Attorney Mitchell Reed Sussman, who has specialized in Real Estate and Bankruptcy Law for over 40 years, has more recently become the face of Timeshare exits and cancellation industry has helped relieve timeshare owners all over the country of ongoing financial burdens of their timeshare. His litigation against industry developers has shed light on the unscrupulous, hard-sell tactics of timeshare salespeople.
Attorney Mitchell Reed Sussman
“Over the years, I’ve heard clients list a variety of unscrupulous tactics used by the Timeshare industry to ‘make a sale.’ The worst of them will say anything to get a signature, committing anyone with a pulse to a purported lifetime agreement that serves only one function: to put more money in the pocket of the big timeshare companies,” says Sussman. “But lately, the timeshares have become so desperate that they’re suing their former’ owners,’ people who no longer hold title to the ‘properties.'”
In a recent case, Americana v. Riley, Case No. SSC 2020027, El Dorado Superior Court, State of California, Stephan and Veronica Riley, were sued by their timeshare after transferring their timeshare to a third party. Before transferring to a new owner, the Riley’s tried to give their timeshare back to the developer, Americana, because they could no longer afford to keep it and could not find buyers. When Americana refused to work with them, they deeded their timeshare to a third party.
Not long after, they found themselves in small court – sued by the timeshare developer which was now behaving more like a spurned lover unwilling to accept that a relationship is over. The timeshare refused to drop the case, even after the Riley’s provided the timeshare with proof that they were no longer the owners.
According to Sussman, it is basic real estate law that “If you own something, you should be able to sell it, give it away, or at the very least, give it back to the person you purchased it from, right?” Unfortunately, it appears that in the world of Timeshares, there are no take-backs.
In ruling in favor of the Riley’s, the judge was very empathetic, knowing they had been furloughed as state workers and had tried to work it out with Americana before transferring it to a third party. According to Mr. Riley, the judge said, “We should not have to pay for something we can use or don’t want.”
