11.    Commitments and Contingencies



In the ordinary course of business, BBX Capital and its subsidiaries are parties to lawsuits as plaintiff or defendant involving its operations and activities. Bluegreen is subject to claims or proceedings from time to time relating to the purchase, sale, marketing, or financing of VOIs or other business activities.  Bluegreen is also subject to certain matters relating to the Bluegreen Communities’ business, substantially all of the assets of which were sold by Bluegreen on May 4, 2012. Additionally, from time to time in the ordinary course of business,  the Company is involved in disputes with existing and former employees, vendors, taxing jurisdictions and various other parties, and Bluegreen also receives individual consumer complaints, as well as complaints received through regulatory and consumer agencies, including Offices of State Attorneys General. The Company takes these matters seriously and attempts to resolve any such issues as they arise. 



Reserves are accrued for matters in which management believes it is probable that a loss will be incurred and the amount of such loss can be reasonably estimated. Management does not believe that the aggregate liability relating to known contingencies in excess of the aggregate amounts accrued will have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations or financial condition. However, litigation is inherently uncertain and the actual costs of resolving legal claims, including awards of damages, may be substantially higher than the amounts accrued for these claims and may have a material adverse impact on the Company’s results of operations or financial condition.



Adverse judgements and the costs of defending or resolving legal claims may be substantial and may have a material adverse impact on the Company’ financial statements. Management is not at this time able to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses with respect to matters in which it is reasonably possible that a loss will occur. In certain matters, management is unable to estimate the loss or reasonable range of loss until additional developments provide information sufficient to support an assessment of the loss or reasonable range of loss.  Frequently in these matters, the claims are broad, and the plaintiffs have not quantified or factually supported their claim.   



BBX Capital Litigation



Securities and Exchange Commission Complaint 



In 2012, the SEC brought an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against BCC and Alan B. Levan, BCC’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. Following an initial trial in 2014 and the reversal on appeal of certain judgments of the district court by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, a second trial was held in 2017, and on May 8, 2017, the jury rendered a verdict in favor of BCC and Mr. Levan and against the SEC on all counts.



In connection with the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ reversal of certain judgments in the first trial, which became final on January 31, 2017, and the resolution of the matter in favor of BCC and Mr. Levan in the second trial, BBX Capital received legal fees and costs reimbursements from its insurance carrier for the three months ended March 31, 2017 of approximately $5.0 million as well as the release of the $4.6 million penalty assessed against BCC in the first trial. The legal fees and costs reimbursements and the release of the penalty for the three months ended March 31, 2017 are reflected in the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations in “Litigation Costs and penalty reimbursements”.



The following is a description of certain ongoing litigation matters:



In Re BCC Merger Shareholder Litigation



On August 10, 2016, Shiva Stein filed a lawsuit against the Company, BBX Merger Sub, LLC, BCC and the members of BCC’s board of directors, which seeks to establish a class of BCC’s shareholders and challenges the Merger.  The plaintiff asserts that the Merger consideration undervalues BCC and is unfair to BCC’s public shareholders, that the sales process was unfair and that BCC’s directors breached their fiduciary duties of care, loyalty and candor owed to the public shareholders of BCC because, among other reasons, they failed to take steps to maximize the value of BCC to its public shareholders and instead diverted consideration to themselves. The lawsuit also alleges that BBX Capital, as the controlling shareholder of BCC, breached its fiduciary duties of care, loyalty and candor owed to the public shareholders of BCC by utilizing confidential, non-public information to formulate the Merger consideration and not acting in the best interests of BCC’s public shareholders. In addition, the lawsuit includes a cause of action against BCC, the Company and Merger Sub for aiding and abetting the alleged breaches of fiduciary duties. The lawsuit requested that the court grant an injunction blocking the proposed Merger or, if the proposed Merger is completed, rescind the transaction or award damages as determined by the court.  On September 15, 2016, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the amended complaint. On November 21, 2016, the Court issued an order granting the Motion to Dismiss with prejudice. Plaintiff appealed the Court’s order dismissing the amended complaint to the Fourth District Court of Appeals, and on March 21, 2018, the Fourth District Court of Appeals issued an opinion affirming the dismissal of the action. 



Bluegreen Litigation 



Commencing in 2015, it came to Bluegreen’s attention that its collection efforts with respect to its VOI notes receivable were being impacted by a then emerging industry-wide trend involving the receipt of “cease and desist” letters from attorneys purporting to represent certain VOI owners. Following receipt of these letters, Bluegreen is unable to contact the owners unless allowed by law.  Bluegreen believes these attorneys have encouraged such owners to become delinquent and ultimately default on their obligations and that such actions and Bluegreen’s inability to contact the owners are a primary contributor to the increase in its annual default rates.  Bluegreen’s average annual default rates have increased from 6.9% in 2015 to 8.4% in 2018.  Bluegreen also estimates that approximately 13.3% of the total delinquencies on its VOI notes receivable as of March 31, 2018 related to VOI notes receivable subject to these letters.  Bluegreen has in a number of cases pursued, and may in the future pursue, legal action against the VOI owners.



On August 24, 2016, Whitney Paxton and Jeff Reeser filed a lawsuit against Bluegreen Vacations Unlimited, Inc. (“BVU”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bluegreen, and certain of its employees (collectively, the “Defendants”), seeking to establish a class action of former and current employees of BVU and alleging violations of plaintiffs’ rights under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (the “FLSA”) and breach of contract. The lawsuit also claims that the Defendants terminated plaintiff Whitney Paxton as retaliation for her complaints about alleged violations of the FLSA. The lawsuit seeks damages in the amount of the unpaid compensation owed to the plaintiffs. During July 2017, a magistrate judge entered a report and recommendation that the plaintiffs’ motion to conditionally certify collective action and facilitate notice to potential class members be granted with respect to certain employees and denied as to others. During September 2017, the judge accepted the recommendation and granted preliminary approval of class certification. Based on that conditional class certification, all potential class members were provided Consent Forms to opt-in to the lawsuit, which opt-in period has since expired, and a set number of opt-ins has been determined. Class-wide discovery was subsequently served and plaintiffs filed a Motion for Protective Order which is pending. Bluegreen believes that the lawsuit is without merit and intends to vigorously defend the action.



On September 22, 2017, Stephen Potje, Tamela Potje, Sharon Davis, Beafus Davis, Matthew Baldwin, Tammy Baldwin, Arnor Lee, Angela Lee, Gretchen Brown, Paul Brown, Jeremy Estrada, Emily Estrada, Guillermo Astorga Jr., Michael Oliver, Carrie Oliver, Russell Walters, Elaine Walters, and Mike Ericson, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, filed a lawsuit against Bluegreen which asserted claims for alleged violations of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and the Florida False Advertising Law. In the complaint, the plaintiffs alleged the making of false representations in connection with Bluegreen’s sales of VOIs, including representations regarding the ability to use points for stays or other experiences with other vacation providers, the ability to cancel VOI purchases and receive a refund of the purchase price and the ability to roll over unused points and that annual maintenance fees would not increase. The complaint sought to establish a class of consumers who, since the beginning of the applicable statute of limitations, purchased VOIs from Bluegreen, had their annual maintenance fees relating to Bluegreen VOIs increased, or were unable to roll over their unused points to the next calendar year. The plaintiffs sought damages in the amount alleged to have been improperly obtained by Bluegreen, as well as any statutory enhanced damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and equitable and injunctive relief. On November 20, 2017, Bluegreen moved to dismiss the complaint and, in response, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint dropping the claims relating to the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and adding claims for fraud in the inducement and violation of the Florida Vacation Plan and Timesharing Act. On March 20, 2018, the plaintiffs withdrew their motion for class action certification and on March 23, 2018, the court ordered dismissal of the lawsuit. On April 24, 2018, the plaintiffs filed a new lawsuit against Bluegreen for substantially the same claims, but only on behalf of the 18 named individuals and not as a class action. Bluegreen believes that the lawsuit is without merit and intends to vigorously defend the action



On January 4, 2018, Gordon Siu, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a lawsuit alleging that Bluegreen and Choice Hotels violated California state privacy laws by recording and/or monitoring a telemarketing call to the plaintiff without his consent. The plaintiff claims the individual making the call requested that the plaintiff provide personal and private information and did not disclose that the call was being recorded until after making such request. The plaintiff seeks certification of a class of persons in California whose telephone conversations were monitored, recorded and/or eavesdropped upon without their consent by Bluegreen and/or Choice Hotels and damages of $5,000 per violation. Bluegreen believes that the lawsuit is without merit and intends to vigorously defend the action.



The following is a description of certain commitments, contingencies, and guarantees:



In lieu of paying maintenance fees for unsold VOI inventory, Bluegreen provides subsidies to certain homeowners’ associations to provide for funds necessary to operate and maintain vacation ownership properties in excess of assessments collected from owners of the VOIs. Bluegreen did not make any subsidy payments in connection with these arrangements during the three months ended March 31, 2018 or 2017.  As of March 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, Bluegreen had $2.3 million and $0, respectively, accrued for such subsidies included in other liabilities in the Company’s condensed consolidated statements of financial condition, respectively. As of March 31, 2018, Bluegreen was providing subsidies to nine homeowners’ associations. 



In October 2013, Bluegreen entered into an agreement to purchase from an unaffiliated third party completed VOI inventory at the Lake Eve Resort in Orlando, Florida over a five-year period. The total purchase commitment was $35.1 million. As of March 31, 2018,  $4.6 million remained payable under this agreement.



In August 2016, the Company entered into a severance arrangement with a former executive. Under the terms of the arrangement, the executive will receive $3.7 million over a three year period ending in August 2019. As of March 31, 2018,  the Company had a $1.4 million liability remaining under this arrangement.  Also during the second half of 2017, Bluegreen commenced an initiative designed to streamline their operations in certain areas to facilitate future growth. Such initiative resulted in $5.8 million of severance accrued as of December 31, 2017 and $0.7 million accrued as of March 31, 2018, included in other liabilities in the Company’s condensed consolidated statement of financial condition.  



In September 2017, Bluegreen entered into an agreement with a former executive in connection with his retirement.  Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, Bluegreen agreed to make payments totaling approximately $2.9 million through March 2019. As of March 31, 2018, Bluegreen had a  $2.1 million liability remaining under this agreement. 



In March 2018, Bluegreen approved in principle the material terms of an Executive Leadership Incentive Plan (the “ELIP”), which is expected to provide for the grant of cash-settled performance units (“Performance Units”) and cash-settled stock appreciation rights (“SARs”) to participants in the ELIP.  It is contemplated that each participant will be granted award opportunities representing a percentage of his or her base salary (the “Target LTI”).  In the case of certain of Bluegreen’s executive officers, the award will be divided 30% to SARs and 70% to Performance Units.  For other participants, including Bluegreen’s senior vice presidents, certain vice presidents and certain other employees, the award will be 100% in Performance Units. Performance Units will represent the right of the recipient to receive a cash payment based on the achievement of levels of EBITDA and return on invested capital (“ROIC”) during a two-year period.  SARs granted under the ELIP, upon exercise after vesting, will entitle the holder to a cash payment in an amount equal to the excess of the market price of Bluegreen’s common stock on the date of exercise over the exercise price of the SAR. The SARs will vest in equal annual installments on the first, second and third anniversary of the date of grant and have a five-year term. As of March 31, 2018, Bluegreen had $1.0 million accrued for the ELIP included in other liabilities in the Company’s condensed consolidated statement of financial condition.



Bluegreen has an exclusive marketing agreement with Bass Pro, a nationally-recognized retailer of fishing, marine, hunting, camping and sports gear, that provides Bluegreen with the right to market and sell vacation packages at kiosks in each of Bass Pro’s retail locations and through other means. As of March 31, 2018, Bluegreen was selling vacation packages in 68 of Bass Pro’s stores and compensating Bass Pro based on VOI sales generated through the program. No compensation is paid to Bass Pro under the agreement on sales made at Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations’ resorts. During each of the three months ended March 31, 2018 and 2017, VOI sales to prospects and leads generated by the agreement with Bass Pro accounted for approximately 12% and 13%, respectively, of VOI sales volume. On October 9, 2017, Bass Pro advised Bluegreen that it believes the amounts paid to it as VOI sales commissions should not have been adjusted for certain purchaser defaults. Bluegreen previously had informed Bass Pro that the aggregate amount of such adjustments for defaults charged back to Bass Pro between January 2008 and June 2017 totaled approximately $4.8 million. Bluegreen continues to believe these chargebacks were appropriate and consistent with the terms and intent of the agreements with Bass Pro, and Bluegreen is continuing to discuss the matter with Bass Pro. On October 20, 2017, in order to demonstrate our good faith, Bluegreen paid and recognized an expense for this amount to Bass Pro pending a resolution of the matter in the ordinary course. Bluegreen has continued to make payments to Bass Pro as previously calculated and Bass Pro has accepted these payments. However, any change in the method of the calculation could adversely impact future marketing expenses.



The Company guarantees certain obligations of its wholly-owned subsidiaries and unconsolidated real estate joint ventures as follows: