Virginia Real Estate Time-Share Act; recordkeeping by resellers.
Summary
SB807 amends the Virginia Real Estate Time-Share Act to strengthen recordkeeping requirements for resellers and lead dealers involved in time-share resale transactions. The bill requires both parties to keep detailed records for five years when contact information is obtained, including the lead dealer’s identifying information, the date/time/place of the transaction, the consideration paid, proof of payment, and the contact information itself in the exact form received. It also requires resellers to retain records for at least five years after each resale-service transaction, including resale transfer agreements and resale purchase agreements.
The bill further creates an evidentiary presumption in civil or criminal cases that contact information was wrongfully obtained if the required records cannot be produced. It also authorizes a private right of action for persons whose contact information was wrongfully obtained or used, with statutory damages of $1,000 per affected time-share owner or exchange-program member, plus reasonable attorney fees and costs for the prevailing party.
Impact
The bill amends a single section of the Code of Virginia, § 55.1-2245, and primarily affects time-share resellers, lead dealers, and persons involved in time-share resale services. It increases compliance obligations by imposing specific document-retention duties and by making failure to keep records potentially costly in litigation. The law also enhances enforcement tools for time-share owners and exchange-program members by creating a damages remedy and shifting attorney-fee exposure to violators.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad legislative support overall, passing the Senate unanimously and the House by a wide margin. Committee and floor votes indicate general agreement that additional recordkeeping and enforcement measures are appropriate in the time-share resale context. The narrower subcommittee vote suggests there was some discussion or hesitation at the committee level, but the final votes show strong bipartisan backing.
Contention
The main points of contention likely centered on whether the enhanced recordkeeping requirements and statutory penalties were too burdensome for resellers and lead dealers, versus whether they were necessary to deter misuse of consumer contact information in time-share resale solicitations. The 4-3 subcommittee vote and 13-6 committee report suggest some members were concerned about regulatory burden, evidentiary presumptions, or the size of the $1,000-per-person remedy. Supporters likely viewed the bill as a consumer-protection measure aimed at preventing improper acquisition and use of owner contact information.