DRIP |Site Info
Login or Register
Online users (0)
No users online.
Hit Counter
Today: 49 Unique Hits: 175,111

USA DRI Members

Dwaelf the Wanderer a posted Aug 22, 15

We've been getting an increasing amount of applications from disappointed and disillusioned DRI owners from the US lately,  and have been wondering how best to help them out.

As our admin team hail from the other side of that big pond known as The Atlantic Ocean, we have a greater understanding of the legal implications of timeshare membership as a whole and DRI (Sunterra/GVC/whatever) membership in particular and we have a large member base in the UK and Europe who happily share their experiences with the company in the forums.

Our US members tend to be more reticent, though we have had some who have been willing to keep in touch and confirm that they have managed to free themselves from their timeshare. We therefore ask our US members in particular to please post on the forums tactics that have helped them to escape so that we can increase our knowledge base of how things pan out over there in the Wild West.

Information US members may find Interesting

Having said that, we do have admin members who trawl around the Internet finding out interesting snippets all over the place, and here are some things that have recently been discovered:

There was a posting on the web at http://insidethegate.com - it was a press release dated May 18 2015 by the lawyers  Mitchell, Read, Sussman and Associates. In their own site there examples of actual US "release" letters from DRI.

It was heard in the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside, Judgement date February 4 2015, award finalised April 20 2015. Case number PSC 1400640

This case received little publicity and it was interesting that shortly afterwards the article about this in the Insidethegate Facebook page disappeared, BUT it is still available at http://insidethegate.com/2015/05the-law-offices-of-mitchell-reed-sussman-associates dated 27/07/2015 and, of course, in the lawyers' own site. (at least, it was until recently - hopefully still is!)

We are reluctant to post details on a public page of the site, but thought that it might be of interest for US members to investigate this further and see if they have better luck in accessing the court records than we have had so far.

As this was a US arbitration case and not a court case result we are not sure about the precedent status in US terms but it is still a very adverse result for DRI.

(Many thanks to the team member who researched this - she knows who she is and how much her input is appreciated)

dossy Is this site dead? There appears to be a bunch of content that's restricted, and I registered an account and completed ...

Well, here I am, visiting relatives in Kent, and what do I find? Yes, you guessed it, touters trying to get 'compensation' for timeshare owners and promises to free them on a no-win-no-fee basis. Heigh Ho. Nothing particularly new in their approach - 'we're getting a group of thousands together' 'I'll explain in words you can understand' (patronising beggars!) - 'the only way you can get out is to hire a lawyer' 'when you die, they'll get their money one way or another' &c &c. My wife found them yesterday rabbitting on about 'helping' some people who were members of Club la Costa and telling them they were getting a group action together against the said organisation. Then today I found them doing the same pitch with some DRI members. So I congratulated the man on his very well executed scam presentation. I don't think he was very pleased with me. He went to get his colleague and they both tried very hard to persuade me that they were legit and working for a solicitor. When I pointed out that I knew there was no action being prepared against DRI, they said they were going against RCI first. Oh, and that they had been working on the action for over 5 years so they could get 'thousands together' for the case.

So, here's a question. If they aren't charging anything for their advice until after the case (which as I said is purported to be on a no-win-no-fee basis). WHO HAS BEEN PAYING THEIR WAGES FOR THE LAST 5 YEARS? I know how NWNF cases are handled, having already been through the process successfully, and though they do take one or two years to prepare, they don't take 5 years as that wouldn't be cost effective. Furthermore, they are initiated by open public meetings and consultations taking up to an hour, not by getting couples together in a private interview that lasts a few hours. Why see people in pairs, which would cost a fortune, rather than in groups, which would be cheaper? Oh yes. Because a single couple is easier to persuade than a group. Of course. If you want to get thousands together, you don't do it 2 by 2.

Next irritating point. Yes, there was a court action against RCI. RCI are an EXCHANGE organisation. They take a week or points from timeshare owners and bank them. They then give the owners a different week at another time or place in exchange. The case against them is based on the fact that they are accused of 'skimming' off the best properties banked with them, and exchanging them for properties of a lower standard. What the heck that has to do with people trying to get out of a timeshare ownership contract, I totally fail to see. The touters I came across quoted the solicitors who handled the RCI case in 2013 as being 'their' solicitors and stated they were getting thousands together. Independent sources say it was about 500, and anyway the case has already been brought and RCI are due to submit their defence this month (August). You can't join an action after it has been submitted, so what would they still be interviewing people for?

The thing I found most interesting, however, was the fact that when I mentioned the word 'scam' rather loudly, some time was spent trying to persuade me that they were no such thing. This included the man involved standing in a supposedly threatening posture right beside me. (The fact that he was only about half an inch taller than I made it less than impressive, and I've been threatened by bigger and very scary people in my time so was more inclined to laugh than cower.) So another big question. IF THEY WERE REALLY LEGAL EXPERTS AND I WAS DEFAMING THEM, WHY DIDN'T THEY COLLECT EVIDENCE AND SUE ME FOR SLANDER? After all, I was in a public place declaring that they were trying to con the public. What more did they need?

So, DRIPs, if you see or hear some poor innocent people being told a load of hogwash, please don't just ignore it. At the least, quietly slip the victims a piece of paper with our website on it so they can make an informed decision. Don't let the bullshitters get away with it!

cremator My husband showed me a full page advert in the IAM (institute of Advanced motorists) magazine from someone offering to s ...
Marjorie51 I have just read the latest publicity statement from ITRA. It starts well and almost copies Dwaelf's earlier note on the ...
ADSARG Many thanks for the info. A Jeff Warren has been sending me emails to say he could get my Timeshare money back. HAHA??? ...

The following article is taken from the Canarian Legal Alliance website:

Spanish Supreme Court’s decision declaring Timeshare Contracts in Perpetuity NULL & VOID 03.04.2015

April 3, 2015 by CLA

The importance of this Supreme Court decision is HUGE. In Spain access to the Supreme Court is very very limited. Only claims for more than 600.000 euros may have access. In other cases for the claimant to have access, he/she needs to show that there is real legal interest, for instance, that there is a real need of a unified interpretation about a controversial legal point that perhaps has been decided in different ways before. In this case the Supreme Court judgements have the effect to interpret the law and how has to be applied by the other Courts (First Instance courts and Courts of Appeal, etc.). The Supreme Court has pointed the way that has to be followed by lower courts.


The paradox is that this time was Anfi who appealed the Supreme Court seeking for confirmation that what they were doing was correct. There had been two different decisions from the Court of Appeal in Las Palmas so Anfi considered that the Supreme Court should decide what interpretation was correct. Unfortunately for them (and for any other Club that has sold timeshare contracts for more the 50 years after 1999) the Supreme Court has ruled against them.


In Gran Canaria this will affect timeshare  clubs such as Palm Oasis or Puerto Calma, among the most poplars. In Tenerife Beverly Hills Club and Heights, Hollywood Mirage and Palm Beach Club could also be affected. Generally speaking this may affect to any Club based in Spain or at least to those resorts located in Spain. The impact can be enormous.


The key issue has been that Law 42/98 included a Transitional Provision, the Second, which deals with Pre-existing regimes. This provision gave the Clubs which were operating before the entrance into force of this Law the possibility to continue to exist forever, BUT the weeks not yet sold would have to be adjusted to it. This means that the schemes can continue to exist in perpetuity, but the weeks sold within the scheme will have to have a maximum duration that cannot exceed 50 years.


Anfi and many other clubs believed that both the Regimen and the Weeks could be sold in perpetuity. This was the big mistake that now has been clarified by the Supreme Court resolution.

From a J P Morgan analyst:

DRI "growth depends on selling to new customers rather than existing customers".

Pyramid Scheme implied? We know that the existing customer service is bad to non-existent in the DRIP experience.

From a J M Securities Investment analyst:

"....no effective secondary market exists to resell time share."

Well we all know this now due to the bitter DRI experience but it is interesting to see a professional analyst also saying that the DRI sales pitch of the timeshare being a valuable asset is a lie, even if only by implication. This quote should be writ large on the front page of all timeshare and re-sales documentation!


"If an effective and cost efficient secondary market develops, (DRI's) ability to sell vacations through its sales channels would be seriously impaired."

The logical assumption is that DRI do not want an efficient secondary market as it is against their own interests.
Basic summary. It is not in DRI's interests to service existing customers or to support the resale of their timeshare weeks or points. 
Old_Deuteronomy Nice to have independent confirmation of what we all know. DRI still claim the ability to sell on, ESPECIALLY with thei ...

Welcome to the DRIP website. This is a store of information on dealing with Diamond Resorts International, ways of coping with their aggressive tactics and details of the experiences of people who have freed themselves from demands for exponentially increasing 'Maintenance Fees'.

In order to read this information, you need to register and complete an application form. ALL application forms, without exception, are processed manually before acceptance, so it can take some time before forum access is granted.
There are literally thousands of comments on the site and it is not possible for the small admin team to search through on your behalf. No-one receives any money for running this site, so please don't ask others to do your research for you. As far as possible, we have tried to group information together in the forums so please spend a bit of time reading them to find out what you need.
Unlike other sites which might make empty promises to buy back timeshare or solve your problems for you, we don't. We just provide a place where people can find out the real experiences of those who have owned timeshare with DRI so that they know the truth and can make an informed decision on how to cope with their own situation.  It IS possible to free yourself. It is NOT a quick or easy fix. Anyone who says anything else is either misleading or deliberately lying to you.
There is NO CHARGE for joining this site. It is, however, a private group of individuals and just because you register and complete an application form that is no guarantee of acceptance. We reserve the right to refuse membership without giving a reason. In practice, very few applications are denied and usually these are because the applicant is unwilling to supply information that enables us to prove their bona-fides.
All we want is fairness. We have no desire to harm DRI, its members or associates. All we ask for is that members of DRI who no longer wish to continue their membership should have the right to resign and have no further charges to pay from the date of their resignation. In an ideal world, with a reasonable company, one could also expect a proportion of the original investment to be returned, but we don't ask for that. All we ask for is that once a member has resigned they should be left alone and not harassed for fees for something they don't want and are not using. You wouldn't pay someone not to clean your windows. Why should you pay for someone not to provide you with holiday accommodation?
My sister in law dri member has been contacted to say a law firm is interested in taking up a claim as there has been a change in Spanish law regarding g miss selling by dri. Has anyone any info ?
SellMyTimeshare is the company
Your messaSee the October adjudication by the Direct Marketing Commission who have decided to cancell the accredition of Hollywood operationg as [link] for their unacceptable business practices. Original at [link]
Huge apologies to all. Have had a slipped disc and been out of action for some week. Will now try to get everything back up to date but please bear with me as I'm on morphine and not very sentient.
November 2015