Commitments And Contingencies
|6 Months Ended|
Jun. 30, 2022
|Commitments And Contingencies [Abstract]|
|Commitments And Contingencies||
9. Commitments and Contingencies
In the ordinary course of business, the Company and its subsidiaries are parties to lawsuits as plaintiff or defendant involving its operations and activities, including the purchase, sale, marketing, or financing of VOIs. 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 other individuals and entities, and it 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.
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 range of loss. Frequently in these matters, the claims are broad and the plaintiffs have not quantified or factually supported their claim.
The following is a description of material legal proceedings pending against the Company or its subsidiaries or which were pending during the six months ended June 30, 2022:
On June 28, 2018, Melissa S. Landon, Edward P. Landon, Shane Auxier and Mu Hpare, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a purported class action lawsuit against Bluegreen and BVU asserting claims for alleged violations of the Wisconsin Timeshare Act, Wisconsin law prohibiting illegal referral selling, and Wisconsin law prohibiting illegal attorney’s fee provisions. Plaintiffs seek certification of a class consisting of all persons who, in Wisconsin, purchased from Bluegreen one or more VOIs within six years prior to the filing of this lawsuit. Plaintiffs seek statutory damages, attorneys’ fees and injunctive relief. Bluegreen moved to dismiss the case, and on November 27, 2019, the Court issued a ruling granting the motion in part. Plaintiffs moved for class certification, and on November 5, 2021, the Court entered an order denying Plaintiff’s Motion. During June 2022, the parties settled the litigation and the lawsuit has been dismissed with prejudice.
On January 7, 2019, Shehan Wijesinha filed a purported class action lawsuit alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (the “TCPA”). It is alleged that BVU called plaintiff’s cell phone for telemarketing purposes using an automated dialing system, and that plaintiff did not give BVU his express written consent to do so. Plaintiff seeks certification of a class comprised of other persons in the United States who received similar calls from or on
behalf of BVU without the person’s consent. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages, attorneys’ fees and injunctive relief. Bluegreen believes the lawsuit is without merit and intends to vigorously defend the action. On July 15, 2019, the court entered an order staying this case pending a ruling from the Federal Communications Commission clarifying the definition of an automatic telephone dialing system under the TCPA and the decision of the Eleventh Circuit in a separate action brought against a VOI company by a plaintiff alleging violations of the TCPA. On January 7, 2020, the Eleventh Circuit issued a ruling consistent with BVU’s position, and on June 26, 2020, the FCC also issued a favorable ruling. The case was stayed pending the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid. On April 1, 2021, the Supreme Court issued a decision on the Facebook case which was favorable to Bluegreen’s position that an automatic telephone dialing system was not used in this case. Bluegreen believes the ruling disposes of the plaintiff’s claim and has filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority advising the court of the ruling.
On July 18, 2019, Eddie Boyd, and Connie Boyd, Shaundre and Kimberly Laskey, and others similarly situated filed an action alleging that BVU and co-defendants violated the Missouri Merchandise Practices Act for allegedly making false statements and misrepresentations with respect to the sale of VOIs. Plaintiffs claims include a purported class action allegation that BVU’s charging of an administrative processing fee constitutes the unauthorized practice of law, and also that Bluegreen and its outside counsel engaged in abuse of process by filing a lawsuit against plaintiffs’ counsel (The Montgomery Law Firm). Plaintiffs seek monetary damages, attorneys’ fees and injunctive relief. On August 31, 2020, the court certified a class regarding the unauthorized practice of law claim, but dismissed the claims regarding abuse of process. On January 11, 2021, the Court issued an order that the class members are not entitled to rescission of their contracts because they failed to plead fraud in the inducement. Discovery is ongoing. Bluegreen believes the lawsuit is without merit and is vigorously defending the action.
On July 14, 2020, Kenneth Johansen, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a purported class action against BVU for alleged violations of the TCPA. Specifically, the named plaintiff alleges that he received numerous telemarketing calls from BVU while he was on the National Do Not Call Registry. Bluegreen filed a motion to dismiss, and plaintiff in response filed an amended complaint on September 18, 2020. On February 18, 2021, plaintiff filed a motion for class certification seeking to certify a class of thousands of individual proposed class members. On April 15, 2021 a court ordered mediation was conducted at which time the parties were not able to resolve the lawsuit. On September 30, 2021 the court entered an order denying plaintiff’s motion for class certification. The plaintiffs have appealed the order to the Eleventh Circuit. The Company is vigorously defending the action.
On March 15, 2018, BVU entered into an Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Assets with T. Park Central, LLC, O. Park Central, LLC, and New York Urban Ownership Management, LLC, (collectively “New York Urban”) (“Purchase and Sale Agreement”), which provided for the purchase of The Manhattan Club inventory over a number of years and the management contract for The Manhattan Club Association, Inc. On October 7, 2019, New York Urban initiated arbitration proceedings against BVU alleging that The Manhattan Club Association, Inc. (of which BVU was a member) was obligated to pay an increased management fee to a New York Urban affiliate and that this higher amount would be the benchmark for BVU’s purchase of the management contract under the parties’ Purchase and Sale Agreement. New York Urban also sought damages in the arbitration proceedings in excess of $10 million for promissory estoppel and tortious interference. On November 19, 2019, the parties participated in mediation but did not resolve the matter. On November 20, 2019, New York Urban sent a letter to BVU advising that it was: (1) withdrawing its arbitration demand; (2) notifying the Board that it was not seeking to execute the proposed amendment to the Management Agreement that was originally sent to Bluegreen on April 24, 2019; and (3) was not going to pay itself a management fee for the 2020 operating year in an amount exceeding the 2019 operating year (i.e., $6.5 million). On November 21, 2019, BVU sent New York Urban a Notice of Termination of the Purchase and Sale Agreement. On November 25, 2019, New York Urban sent its own Notice of Termination and a separate letter containing an offer to compromise if BVU resigned its position on the Board and permitted New York Urban to enforce its rights to the collateral. On November 29, 2019, BVU accepted the offer and on December 18, 2019, BVU provided New York Urban with resignations of its members on the Board of Directors.
On August 30, 2020, over 100 VOI owners at The Manhattan Club (“TMC”) sued BVU and certain unaffiliated entities (the “Non-Bluegreen Defendants”). The complaint included claims arising out of alleged misrepresentations made during the sale of VOIs at TMC and certain post-sale operational practices, including allegedly charging owners excessive annual maintenance fees and implementing reservation policies that restrict the ability of VOI owners to use their points to access the resort while allowing the general public to make reservations. The plaintiffs assert in the
complaint that Bluegreen acquired operational control of TMC from the Non-Bluegreen Defendants in 2018 and assumed joint liability for any prior wrongdoing by them. Bluegreen believes this assertion to be erroneous and that the claims against BVU are without merit. On September 27, 2021, the court granted Bluegreen’s motion to dismiss without prejudice and the Court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims. Plaintiffs have amended their complaint. BVU filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on December 29, 2021 and continues to vigorously defend the action.
On April 2, 2021, New York Urban initiated new arbitration proceedings against BVU, alleging it is owed over $70 million for periodic inventory closings that have not occurred since the Purchase and Sale Agreement was terminated or that will not occur because of the termination. New York Urban also seeks over $50 million because, due to the Purchase and Sale Agreement’s termination, the closing on the management contract will not occur. BVU believes this new claim is without merit and is pursuing declaratory relief and claims based on breach of the parties settlement agreement. Both New York Urban’s claims and BVU’s claims for declaratory relief and breach of the settlement agreement are being heard by an arbitration panel, and BVU is vigorously defending against New York Urban’s claims. Discovery is ongoing.
On September 14, 2021, Tamarah and Emmanuel Louis, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a purported class action lawsuit against BVU alleging it violated the Military Lending Act (“MLA”). The complaint alleges that BVU did not make any inquiry before offering financing to the plaintiffs as to whether they were members of the United States Military and allege other claims related to certain disclosures mandated by the MLA. BVU filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, and plaintiffs then filed an amended complaint on December 3, 2021. The District Court granted BVU’s motion to dismiss. An appeal of the District Court’s dismissal to the Eleventh Circuit has been initiated by the plaintiffs.
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 exit firms and 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 exit firms have encouraged such owners to become delinquent and ultimately default on their obligations and that such actions and its inability to contact the owners have been a material factor in the increase in its annual default rates. Bluegreen’s average annual default rates have increased from 6.9% in 2015 to 7.9% in the second quarter of 2022. Bluegreen also estimates that approximately 11.2% of the total delinquencies on its VOI notes receivable as of June 30, 2022 related to VOI notes receivable subject to this issue. Bluegreen has in a number of cases pursued, and Bluegreen may in the future pursue, legal action against the VOI owners, and as described below, against the exit firms.
On November 13, 2019, Bluegreen filed a lawsuit against timeshare exit firm The Montgomery Law Firm and certain of its affiliates. In the complaint, Bluegreen alleged that through various forms of deceptive advertising, as well as inappropriate direct contact with VOI owners, such firm and its affiliates made false statements about Bluegreen and provided misleading information to the VOI owners and encouraged nonpayment by consumers. Bluegreen believes the consumers are paying fees to the firm and its affiliates in exchange for illusory services. Bluegreen has asserted claims under the Lanham Act, as well as tortious interference with contractual relations, civil conspiracy to commit tortious interference and other claims. Defendants’ motion to dismiss was denied. In January 2022, Bluegreen entered into a settlement with several of the defendants, which includes an immaterial monetary payment and a stipulated injunction. Bluegreen continues to pursue its claims against the remaining defendants.
On November 13, 2020, Bluegreen filed a lawsuit against timeshare exit firm, Carlsbad Law Group, LLP, and certain of its associated law firms and affiliates. On December 30, 2020, Bluegreen filed a lawsuit against timeshare exit firm, The Molfetta Law Firm, and certain of its associated law firms, affiliates, and cohorts, including Timeshare Termination (“TTT”). In both of these actions, Bluegreen makes substantially the same claims against the timeshare exit firms and its associated law firms and affiliates as those made in its action against The Montgomery Law Firm described above. In June 2021, counsel for TTT moved to withdraw, citing TTT’s insolvency. On October 1, 2021, the principals of TTT filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Protection. Bluegreen is pursuing its damages as a claim in those proceedings. Discovery is ongoing with respect to the non-bankrupt defendants in the Molfetta matter and in the Carlsbad matter.
Other Commitments, Contingencies and Guarantees
The Company, indirectly through Bluegreen and BVU, has an exclusive marketing agreement through 2024 with Bass Pro, a nationally-recognized retailer of fishing, marine, hunting, camping and sports gear, that provides the Company with the right to market and sell vacation packages at kiosks in each of Bass Pro’s retail locations and Cabela’s stores and through other means. Pursuant to a settlement agreement Bluegreen entered into with Bass Pro and its affiliates during June 2019, Bluegreen paid Bass Pro $20.0 million and agreed to, among other things, make five annual payments to Bass Pro of $4.0 million in January of each year, commencing in 2020. Bluegreen made annual payments of $4.0 million to Bass Pro in January 2020, January 2021, and December 2021 (as payment of the amount owed in January 2022). As of June 30, 2022 and December 31, 2021, $7.6 million and $7.3 million, respectively, was included in accrued liabilities and other in the unaudited consolidated balance sheets, for the remaining payments required by the settlement agreement.
During both the six months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021, VOI sales to prospects and leads generated by the agreement with Bass Pro accounted for approximately 17% of Bluegreen’s VOI sales volume. Subject to the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement, in lieu of the previous commission arrangement, Bluegreen agreed to pay Bass Pro a fixed annual fee of $70,000 for each Bass Pro and Cabela’s retail store that it is accessing (excluding sales at retail stores which are designated to provide tours to Bluegreen/Big Cedar Vacations, or “Bluegreen/Big Cedar feeder stores”), plus $32.00 per net vacation package sold (less cancellations or refunds within 45 days of sale). Bluegreen also agreed to contribute to the Wonders of Wildlife Foundation $5.00 per net package sold (less certain cancellations and refunds within 45 days of sale), subject to an annual minimum of $700,000. Bluegreen will generally be required to pay the fixed annual fee with respect to at least 59 Bass Pro retail stores and at least 60 Cabela’s retail stores. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the minimum number of Bass Pro and Cabela’s retail stores for purposes of the fixed annual fee may be reduced under certain circumstances set forth in the agreement, including as a result of a reduction of traffic in the stores in excess of 25% year-over-year. In December 2021, Bluegreen paid $8.3 million for the 2022 fixed fee, of which $4.2 million was unamortized as of June 30, 2022 and is included in the Company’s unaudited consolidated balance sheet. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2022, Bluegreen expensed $2.1 million and $4.2 million, respectively, for this fixed fee, which is included in selling, general and administrative expenses in the Company’s unaudited consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income. As of June 30, 2022, Bluegreen had sales and marketing operations at a total of 128 Bass Pro Shops and Cabela’s Stores.
In lieu of paying maintenance fees for unsold VOI inventory, Bluegreen may enter into subsidy agreements with certain HOAs. During the six months ended June 30, 2022 and 2021, Bluegreen made subsidy payments under these agreements of $5.7 million and $4.7 million, respectively, which are included in cost of other fee-based services in the Company’s unaudited consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income. As of June 30, 2022, Bluegreen had $7.6 million accrued for such subsidies, which is included in accrued liabilities and other in the unaudited consolidated balance sheet as of such date. As of December 31, 2021, Bluegreen had no accrued liabilities for such subsidies.
The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.
Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef