it? Well, we would sell it for the estate. What would the amount the estate would get? Oh, we can’t answer that until it happens. That was my cue and excuse to leave that they (even the guy he called over) couldn’t answer my questions with a straight answer. So, apparently with this company they would sell the timeshare and any leftover money (if there is any) would go to the estate. Would a timeshare sales person lie to me? I would take what they say with a grain of salt.
In relation to a previous post. We just updated our will with a new lawyer as our old one retired. He, in a roundabout way, implied our old lawyer was “lazy”. Some of the sections were “to the estate”. He used an example of a million dollar life insurance policy. “To the estate” would mean his fee would based on this amount money and other assets in the estate but if it directly went to a specific person(s) he couldn’t base his fee including that money as it wasn’t part of the probated(?) estate. Better to name specific heirs than say “to the estate”.
If I had a timeshare that was just a huge rusting financial anchor, could I wiil it to the Scientologists or the Republican Party or anyone else I didn’t like?
Or, what if a person outside the power of the US legal system (eg some guy in Northern Cyprus) sets up as a financial gong farmer. You send him 100 euros , he agrees to be the beneficiary for your shitty timeshare.
Take it with a grain of salt that is inside a red-hot chili pepper. If you watch the John Oliver video, posted earlier, there is a clip telling prospective sales associates to lie if necessary to make a sale. The contract that they sign overrides/supersedes anything that the sales associate tells you.
“left over”? Other than sales commission and some legal transfer paperwork, what is there? Of course, i see opportunities for assorted “expenses” to be inflated.
Strangely, this thread came up the day after I listened to a discussion on the Radio (in the UK) about the problems people have when relatives in private sheltered accommodation die.
The situation is exacerbated by the very high maintenance charges that some places have - £1000 a month was mentioned as not excessive.
Most of these apartments were bought for cash (apparently mortgages are not allowed when the fees are this high) and the old folk live there happily until they pass on. The executors are then left with an asset worth much less than the original price (even in a rising property market). The pool of potential buyers is limited; the price was inflated to begin with; cash buyers only, and the property may well have deteriorated anyway.
Part of the problem is that many of these contracts were entered into in haste as someone’s health deteriorated, and funded by the sale of an existing property that may well have been worth ten or twenty times what they paid for it.
But my question still is - if a person has a contract for recurring payment and dies, how long is the estate supposed to remain unsettled and keep paying? I presumed that if the estate is settled, paid out, and closed, then any further demands for payment are simply void. Worst case, the asset involved (timeshare, used car, rental property) returns to the lender to dispose of in lieu of future payments. Technically, the debt is not due until the time for that month’s payment arrives, so future payments are not “outstanding debt”?
The only “gotcha” I see for this is a lot of bank loans and such have terms where the lender can at some time depending of contract demand payment in full (call the loan). Would timeshares have this sort of clause.
