[WSBARP] timeshare devalued by amenity removal

[Andrew Lemmel]

Listmates:  The short version is, timeshare in Washington, management group removes from one whole building an outdoor amenity because they are causing problems, does not replace them.  Other units in other buildings have them inside their unit because they were built later.  Where should I look to make any arguments that the amenity should be replaced, or similar-in-value-to owner amenity installed?  There is a condominium declaration from 1985, and I am sure it has been amended.  Is an advertisement that units have this amenity enough to make them do it, or can they just change that.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Andrew L. Lemmel
Andrew Lemmel Attorney at Law PLLC
1900 West Nickerson Street, Suite 116-153 | Seattle, WA 98119
P: 206-283-0593 | F: 866-397-4743
andrew at lemmel-law.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20150812/3b95cce7/attachment.html>