posted 08-29-2002 20:22            

------------------
Bruce F. & Judy Czajkowski, Kansasville Wi. Judy is a teacher and Bruce is retired (and off his much needed medication)and thinks(?) that you are never to old to have a happy childhood.

posted 08-30-2002 03:39            

Why can't II call a person before a confirmation is made to give options to accept or reject an exchange like other exchange companies do. I just got a call from an independent exchange company that got me an exchange that II coudn't get and I had the option of accepting or rejecting it.

Sometimes the exchange that is found is just not accectable and once the confirmation is made, its a big hassle to cancel it.

If you give me an answer that "that is just the way we do it", that answer will not be acceptable. I'd like a logical reason why you don't give the option or why the policy can't be changed.

P E H

posted 08-30-2002 05:10            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Segiah:
Craig:

Why can't II call a person before a confirmation is made to give options to accept or reject an exchange like other exchange companies do. I just got a call from an independent exchange company that got me an exchange that II coudn't get and I had the option of accepting or rejecting it.

Sometimes the exchange that is found is just not accectable and once the confirmation is made, its a big hassle to cancel it.

If you give me an answer that "that is just the way we do it", that answer will not be acceptable. I'd like a logical reason why you don't give the option or why the policy can't be changed.

P E H

---

posted 08-30-2002 08:10         

A few days ago I spoke to one of your VC about initiating a 'request first' search against my week 26/2004 but she insisted that I have to deposit it before being able to use it for 'request first' or for my own on-line search. Your computer will not allow me to search on line against this week even though it is shown as "available". After a long conversation with your "website support" staff I was given to understand that I have no option, - deposit it or else.

I think it's unfair and unjust. You are entitled to do whatever verifications you need, but your VC should not bend your own policies which allow on-line search or 'request first' without prior deposit.

I also have an unused and uncommitted week 26/2003 which I intend to use myself or give it to my family. I have been able to search with this 2003 week for almost a year. My ownership of this week 26 is not an issue because I have deposited it with II before. Maintenance on both 2003 and 2004 weeks is not yet due or payable, - thus the status is identical. The issue is, of course, why can I search online with the 2003 week but NOT with the 2004 week? The II rule is that I don't need to deposit ANY week in order to search with it.

Please let me have your opinion.

posted 08-30-2002 13:21            

quote:

---

Originally posted by MikeS:
Craig,

A few days ago I spoke to one of your VC about initiating a 'request first' search against my week 26/2004 but she insisted that I have to deposit it before being able to use it for 'request first' or for my own on-line search. Your computer will not allow me to search on line against this week even though it is shown as "available". After a long conversation with your "website support" staff I was given to understand that I have no option, - deposit it or else.

I think it's unfair and unjust. You are entitled to do whatever verifications you need, but your VC should not bend your own policies which allow on-line search or 'request first' without prior deposit.

I also have an unused and uncommitted week 26/2003 which I intend to use myself or give it to my family. I have been able to search with this 2003 week for almost a year. My ownership of this week 26 is not an issue because I have deposited it with II before. Maintenance on both 2003 and 2004 weeks is not yet due or payable, - thus the status is identical. The issue is, of course, why can I search online with the 2003 week but NOT with the 2004 week? The II rule is that I don't need to deposit ANY week in order to search with it.

Please let me have your opinion.

MikeS

---

posted 08-30-2002 13:41            

In anticipation of my new ownership of an Interval timeshare, I have a few questions:

1)Can you add a week to your account and at the same time deposit a week provided that your maintenance fees are paid? Will I be able to obtain any bonus week at that time that might be availale to me?

2) I know that this question has come up before BUT..do Deposit First requests have priority over Request First requests? If so, how does this work?

3) If I conduct an on-going search request with my week, can I still use the same week to shop with on-line?

posted 08-30-2002 14:09         

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:
I do not know which resort you own so I cannot tell you what your resort chose for a request window. However, if you can make a deposit first request, you can also make a request first request. With the week you mention, your resort would need to have a 24 month trading window. The requested travel dates could not be beyond the week you own. If you would care to share the name of the resort, I'd be happy to post the request window allowed.

---

Craig,

Thank you for your response. First, I have been an owner of week 26 at Westgate Villas for some 14 years and I am not new to exchanging both with RCI and II. Second, your VC has confirmed what I knew long time ago, that we have a 24 months trading window. Indeed, I have already used one of my other 2003 weeks to get a confirmed exchange some 16 months in advance.
Third, requested travel dates are not at issue because I cannot use that 26/ 2004 week for ANY travel dates ! Your system simply does not permit me to do so.

Indeed, the problem is not limited to week 26 of 2004, I have other weeks that are subject to the same "restriction". I have focused on week 26 only to simplify the issue.

As you can see, there is something obviously wrong with the input of information into your computer base. If somebody could tell me that the problem will be investigated and resolved, say, in five days or so, I would be happy to wait. But, as it stands now, I can do nothing with my 2004 weeks unless I deposit them first. That's simply wrong !

posted 08-30-2002 14:13            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dani:
Craig or anyone else,

---

OK, I'll be the "anyone else"...

quote:

---

1)Can you add a week to your account and at the same time deposit a week provided that your maintenance fees are paid? Will I be able to obtain any bonus week at that time that might be availale to me?

---

You cannot deposit a week until II has confirmed with your resort that you're an owner. Once that's done, you can deposit and pick up your bonus week. The resort decides whether to require that MFs be paid first. One resort I own has this requirement, the other allows me to deposit without paying MFs first.

quote:

---

2) I know that this question has come up before BUT..do Deposit First requests have priority over Request First requests? If so, how does this work?

---

I would like to know that myself!

quote:

---

3) If I conduct an on-going search request with my week, can I still use the same week to shop with on-line?

---

posted 08-30-2002 14:47            

2) No, unless by extreme coincidence all other factors are the same. In this case, deposit first would be the tie breaker.

3) Yes

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dani:
Craig or anyone else,

In anticipation of my new ownership of an Interval timeshare, I have a few questions:

1)Can you add a week to your account and at the same time deposit a week provided that your maintenance fees are paid? Will I be able to obtain any bonus week at that time that might be availale to me?

2) I know that this question has come up before BUT..do Deposit First requests have priority over Request First requests? If so, how does this work?

3) If I conduct an on-going search request with my week, can I still use the same week to shop with on-line?

---

posted 08-30-2002 14:48         

I'm not sure if this would be better for the newbie board or here, but here goes:

I'm in the process of buying a second timeshare week. Part of the negotiations with the resale agent have centered around the 2002 MF and week available. She originally suggested that I would be able to use the 2002 week in 2003 if I reimbursed the owners. I checked with the resort and that is not true -- they said the only way to transfer the week would be to have the current owners deposit the week with II and transfer that credit to me. When I was talking to the resort (in Las Vegas), they also said the only time they had left for the year was in November. When I told the resale agent that, she said the current owners would reserve a week and deposit it with II.

I guess my questions are: with November 2002 now so close, will I still get the same "value" for the unit if the closing process takes 60-90 days? I would be looking to use the week some time in 2003 or later since I don't have any vacation time left for 2002. And does II even allow this kind of transfer of deposited weeks when there is a sale?

I only bought my first timeshare this summer, so am still trying to grapple with the rules. Both the resorts (the one I already bought in and this new purchase) trade with II, so I'm looking forward to getting materials that may explain this, but in the meantime thought I'd ask here.

posted 08-30-2002 14:56            

I don't mean to ask so many questions but need more information in order to determine where the problem resides.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MikeS:
Craig,

Thank you for your response. First, I have been an owner of week 26 at Westgate Villas for some 14 years and I am not new to exchanging both with RCI and II. Second, your VC has confirmed what I knew long time ago, that we have a 24 months trading window. Indeed, I have already used one of my other 2003 weeks to get a confirmed exchange some 16 months in advance.
Third, requested travel dates are not at issue because I cannot use that 26/ 2004 week for ANY travel dates ! Your system simply does not permit me to do so.

Indeed, the problem is not limited to week 26 of 2004, I have other weeks that are subject to the same "restriction". I have focused on week 26 only to simplify the issue.

As you can see, there is something obviously wrong with the input of information into your computer base. If somebody could tell me that the problem will be investigated and resolved, say, in five days or so, I would be happy to wait. But, as it stands now, I can do nothing with my 2004 weeks unless I deposit them first. That's simply wrong !

MikeS

---

posted 08-30-2002 15:03            

quote:

---

Originally posted by BLLittle:
Hi,

I'm not sure if this would be better for the newbie board or here, but here goes:

I'm in the process of buying a second timeshare week. Part of the negotiations with the resale agent have centered around the 2002 MF and week available. She originally suggested that I would be able to use the 2002 week in 2003 if I reimbursed the owners. I checked with the resort and that is not true -- they said the only way to transfer the week would be to have the current owners deposit the week with II and transfer that credit to me. When I was talking to the resort (in Las Vegas), they also said the only time they had left for the year was in November. When I told the resale agent that, she said the current owners would reserve a week and deposit it with II.

I guess my questions are: with November 2002 now so close, will I still get the same "value" for the unit if the closing process takes 60-90 days? I would be looking to use the week some time in 2003 or later since I don't have any vacation time left for 2002. And does II even allow this kind of transfer of deposited weeks when there is a sale?

I only bought my first timeshare this summer, so am still trying to grapple with the rules. Both the resorts (the one I already bought in and this new purchase) trade with II, so I'm looking forward to getting materials that may explain this, but in the meantime thought I'd ask here.

Thanks,
Bruce

---

posted 08-30-2002 15:04            

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:
To be honest, I do not know the answer to this question. I will get an answer for you. Unfortunately, it will not be until I return to the office on Tuesday.

---

posted 08-30-2002 15:43         

I take your point entirely about the statement "renew now before a price increase" not being wrong - everything goes up eventually - but in the first conversation he specifically said November. He also tied it in to Marriott's renewal of their II contract for another ten years, and said or implied that Marriott was subsidising the rates he was offering as a benefit to their owners.

What really gave me pause was when he told me no, I couldn't call back in to re-up at his rates, since he was on a 'special desk' set up to call Marriott members to apprise them of this offer. I haven't had much reason to call II yet, but my understanding from reading these boards is that II employees have extensions at which they give out so they can be reached by inbound callers.

Thanks for looking into this -

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:
I will determine if this person is an employee of Interval International. The truth is fees do increase over time so the statement "renew now before a price increase" is not wrong. If someone is stating fees are going up on "XX" date, that is not true. There aren't any price increases planned at this time.

Could you please clarify the positioning used?

---

posted 08-30-2002 17:28         

quote:

---

Originally posted by CraigU:
The dates your requesting to travel ALSO cannot exceed 24 months. What dates are you searching for? I see you stated you can't search for any dates but wanted to ensure your statement was exactly as described. Did you call an adviser to place a request or only to internet support?

I don't mean to ask so many questions but need more information in order to determine where the problem resides.

---

Craig,

I don't mind at all if you ask more questions,- as I said, this matter needs to be resolved by someone in authority. I don't know if this falls within your area of responsibility or should I speak to someone else. I tried to explain the problem in just a few short statements, but this may not be enough.

The bottom line is, - I am not prepared to deposit ALL my 2004 weeks at this time. What I want to do is no less than what I am entitled to do under your membership rules, - search on line or start a "request first" search using my 2004 weeks.

Just to make it clear, your first VC told me that I cannot start a "request first" search OR search on line with my 26/2004 week because she has no dates shown against these weeks. This may be true, but it's not up to me to provide II with dates for each week. All my weeks are fixed weeks. The 2004 dates are well known. If your VC needs to verify the dates, or any other information, with the resort, she should go right ahead and do it. As I said before, I am ready to wait a few days, if necessary, but waiting does not appear to be a solution.

At this point, being unable to resolve the problem of how I could start using my 2004 weeks for online search or for "request first", your VC turned me over to your internet support person who could not explain the restriction on the 2004 weeks. She repeated the well known rules about 24 month window, etc., - not unlike what you have done in your earlier post. None of these rules is new to me and my three 2004 weeks meet your rules. And yet, according to your internet support VC, if I want to use any of the 2004 weeks, I need to deposit it first.

Well, like I said before, - I have an IDENTICAL week 26/2003 which I have no plans to deposit at this time, and which I use for on-line search. There is no justification why my week 26/2004 should be treated different, except of course in terms of its eventual expiry date.

The issue of the search dates did not arise in my conversation and is not the problem because I am NOT allowed to search for ANY dates, not in 2003, not in 2004, not in 2005.....unless the week is deposited first.

OK, over to you again.

MikeS

posted 08-30-2002 18:26            

I was wondering how the new "deposit earlier" policy is going. Are you seeing fewer deposits close to the 60 day mark?

posted 08-30-2002 21:11            

BTW, all employees have extensions to provide. I just won't give you mine.

quote:

---

Originally posted by judy.f:
When he called the first time, 8/11, he specifically said there was going to be a price increase in November. When he called back last Monday, he quoted me the rates he was offering and I wanted to make sure that I heard the bit about the price increase again, so I prompted him - 'and this is in advance of a price increase?' - and he said yes.

I take your point entirely about the statement "renew now before a price increase" not being wrong - everything goes up eventually - but in the first conversation he specifically said November. He also tied it in to Marriott's renewal of their II contract for another ten years, and said or implied that Marriott was subsidising the rates he was offering as a benefit to their owners.

What really gave me pause was when he told me no, I couldn't call back in to re-up at his rates, since he was on a 'special desk' set up to call Marriott members to apprise them of this offer. I haven't had much reason to call II yet, but my understanding from reading these boards is that II employees have extensions at which they give out so they can be reached by inbound callers.

Thanks for looking into this -

---

posted 08-30-2002 21:27            

quote:

---

Originally posted by MarTN:
Hi Craig. Welcome Back.

I was wondering how the new "deposit earlier" policy is going. Are you seeing fewer deposits close to the 60 day mark?

---

posted 08-30-2002 22:09            

RE: Call before confirmation.

How do I know you got me exactly what I want if I specified an area with many possible resorts if I cannot find out more about the resort and unit II wants to confirm me into?

If an independent exchange can call before confirmation so could II. I know you will say the independents do many fewer exchanges but they have many fewer employees proportionally and they do exchanges at a lower cost than II.

I appreciate you answering questions here but I consider your answer as "we do it that way because we do it that way" and not acceptable.

In other words, II could serve their members better but they choose not to.

P E H

posted 08-30-2002 22:33            

quote:

---

Originally posted by JEFF H:
Craig,
Owners of Royal Islander and royal Sands are allowed to deposit the hotel lock-off side of there units into Interval.
Interval will not accept hotel units from owners at the Royal Mayan or Royal Carribean resorts even though the HU are basically the same at all four resorts.

Why does the Resort directory and Online resort guide show HU 2/2 available at the Mayan and carribean if Interval does not accept them?

How come Mayan and carribean hotel units are not accepted?

Thanks inadvance

Jeff

---

Craig,
did you not see my question or just ignoring me

posted 08-31-2002 06:10            

Of course we could perform this additional service, for increased fees, but honestly I don't see the logic in it. This does not mean I am stating "we can but we won't". I can't see adding expenses, and resulting fee increases, for something that can be managed well by the person planning their vacation.

As far as the independents are concerned, I'm sure they have things you don't like about them. All companies are different. However, let's see who puts their money where there mouth is if a problem develops. The value of a dues paying member is a lot greater than someone who is paying a very low margin transaction fee.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Segiah:
Craig,

RE: Call before confirmation.

How do I know you got me exactly what I want if I specified an area with many possible resorts if I cannot find out more about the resort and unit II wants to confirm me into?

If an independent exchange can call before confirmation so could II. I know you will say the independents do many fewer exchanges but they have many fewer employees proportionally and they do exchanges at a lower cost than II.

I appreciate you answering questions here but I consider your answer as "we do it that way because we do it that way" and not acceptable.

In other words, II could serve their members better but they choose not to.

P E H

---

posted 08-31-2002 06:35         

Have you had a chance to look at my response posted 08-30-2002 17:28 ?

posted 08-31-2002 06:39            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Segiah:
How do I know you got me exactly what I want if I specified an area with many possible resorts if I cannot find out more about the resort and unit II wants to confirm me into?

---