posted 04-05-2005 11:43               

The 13-month rule relates to the opportunity, if you own two or more Marriott weeks, to call 13 months in advance (instead of the normal 12 months) to reserve consecutive or concurrent weeks at your home resort. Note I used the term reserve. Thus, if you have to exchange a week from (for example) your season to another season in order to reserve two weeks together, you can't use that procedure.

As an owner, you must first reserve your week before you can request an exchange.

Once you have reserved one or both of your weeks at 12 or 13 months out, you can then (and only then) try to exchange one or both of those weeks for other Marriott weeks. Whether your exchanges will be confirmed depends on how strong your weeks are as traders, how early you deposit your weeks and/or request your exchange and whether other owners deposit the weeks you want.

posted 04-05-2005 11:53            

quote:

---

Originally posted by mcpower:
Is it true that if you purchase two silver weeks, you can deposit those weeks under the 13 month rule and get basically any Marriott season or resort?

---

That's a new twist on the 13 month rule that I've never heard of before. Who told you that one? I don't think there's any validity to that statement.

The 13 month rule is for multiple weeks owners. It allows them to book those multiple weeks 13 months before check in instead of the usual 12 month window. The caveat is that the weeks that you book have to be either consecutive or concurrent.

It really doesn't have anything to do with trading except if you use the 13 month rule to book what you conceive to be the strongest trading week in that Silver season and then deposit that week or weeks in II for trading purposes. Once you do that, then the standard trade power issues with II come into play. Trading can sometimes be a crapshoot and in no way is any particular trade a guarantee.

posted 04-05-2005 17:05            

quote:

---

Originally posted by capekong:
For clarification: If I own two weeks at different Marriott resorts, I can call and try to reserve 13 months out, if I reserve concurrent or consective weeks at the two Resorts? IE: I could try to reserve week 1 at Marriott Resort A and Marriott Resort B or I could try to reserve week 1 at Marriott Resort A and week 2 at Marriott Resort B. Correct?

---

True if the seasons overlap or piggy back off each other (where one season ends when another seasons begins the next week). So, if you own a platinum week in Hawaii that is weeks 1 through 51 and a Platinum summer at Timberlodge then you could reserve concurrent or consective weeks during Timberlodge's Summer-platinum weeks only. However, if you own a gold week at Timberlodge and a platinum week at Shadow Ridge where probably none of the weeks over lap then, you couldn't reserve two consective or concurrent weeks. Hopefully, this makes sense...

------------------
You can see my timeshare photos here:

posted 04-07-2005 12:24            

The local sales guys are probably telling you that they MUST be at the same resort as it's in their best interest for them to be able to sell you two weeks. The telesales will tell you that it can be any two weeks as it doesn't matter to them which resort you purchase at.

posted 04-07-2005 17:57               

quote:

---

Originally posted by joepoe:
We were told by our sales guide at Ko Olina that you MUST own two weeks at the SAME resort to use the 13 month option.

---

posted 04-07-2005 19:07            

quote:

---

Originally posted by WiTraveler:
Currently on the Marriott Website in an area that explains the benefits of owning more than one week, it now indicates that both weeks must be at the same resort for the 13 month rule. I'm certain I've seen it in the past, without the word same.

---

posted 04-08-2005 05:11               

The only way it would work is if the two seasons were adjacent to each other and you booked the last week of one season and the first week of the other season.

posted 04-11-2005 17:16            

quote:

---

Originally posted by llp479:
The 13 month rule was in a written doc that we were given, not the salesman's spiel. It clearly stated that you had to own 2 weeks at the SAME resort, and they had to be booked in consecutive or concurrent weeks.

We even asked him about the confusion regarding the interpretation by the reservation folks, and he stated again the same resort, and referred us to the "official" MVC doc.

---

Nobody here is disputing that as that's what's written in most if not all of the resorts CC&R's, but if you think about it, that's pretty much how it needs to be written in each resorts CC&R's because there's no guarantee that Marriott will continue to manage each individual resort. In other words, it wouldn't be practical for Marriott to commit in writing in the CC&R's of each individual resort about the "benefits" of owning multiple weeks in the Marriott system. If they did that and then changed their mind and no longer wanted to continue their management of that resort, then they would be in a legal sticky situation that those owners of that resort could hang them on. As such, it's much safer to use the SAME terminology in the CC&R's which would make a future divorce easier.

I'll now cut and paste this from my previous post:

However, it's not how Marriott currently interprets or has been interpreting the rule. This may be because telesales has been touting the 13 month rule and has been using it as a sales tactic in order to get current single week owners to buy a second week at another resort for awhile. As such, there are a lot of people who've purchased two weeks at two different resorts through telesales with the use of the 13 month booking rule as a primary factor behind their purchase. If Marriott were to change the interpretation of the rule they would probably alienate a lot of owners who purchased their weeks through Marriott telesales.

posted 04-11-2005 17:21            

quote:

---

Originally posted by KathyPet:
I don't care what the official rules say, We own a week at Barony and a week at Grand OCean in Gold season and for two years running we have book a week at each resort in consecutive order 13 months in advance

---

posted 04-11-2005 19:02               

quote:

---

Originally posted by llp479:
The 13 month rule was in a written doc that we were given, not the salesman's spiel. It clearly stated that you had to own 2 weeks at the SAME resort, and they had to be booked in consecutive or concurrent weeks.

We even asked him about the confusion regarding the interpretation by the reservation folks, and he stated again the same resort, and referred us to the "official" MVC doc.

---

posted 04-11-2005 21:26               

All three state that if you own two or more weeks at the resort, you can make concurrent or consecutive week reservations 13 months in advance.

Taken casually, that would appear to mean you must own your multiple weeks at the same resort to use the 13-month reservation system. However, that's not what the rules state.

The key is that nowhere in the language is there a statement that says you can make reservations 13 months in advance only if your multiple weeks are at the same resort.

Thus, Marriott has concluded that they will honor the rules as stated in various resort CC&Rs, but they believe they have the freedom to allow those who own at different resorts to also use the 13-month reservation system. The printed rules are permissive for those who own multiple weeks at the same resort, but do not restrict Marriott from applying the rule more liberally.

posted 04-12-2005 12:21               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave M:
All three state that if you own two or more weeks at the resort, you can make concurrent or consecutive week reservations 13 months in advance.

.... However, that's not what the rules state.

The key is that nowhere in the language is there a statement that says you can make reservations 13 months in advance only if your multiple weeks are at the same resort.

---

posted 04-12-2005 13:16               

Absolutely correct. That's what I said and I stand by what I said.

I clearly understand that you don't agree with Marriott's interpretation (as confirmed by cdiver and numerous others) or my analysis thereof. So be it.

posted 04-12-2005 14:23            

The way Marriott currently interprets the rule is a win-win for them and I don’t see them having any motivation to change it. Telesales can sell multiple weeks at different resorts as well as extra weeks to single week owners and tout the rule while the local sales folks can point to the website or the local resorts CC&R’s to convince their clients that they need to purchase two weeks at the resort their selling and not a second week elsewhere.