WolfgangMaerz
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Only the owner can change the guest certificate to a another guest. You or the guest himself can give the owner the new contact details and the owner will request a new certificate.
The 7-day-incidence (number of new infection within 7 days per 100.000 inhabitants) on the island of gran canary is the first time after the second wave yesterday below 50, the definition of a risk region in Germany. The incidence of the canary island is 51.
The word greatest tour operator TUI is already flying 7 times a week from Germany to the canary islands beginning with October 2020 and will extend the flights soon. Nevertheless the canary island must be 14 days below 50 to be no risk region. This does not apply to UK and the Scandinavian countries with risk level 20.
Here is a website based on official data from the canary health department with very detailed analysis. Today incidence AI7 (accumulated new cases over 7 days per 100,000 inhabitants) at 27th September 2020:
Canary islands: 55
Gran Canary: 68
Capital Las Palmas de Gran Canaria : 128
Region Mogan (with Anfi): 10
The definition of a risk region is 50 in Germany, 20 to 39 in UK and 20 in Scandinavia (I think !?). Some cases in Mogan may be due to illegal immigrants in the harbour of Arguineguin.
Source Real time tracking of the COVID-19 spreading in Canary Islands with hospitals and welfare
Here is the daily current situation in the Gran Canary island:
The figure shows the daily new cases and the 7-days-incidence (new cases in 7 days of 100.000 inhabitants).
No reason to be alarmed about Gran Canaria! For comparison the positive infected persons since outbreak of the pandemic (accumulative) for 100.000 inhabitants with status about 6/8/2020:
Germany: 254
UK: 454
Spain: 758
Gran Canary island: 96That means you travel to a region with less infected persons than where you come from.
The Gran Canary island has a magnificent ‘second wave’ since beginning of August. See Casos (yellow): overall cases since beginning of the pandemic.
Cerrado por alta medica (green): convalesent; Fallecidos (red): Dead
Brian, I refer to the same website. You speak of 15 cases in Mogan region, just now at 10th August there are 14. I mentioned 25 cases that was 9th August. The number of cases change fast.
The accumulated cases positives since beginning of the pandemic at Gran Canary rise now dramatically, see the yellow line in the figure button right! E.g, at 9th August 193 positive cases, now one day later 221 cases. this does not look good. The positive cases are not shown in the figure.
Somebody commented on FB that the 25 Mogan cases are the result of immigrants from Africa who landed on the island and are brought to the Arguineguin harbour from there they were put into quarantine. Some regions protested to give them a home because of the pandemic.
The data of actual cases of the Gran Canary island I have given are from 31th July by the Canarian healthcare authority. The information is from a FB post with no source given. Sorry, I cannot check it.
It would be interesting that others with Google account check security of their passwords. If they found the same problem with this site all password should perhaps be changed.
Anfi is open and guests of Emerald and Puerto are re-located to other clubs without any disadvantage. Gran Canaria has one of the lowest infection rates of Spain (25 in total) and only 3 in the Mogàn region. So Anfi and the Spain government cannot be blamed for quarantine and flight restrictions by UK and Norway. That’s my opinion.
The savings should be shared.
Puerto committee members where informed. Members not.
IFA owns half of Anfi and has noted on the 2019 general assembly I attended that there are about 1000 cases against Anfi.
The pay out of Anfi is very much less than 50 %.
I know the latest contract version and to my humble opinion (I am no lawyer) the contract is OK compared to the contract version late 2018. Nevertheless you have to check it yourself.
The main aim of Anfi is to convert the old illegal contract to a legal one to avoid taken to court. Yourself will have no benefit.
The old floating week contract is split into two contracts, a fixed week contract and an exchange contract (AVC). The result is the same as the old floating week contract.
There is much more to say but this is my answer for the moment. Please read the contract and put your questions.
I forget to add
(to 1) In all cases Anfi looks for out of court settlement.
Yesterday, on 18 July 2019, the annual general meeting of the stock exchange-oriented IFA Group took place. IFA Group includes since 2016 via IFA Canarias the company S.L. Anfi Invest AS which holds a 50% stake in the Anfi Group.
Following the capital increase, which is intended to acquire, among other things, the remaining 50% share of Anfi, the company has a balance sheet total of € 467 million and is now 76% owned by Lopesan Touristik S.A., Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. The operating (adjusted) result was only € 7.4 million before taxes due to various special items. Positive was the contribution of IFA Canarias S.L. with € 3.8 million (including Anfi with € 2.4 million result).
It is well known that Cazorla has the majority of votes (“golden share”) and IFA has nothing to say. Specifically, it looks like this:
The Grupo Santana Cazorla S.L. has a double vote for all key decisions, so that IFA has 33% of the voting rights for these decisions. After acquisition, it has become apparent that IFA is unable to participate in financial and business policy decisions due to company-contractual agreements. The Grupo Santana Cazorla S.L., in fact, excludes IFA participation in all business decisions. Even important business meetings are hold without IFA. Even so IFA was able to acquire the balance sheets of the Anfi group.
The most interesting part of the annual general meeting were the questions and answers. Unfortunately there will not be a public protocol. Due to the presence of Anfi insiders (including myself) the board was overwhelmed with questions about almost all problems of Anfi. Nothing was left out and in particular included questions to solvency and the complaints wave. I limit myself to the few only concrete statements:
(1) On 31/12/2018, there were about 1,000 complaints (at court).
(2) The complaints would only lead to a deferred resale of withdrawn weeks.
(3) Anfi has formed a € 15.5 million risk reserve for that.
(4) IFA sees Anfi as solvent with some bearable risk.
(5) Full take over of Anfi is planned within the next five years.
(6) There are negations with the Mogan community about a hotel at Tauro.
Various responses were dare and may be of ignorance.
The new contract says that the penalty (paying hotel costs for all used weeks in the past, see below*) does apply for ANY early termination of max contract duration of 50 years. Not only for the owner, heirs and their heirs included! Not only non-payment of maintenance fee but also if the contract is declared null and void at court. That means if you win at court (contract is declared null and void) you must pay – a ridicules situation. If this clause is legally valid must be proved a court.
Even if Anfi deletes this penalty paragraph there is another paragraph which says that the owner has to be aware that hotel cost of Anfi are very much higher (see annex) than timeshare based on a long term contract. At termination of the contract this could be used to get hotel cost back at court. This means every owner terminating the contract can be threatened with this.
According to the timeshare directive the contract must have ‘pre-contract’ information before signing it. The information given says nothing of hotel costs. It simply says that at termination of the contract the weeks fall back to Anfi without compensation, that’s all. So the contract is in contradiction to the ‘pre-contract’ information and can be checked at court.
Wolfgang
* Just to show what that means: The penalty sums up to about 70,000 Euro for two weeks over 20 years (paid maintenance fee already subtracted).
In the past you could add your heirs to the owner certificate and even change the order of owners so that the new first gets the bill and letters from Anfi. That’s all without changing the contract. You could even could make a gift to Donald Trump and transfer the weeks to him without changing the underlying contract. Some private buyers have never seen the contract and rely only on the club constitution.
Now this is only possible with a ‘new’ contract? Has anyone tried this with the ‘old’ contract? Or is this because Anfi wants to get rid of illegal old contracts?
The new 5 year Anfi Flex program is only for exchange in the club where you have bought weeks (‘home booking’) if you do NOT join AVC where you can exchange weeks in the weeks and point system annually including externally over RCI. After 5 years the Anfi Flex program is automatically renewed if you do not terminate it. If you terminate it you fall back to your own fixed weeks you can use.
If you terminate AVC the Anfi Flex program is the fall back. If you terminate AVC and you are not member of the Anfi Flex program or you have terminated it before you fall back to your own fixed weeks you can use.
@David
In addition what Roger said you must know that since last year Anfi does not take back weeks anymore if you tell them not to pay maintenance fee next year (tolerated break of contract). They even do not take them back if you have health problems and cannot travel.
Even worse the new contract includes the clause that at any early termination of the contract including declaring it null and void at court you must pay for all used weeks in the past hotel cost of about 350 Euro per night.
Of course nobody will take this huge financial risk. The only thing left then is to rent the weeks out or resale the weeks over Anfi Sales or privately.
The problem with the latter is that the chance to do so depends of ‘good weeks’, that means weeks in a season of high demand combined with high level and good view.
If you have floating weeks Anfi will convert them as Roger said to fixed weeks which can float. This fixed weeks may be any arbitrary weeks you and other may classify as ‘bad weeks’ which you or your heirs may be not able to sell.
You may not think about that today but circumstances of life can change and you or your heirs may find themselves in that situation.
So I would not recommend to sign the new contract if you are happy with the situation as it is.
Wolfgang
@Haydn
“Can Anfi legally impose this new contract and can I refuse to sign”
No, yes you can refuse to sign. Please read the contract carefully.
Wolfgang
@Brian That’s right. Someone terminating at 49 years would pay 49 years hotel cost. That cannot be right for only one year left. This is an extreme example but shows that the penalty is unfair twofold, hotel cost and time. Good news for CLA and others.
The next question is was happens with private resale of weeks based on the new contract. The new contract is about fixed weeks and the Flex program is a separate personal contract. This gives Anfi the possibility to deny resale weeks to float.
Wolfgang
RDO, where Anfi is member, has a Code of Conduct:
There can be read:
(1) In the event of the death of a joint owner, the surviving owner can surrender their timeshare if they wish and additionally, the beneficiaries of a will are not obliged to take on the timeshare if they do not wish to do so.
(2) A timeshare owner who has been declared bankrupt may hand back the timeshare without charge.
(3) If a sole owner or either of the joint owners is suffering from a long-term illness that prevents them from travelling to their resort for the foreseeable future, the timeshare interest may be surrendered.
(4) In all other cases, an owner may surrender their timeshare interest at any time, subject to the agreement of the RDO member. In such cases any surrender fee shall not exceed a sum equivalent to 3 years current maintenance fees.
Nothing of this can be read in the new contract. Instead ANY termination, even with reasons mentioned above, is a breach of contract with huge financial consequences (hotel cost for used weeks instead of maintenance fee).
I just got the message of a member who wanted to end the contract on base of (3). The answer was no.
Wolfgang
