Marriott Vacation Club Class Action Lawsuit: Lennen and Cruise Fees

The largest class action lawsuit against Marriott Vacation Club, Lennen v. Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc., accused the company of selling its points-based program as real estate when it was really a use license. That case was dismissed and the dismissal affirmed by the Eleventh Circuit in December 2021. Separate class actions have targeted hidden cruise fees (settled in 2018), telemarketing calls (still pending), and the Ritz-Carlton Destination Club affiliation (mixed rulings on certification). Here is what each one alleged and where it ended up.

The Lennen Case: Timeshares as Real Estate

Anthony and Beth Lennen filed suit on May 19, 2016, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, case number 6:16-cv-00855, before Judge Carlos E. Mendoza.¹ Defendants included Marriott Ownership Resorts, Marriott Resorts Travel Company (MVC Exchange Company), Marriott Resorts Title Company, MVC Trust Owners Association, First American Financial Corporation, and Orange County, Florida.²

The plaintiffs argued that ownership in the MVC Trust amounted to “a use license, like a gym membership,” not a deeded interest in specific real property.¹ Even so, they said, Marriott collected fees tied to real property — title premiums, closing costs, maintenance fees, and taxes — while keeping the underlying interest intangible and under its own control. The complaint alleged 21 counts, including three RICO Act violations.³ Plaintiffs’ counsel Jeffrey Norton of Newman Ferrara LLP put potential damages “in the hundreds of millions.”⁴

The suit also spoke for “legacy” owners who held traditional deeded-week timeshares from before the points system. The complaint said the MVC Trust program diluted the value of those older interests and raised their costs.⁵

In late September 2017, Judge Mendoza dismissed the complaint on “shotgun pleading” grounds, meaning the pleading failed to tie allegations cleanly to specific legal claims. He let the Lennens refile.³ The amended complaint was also dismissed for failure to state a claim. The plaintiffs sought class certification in May 2019 and appealed. On December 9, 2021, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal and the summary judgment against them, ending the case.²

The Florida Law That Landed Mid-Case

While the Lennen suit was pending, the American Resort Development Association, the timeshare industry’s trade group then chaired by Marriott Vacations CEO Steve Weisz, backed a Florida bill that plaintiffs said was meant to hand Marriott a retroactive defense.³

Senate Bill 818 added a new definition of “interest holder” for points-based timeshare plans and stated the changes were “intended only as a clarification of existing law,” language ARDA’s lobbyist Gary Hunter asked for so the provisions could apply retroactively.⁶ Governor Rick Scott signed it on May 23, 2017. Two weeks later, Marriott told the court the new law went “to the very heart” of the Lennen case and would “decimate much of the complaint.”⁷ Plaintiffs’ counsel responded that Marriott had gone to the legislature because it “could not justify the legality of their conduct under existing law.”

The Cruise Fees Settlement

A separate class action, Finerman et al. v. Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc. and International Cruise & Excursion Gallery, Inc. (Case No. 14-cv-1154, Middle District of Florida), took aim at how cruises were booked through the exchange program. Plaintiffs said the defendants inflated “port fees,” leaving members to believe their points would cover the full fare when they would not.⁸

The class covered Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Exchange Program members who booked a cruise between January 1, 2010, and February 23, 2018. A federal judge preliminarily approved the settlement in February 2018. Class members could choose one of three recoveries on up to five qualifying bookings:⁹

A cash refund of 50 percent of the port fees paid.
Exchange Program PlusPoints worth 75 percent of the cash value of the fees.
An International Cruise & Excursion Gallery gift card worth 75 percent of the cash value.

Going forward, the companies agreed that points would cover the total cost of cruises (excluding government fees) and that non-commissionable fees would be disclosed in booking confirmations.⁸ The claim deadline was June 20, 2018, so the window to file has closed.

Telemarketing Class Actions

Marriott Vacations Worldwide has faced at least two proposed class actions under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Astrahan v. Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corp. (Case No. 8:17-cv-02139) was filed in December 2017 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Cheri Astrahan alleged Marriott called her mobile phone using an autodialer and prerecorded voice despite her being on the National Do Not Call Registry and having revoked any prior consent. She sought up to $1,500 per violation for herself and the putative class.¹⁰

Heller v. Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corp. (Case No. 3:22-cv-00398-FM) was filed on October 31, 2022, by a Texas consumer with similar allegations: calls to numbers on the Do Not Call Registry, calls continuing after requests to stop, and use of automatic dialers without consent. As of early 2026, the case remained a proposed class action with no final ruling.¹¹

Ritz-Carlton Destination Club Cases

Roughly 1,200 fractional owners at two Ritz-Carlton properties have sued over Marriott’s decision to affiliate the luxury Ritz-Carlton Destination Club with the broader Marriott Vacation Club system.

Aspen

In RCHFU, LLC et al. v. Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corp., more than 200 owners of one-twelfth fractional interests at the Ritz-Carlton Destination Club in Aspen sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. Interests originally purchased for between $200,000 and $400,000 starting in 2001 had fallen to less than 20 percent of their original prices after the 2013 affiliation, the owners said. They brought claims for breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, and unjust enrichment. In March 2018, Judge Philip Brimmer denied most of Marriott’s motion to dismiss, finding a fiduciary duty existed between Marriott and the owners.¹²

St. Thomas

Helman et al. v. Marriott International, Inc. (Case No. 3:19-cv-00036) was filed in the District Court of the Virgin Islands on behalf of about 1,000 fractional owners at the Ritz-Carlton Great Bay in St. Thomas. The complaint alleged Marriott engineered a financial crisis involving delinquent maintenance fees and foreclosures, then used it to push owners into a January 2014 vote to accept the merger, while hiding the terms of a 2013 Affiliation Agreement.¹³

In August 2020, the court denied Marriott’s motion to dismiss the breach of fiduciary duty claim but dismissed the constructive fraud claim, ruling it is not a recognized cause of action in the Virgin Islands.¹⁴ In August 2022, the court denied class certification, finding that individual differences in how owners relied on Marriott’s alleged misrepresentations could prevent class-wide treatment of the fraud claims.¹⁵

What Owners Are Complaining About Now

Outside of active class litigation, most of the consumer pressure on Marriott Vacations Worldwide involves getting out of contracts and coping with rising maintenance fees. Its Better Business Bureau profile shows 328 complaints over a recent three-year period, with 109 closed in the most recent 12 months.¹⁶

Owners repeatedly report that there is no way to exit. In a May 2026 reply to one complaint, the company wrote: “At this time, there is no exit or cancellation option available for your vacation ownership under current program guidelines.” Owners who want out are added to a “notification list” in case a deed-back program becomes available. Marriott treats purchases as legally binding after a 10-day rescission period and points to signed acknowledgment forms when buyers allege sales misrepresentation.¹⁶

If you believe a specific practice — a telemarketing call, a cruise booking, or a fractional interest — falls within one of the pending or past cases, keep any confirmations, call logs, and purchase documents, and check the case docket or contact class counsel directly to see whether you fit the class definition.

1
Top Class Actions. Marriott Class Action Says Timeshares Are Not Real Estate
2
Justia. Lennen v. Marriott Ownership Resorts, Inc.
3
NY Real Estate Law Blog. Marriott’s Timeshare Chicanery Continues
4
Timeshare Consumer Association. Marriott Vacation Club Class Action
5
NY Real Estate Law Blog. Reinstate Timeshare Owners’ Claims
6
Orlando Sentinel. Time Share Law Change at Heart of Florida Lawsuit Involving Marriott Vacation Club
7
Florida Trend. Engineering the Law: Marriott’s Class Action Timeshare Battle
8
Truth in Advertising. Cruises for Marriott Vacation Club Destinations Program Members
9
For the People. Class Action Targets Marriott Cruise Charges
10
Top Class Actions. Marriott Class Action Says Telemarketing Calls Violate Federal Law
11
ClassAction.org. Marriott Vacations Worldwide Hit With Class Action Over Alleged Telemarketing Calls
12
Class Law Group. Ritz-Carlton Destination Club Lawsuit
13
Class Law Group. Ritz-Carlton St. Thomas Lawsuit Second Amended Class Action Complaint
14
Class Law Group. Ritz-Carlton St. Thomas Lawsuit Order Re MTD
15
Greenberg Traurig. Helman v. Marriott Order and Opinion Denying Class Certification
16
Better Business Bureau. Marriott Vacations Worldwide BBB Complaints