It has always been the case that in fixed timeshare, the property is held in trust for the owners of that particular timeshare. To alter the trust arrangement, the objects to the club would require alteration, that would be mean that 100% of the votes cast would be required or the club would desolve. Clearly, neither Silverpoint nor MacDonalds have achieved that.
In any event and knowing the trust company would have to sanction any changes, advice ought to have been sort from the very trust company which holds the property on trust for the owners and before the proposed object changes where voted on.
At that point the established legal authorities (in respect to the 100% voting requirements) would have been advised by the trust who in fact owe a duty of care to each member in the trust.
Whatever advice was given the 2 named companies went ahead and carried out the vote and thereby amended the clubs constitutions.
Any such trust approval will have to be contemplated (as to the applied benefit changes and how it effects the members assets) that was the case, is the case now and will always be the case.
Some consumers believe companies like Silverpoint, or indeed the trust companies would have considered this legal obstacle before they in fact change the system, or moved the goal posts, when they interfered with the constitutions.
However they duffed that one, as it is now being reported that post event, post proposal and post the vote they have realised there “boo boo” . Acting too hasty some might suggest, others might say they have run out of lead in their pencils when it came to dotting I’s and crossing T’s.
Ground breaking it certainly is!
Before Silverpoint embarks on a unique proposal you would expected that Silverpoint would have checked out whether they could do what they propose to do. Indeed if Silverpoint (the proposer) did approach the trust company and they said “no” then before the voting took place the proposer would have had the matter settled by way of adjudication. Clearly that has not happened as the trust now seek the courts approval and post event.
So before the vote the trust company might have said “no” and silverpoint ignored the advice.
The trust got it wrong and now seeks post event declarations (to right the wrong which Silverpoint has executed).
Or the likes of silverpoint never in fact asked permission from the trust in the first place.
Some might say this is shady, a few might say the trust is helping Silverpoint and others might suggest that the trust ought to consult the timeshare owners they represent and who they should be acting in the best interest of.
Whatever people say, if the trust seeks court approval they are not sure the actions of Silverpoint are right or lawful.
For more information regarding this article or assistance in any other timeshare related issues please contact the TCA on 01908 881058 or email: info@TimeshareConsumerAssociation.org.uk