Timesharetalk

General Forums => General Discussions => Topic started by: charlie1 on January 15, 2014, 00:10:20

Title: Licensing salespeople what a difference this would make!
Post by: charlie1 on January 15, 2014, 00:10:20
Timeshare owners are not aware that they could obtain their money back even if outside of the cooling off notice.

Most timeshare owners think that they can only cancel their contract during the cancellation period. Cancellation of your contract can happen at any anytime if fraud or misrepresentation has taken place.

If you have signed a contract based on misleading or fraudulent information, presented by either party, the contract is not legal. Timeshare Companies will not want a large class action against them. Dealing with owners is much easier and less likely to cause a precedent and open up further problems.

In contract law, a precedent is a legal case that establishes a rule or judgment that subsequent cases would follow. So if you have a strong case, the Timeshare Company will want to deal with you.

If you have been the unfortunate victim of a scam or misrepresntation, then you need to put a strategy together in order to work towards a successful outcome. To ensure you have a strong case then review this link. http://www.timeshareweekly.com/timeshare-fraud-prevention

If anyone has been in the unfortunate position of being scammed but successfully achieved a return of capital then please ensure you share your experiences here  not of the scam, but how you achieved a return of capital. If you had the support of a company that helped you achieve these results than please provide us details. Beware that any company that is recommended will be checked out. 

Licensing salespeople is by far the biggest deterrent for misrepresentation and fraud. Your input may help contribute to what will be a game changer in this Industry. Get involved and contribute with ideas and suggestions. There are no right or wrong ideas at this stage so all input is welcome

Title: Re: Misrepresentation! Follow this strategy and you might get your money back
Post by: lawnmower60 on January 15, 2014, 06:55:24
Your last paragraph will bring a lot of worms out of the woodwork
Title: Re: Misrepresentation! Follow this strategy and you might get your money back
Post by: eneri on January 15, 2014, 09:21:57
Your last paragraph will bring a lot of worms out of the woodwork

My thoughts to. Regular contributors will better be on the ball to do some serious scrutinising!!
Title: Re: Misrepresentation or scammed! This strategy might get your money back
Post by: martyboy02 on January 17, 2014, 12:49:13
I won my money back plus interest using what was the Financial ombudsman's Service and Sect 75, it took 2 years of fighting, but I did it. Lots of emailing, letter writing, phone calls and covert recording of conversations at the resort.
Title: Re: Misrepresentation or scammed! This strategy might get your money back
Post by: charlie1 on January 17, 2014, 13:28:48
Thats good to hear Martyboy I know I mentioned not to put up scam details but I feel there are times when I think the posters may learn a little from this.Was this misrepresentation I am guessing? Was this something the salesperson told you and was not in your contract or did the resort move the goal posts and this did not reflect what was in the contract you signed up for?

I won my money back plus interest using what was the Financial ombudsman's Service and Sect 75, it took 2 years of fighting, but I did it. Lots of emailing, letter writing, phone calls and covert recording of conversations at the resort.
Title: Re: Misrepresentation or scammed! This strategy might get your money back
Post by: martyboy02 on January 18, 2014, 01:47:35
It was classic misselling, we were informed that all the following would apply:
Free transfers to and from the airport
Stay can be booked at 48 hours notice
Value will not depreciate by more than 10%
Use of other resorts (World wide) at no additional expense

We were not informed about:
Maintenance fees
Annual club membership renewal
Guest Certificates
All additional charges
Cancellation rights or time scales

In addition to the above the deposit was taken from my account there and then, at a later date whilst speaking to the Head of Customer Services she admitted that "Sales staff exaggerated". The member of staff who sold to us parted company and went to work for a reclaim company and attempted to get us to sign up with them. We declined and battled it out with the help of the Financial Ombudsmen Service.

We received a cheque for the balance less deposit from Barclay Partner Finance and Anfi, a week before the final ruling, I think we had become such a pain they just wanted rid of us. Shortly after that the FOS ruled that our deposit should be returned plus interest.

We then contacted Anfi and stated as all monies had been returned to us we considered the contract cancelled and any charges null and void, if they (Anfi) did not respond within 7 days we would consider the matter closed. Needless to say there was no response.

The RDO were contacted and informed of Anfi breaching the RDO's Code of Conduct, but because we had our money back the RDO weren't interested.

Uk Anfi Owners group were of no use neither were the owners Committee, they know what was going on but because they were all on old contracts they were more than happy to sit around and discuss what plants should be in the window boxes or the colour of the sunbeds.

I appreciate that everything possible should be done to stop "pop up scam shops" but the established so called respectable companies also should be looked at when my situation or complaints arise. That is why I believe that it is time to license ALL timeshare companies and the industry robustly policed.
Title: Re: Misrepresentation or scammed! This strategy might get your money back
Post by: charlie1 on January 18, 2014, 22:30:31
Have I mentioned before that salespeople need to be licensed?  ::)

This has been resisted by most Developers fearing that this will reduce their sales and the thought of the sales process having some controls. Licensing would also bring about responsibility and accountability.

Licensing would enable the Developers to evaluate their sales process and update the way that they sell. Most use the old antiquated way of selling but may now use the computer however its still using a similar strategy as they did 30 years ago. This needs a fresh outlook.

To start off with they they should design and market to to suit their ideal membership - This can work more effectively if they market for members more relevant to their resort

Once they have identified their ideal member why not investigate their life style habits, where do they go for entertainment, where do they shop, what are the age groups, ideal incomes. What other services are your ideal members likely to use. Why not approach those companies they use and create some advantage or benefit to their customers. Perhaps create a temporary partnership or affiliation with a company that has an ideal profile of member suited to your resort. Work out whats in it for them?

This is basic simple marketing and if I had a resort that ticked all my boxes and I had a licensed salesperson in front of me I am going to be more receptive. Especially if I had a real after care service from the resort ensuring that I was making best use of my timeshare. If I did not have that resource then I would ensure that this was available on our website. Thats an overview of other Exchange Companies I could use. Key points to ensure that I worked my exchange company effectively. What to do if I get cold called etc

There is so much more that resorts could do with their websites to assist their members.

The good thing about this Industry is that there is so much that can be done if there is a will to do so. The Industry needs some Developers to step up and raise their game and agree to have their sales licensed by an Independent Company and review their products and create new ones with exit options.  8) 

Title: Re: Misrepresentation or scammed! This strategy might get your money back
Post by: martyboy02 on January 19, 2014, 15:39:44
Like you Charlie I also have been calling for licencing now for the last couple of years. The body managing the license would be Governments Trade & Industry Departments or Ministries responsible for tourism.

Initial funding would come from registration fees (Paid annually) and there after by collection of fines by transgressions.

This recently occurred in Scotland recently with the Property Factors Bill Scotland (And I did have some input, making ammendments to the 2nd draft), the Bill was brought about to bring order to an industry that had been self regulating for a couple of hundred years with loads of well established a companies. The same could be applied to the Timeshare business.
Title: Re: Misrepresentation or scammed! This strategy might get your money back
Post by: charlie1 on January 19, 2014, 18:52:46
Hi Martyboy I made an approach years ago, at the time there was no real interest. Since then the media and in particular the Internet has seen more focus on the fraudsters and some Developers who need to review aspects of their business that puts their member at a disadvantage or they have dubious sales practices.

Perhaps who you have been dealing with Martyboy their stance may have changed a little and just needs the right approach. I will set sometime a little later on in the year to put something together as an overview on the benefits of Licensing not just from a consumers point of view but also how this could really benefit the Industry.

I will suggest how this could be achieved and funded also how this could be piloted and the process for licensing salespeople. For a later stage this could expand to additional licensing that would allow the salesperson to advice and specialise in other areas of holidaying.

The 7 points below has mainly been covered before in the Financial Services Industry. I have also been reviewing how this has been worked in the USA.

If anyone has any thoughts please post them on the forum or pm me

1) Regarding the process.
2) What should be considered within a Licence?
3) Who should regulate this?
4) What about Resales Companies staff who deal with the consumer? They could play a major role?
5) How do you see this being funded?
6) Process for investigating complaints?
7) How should a selling Company be accountability if a salesperson is found to be miss-selling from their company.

And anything else anyone would like to constructively comment on regarding Licensing.

Lets say this could be achieved and this is able to come about does anyone see any disadvantages to the Selling Developers and Resale Companies becoming involved. How do you see this impacting on their business?

What changes do you think they may need to consider?

As said when the introduction of effective Licensing takes place this will be a game changer in our Industry.

The pendulum will swing back in favour of the consumer!

This concept once understood will benefit the Timeshare Industry massively once Selling Companies can get past their own personal agendas and issues with Licensing.


Like you Charlie I also have been calling for licencing now for the last couple of years. The body managing the license would be Governments Trade & Industry Departments or Ministries responsible for tourism.

Initial funding would come from registration fees (Paid annually) and there after by collection of fines by transgressions.

This recently occurred in Scotland recently with the Property Factors Bill Scotland (And I did have some input, making ammendments to the 2nd draft), the Bill was brought about to bring order to an industry that had been self regulating for a couple of hundred years with loads of well established a c[/b]ompanies. The same could be applied to the Timeshare business.
Title: Re: Misrepresentation or scammed! This strategy might get your money back
Post by: martyboy02 on January 20, 2014, 03:18:08
Process for application.
Applications for licences would have to be made by all those concerned with selling of timeshare, holiday club or vacation points (Or commonly know as Timeshare business) those in administration posts, maintenance positition or any other area of the said company.Applications would be required to be submitted within 12 months of the legislation becoming effective.
An operators licence would be required by companies to operate and a requirement of this would be to ensure that the above is complied with and other legislation is complied with.
Any person, company or trade organization acting as a consultant, advisor or any other matter directly or indirectly will be required to be licences for the period of involvement.
Failure to meet the above would result in fines, improvement notices, and ultimately closure of a resort, operating company or removal of individual licences (With them being declared as an Unfit Person) with directors/shareholders liable for any losses/damages.

What should be considered within the licence.
Any person who has had a non custodial sentence for any offence (With the exception of fixed motor/mechanically proprelled vehicle offences) within the previous 5 years shall be deemed unfit. Any person who has had a custodial sentence within the previous 10 years (Same motoring exemptions apply) shall be deemed unfit.
Unfit persons/companies shall not be granted licences.
Upon successful conviction of any offence (Save motoring as above) the individual a licence shall be revoked and that person be deemed unfit. Against Companies, licence holding will be reviewed and what measures seeming appropriate will be applied.
Dependent upon seriousness of allegation of offences licences may be suspended. Upon successful defence of allegations, any financial loss may be recovered from those alledging offences and not prosecuting bodies.
The burden of proof shall lessened to probability as to beyond all reasonable doubt. The Moorov Doctrine shall be permissible and accepted by the court regardless of location.


Time for bo bos more to follow, when I am refreshed
Title: Re: Misrepresentation or scammed! This strategy might get your money back
Post by: martyboy02 on January 20, 2014, 11:30:50
Who should regulate this.
Each member states Department  for Tourism shall be responsible for issuing of individual and operators licsnces. A central database shall be maintained by the European Consumer Centre. Upon application all previous convictions (Criminal or Civil) will have to be declared to enable back ground checks to be completed. Failure to declare any Criminal or civil proceedings will result in a 10 year block before the applicant can re-apply for consideration of a licence.

What about Resales Companies staff who deal with the consumer? They could play a major role?
Resale/Reclaim Companies and thier representatives or agents will be required to obtain a licence as any other individual or company as previously memtioned, with the same penalties for failure to comply. No monies will be exchanged or requested before succesful sale or reclaim being awarded. Fees will be capped at no more than 5% of resale price or 20% of reclaim awarded.

How do you see this being funded?
Initial funding would come from Central Governments and European Union. The burden of these costs will be eased by registration fees from individuals and companies. Company fees will be determined by size of resort and weeks available to clients (Weeks available will include sold and unsold weeks or however the business determines its holidaying assets). Companies dealing in a points system the fees will be determines on points sold. Additional funding will come from fines obtained from succesful prosecutions and initail complaint charges.

Process for investigating complaints?
Complaints can be made directly to companies concerned, Governmental Consumer protection agencies, Trade Bodies or Law enforcement agencies. All complaints have to be referred to the Central Body responsible for maintaining the data base. A referral will result in an immediate finacial penalty levied against the individual, agent or company cited. Upon completion of investigations fincial pentalties may be imposed along with compensation awards. If criminal or civil action is taken upon completion previous penalties will apply.
Companies, individuals or agents will legally be obliged to to respond to complaints be they from an individual or other person/Trade Body or Government agency.

How should a selling Company be accountability if a salesperson is found to be miss-selling from their company.
Companies will be responsible for the conduct of thier staff or agents. A degree od vicarious liability will apply if the company can proove if they have provided training and instruction in all relevent current legislation. Ignorance of the law shall not be deemed as a valid defence. No statatory defences shall be built into the Act.



                                                                                                                                                                                                            

The above are just a few ideas and as such are open to debate and modification. They may seem draconian but this would curtail some behaviour within the industry. These are just a base line than would go some way in protecting the consumer and redressing the balance.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 20, 2014, 13:50:19
Licensing salespeople is by far the biggest deterrent for misrepresentation and fraud. Your input may help contribute to what will be a game changer in this Industry. Get involved and contribute with ideas and suggestions. There is no right or wrong ideas at this stage were just exploring so if you some views on this do contribute it's your Industry

Thank you Martyboy theres a lot of ifs regarding the Government in some form getting involved. As said I made a tentative approach years ago, but they maybe more receptive these days if a suggested plan was put to them and the benefits to the Industry if they supported this.

There would need to be a plan B as well. Thats not to say that an agency of the Government would not get involved now or maybe latter taking over another body who steps up to run with this. Or they maybe asked to report back to a Government agency but be allowed to manage this.   

If plan B we would have to take steps towards this and agree an eventual objective within a time frame for the Developers to support this. This is how it was worked initially in the Financial Services Industry to allow everyone time to adapt.

My first thought for now is just looking at the Resale Companies from your post. They could not operate as a business on 5% of the sale and their remuneration would need to be debated. On this subject I am aware that somehow some Resale Companies have side stepped legislation and do take an upfront fee. This has not been challenged?

However I feel that if a Resale Company can show if they are getting real results with pro-active campaigns they should be allowed to charge a small fee if that clients week was going to be part of a specific campaign. This I feel could eventually come off the commission if sold. This needs to be a thinking campaign geared towards results and not passive marketing but specific marketing or not to either end up being a PR exercise raising the companies profile.  Marketing on that basis and their weeks are going to end up on a website under a big list that mainly only timeshare owners are reviewing.

I believe they should legally be entitled to charge more overall. They need to work with non selling resorts directly and start segmenting their marketing of the resorts. Golfing resorts start marketing golfers, Dog friendly resorts start marketing dog owners and so on. I am going off a little on track but there is so much that could be done together as an Industry so that when licensing does come into play and it will everyone has to step up a notch to make this work. Resale Companies could do so much more with the cooperation of non selling resorts

One day a Resale company is going to come to the table and debate this and make a fortune and be seen to be a Resale Company that is actively working with non selling resorts and will be the one to consider first. I believe that Resale Companies could achieve a greater return for the consumer marketing to non timeshare owners with those non selling resorts that worked with them. Anyway perhaps another thread on this later.

Under Best advice the consumer should sign a brief overview of their current situation. If they own in timeshare then provide details, what their objective is regarding this meeting. Then what is being recommended and how this helps the consumer achieve their objective. This is how we worked in finance it protected the consumer and also the company if both signed. Both parties would retain a copy.

At the moment in most cases its all geared around a number of boxes for the owner to tick regarding the contract they are signing. In a number of instances the consumer has not had the chance to digest the package on offer and signs up as there's usually a time limit and he seemed a nice sales person.

Signing up under Best Advice would provide focus to the meeting and everyone would know what the objective is. If I was signing this off as a salesperson I would include that Mr & Mrs consumer have in their possession a copy of the contract they have signed and various support guides that will enable them to make full use of their product. They have also received contact details for our after care service or log in details to our website that specifically helps guide them further.


What about Resales Companies staff who deal with the consumer? They could play a major role?
Resale/Reclaim Companies and thier representatives or agents will be required to obtain a licence as any other individual or company as previously memtioned, with the same penalties for failure to comply. No monies will be exchanged or requested before succesful sale or reclaim being awarded. Fees will be capped at no more than 5% of resale price or 20% of reclaim awarded.

                                                                                                                                                                                                            

The above are just a few ideas and as such are open to debate and modification. They may seem draconian but this would curtail some behaviour within the industry. These are just a base line than would go some way in protecting the consumer and redressing the balance.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 20, 2014, 17:24:35
Some interesting points and valid as always.

Best Practice.
Some developers or their reps/agents will work out you deal showing the pro and con's of timeshare v normal holidays, this piece of paper showing the cooked figures and false representations is almost certainly destroyed, for it would hang them.
Any signed brief would have to be duplicate for the benefit of Developer and Client.

Any overseeing body would have to have lawful power to compel developers to obey any legislation that is in force.

Self regulation very rarely works so enforcement is required coming from outwith the industry.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 21, 2014, 00:20:31
There would be more specifics suggested within best advice. I wont not go into full depth on the forum but as suggested if the consumer has to sign the overview that may include their current timeshare ownerships (if any) and their objectives and what was recommended. I am sure that most consumers would not counter sign to anything that was not true. I am also suggesting that the consumer keeps their copy.

What we had was a six page fact find when licensing was first introduced all diagrams within our presentations were done within the fact find that had a couple of blank pages just for this. If a consumer had a recommendation from a salesperson he would state why this particular product was recommended and how this met with the consumers needs. The consumer and salesperson both signed at the bottom of the page.

The timeshare salesperson would ideally have a much more simplified version than what was required in the Financial Services industry.

If for example a company would take back a week from the consumer as part of the package this would be shown as part of the recommendation in the fact find. Now I am sure any salesperson is going to think twice about trying to bend the truth if the consumer has a copy and they’re a licensed registered sales person. What we found was that the fact find was re-evaluated around every 18 months and changed to suit everyone’s benefit.

This type of selling strategy would attract a different type of salesperson, as there would be a more perceived air of professionalism. Different types of exams would enable them to advise on different areas. Eventually you might even see true Independents set up offices and take exams to sell different products representing a number of timeshare companies. That’s for another day.

The idea is not to stop the salesperson selling
but show and train them how they can get sales that was right for the client and understood.

However the vast majority of sales people and companies could not cope with the thought of this at the moment and would go into melt down about how all this would kill sales etc. Been there and had all that, in fact as I said we adapted as companies and obtained more consumers as clients as confidence and trust returned to our Industry. This would need to be introduced one step at a time with an end plan in mind in a set period.


Resorts as said should be marketing for suitable consumers that 'fit' their resort to assist their salespeople more. This can be done and just needs simple marketing and in some cases affiliations with companies outside of timeshare who may have consumers that 'fit' your resorts profile. The salesperson needs more support in this area to get more of the right type of consumer in front of them. Preparation is key and the resort or company that invited them to attend a presentation should have the consumer complete 7-8 simple questions that would give the salesperson an idea about the consumer before they even met. This would enable them to personalise their presentation to assist the consumer. If I had a selling operation I would profile my salespeople that related to different types of clients.

From my 7-8 questions I would deduce what salesperson sat down with a specific type of consumer. Thats retired folk, perhaps consumers who are detailed people, families, those who own timeshare, self employed consumers, young couples, disabled, owned a pet, golfers etc.

Perhaps I will write a book on this and wrap licensing around this for the benefit of who ever heads up licensing as they might find some workable areas that might assist their research.

If this were not Government backed then a luke warm license to appease the consumers would not work if it did not have an agreed end plan with dates attached. If it is to be TATOC or RDO driven to begin with it needs to start as a pilot with an open minded Developer who agrees a stage one and where this has to go. That Developer could promote this positively and be promoted and they would greatly benefit from this. They would be first and this would always be part of their presentation. 'We acted first and did what was right for the consumer and its right for us too'

Some interesting points and valid as always.

Best Practice.
Some developers or their reps/agents will work out you deal showing the pro and con's of timeshare v normal holidays, this piece of paper showing the cooked figures and false representations is almost certainly destroyed, for it would hang them.
Any signed brief would have to be duplicate for the benefit of Developer and Client.

Any overseeing body would have to have lawful power to compel developers to obey any legislation that is in force.

Self regulation very rarely works so enforcement is required coming from outwith the industry.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 21, 2014, 10:21:41
Currently outside the La Nina complex there are OPCs operating who seem to have licenses and clear identification. They have tee shirts on which clearly show Grand Holidays.
 In the complex where the lifts are there seems to be another operation running out of the offices formerly occupied by {banned word/phrase}. I have not seen any OPCs on the streets from this team but they will be around somewhere and the set up will probably be a reincarnation of the former scam.

If OPCs are licensed then that should not be a problem providing that obtaining the licence to operate is a rigorous procedure and that officialdom makes regular checks on their performance via mystery shoppers etc. and fines, withdrawal of licenses and other enforcement initiatives are part of the ongoing processes.
The lead has to come from somewhere and it would be great if it was begun by the Spanish authorities who have always seemed to shrug and say. "It is happening to visitors and not our native people so it is not our problem."
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 21, 2014, 11:10:44
They have to obtain a license like door knockers and canvassers should in the UK but I understood this had to be around a booth of sorts and they could only work within so many metres outside of this. This was introduced a few years ago mainly in the Canaries and I believe Spain. However there are a few I have been told that hang around on mopeds so they can make their pitch and make a quick get away. Perhaps its changed and like canvassers in the UK can work a specific area as long as they have submitted this and its approved.

Currently outside the La Nina complex there are OPCs operating who seem to have licenses and clear identification. They have tee shirts on which clearly show Crown Resorts or Hotels - I will check.
 In the complex where the lifts are there seems to be another operation running out of the offices formerly occupied by {banned word/phrase}. I have not seen any OPCs on the streets from this team but they will be around somewhere and the set up will probably be a reincarnation of the former scam.

If OPCs are licensed then that should not be a problem providing that obtaining the licence to operate is a rigorous procedure and that officialdom makes regular checks on their performance via mystery shoppers etc. and fines, withdrawal of licenses and other enforcement initiatives are part of the ongoing processes.
The lead has to come from somewhere and it would be great if it was begun by the Spanish authorities who have always seemed to shrug and say. "It is happening to visitors and not our native people so it is not our problem."
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 21, 2014, 11:39:17
There is no visible booth from which these people outside the La Nina complex are working and they seem to be able to venture quite far along that area. They seem to have a team leader who does not approach tourists but simply watches the other OPCs

 I remember in December stopping and talking to a Diamond Resorts canvasser. He was down at the bottom of Fanabe Centro shopping precinct and the Diamond Resorts Booth was outside the Sunset Beach Club some hundred yards away at the other end of the centro. He seemed to be doing his job correctly and not offering inducements or over pitching it. He had no idea we were members until well into our conversation as obviously from my point of view I wanted to see how he was approaching the general public. He said he was licensed and he clearly had Diamond Resorts lettering and logos prominently displayed on his tee shirt. He asked questions about our holiday lifestyle - how often we took holidays abroad etc. Where we went, basically establishing if timeshare would suit our lifestyle. Once I had established that he was not being "over enthusiastic" I told him we were members and we left him to get on with his job.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 21, 2014, 15:46:17
Please correct me if I am wrong, these licences are issued by the company and NO OFFICIAL Government Department.
Let's not kid ourselves these are nothing more than glorified name badges. The T-shirts with printed logos very pretty and adds credibility to is sales rep.
How many bogus trades persons or con artists employ the modus operandi, quite a few? Not all reps or companies should be tarnished with the same brush.
Licences have to come from Government bodies or an indipendent organization that is not even sharing the same house let alone the same bed as developers. The RDO and TATOC do have a place in the industry, but as they stand at the moment not as Regulators.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 21, 2014, 16:22:42
We walked into a place for a coffee this lunchtime and there were 3 of these folks from Grand Holidays having a lunch.
 I did not miss the opportunity of course.
  This is what they said.
They are licensed by the authorities and the license is not easy to acquire. They have to go through a process to ensure that they are not scammers. The license then covers the whole of the area -In this instance Adeje. They promoted Grand Holidays who they said were basically a middle man company buying up blocks of apartments in resorts and renting them on to such as Tui, Thomas Cooks etc. They did seem to also fire in prospects to someone called Arrow Leisure who had an office deck under La Nina. I assume they got a referral amount for this and a bigger amount if a sale went through. They did say that the Las Vistas Marketing/Realistix Solutions running from the rooftop of La Pinta had been closed down last year.
I did walk into the office of Arrow Leisure and ask them if they were timeshare or holiday club but they seemed to be a little shocked and evasive to be asked direct questions so I suspect that they may be a holiday club as their setup seemed to have "presentation" written all over it.   
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 21, 2014, 18:21:39
I was under the impression that it was like a local type of council that approved this. The likes of Tenerife got fed up with the complaints from tourists of being harassed when trying to take a stroll. It reached silly levels a few years back and it was like running the gauntlet in some areas. You got rid of one then 30 feet on someone else was in your face! Wino on another thread states that it is a local council.

It sounds now more like the UK system for canvassers, they have to be licensed and can apply to work certain areas. I know at one stage it was working around a booth of sorts. Still hey ho but good detective work by Mavo.

Lets look at the Process for investigating complaints for Licensed sales people
We discussed this and I would suggest that this would have to go back initially to the Timeshare Company with an agreed process how to handle complaints. It could be the timeshare company says this is how we deal with complaints and who ever is overseeing this might just say thats great give us an update in 4 weeks. If it was not dealt with in an agreed time and the consumer was not happy then the Timeshare Company would be expected to provide an overview of the situation and what they have recommended. This would be forwarded on to what ever agency was equipped to deal with the nature of the offence.

Sometimes its just common sense that prevails and it needs an authority outside of the debate to see this. Sometimes we can all get a little to emotively involved and we have to take all that away and stick to the facts that we have. As I have said on this forum before

We all see things differently based on our own interpretations and how we see the world from our own set of beliefs that could prejudice our case or defence.   

There are always three sides to any case.

1) Those that present their case will have their  interpretation
2) Those defending their case will have their interpretation
3) The truth! We must make a start by cutting out all the chaff from the wheat with everyones interpretations and hear say and because I read it in a newspaper it must be true etc. We have to start from the hard facts.

Working back from hard facts is the only strategy that can be applied when an authority has the difficult task of judging a case. then effective questioning must take place.

Hers a top tip to all resorts that have personal that have some authority and can recommend a change to a way a resort is operating, maintenance issues or unpopular policies etc
You need to go under cover and get some true interaction from your members and spend sometime around the pool or bar. Now if you feel that this would be difficult and you could get recognised than please feel free to contact me as I would be quite happy to take on that very difficult and dangerous  assignment as long as you cover my bar bill and my wife's expenses  ;D
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 22, 2014, 12:50:18
We walked into a place for a coffee this lunchtime and there were 3 of these folks from Grand Holidays having a lunch.
 I did not miss the opportunity of course.
  This is what they said.
They are licensed by the authorities and the license is not easy to acquire. They have to go through a process to ensure that they are not scammers. The license then covers the whole of the area -In this instance Adeje. They promoted Grand Holidays who they said were basically a middle man company buying up blocks of apartments in resorts and renting them on to such as Tui, Thomas Cooks etc. They did seem to also fire in prospects to someone called Arrow Leisure who had an office deck under La Nina. I assume they got a referral amount for this and a bigger amount if a sale went through. They did say that the Las Vistas Marketing/Realistix Solutions running from the rooftop of La Pinta had been closed down last year.
I did walk into the office of Arrow Leisure and ask them if they were timeshare or holiday club but they seemed to be a little shocked and evasive to be asked direct questions so I suspect that they may be a holiday club as their setup seemed to have "presentation" written all over it.

 Stranger than strange but then again perhaps not.
 We allowed 2 ladies from this Grand Holidays gang to approach us. Their story seemed to be slightly at odds with the story from the other 3 yesterday. These said that they were promoting tourism in the Adeje area and all the local bars and restaurants were involved. We went along with this willingly and we were asked to answer some questions on the back of a scratchcard. After 2 failed attempts through her nerves our OPC finally managed to produce for us - Go on I`ll let you guess. Yes you got it right! The top prize and we were to be taken somewhere to receive this.
 At this point it got no further as I was in fits of laughter. I told them a little of what I was about and they magically disappeared. We returned about an hour later and they had still not reappeared although others were still evident outside the La Nina complex.
 It is very easy to tell when they are telling lies. Their lips move.  They are, I accept, professionals at it with off pat answers to everything.

Their card when eventually pried open says:
"This promotion is designed to promote tourism in Adeje, Tenerife. Our invitation gives you the opportunity to visit our resort and experience our facilities. 100% No cost or obligation."
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 22, 2014, 13:16:51
Good work  :D

It must have been nerves were you dressed in your old devils attire?

They usually have on the bottom half of the pack non winners if you dont fit the criteria to sit a timeshare presentation, winners are usually on the top.

Shame you missed out on your '90 minute'  ;D presentation to pick up your discount vouchers (that you usually got to spend a fortune to get a little back). This could have included a bottle of wine for heavens sake! 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 22, 2014, 13:35:09
Good work  :D

It must have been nerves were you dressed in your old devils attire?

They usually have on the bottom half of the pack non winners if you dont fit the criteria to sit a timeshare presentation, winners are usually on the top.

Shame you missed out on your '90 minute'  ;D presentation to pick up your discount vouchers (that you usually got to spend a fortune to get a little back). This could have included a bottle of wine for heavens sake!

She was shaking like a good un. Thinking she was going to get us on a promo.
Oh! I did retain a card winning a bottle of wine which she said I could redeem in any of the local bars. I think I may give it a miss though.  ;D
 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 22, 2014, 20:32:43
So relating to question 5

5) Licensing How do you see this being funded?

If the Government does not get involved then in my opinion there will have to be a bigger focus on Selling Timeshare Companies contributing to this according to the size of the resort based on all weeks that receive a maintenance payment.

The simplest way is to provide an online tutorial service that would be free to participating salespeople. The actual test should be sat at an Independent venue that will raise a fee to sit the exam. Eventually there would be different online courses all requiring fees to sit the exam. The exam fee would be paid by either the salesperson or the resort at the start of the course.

None resort timeshare selling people who qualify will pay a set registration fee and a fee to sit the exam.

Those individuals breaching rules and regulations would be fined or expelled. The Timeshare Companies responsible for their salesperson would also be fined depending on the severity of the case.

Once the first Timeshare Company signs up to this and increases their business then more selling operations will see the benefit of getting involved as consumer confidence grows and they see consumers searching out the Licensed Timeshare Companies.

If this was TATOC or RDO I would like them to reduce or stop the sponsorship or fees paid by the Developer to the management Licensing Company if there an existing member. Now the timeshare Company is paying for a more valuable service that will gradually play a big part in moving this Industry forward.

Has anyone any other thoughts on how this could be funded?
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 22, 2014, 23:58:28
Any body overseeing the Licences has to be 100℅ independent of the industry.

As I have previously stated, like you have repeated, Developers Operating Licences will be based on Number of weeks available (Maximum availability), or Points, Holiday membership sold, so costs of Licence would be on a sliding scale.

All agents, directors and others will have to pass an exam (Written and oral, and practical paperwork completion exercise) demonstrating an in depth knowledge of EU Timeshare Legislation, National and Local Trading laws and regulations. Once all elements have been successfully completed and the required standard achieved a Licence would be granted and then the successful candidates would pay a registration fee, they would then be allowed into the public domain. The registration fee would be paid annually. If any major changes in legislation occur further/continuation training would have to be undertaken. If you don't achieve the required standard you name is removed from the register your licence revoked.

Exams would be sat locally, for the crooked elements would find a way around distance computer based learning! (Cynical or what)


Those presently selling would be required to obtain a Licence and register within a set time frame. NO Grandfather rights (As I refer to them).

With regard to the earlier post stating that some street rats already have licences, and they are not easy to obtain, please enlighten us on what they have to do to obtain these licences.

With regard to the scratch card antics of The Grand Holidays, why did you not report this incident to the authorities, you have defended the industry you care for so much and yet you let these people continue to breach current EU law and keep the timeshare reputation in the gutter. As a senior member of TATOC is there not more of an obligation on to to act with your knowledge, experience and credibility?

He said, she said and the truth are valid points raised. When promises are made verbally and no written or physical evidence is available the Moroov Doctrine should be applied ( As presently in the headlines of UK news, DLT, William Roach, etc, although these are sexual offences, the principle could still apply). And the biggest element you missed is What does the Law State, remembering that EU law over rides or has precedence over Member States law.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 23, 2014, 01:52:46
Hi Martyboy

This is all just an overview. However in my opinion learning online is the only cost effective way to train timeshare sales people across Europe.

Just a little more meat on the bone I think I have mentioned either on this thread or another that tests would be taken at an Independent office. So it does not matter who takes the course online but the registered salesperson would have to attend at a designated place with proof of identity. It could only be an appointed Independent Company that would be vigilating the exam.

We had an arm wrestle in Financial Services and it was agreed there could not be any Grandfathering. I was the top UK manager for a Company that had 125 offices at one stage but I still had to sit the exams.

I am aware that Mavo was told that the Licenses were difficult to obtain by the OPCs but I would not look into this to much as this is just what he reported he was told. It must be remembered that Mavo is on holiday. If there were any hard facts to report than this could be done once home, but in all seriousness just based on what was said in the post I doubt if any authority there would give it the time of day.

I did not think that I missed out anything at all " And the biggest element you missed is "What does the Law State, remembering that EU law over rides or has precedence over Member States law".

Anyone in Authority would be acting within the Law governing whatever type of criminal activity took place. 

Keep up the posts though as you have made some good contributions.

There needs to be a plan B if a Governing agency for the time being does not want to get involved. I would suggest that if TATOC or RDO took this up then there should be an Independent panel involved who are not associated with either who play a part in the creation of Licensing and have a vote regarding policy on Licensing.

This would assist any concerns that consumers might have that policy would be decided largely in favour of the Developers. Just a thought. However it must be a License thats initially introduced that allows the selling resorts to adapt. It must be workable as the Licensing evolves to achieve its end goals.


Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 23, 2014, 09:28:50
Unfortunately Charlie 1, Martyboy seems to feel the need to read into my posts things that are not necessarily there, and you of course are quite right in that I reported what was said to me in both conversations with different members of the team. I did not, of course, say that the licence was difficult to obtain, they did. They and not I  said the licence was issued by the authorities. Which authorities I have no idea and have no intention of personally spending my precious holidays tramping around the island to find out. It was not a "job and finish exercise" but it does raise possibilities for the future with regards to work which could or may be undertaken by the newly forming Taskforce.
 Regarding my position on TATOC. I would not as a director of TATOC go around abroad making and taking unilateral decisions and of course I say again that TATOC conducts the majority of its business in the strictest of confidence and anything it ever wishes to impart to consumers and its members can be found on its website. http://www.tatoc.co.uk/   
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 23, 2014, 12:42:36
Mavo

I am not expecting you or anyone else whilst on holiday to run around the island asking you to research what is required for a licence to to obtained, that would be totally unreasonable on my part.

What I was getting at was did THEY say who in particular issued the licence and did they say how they obtained the licence. If they didn't a simple "They didn't go into any great detail" will suffice.

You as much as anyone else know that a lot of these people are so full of c""p that thier eyes are turning brown, perhaps they were selling a red herring.

The reps from Grand Holidays were breaking the law, why did you not report this?

I fully appreciate that you don't wish to disclose the daily going ons in TATOC, but you can still act as a private citizen with regard to law breaking. If you choose to turn a blind eye to it that is your choice. Enough said.
                                                                                                                                                                                                           

RDO and TATOC could have no part in Plan A, B or C in deciding policy as they are too aligned to developers, anyone overseeing Licences and Registration has to be indipendent. They may offer advice, which would be most welcome, but like all advice it does not have to be acted upon.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 23, 2014, 13:04:29
Mavo

I am not expecting you or anyone else whilst on holiday to run around the island asking you to research what is required for a licence to to obtained, that would be totally unreasonable on my part.

What I was getting at was did THEY say who in particular issued the licence and did they say how they obtained the licence. If they didn't a simple "They didn't go into any great detail" will suffice.

You as much as anyone else know that a lot of these people are so full of c""p that thier eyes are turning brown, perhaps they were selling a red herring.

The reps from Grand Holidays were breaking the law, why did you not report this?

I fully appreciate that you don't wish to disclose the daily going ons in TATOC, but you can still act as a private citizen with regard to law breaking. If you choose to turn a blind eye to it that is your choice. Enough said.
                                                                                                                                                                                                           

RDO and TATOC could have no part in Plan A, B or C in deciding policy as they are too aligned to developers, anyone overseeing Licences and Registration has to be indipendent. They may offer advice, which would be most welcome, but like all advice it does not have to be acted upon.


Martyboy.

 I quoted in full what was discussed with me regarding the licenses they were wearing. You assume that there was further details made available to me.
 You also assume that I have not taken the matter further.
You also assume that TATOC are too aligned with developers.
 You have (at your request) been availed of the opportunity to find out about TATOC and its workings and I even got you an invite to join as an individual member despite the fact that you no longer own timeshare products.
 Why do you not avail yourself of these opportunities in order that you could then speak with knowledge?
This would surely prevent you from making assumptions based on your bias knowledge built on the mistrust of the industry in general coming about via your bitter experience with one developer who, interestingly enough, is not and never has been affiliated to TATOC.
 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 23, 2014, 14:19:59
Mavo calm down you are going to burst a blood vessel.

All I was wondering was what they had to do to get these licences and who awarded them, if they didn't say that's fine, like I said I am not expecting you or others to waste holiday time finding out.

If you have taken the reporting unlawful practices further why not say so?

I shall do some research into TATOC with regard to where their major funding comes from and their core mission statement.

And finally for the final time I KNOW AND HAVE NEVER STATED THAT THE DEVELOPER WAS PART OF TATOC.

Now can we please keep to the thread, I am becoming extremely bored with your assumptions, personal attacks and trolling, needless to say you will continue with your utopian view of the industry savaging those of us who want consumer protection and to debate and ask questions in a reasonable manner.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 23, 2014, 16:29:08
Mavo calm down you are going to burst a blood vessel.

All I was wondering was what they had to do to get these licences and who awarded them, if they didn't say that's fine, like I said I am not expecting you or others to waste holiday time finding out.

If you have taken the reporting unlawful practices further why not say so?

I shall do some research into TATOC with regard to where their major funding comes from and their core mission statement.

And finally for the final time I KNOW AND HAVE NEVER STATED THAT THE DEVELOPER WAS PART OF TATOC.

Now can we please keep to the thread, I am becoming extremely bored with your assumptions, personal attacks and trolling, needless to say you will continue with your utopian view of the industry savaging those of us who want consumer protection and to debate and ask questions in a reasonable manner.

Martyboy.
 I am not bursting blood vessels. I simply do things my way. We have to accept that my way may not be your way or the way of others. You all have the opportunity to get involved and do things your way but if you are not prepared to do so then please do not try to dictate to me how I chose to conduct myself.

And finally for the final last time I KNOW AND HAVE NEVER STATED THAT THE DEVELOPER WAS PART OF TATOC.

I have never said you had. I simply responded to your words which were as follows:

TATOC could have no part in Plan A, B or C in deciding policy as they are too aligned to developers.

How do you know that TATOC are as you say when you have never taken time out to establish this despite constant invites?

 Again as I say - You are just full of assumptions derived from lack of knowledge.
  It`s simple really. Get clued up!


Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 23, 2014, 16:58:46
And now back to the thread and lets try to keep to it  :-X

Licensing monitoring and auditing the Timeshare Companies


Having a process for this and the resource to use an Independent body is a whole new ball game.

For a start no timeshare company will be happy with having their sales process reviewed and their own internal compliance system vetted.

Certainly we did not when it was first launched in Financial Services it was embraced with open arms and a fear of the unknown. We had annual compliance visits from a company that in turn reported into Government agencies.

Before a visit there would be a series of questions that were asked of the resort regarding our systems to support the consumer and vet current sales. There would also be an overview of our process to respond to a consumer complaint and how this would be finalized.

I always made sure I had my prettiest secretary to greet the compliance team with the best tea and coffee that money could buy. We did all the normal things that everyone does on such an occasion everything was stepped up and tightened prior to the visit.  :D

The senior personal involved in internal branch compliance all had ‘meetings’ and were asked to run through their systems and how they dealt with consumer issues.

I would have a lunch meeting that was pretty pleasant with an update of any current concerns they had so far during their visit. They would then request around 20 client files of their choosing that would be new clients or old. They would then disappear for several hours and then come back with some questions to the internal branch admin team. They would then ask to see a couple of managers and consultants new and experienced and the sales trainer all meetings were done separately.

If a branch was found in breach of the rules they were assisted on how to get this right. Especially in the early days of licensing, there was also a support line as back up to help move towards getting this right for the branch office. However if you ignored this there would be a follow up visit usually 3-4 months later.

This could result in a branch in my day being fined or if very serious suspended from trading until it was put right.

What we found was it was far easier to have our own compliance officer in the branch so that when the compliance team came in for a visit we were ahead of the game. We had always had fact finds with our clients and got them to sign at the bottom of each page.  These were above licensing requirements.

If we got all this right then it came down to the following to get the business and growth up.

In the end it boiled down to getting a better understanding of what consumers want and need. The better we got at that the more successful we became.

That’s should be easy in the holiday Industry as who does not want and need holidays. If they were free who would not take a holiday with NO catches! So we would all want a holiday its just getting it right and why timeshare.

We had to put more value into our new contracts and gave people what they wanted. Like break options, (exit strategies like discussed in earlier posts for timeshare contracts) we could not convert or change the old contracts like whole of life, but we could promote new contracts that attracted a whole new generation.

There are three simple rules for change

1) We need to see it as it is but not worse than what it is. We are where we are.

2) Then see it better than it is and thats our vision. No organisation can get better until they admit something is wrong. The problem is no one wants to be seen as doing wrong. So most companies compare themselves with others. We can then say that were doing better than xyz so we can feel good about ourselves and move on.

The answer is for Companies to set their own standards. If there does not seem a way than you make a way! That standard is not a should it’s a MUST!

3) Make it the way that you see it. That’s your company’s vision.
Get resourceful find a way. Ask questions how is our sales strategy really, how is our product really and could we improve on this. Do we really communicate and connect to our members really. If not find a way and change what your doing! There’s always a solution even if it has to be applied in stages

Problems and progress go hand in hand.

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 23, 2014, 17:30:15
Like you say compliance, is a must especially with the regard to the law.

 Timeshare, holiday clubs have been self regulating and it hasn't worked, some not all are still continuely breaking the law. When these break the law and get caught they drag the whole industry into disrepute.

Until there is licencing and an Ombudsmen or other body to ENFORCE current legislation the industry may not be able to move forward with public confidence.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 23, 2014, 18:59:53
If we recognise that this thread will be read with interest by some who will be manoeuvering for positions of influence on any future steering group looking into licensing then we must accept that some ideas will be dismissed and some accepted. What any group involved in this have to ensure is that there will be no watering down of the processes required to obtain licenses. We have seen from the past that self regulation cannot work in this industry or any other industry where finance is king.
 

 This initiative is on the agenda, commissioned by RDO, so we must hope that they have come to recognise the need for further systems that will restore and retain the credibility of Timeshare. We all know the dangers of creating a weak system that can be manipulated by Reps/Consultants who are mentally unable to recognise that cutting out their mis selling and misleading practices will ultimately benefit them as consumers regain confidence in the product thus making it easier to sell.

 The simple truth is that given workable Exit Strategies and Licensing of selling the product becomes emminently saleable once more and good quality products are easy to sell.   
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 23, 2014, 20:05:03
Let the RDO do their study and publish their findings, but let us not forget who they are and how they are funded. No doubt there will be some interesting reccomendations.

Like I keep saying what ever is established must have lawful power to fine, remove licences, remove operator licences and issue improvement notices.

The tail mustn't be allowed to wag the dog!!
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 23, 2014, 20:30:10
Let the RDO do their study and publish their findings, but let us not forget who they are and how they are funded. No doubt there will be some interesting reccomendations.

Like I keep saying what ever is established must have lawful power to fine, remove licences, remove operator licences and issue improvement notices.

The tail mustn't be allowed to wag the dog!!

 I just cannot understand where your lack of logic comes from Martyboy. Without the will of developers via the RDO these initiatives cannot possibly be put in place. No outside bodies have the ability to enforce such legislation, as is being proposed, on the industry. Change has to willingly come from within.
An industry with its leading players based all around the world is not going to be dictated to by some group or body, government or otherwise, that has suddenly sprung out of nowhere and been hurriedly put together.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 23, 2014, 20:56:12
In the UK are there not industries that can be compelled to obey their relevant ombudsmen.

The same could happen within the EU with the creation of  Timeshare Ombudsmen with support and legislation.

For too long (Way before I got involved) the lack of willingness of companies to obey the law and looking for loop holes have lead us to where we are now.

You may or maynot look at it from the developers perspective but Consumer protection is No1 in my book. If customers can buy with 100% confidence, knowing there is a body to turn if things go wrong, surely that only will improve confidence in the industry, thus increasing sales and securing the industries future.

Perhaps this could be discussed at the TATOC RDO seminar during Conference this year.

Yes it really is as simple as that.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 23, 2014, 21:05:19
Answer me this, who out there has the timeshare holiday club member interest at heart and can compel the industry to toe the line?
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 23, 2014, 21:44:40
If this is not Government backed and this is likely (but I will test the water a little later). There is nothing in place to force Developers to be apart of this. The only only real reason that some will come to the table is if they see common sense and that this will result in good business for them as the consumer would be advised to sit with only licensed sales people.

It does not matter who has the consumers interest at heart. No one outside of Government can compel a Developer to do anything if its not backed up by legislation.

If this does not have Government backing I would as I see that this would need to be phased in with an agreed end policy. The finance Industry had a settling in period to get their houses in order.

Once this is shown to work the resorts would not wish to see their Licenses taken away as this would certainly not look good in the eyes of the consumer and they would likely see a down turn in business. They would then agree to additional policies as licensing evolves to maintain their License.

The winners here will be the Timeshare Companies that welcome this and get on board first and try to get ahead of this. They will then have the edge on the competition as being the first ones involved.

Ideally we need a pincher type approach to achieve real success thats.

1) Effective Licensing

2) New Contracts with exit strategies.

Timeshare Companies need to change their constitutions to allow new contracts to be marketed to the younger generation. Thats new contracts with break options that may still run to the term of the old contracts, but these would have break options after say the first five years and then with agreed notice every 5 years after that. This will be far better than a temporary try before you buy approach as the new member has to pay more to get involved again. Far better to have a contract of substance over a specific term but is flexible enough to allow me to exit with notice or sell it.

This exit strategy would keep the resorts on their toes as they dont want members leaving!

These contracts will also be far more popular in the resale market. I could buy a new contract with exit strategies because the owner selling it is already 3 years into his contract. So I could purchase a resale contract from the Resale company that has a two year exit option coming up.

I dont believe that a lot of these options will be taken, but its just the security of mind that its there. Take for example the 3 UK resorts I mentioned on another thread that weeks can be handed back either immediately or give 12 month notice too. They don't have members clambering to leave yet they can just leave.

What about the resort in Devon I mentioned that has over 500 personal weeks up for sale from members on their website as the resort wont let them leave and threatens their own members with debt collectors! These two resorts are only around 10 miles apart yet one has over 500 weeks for sale the other very few.

New members come on board quickly with the resort that allows members to hand back there weeks, because they know that if a life challenge comes along they can just either sell it or hand it back.

Surely the benefits are plane to see??? Those resorts who have a queue cant open up the doors as this would jeopardise the financial stability of that resort. However they could create a new contract, as this grows in popularity they could start allowing members to leave who have the old contracts.

In order for continuing positive change to take place everyone that plays a role in timeshare needs to come to the table. Then be asked honest questions of themselves regarding their products and service to the consumer and then see how this could be improved. We are all in this together and its going to be a slow process if this is done in splintered groups.

The Industry must work towards a uniformed approach that has the consumer in mind to ensure that they all have a total holiday experience. Its no use my resorts getting it right and I have happy members but they end up exchanging into a resort that does not reflect the holiday experience my member is used too.

We all have to work at various areas together and some of this is very simple stuff that could make just that little bit of difference. My online training would extend to anyone who has responsibility or contact with the consumer. Everyone counts! From the cleaner upwards as they can all contribute to the consumer having a good feel factor. Sometimes just a friendly smile can make a difference
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 23, 2014, 23:43:43
In the UK are there not industries that can be compelled to obey their relevant ombudsmen.

The same could happen within the EU with the creation of  Timeshare Ombudsmen with support and legislation.

For too long (Way before I got involved) the lack of willingness of companies to obey the law and looking for loop holes have lead us to where we are now.

You may or maynot look at it from the developers perspective but Consumer protection is No1 in my book. If customers can buy with 100% confidence, knowing there is a body to turn if things go wrong, surely that only will improve confidence in the industry, thus increasing sales and securing the industries future.

Perhaps this could be discussed at the TATOC RDO seminar during Conference this year.

Yes it really is as simple as that.

Martyboy
The answer to your very first sentence is the very reason that blows you out of the water.
 No there are no industries  in the UK that are compelled to obey any ombusman.
 Energy, Utilities, Banking. Insurance, Telecommunications, Pensions. Do you want me to go on?

Charlie1 You are quite correct to expand on my few short sentences based around the will of the developers. I will just point out that it also needs the will and co operation of developer employees and that will not come about without effective policing and it is no good pretending that an ombusman type setup of old farts will achieve this in an industry such as timeshare, when they have regularly and spectacularly failed so miserably in far easier and insular industries to control. 

 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 24, 2014, 00:03:20
You are so misguided again.

Was the Financial Ombudsmen Service ordered Barclay Card to repay my deposit with interest. If that wasn't an ombudsman what was?

If you complain about a Dr it goes to the GMC an ombudsman in all bar name they can order retraining, supervised working or remove a licence to practice, same with Nurses and the RCN.

Look at wider society there are plenty of practices out there, that are governed by a professional body that acts as an ombudsman, you just have to look.

If you want to benefit the timeshare industry thinking out of the box could be a great advantage.

Moving swiftly on to more serious matters, distance learning would be great, training can be monitored but exams like you say Charlie would have to be sat in person at a test centre, like we do with driving tests.

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 24, 2014, 00:50:00
We had the same problem Mavo with long term served sales people, no one likes change. We found on closer examination of there business that some of there business practices were causing us problems or would be in the in the future.
Some were just like dinasaurs and as Martyboy said at the end if the day you can't have the tail wagging the dog. No individuals should be bigger than the company. The company has to look to the future and if it is to be a part of this it has to move with the times.

You can't hold on to the past and not get involved or try to influence a water downed licensing to suit a hard core of die hard senior salesman or managers as this will be easily seen to be valueless! In this day and age there is no hiding from the Internet and if consumers are unhappy the Internet is now being as a medium in various guises that they can use to express their concern.

We found in the Financial Services Industry that we lost some old fashioned sales people who could not work in the consumers interest left. They were quickly replaced by a new breed of sales person who saw a real career that was licensed and now respected.

For those Developers who don't get on board you will do at some stage as you will see the consumers consider an effective Licensing program, its only when you may eventually join but this will be at great cost the longer your left holding on to the past.

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 24, 2014, 01:15:41
In the UK are there not industries that can be compelled to obey their relevant ombudsmen.

The same could happen within the EU with the creation of  Timeshare Ombudsmen with support and legislation.

For too long (Way before I got involved) the lack of willingness of companies to obey the law and looking for loop holes have lead us to where we are now.

You may or maynot look at it from the developers perspective but Consumer protection is No1 in my book. If customers can buy with 100% confidence, knowing there is a body to turn if things go wrong, surely that only will improve confidence in the industry, thus increasing sales and securing the industries future.

Perhaps this could be discussed at the TATOC RDO seminar during Conference this year.

Yes it really is as simple as that.

Martyboy
The answer to your very first sentence is the very reason that blows you out of the water.
 No there are no industries  in the UK that are compelled to obey any ombusman.
 Energy, Utilities, Banking. Insurance, Telecommunications, Pensions. Do you want me to go on?



Mavo
Tomorrow or later today I shall be posting links to various sites as Ofwat, for fines they have imposed, Ofgen for fines they have imposed, unless you wish to reconsider your position. Facta are facts as you are only to keenly point out to others!!
If you have nothing sensible to add to the debate (Other than having petty digs at me) jog on!
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 24, 2014, 09:02:56

 Martyboy
Of course there will be instances where ombusmen type bodies have been of influence but there are many more instances where they prove to be ineffective ie. Recent energy rises way above inflation. Recent similar events in the water industry. Forthcoming rises by some local authorities that come April will fly in the face of national government advice. All these are in what should be easy to control and dictate to industries and areas of governance.
 Do you really believe that the timeshare industry is as responsible and as easy to control as the above?

There will not be an ombusman type of independent organization who would touch timeshare with a bargepole and if there were then certain companies within the industry would be delighted to be "controlled" by what would be seen by them to be an ineffectual body.

Do I have the complete answer? Currently No but I know that an ombusman type of moderation and scrutiny cannot work in this industry which has too many loose cannons.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 24, 2014, 12:12:58
Look at wider society there are plenty of practices out there, that are governed by a professional body that acts as an ombudsman, you just have to look.

If you want to benefit the timeshare industry thinking out of the box could be a great advantage.


You shoot yourself in the foot with statements such as these above Martyboy.

 So lets just think outside your box.
A professional body would be defined as a body with experience of the industry it is dealing with (had it not got that experience then it would be defined as an unprofessional body.)
Therefore in your eyes it would not and could not then be independent as you seem to insist that the regulating and administering of licensing for the timeshare industry has to be.
 Does your out of the box thinking believe that Ofgen, Ofwat, Oftel etc. are made up of people who have no experience or knowledge whatsoever derived from the industries they are regulating?
 That experience is the very reason they are chosen in the first place.

A body lacking in experience or knowledge of the Timeshare Industry would be no match for the unscrupulous.
Let us not forget some of these people still reside within the industry and in selling in particular, or licensing would not be deemed necessary.

The above is just one area of thinking and I can see many more negatives to an independent body, such as who would "independently" choose this independent body without the cry of cronyism ringing out.
 We have to remember that policing would have to take place around the world and cries of "being sent on a jolly" to assess performance would come from many quarters and I am sure that you would take great delight in leading the baying hounds on this one.

 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Norm de Plume on January 24, 2014, 13:32:33
There seems to be some confusion between an ombudsman and a regulatory body. The former is an independent assessor of grievances, whereas the latter is a body formed to set professional standards and to enforce them.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 24, 2014, 15:12:49
The idea of this thread is to encourage debate on some very important issues that will impact on timeshare and be to everyone’s benefit if this is done effectively.

The two main points raised are Licensing and Exit strategies on this thread. These two points will be of positive benefit to everyone, well except one fraudulent body Scam Companies. This will impact on everyone else positively if the right steps are taken - existing timeshare owners, prospective timeshare owners, ‘THINKING’ Resorts, Resale Companies, RDO and TATOC

Existing timeshare owners –

1) More prospective timeshare members joining if Licensing is EFFECTIVE this will promote trust and confidence. As more members join your Timeshare Company this will allow your Timeshare Company to consider those existing members who have life style challenges a means to now exit with out jeopardising the viability of the resort.
2) New contracts if introduced with exit strategies will be far more attractive to new timeshare owners as this caters more for current life styles and thinking. I see no reason why you will not enjoy a similar growth as seen in Financial Services when we introduced contracts with break options as opposed to the Whole of Life contracts that we had that was just dated! Simple focused marketing as discussed will make all the difference.

Prospective new members.
For all of the above. Most prospective new members will be keen to know that they have a contract of substance with exit strategies during the term of the contract to cater for life style challenges. Most wont use this but its just nice to know its there. This has been proven with resorts that allow members to exit, as they have no queues to leave unlike resorts that threaten members with debt collectors. They should find it easier to obtain new members if this is promoted.

THINKING Timeshare Companies

Those that embrace these changes and take part will benefit from this with happy existing members knowing that at last something constructive is being done and new members joining should allow those with life style challenges to be considered first for exiting. New members will be happy to join a forward thinking Timeshare Company that has a contract that reflects today and not a bygone age.

If the Timeshare Company takes it a stage further and has a genuine pro-active after care service as discussed they will go on to have something called referred business and timeshare owners will maximise their holiday experience. That would be nice. :o

Resale Companies
They will have new contracts for sale in the future that will be easier to promote.
THINKING Resale Companies as I have discussed on previous threads could play a massive role in changing the Industry on behalf of non-selling resorts if the two non-selling resorts and the Resale Companies got together with a shared project. This can be done and I may discuss this further on a new thread at some stage.
Resale Companies also could be so much more pro active in marketing with simple strategies.

Scam Companies >:(
They would find it far more difficult if effective Licensing was introduced as Timeshare Owners become more educated and ask specific questions around Licensing. If I were managing Licensing I would create a License for all Resale Companies and promote that we advise that only licensed Resale Companies be considered.

As new contracts become available more with Exit strategies the Scam Companies and Salespeople who play upon the fact that EVERYONE in the whole world is going have to leave their timeshares to their beneficiaries and by then the maintenances will be about give or take a few added zeros around 10,000 a year!! :o

Most of this is of course nonsense so talk to your resort first!

RDO and TATOC
should have less complaints as these two measures Effective Licensing and long-term contracts with exit programs should reduce the biggest problems that we have in timeshare.

I mentioned before on a post within this thread that there are three simple rules for change. The first one is worthy of reviewing again at this stage.

1) We need to see it as it is but not worse than what it is. We are where we are.

There are no ombudsmen that have the authority or experience at the moment to embrace timeshare issues. As this would be a massive NEW role for an ombudsmen to consider.
I would also think that there is a more likely opportunity that a Government agency would get involved if not soon than perhaps at a later stage.

Licensing has to be done right and would be a foolish exercise to roll out a license that had no teeth as this could be easily seen in the eyes of the consumer. This would do nothing but weaken the REVELANCE of that managing body to the consumers.

As we know with the Internet word spreads very quickly and the licensing would lack confidence and be mistrusted. Something as important as this if interfered with would see the consumers seek another source for guidance.

Licensing would need to have a definitive planned release of procedures with an end plan. It would be constantly evolving but it must start with some teeth. We are all aware that the scam companies and dodgy salespeople will adjust and try to get around this but it wont be easy like it is now and Licensing procedures should not stand still either.

I have been standing on a soapbox about this for years having had the experience of travelling this path before knowing what aspects will likely be tried and wont work etc and what needs to be considered to make this work. Even on this forum I have been putting up threads on these areas over the last year. Both these areas need to happen quickly to give this Industry a massive positive shot in the arm.

This forum does not allow any real depth with the nuts and bolts that need to take place, but it might encourage debate and some thought and who knows if we are all chucking in a pebble perhaps we might together make some waves that might be considered.

Timeshare created its own problems but we have the means to put this right if we swallow the pill and take the right steps. 8)
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 24, 2014, 15:22:21
There seems to be some confusion between an ombudsman and a regulatory body. The former is an independent assessor of grievances, whereas the latter is a body formed to set professional standards and to enforce them.
Unfortunately Norm de Plume, without knowledge of the difficulties that are to come in the future we will get those who theorize around Utopia.

 Having sat for more years than I care to remember on a group who were writing NVQs for an industry that had little or no regulatory structures in place I am fully aware of the two facets of this that would have to be attended to.
 Firstly a scheme would have to be devised and agreed upon by all and secondly that scheme would have to be policed effectively by "independent" assessors who would have to be trained up to a standard that allowed them to do a thorough job of assessment of performance.

Bearing the above in mind I am fully aware (having spent 12 years trying to get EU uniformity of manufacture in an industry) of how difficult it is to get all parties to agree. Just when you think the job is done then some nation throws in their veto. So it will be with this industry, we will find that there will be certain developers and/or members of the industry who fight against this change. What needs to happen, and I am repeating myself from a past post, is that those who are not prepared to accept reform may well have to be cast adrift.
   
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 24, 2014, 19:30:55
I have never said that the licencing should be world wide, I have only referred to the EU.

I have said the RDO and TATOC should not dictate policy, but advise if they should want to.

I have never said that anyone involved in timeshare should be barred from such a body unless they are not fit and proper.  Many others from such industry's as travel, law, property and hospitality have transferable skills that could proof to be a great asset and should not be overlooked.

The above  Are incorrect assumptions on your part.

Like I have said before I am willing to debate in a civilised respectful manner. I have talk with Royalty, Heads of State, Peers of the Realm, Government Ministers and many other people from all walks of life about all manner of subjects, and not once when I questioned them or asked them to expand on a point of view I was never subjected to such bile and venom as I receive from a certain individual on here. I thought that 23 years in HM NAVY,SUBMARINE SERVICE, would have prepared me for anything.

So Gentlemen happy debating and to Mavo happy trolling, i shall be withdrawing from this particular thread. Congratulations Mavo another voice silenced by yourself. You Sir your language and attitude, disrespect for differing views are typical of what is wrong with the industry.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 24, 2014, 22:59:02
I have never said that the licencing should be world wide, I have only referred to the EU.

I have said the RDO and TATOC should not dictate policy, but advise if they should want to.

I have never said that anyone involved in timeshare should be barred from such a body unless they are not fit and proper.

The above  Are incorrect assumptions on your part.

Like I have said before I am willing to debate in a civilised respectful manner.

So Gentlemen happy debating and to Mavo happy trolling, is all be withdrawing from this particular thread. Congratulations Mavo another voice silenced by yourself.

 What on earth is the matter with you Martyboy. I have never said that you did suggest any of the above. All I am doing is giving my slant on things. You have been the one posting about totally independent bodies, all I have done among other things is point out that without those bodies having a modicum of timeshare experience then your ideas are nothing more than unworkable pipedreams.
 If you cannot accept the logic of that then I will be sorry to see you leave the debate as it did avail me of the opportunity to show why certain scenarios would be unworkable. It just seems a little unfortunate that you were the one to put those scenarios forward.
 
   
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 24, 2014, 23:24:06
I have never said that the licencing should be world wide, I have only referred to the EU.

I have said the RDO and TATOC should not dictate policy, but advise if they should want to.

I have never said that anyone involved in timeshare should be barred from such a body unless they are not fit and proper.

The above  Are incorrect assumptions on your part.

Like I have said before I am willing to debate in a civilised respectful manner.

So Gentlemen happy debating and to Mavo happy trolling, is all be withdrawing from this particular thread. Congratulations Mavo another voice silenced by yourself.

 What on earth is the matter with you Martyboy. I have never said that you did suggest any of the above. All I am doing is giving my slant on things. You have been the one posting about totally independent bodies, all I have done among other things is point out that without those bodies having a modicum of timeshare experience then your ideas are nothing more than unworkable pipedreams.
 If you cannot accept the logic of that then I will be sorry to see you leave the debate as it did avail me of the opportunity to show why certain scenarios would be unworkable. It just seems a little unfortunate that you were the one to put those scenarios forward.
 
   
I humbly suggest you read the posts again.

You have identified the problems with timeshare, try searching for the solution. A regulatory body established by the EU to oversee the industry place enforcement orders etc, they say jump the industry jumps.

Now is your chance to display a workable solution that protects customer and developer alike!
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 25, 2014, 01:02:13
I think we have done the rounds on regulatory boards and the ombudsman. Let's move on to any other aspects that you may wish to contribute. There have been some good posts by Martyboy.

This is an important thread we have to many voyeurs just reviewing and not participating. If you do agree on a point or disagree even that would contribute to something that could change your industry. Unless of course you agree with all thats been posted so far  8)
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 25, 2014, 11:17:24
I have never said that the licencing should be world wide, I have only referred to the EU.

I have said the RDO and TATOC should not dictate policy, but advise if they should want to.

I have never said that anyone involved in timeshare should be barred from such a body unless they are not fit and proper.

The above  Are incorrect assumptions on your part.

Like I have said before I am willing to debate in a civilised respectful manner.

So Gentlemen happy debating and to Mavo happy trolling, is all be withdrawing from this particular thread. Congratulations Mavo another voice silenced by yourself.

 What on earth is the matter with you Martyboy. I have never said that you did suggest any of the above. All I am doing is giving my slant on things. You have been the one posting about totally independent bodies, all I have done among other things is point out that without those bodies having a modicum of timeshare experience then your ideas are nothing more than unworkable pipedreams.
 If you cannot accept the logic of that then I will be sorry to see you leave the debate as it did avail me of the opportunity to show why certain scenarios would be unworkable. It just seems a little unfortunate that you were the one to put those scenarios forward.
 
   
I humbly suggest you read the posts again.

You have identified the problems with timeshare, try searching for the solution. A regulatory body established by the EU to oversee the industry place enforcement orders etc, they say jump the industry jumps.

Now is your chance to display a workable solution that protects customer and developer alike!

 
 Martyboy
I humbly suggest that you read my posts and you will see that I quite openly state that I currently do not have a solution. I do know that it will not be a solution which is identified by any individual such as myself or yourself. It will come about by interested parties getting round a table and working out a way forward. This way forward my well incorporate ideas that come out of consumer debates such as this. and that is why charlie 1 put it up here.

  A regulatory body within the EU is already in place which you would know if you took the trouble to find out. This body does not seem to be as effective as it could or should be as yet but given the full backing of other organizations it should go from strength to strength in the near future and become an effective part of the Timeshare Taskforce Initiative.

I am trying to give readers and posters an insight into what is likely to evolve and I feel that it is important for consumers to understand that any Taskforce initiatives have to have experienced people within. Without that experience mistakes will be made.

 Some may say that people such as myself should have no input because some are of the belief that I am bias towards timeshare. The reverse could be said in that people like Martyboy should have no input because they are bias against the industry. So on that basis who should have input?

 My aim is to try to do my bit to improve the industry and thus my holidays, which I have made a considerable investment in.
That is not being bias it is simply looking after my own interests and if other consumers benefit along the way then that is fine.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 25, 2014, 19:13:11
It will be interesting to see who is actually getting around the table to discuss Licensing and Exit Strategies of substance.

I am of the same thoughts as Mavo I would cast adrift those who do not want to get involved at the moment. Or they would prefer to work with a luke warm poor imitation.

I can only see this being successful to those who work with this as consumer confidence builds. It is just as important to build the right steps on route into this as it is to have the right product. This is a massive area on paper will involve a lot of preparation to make this workable.

Some of the old die hard sales people and managers may need some counciling :D

However from personal experience if this is introduced at the right pace with a workable effective policy this will lift the Industry and will have a positive knock on effect especially if coupled with new contracts with exit programs. The benefits far out way any initial concerns or challenges some may feel they will have with this.  ;)
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on January 25, 2014, 21:40:39
Sorry guys this thread is like a bad habit I just can't stay way.

Every and any interested parties should be able to parcipate in any talks. If you declare any particular interest those listening to you can have an informed opinion as to where you are coming from.

I am not anti timeshare, it is a good idea, all I would like to see is greater customer protection. The loose cannons and rogues brought to heel or shut down. Then I know I can rebuy with full confidence.

The developer I was involved with refused to answer any correspondence from my MP, MEP, Trading Standards, European Consumer Centre and Spainisg Trading Standards. And then to top it all they even refused to communicate with Barclay Partner Finance, who they acted as an agent for!!! Anfi weren't accountable to anyone, this wrong and needs to be addressed.

Previous post ref ombudsman, regulators are ideas for the melting pot, in areas they may be floored, but with discussion and input from others there must be a solution out there. Spotting the problems is easy, a collective solution to benefit all is harder but not impossible.

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on January 26, 2014, 00:23:13
Sorry guys this thread is like a bad habit I just can't stay way.

Every and any interested parties should be able to parcipate in any talks. If you declare any particular interest those listening to you can have an informed opinion as to where you are coming from.

I am not anti timeshare, it is a good idea, all I would like to see is greater customer protection. The loose cannons and rogues brought to heel or shut down. Then I know I can rebuy with full confidence.

The developer I was involved with refused to answer any correspondence from my MP, MEP, Trading Standards, European Consumer Centre and Spainish Trading Standards. And then to top it all they even refused to communicate with Barclay Partner Finance, who they acted as an agent for!!! Anfi were not accountable to anyone, this is wrong and needs to be addressed.

Previous post ref ombudsman, regulators are ideas for the melting pot, in areas they may be flawed, but with discussion and input from others there must be a solution out there. Spotting the problems is easy, a collective solution to benefit all is harder but not impossible.


It is nice to see you finally recognizing the difficulties that will be encountered and the fact that total independence is impossible to create. You have pointed out above that the company who you blame for all your ills were not accountable to anybody. The fact that a finance house was forced by legislation to reimburse you and not the timeshare company itself says it all.
 
If you care to read back on your posts on this thread you will see that your posts around use of an ombudsman/regulator were not ideas for the melting pot but were a determination over more than one post that anything other that a totally independent ombudsman/regulator would not be acceptable to you. OK you now revise that which is fine.

 Your previous posts on this thread offer up ideal world scenario solutions and as your experience with Anfi demonstrates, Timeshare is not currently in an ideal world.

The solutions will be complex and bitterly contested before compromise is reached and mark my words, like it or not, there will be compromises in the first draft and probably the initial rolling out of any program. It will though be something to build on for the future. So lets see if it can be got off the ground, anticipated benefits then being seen thus allowing further progress to be made.
It has to be an ongoing and evolving solution, so nobody should expect it all to happen overnight. Flexiblity and the ability to react to how changes are affecting the industry and adjust accordingly will be the key to both industry and consumer confidence.   



 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 27, 2014, 01:41:43
Licensing is a massive undertaking if this is to be effective :o

I have mentioned many times that the License program would have to evolve. It would be impracticable just to say this is exactly what we need now and just try to enforce this. This would be very damaging!

As mentioned Licensing would need to have a definitive planned release of procedures with an end plan! It would be constantly evolving but it needs to start with ‘some’ teeth to be taken seriously in my opinion.

The committee involved considering the licensing policy would need experts involved who have experience in all the areas necessary to make this work. This needs a strong leader to head that up with no axe to grind and this is made to be their primary focus. They need to ask lots of questions when faced with opposition. Why not? What has to happen to make this work in this area?

Temporary panels should ideally be formed headed up by a member of the committee as required. This is important to obtain maximum exposure to the more challenging areas to avoid future costly mistakes that have to be rectified.

There needs to be a transparency as each area is agreed on with a FAQ section.

I would strongly suggest that there should be no Developers on this policy making panel otherwise there will always be a cloud around this that they influenced policy. By all means there should be a sub committee consisting of Developers and Resale Companies so their opinion and advice can be sought in relative areas to the selling process so it can be assessed what has to change to make this workable and how could this be worked.

If there are areas that the selling resorts express concern this must be effectively investigated and validated and not just accepted as it will be natural for them to feel protective of a business area that is relative to them.

The Financial Services Industry did not have a choice it had to be licensed. There were no maybes that this might happen; a date was given with what had to be in place prior to D Day. 

As memory serves we had a year plus to gear up so that all companies it affected could gear up to make licensing workable.

It is no use introducing something that cannot be worked. On route in Financial Services there were upgrades to the licensing procedure and each company abided by the policy and added internally whatever assisted their business or enabled them to further insure them that there was less chance of any questionable business being written.

Each manager had his own team that they were responsible for and the manager had to sign off that salespersons business. We ensured within our offices that staff randomly contacted clients. We had in place systems beyond what was required. We had fact finds that were extensive outlining the client’s situation, their objectives and how our recommendations were working towards their objectives.

The Financial Services introduction of Licensing was a directive where in the timeshare Industry Developers have to be shown and believe in the benefits of them accepting a licensing procedure.

The timeshare Industry does not need to be as regimented as the Financial Services Industry as even my business card had to be approved!!

Licensing is not meant to restrict selling and I believe that it will genuinely increase sales
:D

Not all Developers will be receptive towards this as it may be in conflict with how they do their business and not everyone will be happy about having controls in place and being answerable to how they do their sales.

The thinking Developers will know that this day will come regardless and consumers will place more trust in a licensed Developer. Those that get involved can steal a march on their competitors and in the early stages of licensing those Developers could have some influence on the way this is worked and introduced initially.
 
Get involved this is the future and you can be a part of this :)
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 27, 2014, 18:26:24
Key to success in such a massive project is having the right team on board to begin with. This is new terrority in some areas and you cant just pull data to support a plan of action. In my opinion this not the case to just bring in the same team you have had before on other projects. So who ever head’s this up should be evaluating who brings in real value to this particular project. They may only be part players to focus on a particular aspect that plays an important part of this project.

You can’t rely too much on past data in any given area.  As people change, times change, circumstances change. The amount of variables that made past outcomes possible will never be the same. Thats why I would only look at the Financial Services Licensing as a loose guide, but at least its something to consider. Most of those salespeople were also on commission with little real controls and they certainly with their sales managers were not happy to see this even being talked about. Certainly the companies felt that it would cost them dearly in terms of Company turn over. That turned out not to be the case!

I always found that stuff like Spreadsheets and past performances was an attempt to create a pre-emptive excuse for failure.

The reason Investment Companies requires every statement about a company’s future to include some variation of “past performance does not imply future results” is because that’s true.

I feel there needs to be new research in some areas this does not provide good ‘cover’ that’s why its important to have the right team on board who have had some experience in a given area but are prepared to role up there sleeves and invite the right people around them when required in a given area and ask questions and that’s lots of the right questions. This could even be on a one to one rather than one individual who is fairly out spoken sways individuals. Skype comes to mind.

The most important thing in my opinion is not try to succeed as fast as possible, but try to answer the most important questions as fast as possible and get the right people around you to ask those questions! All feedback should not be dismissed straight away and should be respected as sometimes this can lead on to a successful outcome. There’s a need to replace assumptions with data and feedback. The faster you can make that transition and start to build around data over delusion and some closed minds with open questions, the more likely this is going to be successful with least costly mistakes.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 28, 2014, 12:57:53
Best Advice

This in my opinion is one of the most important areas if not the most important concern in selling that needs to be addressed and given some real thought too. Best Advice practices alone if done effectively would address a high percentage of problems that occur with selling operations. 

Without Best advice applied to licensing. Licensing in my opinion would not have any real depth.

Has anyone else any thoughts on Best Advice or perhaps your not aware of its significance?  :-X
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 29, 2014, 16:29:17
Licensing in my opinion needs to embrace Best Advice Practices.

This ensures a focus for the salesperson that they provide the best solution to the timeshare owners needs within his allocated product range and the consumers budget.

I have seen consumers have access to a good timeshare product, but the allocation of ownership within that product did not enable the consumer to reach their holiday objectives.

For example one consumer was sold 20,000 RCI pure points. The consumer could only take UK holidays and required April to September holiday time. So due to the number of points required they had to roll over 2 years worth of holidays to combine too 40,000 RCI Points and borrow from next years points as well! So effectively within timeshare they could only take a UK holiday every 3 years and pay 3 years of maintenances! Good product but they just did not own in the right way and no one had explained about bonus weeks either.

There again you only have that consumers word for it. Factually they only had 20,000 RCI Points a year and through ill health could not fly that I do know. They of course did not speak very highly of timeshare, but now at least their members of Dial and UKRE and can access bonus weeks now.  :D

I have come across hundreds of clients who just owned timeshare in the wrong way. All consumers of course said the the sales person was aware of this and no one gets back. However I was not there and who knows what was said on the table

Even more consumers thought they were miss-sold, but I have found they just do not understand how to work timeshare effectively. And of course you do get consumers that are just miss sold
and under pressure end up with something that may just not be workable or is missing a few facts :D

Suggested Solution

A simple one page fact find starting with the normal consumers details. Address contact details etc
 
1) State what they currently own in timeshare if anything

( e.g Orange Lakes Florida week 26)
 
2) Next on 2-3 lines what their holiday objectives are
( e.g Mr & Mrs Jones are retiring soon and wish to take more UK holidays particular in Cornwall)

3) Recommendations and general advice.

e.g I have recommended a 1 bed St Mellion in Cornwall week 38, a benefit to them is they enjoy golf. I informed them that the resort also has an exit strategy as you can simply hand it back or sell it. I have also high lighted the benefits of other Exchange Companies to Mr & Mrs Jones. I have abided by all the regulations as required. Copies of any notes or diagrams have been photo copied so Mr & Mrs Jones have an easy reference for referring back to our meeting.

They also have a direct line number for our after care service and once they have gone through the cooling off period they will receive log in details for our website where members can access information to ensure they are really working their timeshare. This also allows members to have access to current updates and our news letter. This website also allows members to make recommendations of attractions, restaurants, beaches etc that they have personally visited.

I have also informed them when they stay with us at St Mellion we will allocate a brief time for them to meet up with our Customer Care Educator and they will ensure that they are making the very best of their timeshare. 


Then the Licensed salesperson signs the bottom of the Holiday fact sheet and so does the consumer saying this is a fair overview. The consumer then has an opportunity to add any general comments and they date this. The consumer keeps a copy.

That would be nice! Now theres always a record as sometimes its the consumers lifestyle that has changed and at the time the product suited their holiday requirements. They then complain years later that it does not suit their holiday style and memory can get distorted over the years.

Please note that I dont believe that St Mellion do any of this but it is a good resort with golf and they do allow timeshare owners to hand back their weeks.


The fact find worked in Finance and was a life saver sometimes when you had something that you could refer back to we found 'surprisingly' that sometimes our own clients were duped into complaining by a third party so they in turn would cancel our product and take out our competitors product! Sound familiar? ;D This Fact Find with licensing stopped that unless there was a legitimate reason for doing a part exchange or requesting a cancelation if our contract allowed this.

This is all a suggested opinion utilising a fact find. We found that it actually was very much to our companies benefit and we had a fact find long before the Licensing came into effect. Of course our sales people and managers were suicidal to begin with at the thought of this. However with training they saw the benefits and it really worked well for everyone. The client felt comfortable that they were sitting down with a company that was really looking for a solution on a professional basis. Does anyone not see the benefits of this at some stage of a Licensing or feel that one aspect is not workable?
Title: Licensing debate get involved! Claim advise link has been updated in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 30, 2014, 10:56:57
Please note that the link  http://www.timeshareweekly.com/timeshare-fraud-prevention has been updated and also recommends a solicitor who advises on timeshare matters. Where the first consultation is free. Ensure you use the articles recommendations on how to put together the facts so you can be advised accordingly on your free first consultation.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 01, 2014, 14:50:29
Under Best Advice Practices

As mentioned in the post just one back from this post I introduced a simple Fact Find that would be signed at a presentation that I believe would ensure that best advice was received where the consumer signs this with the sales person each dates and keeps a record. The consumer also has the opportunity to add any comments.

A simple Fact Find as suggested as a solution is below

Starting with the normal consumers details. Address contact details etc
 
1) State what they currently own in timeshare if anything
( e.g Orange Lakes Florida week 26)
 
2) Next on 2-3 lines what their holiday objectives are

( e.g Mr & Mrs Jones are retiring soon and wish to take more UK holidays particular in Cornwall)

3) Recommendations and general advice.

e.g I have recommended a 1 bed St Mellion in Cornwall week 38, a benefit to them is they enjoy golf. I informed them that the resort also has an exit strategy as you can simply hand it back or sell it. I have also high lighted the benefits of other Exchange Companies to Mr & Mrs Jones. I have abided by all the regulations as required. Copies of any notes or diagrams have been photo copied so Mr & Mrs Jones have an easy reference for referring back to our meeting.

a) Would anyone have objected to signing to anything like this when you were first sold a timeshare?

b) Is there anything you would add?

Perhaps this could have helped if we had something like this to refer back to as in all fairness sometimes our circumstances change and through time we may not remember all the reasons why we signed up at the time.

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on February 01, 2014, 15:44:55
A fantastic baseline to work from.

In addition to what you have outlined could the following be added, (Just some ideas for the melting pot)

FINANCE

1. The initial cost of xxxxx has been agreed.
2. All management fees have been explained and consented to.
3. All additional cost and fees (Which are then listed) have been explained and agreed to.
4. Annual fee & price increases will be no greater than 5% greater than the Bank of England (Or other nominated financial institution) base rate at the relevant time.

All other benefits (As follows) have been explained and understood.

A copy of this certificate is to be retained by the Company and Customer.

If not completed at the way initial stage, perhaps some other time before concluding negotiations and see signing of contract.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 01, 2014, 20:11:20
Hi martyboy

Some of the financials would be included in the actual application form which the Timeshare owner should have a copy of.

Maintenance fees in my opinion should be explained and ideally should have some fixed rate.
However in the contract they may point out that in the event of the members for example wishing to have something like a new swimming pool/ restaurant facility they may be asked to contribute. This should be put to the members to vote for or against. If there are any other events that might trigger a subsidy this also should be entered into the contract.

The fact find will focus the salespersons mind on whats best for the new member and has to ensure that their recommendations meet up with what the new members objectives are. It must also be remembered that the new member ideally should have an opportunity to add their own comments to that page in a separate box.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 03, 2014, 01:34:20

What are some of the biggest challenges facing consumers who have a problem with their timeshare today?
(Leaving aside exit strategies, but we have discussed this within the thread with suggested solutions.)

a) Some timeshare owners may simply own the wrong product that does not suit their holiday style. Perhaps the product is right but they own at level within that product that does not work for them. For example they own low season and need school holiday time.

b) Lack of knowledge of how to work timeshare effectively is one of the reasons many timeshare owners I have found become frustrated and they therefore inteprut this is that timeshare does not work. Unfortunately the real issue is that maybe they just were never shown effectively how to work their timeshare and may also not be aware that there are alternative Exchange Companies to consider. Some Exchange Companies may not even be in the country that they reside in yet they could access them. Knowledge really is power.

c) The product was misrepresented or perhaps miscommunicated at point of sale.

d) Some owners sadly have some genuine life style challenges so they can no longer use timeshare.

e) This leads timeshare owners to be receptive to listening to scam operators who play on this and they in turn will build on this and create a sense of urgency that they have the answer but it must be done now! This solution always requires money upfront that you rarely see again.  >:(
 
Licensing once effectively introduced will have a far greater impact on most timeshare problems than trying to chase down and put right timeshare problems and scams after the event. In most cases the horse has already bolted!!

Chasing down existing timeshare problems is "treating the cause not the effect" Licensing is more a preventative measure saving many unnecessary frustrations trying to resolve these issues. Non no less than promoting that timeshare has problems for the world to see. It's got to be better to tackle those problems in the right way with an effective license so that we can reduce these problems occurring in the first place!

This has got to be better than saying we know we have problems but we can chase them down after the event! Let's stop them occurring where we can with licensing!

Licensing maybe better understood if you visialise Licensing as a tabletop and this tabletop is supported by three legs, each leg is essential to supporting the tabletop.

1) One leg is the important "code of conduct" and this ideally should be displayed on the timeshare companies website proudly displaying the companies principles values, standards and rules of behavior that guide the decisions, procedures and systems of an organisation in a way that respects the rights of all members affected by its operations."

This should be supported by a true after care service and could be outlined in the code of conduct. This will ensure that the new member has a support structure and for example this could be with a login members only section on the resorts website that will promote key components of their products best use. How to effectively use Exchange companies available to their members. A FAQ section of general questions that the new member can refer to. Finally a contact number that will assist members with there enquires.

This type of support would have many benefits as I have found many timeshare owners considering leaving timeshare simply because they were not using their timeshare to its full potential. Also creating this bond and building your membership as a community it is more likely those members will seek advice from their own timeshare company if approached by scam companies.

Members should be encouraged to attend a genuine meeting with a timeshare educator when visiting their home resort. To ensure that there member is making full and best use their timeshare. This also gives the opportunity to make sure they are making full use of their home resort and local attractions. Feedback from this would be of real benefit to the company as well and may contribute to future policy changes.

This type of support would generate referred business and they are far more likely to retain their member.  ;D

In every industry, the businesses that look after their consumers best interest are usually the most successful. High performance businesses look after their current consumers, because they understand that getting new ones is 10 times more difficult and 10 times more expensive.

2) Another important leg is "Know your timeshare" starting with your companies product(s) and to include a broad knowledge of timeshare extending that to Exchange Companies.  A working knowledge of the timeshare act is essential.

3) The third leg is "Best Advice Practices" without this the overall objective to ensure the consumer receives best advice within the companies product range could be exploited.

As mentioned earlier even if the product is correct we have to ensure that the consumer has access at the right level within this product to meet their holiday objectives. For example if a points system is offered that the new consumer should have sufficient points to enable them to satisfy their current holiday style. If a consumer has to take specific holiday periods than perhaps a floating system may not be in their best interests. If they have to take school holiday time then owning a week in low season may not suit their holiday requirements.

This is why in my opinion a fact find could be of real benefit as as there can always be mitigating circumstances why a recommendation on the face of it may look poor advice. However for example the consumers personal holiday style may be changing shortly and the advice given is there to reflect this. Perhaps the consumers are retiring shortly. The fact find under Recommendations and General Advice would provide clarity and support the advice provided. As mentioned this would be counter signed by the consumer and they would have the opportunity in another box to add any comments if they wished.

The Licensing discussed is just my opinion based on a loose model of licensing in the Financial Services Industry and my understanding of the Timeshare Industry.

If anyone has been following these posts you will get an understanding that Licensing could not be introduced overnight .

Licensing would be something that the Industry would have to introduce in stages giving the Industry involved in selling the opportunity to adjust. Licensing will not reduce sales from my experience Licensed sales people will see an increase in sales especially with updated sales strategies. The only sales people that will suffer are those that know no other way but to sell dishonestly.

Timeshare does not need to be sold if intelligent marketing takes place and with good questioning and listening skills your have a far more receptive new member. People like to buy they don't like being sold to.

Licensing will have many positives in the Industry.


1)   Consumers will trust the licensed salesperson and will search them out. Licensed selling Companies including Resale Companies.
 
2)   Scam companies will find it more difficult to operate when challenged for their license details. This would be simple to check.
 
3) This will assist the salesperson to focus on what's right for the consumer as this will be disclosed in their fact find that a company manager would have also have to sigh out as well as the consumer agree with a signature to a fact find as suggested on a post on this page.

Licensing will have a positive impact on the cause of most timeshare problems and will have a positive knock on effect.

It is a win win scenario Licensing is far better for the consumer and the Industry will be better perceived. From my experience it will be better for the Selling Companies albeit most wont initially see this. Certainly most sales people will fear this change and its not until their educated and trained themselves will they see the benefits of having their profile raised in the public eye as professional licensed sales people.  :o

Those that don't get involved in Licensing will simply watch their competitors business grow as theirs continues to fall. I would see that Licensing would be heavily promoted and the consumer will be searching out for Licensed Companies. Those that get on board first will help shape the initial Introductory stage so its workable as the Licensing act proceeds with introducing new policy at set stages until it achieves its end game. Remember that this will be constantly evolving as it has in the Financial services for the benefit of the consumer.

This will raise the profile of the Industry and the Licensed Companies as this will generate more trust and confidence. The bad guys are the minority in the timeshare Industry but they get the biggest media coverage! Everywhere you look, stories regarding negative aspects of timeshare on the forums, newspapers and the Internet. Because our brains are wired to see the negative in life more fiercely than the positive, its easy to fall into the category that "its all bad". The timeshare timeshare Industry is a great concept and has exceeded the expectations of a very high percentage of timeshare owners who work the system effectively and have not fallen into the first 5 categories listed at the beginning of this post. However they rarely have a need to search out for advice or visit forums. In any event rarely does positive news sale papers!

We had a slogan that worked its way through our company right down to the very new recruit as we knew of the importance of getting ahead in the game. It was simply Think, Believe, Act, Become, adjusting on route.

Licensing and Exit Strategies discussed in this thread are of course only my opinion, there are others who will no doubt have differing opinions how the Industry could be better supported. If so I would like to hear them. The more positive ideas that are thrown in the hat the better.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on February 03, 2014, 22:13:24
Many good ideas Charlie, perhaps and I hope you hear from more than the Usual Suspects. For this to work we need to hear from reformers and those who want to maintain the status quo, and their rationale for their stance.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 05, 2014, 22:16:16
So does anyone have any thoughts on how Licensing might cut down on Scams?

I wonder if timeshare owners would be more inclined to deal with Licensed Resale Companies and Licensed Companies advising on their timeshares?
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on February 05, 2014, 22:35:16
 One of the answers to scams is as follows:
I think that one of the stated objectives of the Timeshare Taskforce is to work with a variety of agencies both in the UK and Europe. One of the objectives being a concerted attack on the scammers.
 If that turns out to be a viable exercise then I feel sure that a strong licensing policy will enable the industry to highlight the need for consumers to only deal with companies who work with licensed consultants.
This will or should mean that the only licence which can be issued to sales will be a licence to those who have gone through a meaningful training course in order to obtain that licence. Companies will need to be registered in order for their consultants to be eligible for that course and consultants would no longer be licensed if they move to companies who are not registered. Thus a consultant/salesman could not, as he can now, move to a scam company or set up a scam company and retain that licence.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on February 05, 2014, 22:45:21
Totally agree with your post, but , who will oversee and maintain the register?
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on February 05, 2014, 23:01:29
Totally agree with your post, but , who will oversee and maintain the register?

Possibly an agency in the countries where the licenses are issued.

At some stage it seems to me that there will be the need for some centrally maintained database and there is certainly a variety of independent agencies in this country and possibly abroad who could oversee and maintain such a bank of data, If it was to enable the dismantling of the scam industry then it may not even need to be independent, ie. "If you are a developer or a resort who does not buy in to licensing (for whatever reason) then you cannot employ "with licence sales." On joining your organization their licence will be revoked."
 Any agency independent or not could administer that.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on February 05, 2014, 23:45:30
Perhaps an amendment could be added to the latest EU Timeshare Directive placing the responsibility on each members state Tourism Board/Ministry to maintain a register and set the tests required for licences?

That way EU law is covered as well as individual states trading laws.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 07, 2014, 00:12:05
Most small time scammers tend to use the phones and collectively they tend to cause a lot of damage. If consumers ignore our advice which is generally to tell them you no longer own timeshare and how did you get my telephone number that should see the line go dead.

However we know that some timeshare owners get caught out and stay online maybe curiosity, desperation or they get hit with a quick opening line that hooks them in with either a fear statement or we have a potential buyer.

As a last line if the timeshare owner knows that they should only deal with licensed salespeople. What questions do you think they should ask this sales person in order to validate their authenticity? So that they can check them out prior to the next follow up call that the salesperson usually arranges within 24 hours.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 10, 2014, 13:31:29

I would consider the following when checking out a company especially a cold calling company.


1) Ask them how they got your details.
2) Ask them to please go over this again so I can record the conversation
3) Can you please send this on hard copy to me with your proposal and your terms and conditions on company headed paper please.
4) Google the company details to see what is found on the Internet
5) If a Limited Company verify this with Company House. This will give you details of Directors and Company address etc.
6) Google the name of the company and the word scams after their company name. (To see if anything is picked up)
7) Are they members of TATOC or RDO
8 If you have any concerns access and use the business check website by KwikChex. The purpose of The Timeshare Business Check website is to verify information regarding businesses operating within, or associated with the European timeshare sector- http://www.timesharebusinesscheck.org/
9 You can check up futther details on the company website to find out when this was created and who owns the website and addresses for example.
10) If Licensing has been introduced. I would not deal with them if not a licensed company.

A word of caution
1) If cold called it does not mean they are automatically a scam company but sadly for our Industry it would appear that the majority are. So you must follow other stringent checks
2) If not a member of RDO or TATOC this again does not mean that all Timeshare Companies outside of their membership means their a scam company. If that were the case we would have very few Timeshare Companies in Europe that would not fall under the banner of being a scam company. However if a member it can allow you to check up on some further details.
3  If you pick up a few derogatory comments on the Internet but in the balance the vast majority are more positive about the company than thats a good sign. I know of no company that does not attract the odd criticism we cant please everyone and so odd comments does not make them a bad company. Even consumer bodies will pick up criticism.   

At the end of the day if your telling a company that your recording the telephone call and you want a hard copy letter with an overview of their proposal and their terms and conditions a Scam Company is going to put the phone down or your never hear from them again. They will then go on to look for easier prey who is going to pay money upfront on the basis of a phone call.

Do not pay any money upfront especially to a stranger on the basis of a phone call or one meeting that resulted from a cold call. Didnt your mum warn you about strangers?!
  :o

Do your due diligence.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 17, 2014, 10:47:56


Both ideal scenarios by Mavo & Martyboy. This may end up as an end plan. We have seen self governance by Timeshare Companies and in most instances this has not worked. An outside agency I feel would be a long time coming and I see TATOC a more preferable option as things stand at the moment. Even this would take sometime to get this off the drawing board, but some preparation could start to be in the making.

Quote from: Martyboy
Totally agree with your post, but , who will oversee and maintain the register?

Quote from: Mavo
Possibly an agency in the countries where the licenses are issued.

At some stage it seems to me that there will be the need for some centrally maintained database and there is certainly a variety of independent agencies in this country and possibly abroad who could oversee and maintain such a bank of data, If it was to enable the dismantling of the scam industry then it may not even need to be independent, ie. "If you are a developer or a resort who does not buy in to licensing (for whatever reason) then you cannot employ "with licence sales." On joining your organization their licence will be revoked."
 Any agency independent or not could administer that.
Report to moderator     Logged


author=martyboy02
Perhaps an amendment could be added to the latest EU Timeshare Directive placing the responsibility on each members state Tourism Board/Ministry to maintain a register and set the tests required for licences?

That way EU law is covered as well as individual states trading laws.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 17, 2014, 18:21:19
Your post charlie1 above at 10.47.

I am a very happy timeshare owner for over 25 years, so more than qualified to give my opinion.

The Silverpoints, BHH, BHC and HM threads do not speak very well of 'The Owners Committee,s'

T.A.T.O.C. stands for 'The Association of Timeshare Owners Committee,s' and BHH, BHC and HM committee,s are members of TATOC.

Your saying that 'T.A.T.O.C. a more preferable option' would, in my opinion, be  like putting Bruce Reynolds, Buster Edwards and Ronnie Biggs in charge of the British Rail Timetable during the 1960,s

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 17, 2014, 20:14:22
Hi Happyowner 25 I can understand where you are with this.

If you read through my past posts on Licensing I have made a point of mentioning that it ideally should be a Government agency.

However this would not be practicable to work for a couple of reasons in my opinion.

They would have no real experience of timeshare and the legalities. Just as important they would not know its history. This could make them vulnerable and be influenced. I have seen this happen.

For this reason a Government agency off its own bat will be a long time coming.

So what do we have at the moment that could bring some experience to the table?

We have RDO who perhaps are better resourced but as I have mentioned on many occasions tin my opinion they should make changes on their board. I believe that a board member of RDO should have no conflict interests with other Timeshare Companies. The board of RDO is represented by having Silverpoints on the board and other Directors who have other Timeshare interests.

Also I believe that their compliance department headed up by Alberto Garcia of Mindtimeshare.me should investigate all complaints and not just non-members of RDO. They usually tend to appear to be the small time fraudsters and Scam Companies and the bigger Companies are not tackled.

TATOC on a much smaller scale work with some of the Developers that are affiliated to TATOC and sign up to their Code Of Conduct. They are remunerated on a much smaller scale for this.   

TATOC need to raise funds from other resources and be less reliant on RDO and the Developers. This I believe will be come about.

In an Ideal world I would have TATOC who have experience of the Industry work along side an Independent panel to help shape Licensing as it evolves. An Independent body should act for registration purposes for all Licensed Companies and Salespeople. And be responsible for all examinations and training At a later stage perhaps a Government agency would be enticed to get involved adding more weight behind Licensing.   

This I feel is the only way ahead to at least get something moving.

At the moment as you mentioned Silverpoints on this thread we will have to see the outcome of Silverpoints as there has been many posts on this forum and advice given. We must wait and see what the outcome will be. Its early days yet but the next 3-4 months will see where we are with this.                               


Your post charlie1 above at 10.47.

I am a very happy timeshare owner for over 25 years, so more than qualified to give my opinion.

The Silverpoints, BHH, BHC and HM threads do not speak very well of 'The Owners Committee,s'

T.A.T.O.C. stands for 'The Association of Timeshare Owners Committee,s' and BHH, BHC and HM committee,s are members of TATOC.

Your saying that 'T.A.T.O.C. a more preferable option' would, in my opinion, be  like putting Bruce Reynolds, Buster Edwards and Ronnie Biggs in charge of the British Rail Timetable during the 1960,s
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 17, 2014, 21:03:15
I think the post by mabel at 20.50 tonight on hollywood mirage thread has answered my point charlie1
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 17, 2014, 21:42:36
Hi Happyowner
In all fairness to you we have been discussing Silverpoints on at least 5 theads going back a couple of years and more. I assume you have not been following them. I have raised issues and even solutions. There's a couple of weeks of reading for you.

 At this stage as it unfolds we will see where we are from this. I would expect some members to launch a legal challenge if they are not satisfied with any debate they are able to have with Silverpoints to find a solution that both parties are happy with. This has all been discussed in some depth given where we are at the moment. Let's see how this unfolds.

I think the post by mabel at 20.50 tonight on hollywood mirage thread has answered my point charlie1
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 17, 2014, 21:54:39
Hi charlie1

The 'licensing debate, get involved' is where I replied to your posting of 10.57 this morning. My only posts have been here, on the same thread, in response to yours.

I am referring to how a TATOC affilliated committee appears to have 'done what the masters want'

I have been reading timeshare talk since its start, after the demise of crimeshare talk, so I am up to speed on the threads.

If you do not wish people to 'get involved', please say so.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 17, 2014, 22:36:42
The good old crimeshare. I am more than happy in fact I wish that more would get involved these are serious issues.
My own personal thoughts, right or wrong is that in order to get licensing off the ground I don't see any other alternatives. No Government agencies I believe will get involved at this stage as timeshare at the moment is not quite as important as the Financial Services Industry. I will test this later in the year though.

For me it's important to get licensing off the ground. It's easy to say what's not right and have our own thoughts on this. But do you have a suggested proposal how licensing could be governed?

I have suggested a mixed bag of TATOC working with an Independent panel, plus an independent registered body to train and test sales people. This would also hold the data for licensed companies and licensed sales people.

If you have read the posts then you would have seen that Harry of TATOC got involved to resolve a case on behalf of a very unhappy Silverpoints member. I now this for a fact as I was part of this 2 hour tele conference that also involved Mark Cushway. It ended with one very happy timeshare owner. I have also seen TATOC get involved in other matters.

So I am a little more comfortable with TATOC. It's perhaps unlikely that my thoughts would be acted on but I would be interested if you could possible offer up any suggestions? I am genuinely interested.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: martyboy02 on February 18, 2014, 15:06:38
If you read through my past posts on Licensing I have made a point of mentioning that it ideally should be a Government agency.

However this would not be practicable to work for a couple of reasons in my opinion.

They would have no real experience of timeshare and the legalities. Just as important they would not know its history. This could make them vulnerable and be influenced. I have seen this happen.
  Posted by: charlie1 on: February 17, 2014, 20:14:22

I fully appreciate what Charlie says, but, how many Goverment Ministers, MPs, Chairpersons of Boards/Quangos are expert or seriously experienced in thier relevant field, not many I fear. That is why they have advisers and legal eagles.

If there is a will then there is a way.

What would be good if the Canaries Tourist Board got on board and trialed a scheme on one of the islands, then this could be rolled out over the rest of the islands and then further a field. I think it would be good the Canarian authorities, consumers and industry.



Also I believe that their compliance department headed up by Alberto Garcia of Mindtimeshare.me should investigate all complaints and not just non-members of RDO. They usually tend to appear to be the small time fraudsters and Scam Companies and the bigger Companies are not tackled.
Posted by: charlie1 on: February 17, 2014, 20:14:22

Would the RDO seriously bite the hand that feeds them? NO, and I speak from first hand experienced here, laying evidence on the RDOs table with regard to Anfi (No longer RDO member) breaching several points of the Code of Conduct, the RDO weren't interested. Lets remember they are the Resort Developers Organisation and not the Retailers Defense Ombudsman.

So the debate goes on!



Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 19, 2014, 13:30:17
“Lincesing debate, get involved”

Post No 73 Quote from Charlie1 “I see TATOC a more preferable option”.

Being a very happy owner of timeshare for more than 25 years, have we always been happy? No. Like all if not most people, when we purchased timeshare it took us a couple of years and holidays to “get used to it”. We took advantage of the free coffee,s and asked many questions of the sales reps. Now our timeshare holidays are perfect for the family. Yes, we also love all inclusive holidays, so we have the best of both worlds.

Surveys show that most timeshare owners are “more than satisfied” with their ownership. My wife and I fall into the small category of “very happy timeshare” owners.

Our ownership is within Europe,s 95% of timeshares not affiliated to, influenced by, or has any input from T.A.T.O.C.

95% I hear you ask. There are more than 2,000 timeshare resorts throughout Europe. Those affiliated to Exchange companies and those “buy to use, no exchange company” resorts. Looking at the TATOC website, there are 92 Timeshare resorts or companies listed as being affiliated.

T.A.T.O.C. as stated, stands for “The Association of Timeshare Owners Committees,”. I will copy a quote else where from the timeshare talk website, from a TATOC Director which was in response to a Mavo question.
Quote
With regards to TATOC I was voted onto the board by the members of TATOC which I have to say you are not a member of TATOC directly. The constitution of TATOC is that resort committees are the members of that company and it was they who voted for me. To qualify as a director of TATOC you have to be on the committee of a member resort as I am and then be voted on by all the other resorts which I was.

Each individual resort has members who elect their committee and through that they are members of TATOC. In March this year the membership of of TATOC was broaden to allow individual members to join TATOC provided they are members of a timeshare resort that is not a member of TATOC. You as a points owner could therefore qualify under that heading if you so wish to join. If you were to join then at future AGM's of TATOC your would be able to attend speak and vote. There is also a qualifying period after which you wuld alo be able to stand for the board of directors but that period of times escapes me.




So lets be clear on the subject. TATOC  does NOT represent the owners within an affiliated resort, TATOC represents the committe,s.




I know there are individuals within TATOC who strive to assist and do help many timeshare owners in any way they can and they no doubt do some good work, however, TATOC represents the Timeshare Owners Committee,s.

My post at No 74 “The Silverpoints, BHH, BHC and HM threads do not speak very well of 'The Owners Committee,s' “
My post at 76 “I think the post by Mabel at 20.50 tonight on Hollywood mirage thread has answered my point charlie1”

Since 1st Nov 2013, 99% of the negative posts from timeshare owners have come from people who own in TATOC affiliated resorts.

Charlie1 post No,s 77. Your assuming and condescending post regarding other threads being available on the site was flawed except for the point you tried to make re “lets stick to the thread”.

What you are advocating Charlie1, is the 95% of owners outside of TATOC involvement, should in future, deal with licensed sales reps who are “vetted and verified” by an organisation who do not even represent timeshare owners.

Hence my quote
Your saying that 'T.A.T.O.C. a more preferable option' would, in my opinion, be  like putting Bruce Reynolds, Buster Edwards and Ronnie Biggs in charge of the British Rail Timetable during the 1960,s

With regards to your post No 79, I would like to quote from the Historian and Biographer Laurence Bergreen who said of one individual “He was elegant, high class, the berrie,s. He played the part of a self made millionaire, who could show people about doing business”.  Guess who the individual was? Al Capone.






Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 19, 2014, 15:54:30
Thanks you Happyowner25 its good to see you fall within the very happy timeshare owners group. I hope you may be tempted to contribute on some of the other threads like Exit Strategies etc

I dont believe you have looked at my suggested solution and have just looked at one part of this solution I suggested and that seems to be just focused on TATOC? 

From where I am, I could make also make a case against RDO, TATOC, Government Agencies, the Queen and even the Pope. (Please note this is not meant to be a condescending statement but how we can all see things differently) We all have opinions and thats healthy for debate.

The way I see TATOCs membership of resorts is rather just like this forum. Most posters and viewers on here are the result of having a problem. They then came across TimeshareTalk on the Internet.

Most happy timeshare owners are not on the Internet seeking advice. They are content and happy with the way they are working their Timeshare. They with few exceptions wont even know that Timesharetalk exists. That’s a shame really as there is some good education on here and some good tips.

TATOC has not quite acquired its membership on the same basis as timeshareTalk, but I feel that some of those resorts have challenges and have reached out for guidance. Now the selling resorts and this is just my opinion have mainly become members of TATOC because it helps give them more credibility at point of sale. I am aware that this is a part of their sales pitch. I would suggest that the selling Timeshare Companies on TATOC would represent most of those issues you refer too.

( Please note that I suggested that this would ideally consist of two other companies supporting Licensing. An Independent panel that would have a say in Licensing policy and an Independent company who would be responsible for registration of Licensed Timeshare Companies and Licensed salespeople. They would also provide online training and ensure that salespeople attended an exam with proof of identity.) So as you can see my suggestion was that TATOC was part of the solution.


I have a few reasons for suggesting TATOC. As being a part of this solution.

1) I have seen first hand TATOC get involved behind the scenes. If I had not then perhaps I would have had a few reservations.
2) They don’t have a Developer on the board
3) They do have Industry experience.

Their weak area is that they are under resourced and need to develop other income streams and be less reliant from the income derived from Timeshare Companies affiliations.

I feel it matters not regarding that TATOC as you say is there for the committees only. However I would be wondering why they have a consumers helpline I am sure it is not full of committee members phoning in.

I tend to break challenges down when considering a possible solution.

1) Identify the problem
.
This comes in two parts where I have pointed out on past threads that Licensing when it has evolved would have a massive knock on effect and lot of our timeshare issues would disappear and who could manage Licensing?

2) What tools do I have available now or could have. I try to see things in the present rather than anticipating what would be nice to have.

We could go back and forth over TATOC as being part of the solution, but its only my suggestion and you have a different opinion thats great.

In Financial services those who kicked off Licensing were no longer involved after 2-3 years and the Government got more involved. What I am more interested in doing is getting the ball rolling sooner rather than later waiting for the perfect scenario. 

Let me get back to one of your comments

Charlie1 post No,s 77. Your assuming and condescending post regarding other threads being available on the site was flawed except for the point you tried to make re “lets stick to the thread”.

How was I to know that you have covered other threads and have been on TimeshareTalk since the end of crimeshare. This was your first post on here! Unless you also post under another name also. So I was just trying to be helpful and suggesting a catch up. So don't look into this to much I was just trying to help.

Your second Point What you are advocating Charlie1, is the 95% of owners outside of TATOC involvement, should in future, deal with licensed sales reps who are “vetted and verified” by an organisation who do not even represent timeshare owners.

This would be a new company in my opinion managed by TATOC together with an Independent Panel and also an Independent Company that would manage the registration and training. There would be a new board created and each company would be represented on the board. This is to big a job just for one company.

As such a new company would have its own code of conduct and rules that would govern licensing

Now I dont expect that this would work out on this basis but this my opinion.

As I have mentioned many times now, I have suggested 3 companies each working together. This is a massive job and as I have been there before I appreciate that this will evolve on route and change.

I did ask before and would genuinely be interested in your opinion. Do you have a solution that you would like to propose?
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 19, 2014, 16:17:22
I charlie1,

I am watching the debate with great interest because no doubt, sometime in the future, it will affect others including ld' owners like us.

I have seen and appreciate many positive thoughts and comments you have stated on this thread, hopefully the debate will grow.

However, your last post, paragraph 10 you say "I feel it matters not regarding that TATOC as you say is there for the committee,s only"
1) I quoted directly from a previous posting by a TATOC Director, and its in the TATOC constitution, so its not"as I say" charlie1, its their constitution. Please do not twist versions or comments, let's stick to facts.

Yes they have a consumer help line, and I know they do help consumers, I even mentioned the same in my last post.

I would agree that any "body" licensing the industry should consult TATOC at some stage, however, TATOC,s constitution should never allow them to be more involved other than a 'consultation'

...
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: jcorrea-lawyer on February 19, 2014, 16:40:57

What would be good if the Canaries Tourist Board got on board and trialed a scheme on one of the islands, then this could be rolled out over the rest of the islands and then further a field. I think it would be good the Canarian authorities, consumers and industry.

Licensing seems a very good option and of course an improvement is the right direction. Nonetheless we (in Mogán, Gran Canaria where Anfi is based) have already something similar. There is a Council Bylaw on Publicity that bans all kind of agressive selling (applying what the Canarian Tourism Law of 1995, several times amended, sets in art.46) and establishes licenses for what we can call “Promotion Agents on Publicity”. From my experience it doesn’t really deter from bad selling practices because the City Council didn't apply the rules as they should, showing some sympathy with the Developers because they bring them lot of business. Perhaps the control should be above the City Council level, probably at regional level, and to be effective must be very deterrent, with high penalties and quick executions of the fines. If not, breaching the law may be economically worthwhile.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 19, 2014, 20:13:22
Hi Happyowner it’s always difficult to just communicate on the forums. Thank you for you’re input as said please get involved on the other threads. The other big issues are Exit strategies and How to sell timeshare.

My understanding with TATOC and any business is that it can change its constitution if agreed and voted in by the members. If TATOC saw that they could contribute and this would be of benefit I’m sure they would find a way to be a part of another company if they wanted to.

Also TATOC has changed its constitution and the helpline is a separate entity with its own constitution. This allows them to broaden their funding opportunities and this will give it greater independence from the developers.

The Company changed its name to Timeshare Association (Timeshare Owners and Committees) by special resolution on 9 March 2008. The TATOC name is retained but the organization has changed a great deal since 2008. This means it could change the constitution again.

If I were TATOC I would consider a timeshare owners forum that enabled members to log in, but that’s a nice thing to have as not everyone wants to pick up the phone but I would assume they would not have the man-power to manage this.

The most difficult thing to do is just to get this off the ground. Once off it will evolve and take shape. There are to many benefits for the consumer and the Industry not to make this happen.

From what  jcorrea-lawyer has posted it would appear that they are doing a good job keeping most of the promotional agents off the streets. At one stage you had to run the gauntlet with one every few yards! The local Councils I feel are to close to the resorts and would be influenced by the business generated by the resorts to get involved in licensing as thats where the bigger problems are generated.

I have mentioned before that Licensing should not be feared by the resorts or the sales people as from my experience it will increase the confidence and trust of the consumer and it will generate more business as the Industry is perceived in a more professional light.

Licensing is a big part of whats needed to bring about a positive change. This coupled with Resorts reviewing their own constitutions and creating new contracts with exit strategies as suggested on the thread Exit Strategies http://www.timesharetalk.co.uk/index.php/topic,17528.0.html

We also need some debate on the thread What about a debate on how to sell your own timeshare? http://www.timesharetalk.co.uk/index.php/topic,18719.0.html however I can only assume that everyone has no problems selling their weeks as no one has contributed to this thread.  8)
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 19, 2014, 20:38:20
Jcorrea-lawyer is correct in what he says and obviously the 'legal' person for others to listen too.

His posting included "from bad selling practises because the city council didn't apply the rules as they should".

This in plain english is 'money talks'. I am sure if I am wrong, jcorrea-lawyer will correct me.

Besides the 'possibility' of TATOC changing its constitution, they would have to completely change their way of being financed. Being financed by developers takes away their 'complete' independence and does not put any faith in 'customers'.

As stated previously, the majority of timeshare owners are 'more than satisfied' and owning in one of the 95% of non TATOC involvement has not been a disadvantage to these many "happy owners".

With regards to exit strategies, our grown up 'off springs' are desparately waiting for us to do our "ultimate exchange' so they can take ownership of it. Therefore, its not an issue for us.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 19, 2014, 21:22:09
Happyowner25 as said communication must be an issue between us. We all see what we want to see and I believe you are on a different page to me.  :-\

First off where did I disagree with Jcorrea Lawyer??? I amazingly understood this as well that 'money talks'. So from that I deduced all on my own is that the council would not be best suited to Licence the sales people. As said 'money talks'  :o I hope that is not to confusing, but if you actually read this you may see that I actually agreed with Jcorrea Lawyer

You did not read my post again. TATOC have already changed its constitution?? For the sake of repeating myself I have copied you in again below please read this time.

Also TATOC has changed its constitution and the helpline is a separate entity with its own constitution. This allows them to broaden their funding opportunities and this will give it greater independence from the developers.

The Company changed its name to Timeshare Association (Timeshare Owners and Committees) by special resolution on 9 March 2008. The TATOC name is retained but the organization has changed a great deal since 2008. This means it could change the constitution again.


So do we understand its already been done and if it can be done once it can be done again.I have no idea why you seem fixated on TATOC have you had a personal experience with TATOC not to your liking?

I have stated before and again for your benefit "I stated in my opinion the only resorts that have reached out to TATOC are those that I personally felt required some guidance or they were a selling Timeshare Company. The happy resorts will just get on with it and thats great! So we agree I hope?

If you want to debate who would manage a Licensing company than please suggest something, anything instead of focusing just on TATOC As I said they would only be a part of a company in my SUGGESTION.  We have a different opinion thats all and are certainly on a different wave length. This is not meant to sound condescending but I feel as if you dont actually read the posts. Then go off at a tangent for some reason.

I am pleased that you are happy with your timeshare if you have followed my threads you will see that I am also very happy with timeshare and am more than happy to support other fellow timeshare owners to ensure that they too become part of the majority of happy timeshare owners.  ;D

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 19, 2014, 21:39:35
1 assuming post, 1 "I don't believe" post n(82) now an insulting post.....thank you charlie1.

Where did I say you disagreed with jcorrea-lawyer?.....please direct me.

 As you state, TATOC  have a separate entity constitution for their helpline. Their constitution for the Timeshare Owners Committee,s are  as stated in previous posts.

I do not have an issue with TATOC. I have an issue with your "I see TATOC a more preferable option" to run the licensing, which is your desire.

We are now "the dog chasing its tail"

Until you refrain from 'assuming' 'I don't believe' 'twisting' words quoted in post above, I will refrain from any further posts.

I stand by my previous posts, in which you obviously only see what you want to see.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 19, 2014, 22:06:00
Hi Happyowner25

I always say there are always 3 sides to any event

1) Those that are accused. Theres their side and their interpretation

2) Those that accuse will have their interpretation and story.

3) Then theres the truth backed up by facts. 

Its easy to assume and I am just as guilty as anyone especially when your relying upon email. So perhaps we have both assumed in different areas

I shall move on from my suggestion that to get something just moving I felt that it would require 3 different skill sets to come to the table.

Moving on

With the complexity of various selling companies with different products has anyone any suggestions to see how a training company would deal with this. As I suggested the only way to train would be to do this online and sit the exam within a controlled environment.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 20, 2014, 08:21:23
Licensing debate, get involved        post No 73 Quote from charlie1 "I see TATOC a more preferable option"

From the 3 sides to any event 'number 3) then there is the truth backed up by facts.

Because number 1) and 2) are where charlie1 has placed him and I, I ask the 2 most prominant legal people who post on timeshare talk, to PLEASE decide on the information provided on this thread, since post No 89, whether THE FACTS provided are correct and therefore the TRUTH. Norm de Plume whose many posts and advice I have respected, as do many and jcorrea-lawyerwhose title speaks for itself. Could you both please be the JUDGE.

1) 95% of european timeshares are not alliliated to TATOC.
2) TATOC stands for 'The Association Of Timeshare Owners Committee,s'
3) All other constitutions aside, I other words, forgetting the "separate entity constitution for the TATOC helpline"the MAIN TATOC constitution represents the Timehare Committee,s and NOT the timeshare owners of the TATOC affiliated resorts.
4) Since 1st November 2013, 99% of the negative posts from timeshare owners have come from people who own in TATOC affiliated resorts.
5) charlie1 is advocating that 95% of owners outside of TATOC involvement, should in future, deal with licensed sales reps who are 'vetted and verified' by an organisation who do not REPRESENT timeshare owners.

If my 2 learned posting colleagues answer yes to all the 5 questions above, then I will rest my case charlie1.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Norm de Plume on February 20, 2014, 10:00:20
I do not want to get involved in the minutiae, but I have always made clear my doubts on TATOC's ability to act independently.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on February 20, 2014, 11:56:01
In order to dispel misconceptions and historically out of date information about TATOC.

Fact: The Company changed its name to Timeshare Association (Timeshare Owners and Committees) by special resolution on 9 March 2008.

Fact: I am a board member of TATOC and do not represent or serve on any Resort Committees.

Fact: TATOC uses Resort Committees as a way of communicating with owners. Limited funding means that this method is, in our experience, one of the most cost effective means of reaching as many of the consumers we represent as possible.
 
Fact: TATOC does not limit its involvement, help and advice to only those resorts who are affiliated to TATOC and indeed we are currently supplying advice to any owner run resorts finding themselves in difficulties.

Fact: An internet "walk through" the regularly updated TATOC website is the best way of gaining correct and current information on the TATOC organization and its work and the future plans it has for representing timeshare owners.


Our mission statement, at the front end of the website alongside our Banner and contact details is as follows:

 "TATOC exists to safeguard and enhance the timeshare holiday experience for users and be the voice of owners".

There are, and always will be, a very small minority who make assumptions around the financial arrangements and other areas of TATOC based on historically out of date information or beliefs. Why they do so has never been fully explained but it seems to stem from past performance from many years ago. Until such times as individuals take up the offer to visit TATOC and revue its workings then those unqualified assumptions will remain.
However it is to be noted that by making the invite we at TATOC are doing all we can to dispel any doubts as to our degree of  independence. 

Fact: TATOC currently work with a variety of agencies, including government ones, and sit round the decision making tables with many organizations working in and around the tourism industry throughout the world.
 
Policy: TATOC will always be prepared to work for a better industry and as per our mission statement we will contribute to any worthy and professionally constituted processes that we deem to be capable of facilitating change which could enhance the holiday experience of the timeshare consumer. 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on February 20, 2014, 23:44:09
In order to dispel misconceptions and historically out of date information about TATOC.

Fact: The Company changed its name to Timeshare Association (Timeshare Owners and Committees) by special resolution on 9 March 2008.

Fact: I am a board member of TATOC and do not represent or serve on any Resort Committees.

Fact: TATOC uses Resort Committees as a way of communicating with owners. Limited funding means that this method is, in our experience, one of the most cost effective means of reaching as many of the consumers we represent as possible.
 
Fact: TATOC does not limit its involvement, help and advice to only those resorts who are affiliated to TATOC and indeed we are currently supplying advice to any owner run resorts finding themselves in difficulties.

Fact: An internet "walk through" the regularly updated TATOC website is the best way of gaining correct and current information on the TATOC organization and its work and the future plans it has for representing timeshare owners.


Our mission statement, at the front end of the website alongside our Banner and contact details is as follows:

 "TATOC exists to safeguard and enhance the timeshare holiday experience for users and be the voice of owners".

There are, and always will be, a very small minority who make assumptions around the financial arrangements and other areas of TATOC based on historically out of date information or beliefs. Why they do so has never been fully explained but it seems to stem from past performance from many years ago. Until such times as individuals take up the offer to visit TATOC and revue its workings then those unqualified assumptions will remain.
However it is to be noted that by making the invite we at TATOC are doing all we can to dispel any doubts as to our degree of  independence. 

Fact: TATOC currently work with a variety of agencies, including government ones, and sit round the decision making tables with many organizations working in and around the tourism industry throughout the world.
 
Policy: TATOC will always be prepared to work for a better industry and as per our mission statement we will contribute to any worthy and professionally constituted processes that we deem to be capable of facilitating change which could enhance the holiday experience of the timeshare consumer. 
Just changed a word in the last sentence as it seemed more appropriate and in line with our mission statement.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 21, 2014, 07:44:15
Minor adjustment to my post 90 above.

Silverpoints/Beverley Heights thread Post #220 final paragraph re Tatoc.
Personaly I find the situation at those resorts is something I and many others who own in the 95% of Timeshare in Europe with non TATOc involvement,  do not want thrust upon them.

Post 92/93 this thread. "TATOC currently work with a variety of agencies, including government ones". The Taliban also work with various agencies and are in negociations with the UK & USA governments, but I don't rate their credibility.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on February 21, 2014, 08:27:41
Minor adjustment to my post 90 above.

Silverpoints/Beverley Heights thread Post #220 final paragraph re Tatoc.
Personaly I find the situation at those resorts is something I and many others who own in the 95% of Timeshare in Europe with non TATOc involvement,  do not want thrust upon them.

Post 92/93 this thread. "TATOC currently work with a variety of agencies, including government ones". The Taliban also work with various agencies and are in negociations with the UK & USA governments, but I don't rate their credibility.
Having just read you taking the thread off topic Happyowner, I will bring it back in line by asking the two simple questions that you have so far failed to answer. *You may also care to answer the new question I pose to you?
 1) So who do you trust to facilitate and run a licensing scheme?
 2) If you cannot answer question 1) above, then what are your alternative ideas? (criticism without solution being worthless)

 *Also I would like to ask you exactly what financial contributions you and "the other 95% of not involved with TATOC owners" make to the year on year effort to help those people/ consumers/owners etc. who find themselves scammed by bogus holiday packs and/or bogus timeshare resellers?

The reason I ask the above question is because every single owner of fixed, floating weeks or points that TATOC represents via resort affiliations makes annual financial contributes to TATOC and the effort to minimise the impact these scams have on the public and this work via the free helpline is carried out for everybody (including your supposed 95%) not just TATOC affiliated owners.

 Don`t you feel that you and your kind have a duty of care to protect yourselves as opposed to expecting someone else to do it for nothing for you?

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 21, 2014, 09:16:29
Post No73 quote from charlie1 "I see TATOC a more preferable option"

Hi Mavo,
I have not taken the topic off thread, I am reaffirming my opposition to charlie1,s 'quest'. In order to reaffirm my opposition to TATOC being the "more preferable option" am I not allowed to make any references?

There are many posts since 1st November 2013 (approximately 99% give or take) from timeshare owners who own in TATOC affiliated resorts,  where the timeshare owners have been 'rolled over'. I referred to the post by 'mabel' and her thoughts iregarding a TATOC affiliated committee in a previous thread.

In response to your "don't you feel you and your kind have a duty to care to protect yourselves as opposed to expecting someone else to do it for nothing"

Our maintenance fee,s include the various costs of our 'ELECTED' committe,s expenses. So we do contribute Mavo, and we have a fine 'ELECTED' commitee who are doing a fantastic job. There have been posts on the various threads since 1st Nov 2013 where very unhappy owners have made attempts to change their tattoc affiliated committee.

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on February 21, 2014, 10:04:50
Post No73 quote from charlie1 "I see TATOC a more preferable option"

Hi Mavo,
I have not taken the topic off thread, I am reaffirming my opposition to charlie1,s 'quest'. In order to reaffirm my opposition to TATOC being the "more preferable option" am I not allowed to make any references?

There are many posts since 1st November 2013 (approximately 99% give or take) from timeshare owners who own in TATOC affiliated resorts,  where the timeshare owners have been 'rolled over'. I referred to the post by 'mabel' and her thoughts iregarding a TATOC affiliated committee in a previous thread.

In response to your "don't you feel you and your kind have a duty to care to protect yourselves as opposed to expecting someone else to do it for nothing"

Our maintenance fee,s include the various costs of our 'ELECTED' committe,s expenses. So we do contribute Mavo, and we have a fine 'ELECTED' commitee who are doing a fantastic job. There have been posts on the various threads since 1st Nov 2013 where very unhappy owners have made attempts to change their tattoc affiliated committee.

So you do not reply effectively or responsibly to any of the questions.
Question 1) You make no comment
Question 2) You again make no comment or provide an alternative solution of any kind.

 And finally to my last question. Your answer will not wash with anyone reading the thread who has considered your response and it smacks of "I`m alright Jack"

You see. I criticise but offer a solution which is to join TATOC and make a financial or intellectual !!! contribution to the greater picture.

Finally while you seem to like to go on about 99% of the posts being negatively slanted around a Developer whose owners are affiliated to TATOC it is obvious to all that these posts all revolve around ONE Developer and its committees. It is not a multitude of TATOC affiliations. 

BTW The phrase I used was : Don`t you feel that you and your kind have a duty of care to protect yourselves as opposed to expecting someone else to do it for nothing for you?
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 21, 2014, 10:25:40
Post No 73 quote charlie1 "I see TATOC a more preferable option"

In response to your "who do you TRUST to facilitate and run a licensing scheme". I emphasise d the most important word. I imagine if you were to hold a 'Poll' on a separate thread today, asking timeshare talk members to vote on TATOC being the "more preferable option" you would receive your answer Mavo.

You say "And finally to my last question". Then you make a statement "Your answer will not wash with anyone reading the thread who has considered your response and its smacks of 'im alright Jack'. I am looking for the question in that statement.

Its not a case of "I'm alright Jack" because as stated in my post No83, "I am watching the debate with great interest" because no doubt, at sometime in the future Licensing will come in and needs to. BUT never 'TATOC' as the more preferable option.

Your final paragraph in post 97 above, the Timeshare Talk is littered with many, many disgruntled timeshare owners who own in TATOC affiliated resort.

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on February 21, 2014, 10:47:03
Post No 73 quote charlie1 "I see TATOC a more preferable option"

In response to your "who do you TRUST to facilitate and run a licensing scheme". I emphasise d the most important word. I imagine if you were to hold a 'Poll' on a separate thread today, asking timeshare talk members to vote on TATOC being the "more preferable option" you would receive your answer Mavo.

You say "And finally to my last question". Then you make a statement "Your answer will not wash with anyone reading the thread who has considered your response and its smacks of 'im alright Jack'. I am looking for the question in that statement.

Its not a case of "I'm alright Jack" because as stated in my post No83, "I am watching the debate with great interest" because no doubt, at sometime in the future Licensing will come in and needs to. BUT never 'TATOC' as the more preferable option.

Your final paragraph in post 97 above, the Timeshare Talk is littered with many, many disgruntled timeshare owners who own in TATOC affiliated resort.

 You are still not effectively answering any of the now 3 questions.
I`m alright Jack refers to your attitude to helping to finance work being done for the good of all and not just by your committee for you and your resort only. It was not a question.
 The question which you did not answer effectively was as follows:

 *"Also I would like to ask you exactly what financial contributions you and "the other 95% of not involved with TATOC owners" make to the year on year effort to help those people/ consumers/owners etc. who find themselves scammed by bogus holiday packs and/or bogus timeshare resellers?"

If you cannot answer direct and simple questions or furnish workable alternative solutions but just resort to negative criticisms then you should not be involving yourself in this debate (where you are currently backing yourself into a corner from which you seem unable to extricate yourself from.)
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 21, 2014, 11:10:44
Licensing debate quote charlie1 "TATOC a more preferable option"

Your views and opinions are different from our views and opinions. However, this is a licensing debate were all members of
he Timeshare Talk website are allowed to contribute.

I have explained how through our maintenance fee,s, we do contribute to our PROTECTION by an ELECTED committee.

I will continue to watch the debate because, no doubt, when the licensing 'body' are put forward to represent ALL timeshare owners, then we would want 'our say' in some one we TRUST.

I have given what I believe to be, enough FACTS as to why TATOC should not be that 'body'

The 'public' will have their say IF it is put to the vote.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on February 21, 2014, 11:38:19
Hello again Happyowner. It is now obvious that you cannot or will not answer the questions posed. So lets move on a little and attend to your statement below. ( I know it takes us off topic slightly but it is worth it. )


"Timeshare Talk is littered with many, many disgruntled timeshare owners who own in TATOC affiliated resort. (s)"

It is also littered with disgruntled timeshareowners who are not TATOC affiliated:
In recent times the other Developers/Resorts attracting the most negative comments on timesharetalk have been Petchey, Dyserth Falls and Anfi. None of these are TATOC affiliated but it is to be noted that it has been reported, on timesharetalk, by an owner with an interest that TATOC has been involved in trying to seek a resolution to the problems of at least one of the above mentioned.
Have you or your resort contributed in trying to resolve reported issues at any of the above?

It is to be noted that timesharetalk is also littered, by a majority, trying to help, a very small minority, thankfully, who try to harm and those who do neither one thing nor the other.


 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 21, 2014, 11:53:26
Post No 73 quote charlie1 "TATOC the more preferable option"

Your cavalier attitude in 'Dont do as I do, do as I say' with regards to demaning answers, posts 97, 99 and 101.

In my post 96, which numerically comes before 97, 99 and 101, responded to your accustion of taking the subject "off thread" with "I have not taken the topic off thread, I am reaffirming my opposition to charlie1,s quest in order to reaffirm my opposition to TATOC being "the more preferable option"am I not allowed to make any references? This QUESTION was not answered, so please Mavo, do not have the cavalier attitude you appear to excel in.

In answer to 'some' of the good work that TATOC does, I refer to my post 81 paragraph 10.

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on February 21, 2014, 14:14:14
Post No 73 quote charlie1 "TATOC the more preferable option"

Your cavalier attitude in 'Dont do as I do, do as I say' with regards to demaning answers, posts 97, 99 and 101.

In my post 96, which numerically comes before 97, 99 and 101, responded to your accustion of taking the subject "off thread" with "I have not taken the topic off thread, I am reaffirming my opposition to charlie1,s quest in order to reaffirm my opposition to TATOC being "the more preferable option"am I not allowed to make any references? This QUESTION was not answered, so please Mavo, do not have the cavalier attitude you appear to excel in.

In answer to 'some' of the good work that TATOC does, I refer to my post 81 paragraph 10.

 Again an ineffective post which is not a response at all to points raised in my last post.
  With respect. If you cannot debate sensibly and coherently addressing the issues and thoughts within the thread then you should not be taking part in it.
The thread was designed to get answers, solutions and positive suggestions to the complex task of creating an effective workable licensing structure for the timeshare industry. In your numerous posts on the thread you have failed to furnish any answers, solutions or positive suggestions.
 Your main interest seems to be in taking phrases out of context and then asking "innocently" am I not allowed to do this? The answer is you are allowed to do whatever you wish within the rules of the forum but you are now, by asking that question, being questioned yourself as what if any relevance it has to the thread or debate?
 I have had to break into the thread in order to bring you up to speed with the current policies etc. of TATOC. I had to do so simply because you were making reference to situations within TATOC from the past, some which went as far back as around 6 years ago. You did not even know it had changed its name let alone its articles of association nor have you acknowledge that your assumptions are wrong despite the fact that the information I posted can be viewed in various areas of the TATOC website.
 
 In conclusion if you wish your posts to be taken seriously by readers and those actively taking part I humbly suggest that you bring some positivity to the table as you are currently distracting from its aims and goals.


 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 21, 2014, 14:23:16
Licensing debate quote from charlie1 post No 73 "TATOC the more preferable option"

We all have opinions, which we are entitled to.

My opposition to the heading I have included in most of my posts "TATOC the more preferable option" is in MY and probably many other peoples thoughts, a POSITIVE input.

Who/when and where the licensing 'body' comes from, is something which I think we ALL agree, should happen.

I am entitled to my POSITIVE opinions.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: eneri on February 21, 2014, 14:38:46
So lets take stock of where we are. In Charlie1's opinion TATOC is the more preferable option. In happyowner25's opinion they are not. Any danger we can now move on!!
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 21, 2014, 15:23:43
So lets take stock of where we are. In Charlie1's opinion TATOC is the more preferable option. In happyowner25's opinion they are not. Any danger we can now move on!!

I agree Ernie under normal circumstances I would not bother, but I don't think Happyowner25 is wrong in his core reason for objecting to TATOC. Its  just his interpretation and some of his points raised to support his interpretation are flawed.

I am more concerned now that this important part of Licensing and my suggestion of how Licensing could be managed has become confused.

First off let me apologise to the length of this post I have felt it necessary to ensure that viewers understand my suggestion as I feel this may now be misinterpreted. That must be my fault somewhere, so let me add a little more detail, which I had hoped to avoid as this was only meant to be a general debate. Licensing is a very complex area to review and introduce and that’s way beyond this general thread.

I think that Happyowner25 is more fixated with TATOC heading up Licensing and so somehow I have confused the issue. Now it would appear that they are on a par with the Taliban! I had better warn all Scam Companies as the price for their fraudulent behavior could be very high indeed, if they cross TATOC.
 
All joking aside I accept that you have your reasons for doubting TATOC as you have raised so many different points albeit some may be a little dated. You are entitled to your opinion. Also I note you have no alternative solution to add to my suggestions.

I would also be as concerned as you if there was just one company running this with specific skill sets. This cannot be the case and if you read through my posts I have mentioned three groups.

However I do feel the need to clarify where it feels that your twisting my suggestion out of context and interpreting this to suit ‘your’ posts.
 
The survey you posted looked as if you were trying to influence the posters so that all the boxes get a yes. In fact if I were coming on here for the first time and was not involved in the build up to this thread and not had experience of licensing I would have probably said yes to most of your points if not all of your points.
 
However your question 4) Where have you got 99% from can you prove this why not 76.5%. How can you possible expect Norm & Javier to confirm this???
 
However lets look at your questions. Point 5) In particular is completely not relevant, as I have said before you have not understood what I am suggesting. That’s obviously my fault as I don’t seem to be able to get the message across to you.

If any other poster have felt confused by my suggestion on how licensing could be run and thought this was all going to be TATOC then please post and ask a question so I can clarify any point. If you have other suggestions then please put them up that’s what this thread is meant to be about.
 
So let me try to put a little more meat on the bone. I have stated many times that in my opinion Licensing cannot be governed by one company this will involve a number of individuals/panels, certainly to begin with. In my experience, having actually been involved in Licensing before, this is to big a job and requires different skill sets and specific knowledge geared to each process. So this can`t be an all singing and dancing TATOC who will know all the answers and can run this.
 
1) Happyowner25 I assume you did not disagree with having an Independent panel as being a part of this company, as I have suggested, as you have not even commented on this part at all Yes/No ( You only seem to be distracted by your interpretation that I meant that TATOC would be heading up Licensing.)
 
For this to work certainly in the formative stages this would have to consist of various panels with relative skill sets so that a challenge could be put to them and they are tasked to suggest various solutions. I would be suggesting also a panel of Developers and those heading up Resale Companies as well.
 
I have said through my past posts that you can’t have something that’s not workable. We need a variety of input just as we did in the Financial Services Industry. This was invaluable so that effective debate took place and for example the Fact Find I mentioned in an earlier post showed  that this was required for the benefit of both the Consumer and the Timeshare selling companies.
 
Licensing would have to involve all the key players representing the various spectrums of the Industry this would obviously have to include the RDO. It  would also include Legal Experts who ideally would have some knowledge of this Industry, training companies who can demonstrate success in other Industries and can demonstrate how they could support what’s required in the Timeshare Industry.

2) I also recommended that another Company/Group be responsible for the registration, online training and testing of sales people with proof of identity. Did you agree and understand this companies involvement. You again have not mentioned this either.Yes/No
 
Now it follows that any company or body responsible for registration and  training would also be involved in the vetting and verification of licensed salespeople. Timeshare Companies agreeing to licensing would need, at some stage, to be involved in this. Do you agree with this Yes/No 
 
The third Body I suggested was TATOC who would also bring to the table experience of the industry and would assist in the SHARED management of this group. Do you understand this part Yes/No?
 
The management of Licensing could take many forms and this would likely be more an organization and not a company certainly to begin with. There would be a number of panels required, as it has to begin correctly. There would have to be a steering committee(s) to orchestrate this. Maybe KwikChex could control this element.
 
Now if we are happy once the dust has settled and various panels and advice has been sought I feel (suggestion) this would end up with three main groups. That’s an Independent panel(s) and another company specifically responsible for training, vetting and testing sales people. I also suggested TATOC if you are unhappy with TATOC who are you suggesting to support this necessary part of the jigsaw that I see as being important??? Perhaps this could be RDO for you as it’s only an opinion?
 
5) This question as I mentioned earlier is not relevant as this is aimed at vetting and verifying by another company NOT TATOC so please don’t try to twist your own concerns of TATOC to fit my Suggestion! [/b] This is a massive undertaking and requires a very pro-active approach to ensure that an agreed procedure is adhered to so that we don’t have any rogues having the opportunity to acquire a License.

Everyone needs to come to the table to make this work because IF this is not done correctly and bad selling practices come to light it will undo any trust and confidence the public would have in Licensing. This is a game changer if done correctly.
 

Now it also follows as in my suggestion that if TATOC are initially part of a panel/organization/Company then there has to be an agreement with all those involved re a singular policy do you understand and agree on this Yes/No
 
So it would be very unlikely that TATOC could unduly influence policy with out other members of this organisation also agreeing to this. So do you understand, as in MY suggestion they are only a part of this? Yes/No
 
Remembering the reason I would be happy to see TATOC get involved
 
1) Is because I have personally seen them do some good work behind the scenes
 
2) I don’t see anyone else in my opinion at the moment. WHO DO YOU SEE?
 
Finally this is where you are so focused on your feelings towards TATOC heading up Licensing that you state comments that I am meant to have stated on Post 88 as shown below.
 
“I do not have an issue with TATOC. I have an issue with your "I see TATOC a more preferable option" to run the licensing, which is your desire” The wording highlighted is your wording and interpretation not mine. This is a perfect example of what we see.
 
You’re so caught up in your feelings towards TATOC heading up Licensing you’re seeing what you want to see. I have repeatedly stated that they would be in my opinion only be part of a company but as stated this is more likely to be an organisation/group certainly to start with and it may just stay as that an organization with a steering committee. Due to the enormity of what’s involved this will require many experienced personnel from inside and outside of the Industry within the various panels.
 
The Financial Services Industry is still evolving its licensing after 30 years!!! Those originally involved moved on within a couple of years. The processes and procedures, all are constantly changing.
 
However it all had to start at some point in the Financial Services Industry and this was certainly geared to make it workable for the Selling Companies so they could adjust on route. What was introduced initially nearly 30 years ago bears little resemblance to what the industry has today. However the Financial services Industry moved on and the Timeshare has not in my opinion and feels as if it’s caught in a time warp in many other areas as well.
 
Licensing should ideally be piloted to begin with by 2-3 forward thinking Sales Companies.
 
We need to try to keep it as simple as we can. As mentioned previously somewhere even my business card had to be approved in Financial Services!!
 
Remembering this is all only my opinion and the likelihood of this coming to fruition on the basis I have suggested is very small.
 
In reply 96 I now note that this is a quest of mine like some sort of plot to get TATOC heading up licensing. If you read carefully it was my SUGGESTION that they should play a PART in this. Do you now understand?? It’s a suggestion not a QUEST!
 
Your post 96 "I have not taken the topic off thread, I am reaffirming my opposition to charlie1,s 'quest".
 

You have taken the thread off topic! If I did not know any better I would think that this is your intention rather than just your misunderstanding.

I have also said in my opinion that most complaints would have come from Timeshare Companies that are selling. This does not mean that most complaints are miss-selling issues. I have spoken to many timeshare owners and it boiled down to that they did not know how to make the most effective use of their timeshare. So they wrongly put this down to the fact that their timeshare was miss-sold.
 
I would suggest that TATOC have received most enquires from just one Groups members and that’s Silverpoints.
 
Do you have anything else of value to contribute beyond your feelings towards TATOC heading up licensing now that hopefully you understand that they have never been anything other than someone who could contribute to Licensing in my suggestion. So your argument has been based on your incorrect understanding that I wanted TATOC to run Licensing on there own. This is impossible!
 
If your not able to contribute further to this thread beyond your feelings towards TATOC please let me know the name of your resort as I speak to a number of resorts and if your committee has this working so well I would like to contact them so perhaps other resorts can learn from them. This has got to be good when were looking at the bigger picture.

If this post appears condescending I apolgise as I see no other way to try to put across the point that it was not my suggestion that TATOC head this up. This is too big a task just for one company to run.

I have already apologised enough times. If somehow anyone else thought that I meant that just one Company could run this. Now perhaps we can move on to other aspects of Licensing.My main reason for adding to this is that I am concerned that perhaps other posters may be swayed by Happyowers25 understanding of this important point of how I suggest licensing could be managed. 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 21, 2014, 15:25:59
I like eneri,s post No 105 at 14.38 above. Let's move on.

Your very well prepared posting at 106 is going over previous posts o which I do not want to become 'the dog chasing its tail'.

Having looked at this website since its begining, I am fully aware of previous ,participants' who because they didn't agree with the pointsbeing made by other,s, were banned/blocked from posting. There is even a hint of the same in posting No 103.

History has taught us many things, remember middle Europe in the early 1930,s, any opposition to 'ideology' and 'the way forward' was 'snuffed out'

So, as eneri says...........LETS MOVE ON
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 21, 2014, 17:01:58
As my post on 89 requested

Moving on

With the complexity of various selling companies with different products has anyone any suggestions to see how a training company would deal with this. As I suggested the only way to train would be to do this online and sit the exam within a controlled environment.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 21, 2014, 17:26:59
Without changing the subject from your last posting, may possibly assist in 'kickstarting' the debate with what I believe many would see as a massive contribution to the 'Exit Stratergies'. I believe even you will respect the positiveness in this charlie1
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 21, 2014, 17:53:32
Without changing the subject from your last posting, may possibly assist in 'kickstarting' the debate with what I believe many would see as a massive contribution to the 'Exit Stratergies'. I believe even you will respect the positiveness in this charlie1

Sorry Happyowner25 I did not understand your last post if theres anything more to add to the Exit Strategies thread let me know. This is also one of the big areas that I have been working on for a while now. Did you mean introduce my previous thread to Exit Strategies?

The key areas I am focused on are
Licensing
After care support to owners with effective education
Working towards creating a holiday experience for timeshare owners
Customer service
Updated products
Sales presentations brought up to date in the 21st century that are consumer friendly
Resorts marketing in specific markets to introduce suitable new members that would appreciate their resort.

These are all key areas I have discussed positively just on this forum in the past. If you have anything to add create another thread or search through my posts and add to that thread then great as it all helps.


 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on February 21, 2014, 17:54:45
Exit strategies.

As stated previously, we are very happy owners and our grown up children use 'whats left' so our existing ownership will never be an issue' hopefully.

Having stayed in a small number of Macdonald Hotels in the UK, not long before my wife and I retired abroad, we exchanged into a Macdonal timeshare on the Costa Del Sol. We chose the resort because we knew the location, and we were doing a 'recky'.

We met with their sales rep and looked at their 'Options' points system, knowing we were moving abroad. Our apartment was of the high standard of 'Gold Crown', the location was perfect. Their Options system was something we seriously considered, because we knew we could use their points and stay in more of their beautiful Hotel,s in the UK. To give you an idea how 'savvy' we are on timeshare, we knew 2 high pointed weeks would give us enough and more, breaks in the UK.

We knew they are TATOC affiliated, which although was a 'tiny' thought, we also knew it was not a reason, for  not buying.

Our resons for not buying, was our children did not want the burden of the maintenance fee,s after our 'demise'. The fact the sales rep told us what we knew to be a lie, also didn't put us off.

If there had been an "Exit strategy" or short term ownership, we would have bought. I could broaden the experience and bore others re 'our calculations' and why we wanted to buy, however, the 'tied in' was the major if not only reason why we didn't buy.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 21, 2014, 18:28:26
Exit strategies.

If there had been an "Exit strategy" or short term ownership, we would have bought. I could broaden the experience and bore others re 'our calculations' and why we wanted to buy, however, the 'tied in' was the major if not only reason why we didn't buy.

I met up with the Sales Director of MacDonalds and raised this issue just as I have discussed on this forum under Exit Strategies. If a product was created that had exit strategies say every five years without penalty and by providing 12 months notice. More would join, I also believe that it would raise the game of the resort to ensure they did all they could to make their owners and guests have a total holiday experience. This does not necessarily cost any real outlay of money in some areas but could make all the difference to someones holiday experience.

I also believe within this product that once a member reaches 75 this 5year break option should reduce to two years giving 12 months notice. I believe more would join timeshare and there would be few taking advantage of the exit strategy but would feel comfortable with it being there. If you have anything more to add to this were pick it up under the thread Exit Strategies.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 22, 2014, 11:56:34
With the complexity of various selling companies with different products has anyone any suggestions to see how a training company would deal with this. As I suggested the only way to train would be to do this online and sit the exam within a controlled environment.

Based on past experience a Compliance/Training Company would consider or review the following

1) The selling Companies  product with detailed procedures and rules

2) A basic overview of all key points

3) Type of consumer that the product is not suitable for.

4) A copy of the selling companies internal training program on specific product training.

5) A list of test questions that the Selling Company feels that is important for the salesperson to know.

In Financial Services the Companies did their own in house training, but their exams were tested by an Independent Company and they would vigilate the proceeding exam

If online training was considered and taken on board by a company that provided a course online this should also include relevant timeshare regulations, code of conduct and questions around 'best advice' geared around their product. It would also be ideal to have general questions based around the Exchange Companies that their resort members would have access too.

It might be that the selling resort might provide all the training and ensure that there salespeople attended the exams.

Does anyone else have any other areas specific to training and exams that you feel requires some thought?

Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on February 22, 2014, 12:19:50
In the NVQs system the candidate has to work towards various levels or grades. This is usually done in house via a portfolio and an independent assessor will from time to time require candidates to demonstrate the knowledge that their portfolio indicates that they have attained. Some are allowed to bypass various stages via "Grandfather Rights" but in the timeshare licensing I feel it would be unwise to include any Grandfather Rights whatsoever.

 I feel that it would be possible to create a rounded NVQ type of a structure for licensing that could be adapted to a variety of products and selling companies by simply "bolting on" or "fitting in" suitable elements covering the various and differing scenarios that each selling company may have.
 
The above could also be used equally as well with any new products that selling companies may develop in the future.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 23, 2014, 21:28:45
Hi Mavo

Your knowledge of the NVQs system as explained is how the Financial Services Industry moved this forward. There were essentially three levels to pass out with initially FPC 1, 2 and 3.

I feel this this could work with the larger selling Companies but the small resorts who would not have the resource or even knowledge to train up whoever they have to do the paperwork would need support, this could be provided online.

I feel to gain the consumers trust as it was done in Financial Services all exams were Independently vigelated by an outside Company. This was about every 2 months as I seem to recall. This also focused our recruitment of new salespeople. Until they passed there license they had to piggy back with a senior salesperson when dealing with consumers.

We also noticed that when this licensing settled we were attracting a higher calibre of salesperson as a real career path started to unfold. Not just for those who hung around the longest! We also started to experience more sales and a bigger turnover as a Company.

If Licensing had been in force years ago we would not be seeing half the problems we are seeing on the forums now. The Financial Services Industry has had Licensing in for nearly 30 years! The financial Services Industry recognised what was needed and went from strength to strength.

At what cost will this be to the Industry with the longer we delay in getting this moving. This as I have mentioned will have one of the biggest impacts on our Industry in a big way and have a positive knock on effect. This is just a matter of when and who is going to stand up and start the ball rolling.
 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on February 23, 2014, 23:58:13
Hi Mavo

Your knowledge of the NVQs system as explained is how the Financial Services Industry moved this forward. There were essentially three levels to pass out with initially FPC 1, 2 and 3.

I feel this this could work with the larger selling Companies but the small resorts who would not have the resource or even knowledge to train up whoever they have to do the paperwork would need support, this could be provided online.

I feel to gain the consumers trust as it was done in Financial Services all exams were Independently vigelated by an outside Company. This was about every 2 months as I seem to recall. This also focused our recruitment of new salespeople. Until they passed there license they had to piggy back with a senior salesperson when dealing with consumers.

We also noticed that when this licensing settled we were attracting a higher calibre of salesperson as a real career path started to unfold. Not just for those who hung around the longest! We also started to experience more sales and a bigger turnover as a Company.

If Licensing had been in force years ago we would not be seeing half the problems we are seeing on the forums now. The Financial Services Industry has had Licensing in for nearly 30 years! The financial Services Industry recognised what was needed and went from strength to strength.

At what cost will this be to the Industry with the longer we delay in getting this moving. This as I have mentioned will have one of the biggest impacts on our Industry in a big way and have a positive knock on effect. This is just a matter of when and who is going to stand up and start the ball rolling.


 No resorts or developers, large or small,  should fear licensing. Indeed small resorts who are currently challenged with a variety of problems should embrace it.
 Why? because it will open the door to the creation of simple "resort specific" sales systems that will enable them to sell ceded back ownerships and new ownerships ethically without the element of mistrust that the public currently have of timeshare in general.
It should be easy to create a licensing system that cuts out bad practice, as we all know what bad practices operate within the industry with regards to selling techniques.
It should also be easy to block any loopholes that the sales teams connive to create, during the licensing concepts evolvement, by simply making ongoing amendments to any course/ training/tests etc. that they have to take in order to obtain a licence.
 There will be those who oppose licensing who will suggest numerous barriers and reasons as to why it will not work. We all know why and it is up to those resorts and developers, who wish for reform, to be resolute and strong enough to recognize that the time for real reform is now and realistically it is the only way forward that will allow timeshare to continue and even grow. If those opposed to licensing do not wish to get involved and achieve licenses for their sales teams then so be it. The internet will soon see that they become disadvantaged and marginalized.
 RDO are currently "talking the talk" only time will tell if they are really prepared to "walk the walk."   
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on February 24, 2014, 15:19:46
Its the small resorts that just does not have the resource or personal to sell timeshare that will have the most problems especially if they have an ageing membership desperate to believe in the smooth talking con artist. Its important they are included in the License program. Anyone any ideas what could be done to support those smaller resorts sell their weeks as some are doing all they can just to stay in the game? Perhaps they just need another focus
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on March 01, 2014, 07:19:33
Licensing needs to be brought in and the sooner the better.

The organisation appointed to regulate the Industry, issuing of licences, vetting and verifying sales reps MUST be completely free and financially independent from Resorts, Developers and Organisations who employ sales people to sell the products.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on March 05, 2014, 06:55:38
The following will only take a maximum of 30 minutes of your time, yet it could save you many, many months if not years of heartache and stress in the future, but I wonder how many timeshare owners will bother.

There will be those who are thinking 'Its too late for us now'. Its never too late and you don't know what CAN be done for you with the correct help and assistance. Claims are being made against the Financial Services Industry going back many years.

For us 'oldies' who are not as computer savvy as others, we all have grandchildren or young relatives who are magicians on computers. The following is also far easier to do than you may think and it WILL go a long way in protecting your ownership in the future.

You should also tell any family, friennds, work colleagues and anyone else who you know owns timeshare. Each and every owner should be taking part because licensing needs bringing in a.s.a.p. For 30 minutes of your time, it will be worth it in the long run.

Most timeshare owners from the UK own outside the UK, with the highest percentage owning in Europe. Therefore, the regulatory body should be EU wide.

There are 78 UK MEP,s and 766 MEP,s in total. If you look at the following website you can search for your own MEP
www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/map.html  When looking at each MEP,s own page, you will see on the middle right a "E-MAIL"  envelope, were you can contact the MEP.

Write a letter on microsoft or other, so you can copy and paste the letter as many times as you want.

You should tell your MEP that a timeshare regulatory body and licensing needs to be brought in immediately.

Because there has been some very good work previously done on this thread, you may even want to copy a link to this thread in your letter. You might even want to copy a link to another thread or threads on subjects which are relevent to any 'issues' you are currently involved in. They may even be able to help you on something which you think is 'too late', you won't know until ou write.

Express the importance of legislation with a regulatory  body, with licensing.

I would also include in your letter, the names of each and every one of the current MEP,s  listed below, because in recent times, they have all voiced concerns and raised 'issues' on timeshare. The Dutch MEP Toine Manders appears to be quite knowledgable.  By adding the names to your letter, your MEP will have others to discuss your concerns with.

Tell your MEP you will be contacting them periodically to ask for updates. You can even 'sign up' for email updates by simply adding your email address.

Your elected MEP is obliged to contact you regarding your 'issues' and or concerns.

By telling family, friends ect, you are also 'advertising' this website and getting more people involved.

I am sure there would be one if not be a group of MEP,s who could see the advantage of taking the matter further, even if only to bolster their own position within the European Parliament.

Because there are EU elections in May 2014, now is the ideal time to bring it to your current MEP,s attention. You may even want to add that you will bring the issue/s up again after the elections. I would do this anyway.

The following are the MEP,s who have all been 'involved'  I would copy your letter to each of the following;

Sharon Bowles MEP. Peter Skinner MEP. Sir Graham Watson MEP. Phillip Whitehead MEP. Luis Marinko MEP. Fiona Hall MEP. Catherine Bearder MEP. Baroness Sarah Ludford MEP. Baroness Arlene McCarthey MEP. Malcolm Harbour MEP. Jill Evans MEP. Elizabeth Lynne MEP. Toine Manders MEP. Phil Bennion MEP. Ian Hudghton MEP. Richard Howitt MEP.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on March 10, 2014, 21:39:55
My own opinion of how this can be taken forward initially is expressed in post 106.

I will be testing again in the future to see what interest there could be in the future for the Government to get behind this in whole or partly supporting licensing. In the Financial Services Industry it was very much in the Governments Interest to get behind licensing. However it took YEARS before they really got involved in the Financial Services Industry and this was a far bigger and more important area for the Government to concern itself with.

However if as Homeowner25 has said if everyone got behind Licensing and got actively involved by lobbying their MP this can only accelerate the process.

I will revisit this aspect of licensing again, but unless the timeshare owners get behind this vital part of the puzzle to get timeshare on the right path, EFFECTIVE licensing will be a long time coming.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on March 11, 2014, 05:28:45
In reference to your TORTUOUS post No 106, I will refer to my post No 107 of "I do not want to become the dog chasing its tail"

We obviously agree that Licensing/Regulation is very important and the sooner its brought in, the better.

The Licensing/Regulation body MUST be EU wide for the following 2 reasons;

1) Most UK timeshare owners will own outside the UK, with the highest percentage owning in European timeshares.

2) Many European timeshare ownerships cross 2,3 or even more borders and jurisdictions within the EU.

The simple and easy process of getting someone,s MEP involved is described in my post No 119, page 6 of this thread.

If EVERY timeshare owner reading this thread contacted their MEP, then the number of MEP,s involved would be sufficient to start the process immediately.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on March 11, 2014, 09:12:28
The 'tail wagging the dog' funny you should mention this again. As it's always you that does just that. The very long post 106 was solely for your benefit and anyone you were misleading. As it was only your INTERPRETATION of my suggestion that TATOC would be heading up licensing.

That was completely a wrong assumption on your part and was misleading the thread.

TATOC may have had a role to play in my suggestion or its equivalent.  The main role would have been an outside specialist that was non timeshare and would have been responsible for training and licensing and vetting resorts and sales people not TATOC.

 This would obviously need to ideally expand to cover the whole of the EU to have any real impact.

The difference of opinion we have as who will be heading up licensing is only our opinion. Mine is only based on getting something moving ASAP.

My past experience has seen that the Government did not really get involved until someone started the ball rolling and was actually running licensing.

However today we have The Internet so if everyone contacted relative MPs then it will help accelerate the process. Sadly this thread only has a very small viewing and for this to work it needs other relevant platforms to launch this so that more consumers and the timeshare Industry itself understands the benefits and gets involved.

In Financial Services this Industry actually had an impact on the countries economy but from MPs actually talking about licensing and getting more involved was several years. This needs to be piloted and rolled out within 18 months. This is an awesome program to set up and get right and won't be immediate.




Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: eneri on March 11, 2014, 10:34:01
In reference to your TORTUOUS post No 106, I will refer to my post No 107 of "I do not want to become the dog chasing its tail"

We obviously agree that Licensing/Regulation is very important and the sooner its brought in, the better.

The Licensing/Regulation body MUST be EU wide for the following 2 reasons;

1) Most UK timeshare owners will own outside the UK, with the highest percentage owning in European timeshares.

2) Many European timeshare ownerships cross 2,3 or even more borders and jurisdictions within the EU.

The simple and easy process of getting someone,s MEP involved is described in my post No 119, page 6 of this thread.

If EVERY timeshare owner reading this thread contacted their MEP, then the number of MEP,s involved would be sufficient to start the process immediately.

Your right to say that licensing/regulation is very important and should be brought in. The problem is that timeshare owners are very much a minority of the voting public both in the UK and Europe. Now whether its MP's or MEP's they all have their eye on the next election and might not see fighting for a small minority of voters as helping "their" cause. Charlie1 highlights the problem in his post where government involvement in a much larger and more important industry took years to achieve. By all means keep fighting for what you want but I feel that your idea "..would be sufficient to start the process immediately." might be pie in the sky.

Ps.  Sorry, looks like Charlie1 got in before me!
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on March 25, 2014, 02:52:04
My time out in the states in between holidaying is revolving around reviewing what our cousins across the pond are doing in timeshare. Its interesting to see that licensing differs from state to state in the USA. Florida seems to be the toughest one in the states yet were only talking around 60 hours of class room time before you can take your exam that is independently assessed. The timeshare salesperson then has too sit new exams every two years.

Also at Orange Lake they now video the last meeting that takes place when the new member goes through their contract with the manager. This is where an overview is given and the new owners ask any last questions they may have. This certainly ensures that the resort is on their toes.

We have a little catching up to do in Europe.....
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on May 12, 2014, 20:56:07
I must refer back to my previous post regarding a fact find. In section 3b in the post below the prospective member has an opportunity to add their comments. This would be a great baseline to work from it worked in Financial Services. I bring this up again as i have had several owners who recently would have benefited from this and that does not mean they would have had a claim but perhaps would have seen why they made that decision years ago based on there circumstances at the time. As the new member keeps a copy as well as the sales company so there are no miss interpretations.

This would work for the sales person and the company as well. Everyone needs something like this the Resales Companies, Selling resorts and legitimate companies in this Industry who offer a service and take money in this Industry.

This would help clean up this Industry those companies that worked on this basis would soon build a reputation and more business as a result of this.

You don't need a license to work this type of fact find. Any selling companies out there that want a little more business? I would certainly promote you?

Under Best Advice Practices

As mentioned in the post just one back from this post I introduced a simple Fact Find that would be signed at a presentation that I believe would ensure that best advice was received where the consumer signs this with the sales person each dates and keeps a record. The consumer also has the opportunity to add any comments.

A simple Fact Find as suggested as a solution is below

Starting with the normal consumers details. Address contact details etc
 
1) State what they currently own in timeshare if anything
( e.g Orange Lakes Florida week 26)
 
2) Next on 2-3 lines what their holiday objectives are

( e.g Mr & Mrs Jones are retiring soon and wish to take more UK holidays particular in Cornwall)

3) Recommendations and general advice.

e.g I have recommended a 1 bed St Mellion in Cornwall week 38, a benefit to them is they enjoy golf. I informed them that the resort also has an exit strategy as you can simply hand it back or sell it. I have also high lighted the benefits of other Exchange Companies to Mr & Mrs Jones. I have abided by all the regulations as required. Copies of any notes or diagrams have been photo copied so Mr & Mrs Jones have an easy reference for referring back to our meeting.

a) Would anyone have objected to signing to anything like this when you were first sold a timeshare?

b) Is there anything you would add?

Perhaps this could have helped if we had something like this to refer back to as in all fairness sometimes our circumstances change and through time we may not remember all the reasons why we signed up at the time.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: happyowner25 on October 05, 2014, 20:00:08
I see there have been 'developments' since this topic was debated.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on October 06, 2014, 10:14:22
Yes the ball has started to roll on this at last. I tabled the question on a jointly held seminar in March between RDO and TATOC as to when we could see Licensing piloted. Paul Gardner-Bougaard CEO of RDO said before the year end. I understand that this has been out for a little while piloted within CLC. I had a meeting at Orange Lakes in Orlando to understand more their licensing procedure apart of this is that they now video the summery by a manager of the product and its benefits with the prospective new owner . The owner verifies that they understand the product and the contract at different points. I believe that something like this also is on trial at CLC.

This will obviously be very basic, an important step needs to have the introduction of a Fact Find as mentioned in post 125 of this thread. This worked well in Financial Services because you had to provide detail if the client had any other contracts with either the selling company or another company. The salesperson had to justify why another contract was being recommended or another being canceled or part exchanged.

This would stop owners simply paying out unnecessary extra money if it is a case that the owner just did not understand their existing ownership. We had the Financial client sign a disclaimer if they insisted that it was their decision to part exchange for what ever reason. This was sometimes more an emotive reason that they had a grievance with some aspect of their existing company. However this was rare.

Licensing may also have another benefit as well as taking steps to ensure consumers are not miss-sold. Once in place rather than justify each sale if they were existing owners with another company we found to be far easier to introduce to new clients that had not used the services of a Financial Company that did not cover a short fall. So marketing got more involved looking for new consumers.

I have generally found that Marketers in Timeshare are 'lazy' thinkers, preferring to create some wondrous add on to sell to their existing owners or approach guests staying at their resort. Beyond this they tend to just do general marketing and hope something sticks. There is no longer any one 'General Market'. Marketing should be done more selectively to specific groups relative to your product and resort.

Effective licensing once its up and running will have many knock on effects. At some stage in my opinion this will need an Independent body involved outside of timeshare to play a major part in this massive undertaking as this must ultimately spread through Europe.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on January 26, 2015, 10:07:54
Licensing should be the next big area that the EU Commission should get involved with. This would by far with Exit strategies sorted be the biggest deterrent for misrepresentation and fraud.

Licensing needs to include 'best advice" and a simple fact find signed and completed at the point of sale as described below must be considered

Under Best Advice Practices

As mentioned before I suggested a simple Fact Find that would be signed at a presentation that I believe would ensure that best advice was received where the consumer signs this with the sales person each dates and keeps a record. The consumer also has the opportunity to add any comments.

A simple Fact Find as suggested as a solution is below

Starting with the normal consumers details. Address contact details etc
 
1) State what they currently own in timeshare if anything
( e.g Orange Lakes Florida week 26)
 
2) Next on 2-3 lines what their holiday objectives are
( e.g Mr & Mrs Jones are retiring soon and wish to take more UK holidays particular in Cornwall)

3) Recommendations and general advice.
e.g I have recommended a 1 bed St Mellion in Cornwall week 38, a benefit to them is they enjoy golf. I informed them that the resort also has an exit strategy as you can simply hand it back or sell it. I have also high lighted the benefits of other Exchange Companies to Mr & Mrs Jones. I have abided by all the regulations as required. Copies of any notes or diagrams have been photo copied so Mr & Mrs Jones have an easy reference for referring back to our meeting.

a) Would anyone have objected to signing to anything like this when you were first sold a timeshare?

b) Is there anything you would add?

Perhaps this could have helped if we had something like this to refer back to as in all fairness sometimes our circumstances change and through time we may not remember all the reasons why we signed up at the time.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on March 12, 2015, 15:29:54
Theres so much going on at the moment with the recent ruling in the Spanish Supreme Courts, the EU reviewing exit strategies because the Industry has not got there act together on exiting.

The other big piece to get right is Licensing of salespeople moving into Independent governance. This would stop a number of problems in their tracks. As sales people would have to record and justify their recommendations. A fact find signed by the consumer as suggested on this thread would install confidence and lead to a better service under best advice to the consumer and both parties would sign the fact find. 

This would encourage a more professional salesperson to consider timeshare as a career. This is exactly what took the Financial Services Industry to another level 30 years ago!!!

I mentioned this over a year ago at a jointly held RDO/TATOC seminar and was told by RDO that this was being piloted. So I hope that we should soon have some feedback on this. When Licensing takes place all salespeople would have to prove that they are approved under a Licensing scheme. All timeshare sales people that did not have a License, consumers would be advised not to deal with. So every cold call I would ask for their License number and ask them to phone me back tomorrow so I can check this out with the governing body responsible for this. How many calls back do you think I would have?

The Resale Companies could really steal a march with this if they worked this out, as they would be true Independents and would through a simple fact find initially done online make some recommendations not just based on the one resort or product that most salespeople are restricted too.  With the right process and questions they could personalise a holiday solution that relative to every consumer enquiry.

Still waiting... - Licensing - Fair Exit strategy - Long term contracts with exit options - more consumers being educated on best use of timeshare by their Timeshare Companies - consumers being shown how to sell timeshare - Resale Companies promoting timeshare products more effectively - Timeshare Companies marketing intelligently so they can create an ideal suitable membership - Salespeople shown how to sell beyond their one hit presentation Still waiting...
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Athena Law Solicitors on March 19, 2015, 11:15:55
As a lawyer, I must say that my main concern is the number of unregulated "para-legal" companies that are operating. Para Legals used to work within, and under the supervision of , firms of solicitors but that no longer appears to be the case. There is a requirement for companies operating in financial claims to be regulated by the Ministry Of Justice, but timeshare claims is a grey area. Given that many owners are elderly and vulnerable, the claims industry needs greater regulation. What are the levels of training, insurance, practical experience in providing litigation services (it would seem some are also carrying our or attempting to carry out reserved business which is unlawful)? Are these companies expected to put a client's best interests first or is their primary concern to profiteer? For me, this is the area where there needs to be tighter regulation.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on March 19, 2015, 11:55:01
As a lawyer, I must say that my main concern is the number of unregulated "para-legal" companies that are operating. Para Legals used to work within, and under the supervision of , firms of solicitors but that no longer appears to be the case. There is a requirement for companies operating in financial claims to be regulated by the Ministry Of Justice, but timeshare claims is a grey area. Given that many owners are elderly and vulnerable, the claims industry needs greater regulation. What are the levels of training, insurance, practical experience in providing litigation services (it would seem some are also carrying our or attempting to carry out reserved business which is unlawful)? Are these companies expected to put a client's best interests first or is their primary concern to profiteer? For me, this is the area where there needs to be tighter regulation.

As laymen most readers or posters on these forums would be unable to differentiate between a "Para Legal" who is working regulated or unregulated. However as we will now have legal entities regulated or unregulated hanging around forums such as this who will be doing so in the hope of identifying some of the opportunities that the future is now likely to be affording the "legal industry." Would it not be a good idea for those lawyers who are operating legally to list on here those "enterprises" who are not operating legally. I am fairly sure, that given an indication that lawyers were prepared to list those unregulated operators, Bossman would create a place within the forums where these unregulated operators could be listed in order to protect the consumer.
   
 
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Athena Law Solicitors on March 19, 2015, 14:43:08
If they are not a firm of solicitors or regulated by the Ministry of Justice, then they are unregulated. The consumer before  dealing with any Company should be capable of ascertaining the position. Both the Law Society and the Ministry of Justice have lists of regulated firms, along with easy to use search facilities and helplines. When discussing diversity in the legal market one needs to bear in mind that certain activities such as the conduct of litigation are activities that can only be undertaken by a regulated person (section 12 of the Legal Services Act 2007). All I am saying is that if you are qualified to provide legal services, act in client's best interests and are insured why would you not want to be regulated?
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on March 19, 2015, 15:08:14
There are some good points raised here by both Mavo and stephen Boyd. I think that this should be in a new thread rather than this be debated under Licensing for salespeople. So in the future if a timeshare owner wishes to search for advice on this matter this will be found more easily if you have an appropriate thread heading.

There is no doubt that scam 'legal' companies are now researching their new angles to entice timeshare owners to consider their services with Perpetuity and Exit issues being discussed.

It is still my opinion that Salesman being Independently Licensed under best advice would allow us to treat the cause not the effect. If we got them to do their sales job more effectively to begin with we would see a big reduction in timeshare owners seeking the council of 'legal' companies.

It should also be noted that a higher percentage of timeshare owners may just grin and bare it and have inappropriate timeshare products sold to them that just does not fit the way they holiday. This causes damage as those unhappy timeshare owners will not exactly be a walking advertisement for timeshare.   
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Mavo on March 19, 2015, 15:24:08
If they are not a firm of solicitors or regulated by the Ministry of Justice, then they are unregulated. The consumer before  dealing with any Company should be capable of ascertaining the position. Both the Law Society and the Ministry of Justice have lists of regulated firms, along with easy to use search facilities and helplines. When discussing diversity in the legal market one needs to bear in mind that certain activities such as the conduct of litigation are activities that can only be undertaken by a regulated person (section 12 of the Legal Services Act 2007). All I am saying is that if you are qualified to provide legal services, act in client's best interests and are insured why would you not want to be regulated?

We have to recognise that most readers, in the instance of seeking legal guidance on here, are looking for advice and where to turn to when their circumstances change for the worst or indeed better and they find themselves in situation of others changing the contracts that they bought in to. In that respect I refer not only to developers altering contracts via their committees but now we see Supreme Courts taking decisions that may fundamentally change many hundreds of thousands of contracts. The people seeking clarification do not need or want to be trawling The Law Society websites and the Ministry of Justice websites in order to see a probable ever changing list of those unregulated legal entities who decide to take the plunge and thus become regulated.

Obviously if someone from a regulated practice were to begin to compile and periodically add to a list of unregulated companies who were seen or heard to be purporting to act in the best interests of consumers then that person would probably gain great credence and trust for himself and the practice that he represented.

       
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on March 19, 2015, 15:29:39
That should work Mavo as no one is accusing them of anything but just stating that they are unregulated. If of course there is some hard facts to substantiate any wrong doing than that should be noted.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: charlie1 on July 21, 2015, 22:33:22
Salespeople should have been licensed years ago!! RDO over 18 months ago stated that licensing was being piloted when I tabled the question at a RDO & TATOC shared seminar. What is happening?? we need someone to take this up and work with some professional bodies to make this work. The benefits and ripple effects would be enormous. This with effective exit strategies is the big two that will be a game changer.

1) We have seen Dyserth Falls start up again for the 3rd time!!!with dodgy selling taking back part exchanges because timeshare owners were told the familiar story that they were stuck for life in their timeshare and there beneficiaries were liable for their timeshare. I came across timeshare owners that were conned and did not realise that all they had to do was hand back their week and their resort would have accepted this! Those selling this have long since gone what happened to Craig Derbyshire? Why were simple, simple checks not made with the Trustees  and the Land registry?? Why was that not checked out again as it was the same scam played out it would seem 3 times!!!
2) Then we have had AROMA salespeople taken off the Lakeview resort with several salespeople sacked for it would seem offering an exit program for Lakeview members as long as they joined AROMA points.
3) Club Las Calas had CLC reps on their selling but have now all been kicked off by the committee.

If we had licensing and it included 'best advice" and a simple fact find signed and completed at the point of sale as described below would we have had problems with Dyserth, AROMA and CLC salespeople?

Under Best Advice Practices

As mentioned before I suggested a simple Fact Find that would be signed at a presentation that I believe would ensure that best advice was received, where the consumer signs this with the sales person and each dates and keeps a record. The consumer also has the opportunity to add any comments.

A simple Fact Find as suggested as a solution is below

Starting with the normal consumers details. Address contact details etc
 
1) State what they currently own in timeshare if anything
( e.g Orange Lakes Florida week 26)
 
2) Next on 2-3 lines what their holiday objectives are
( e.g Mr & Mrs Jones are retiring soon and wish to take more UK holidays particular in Cornwall)

3) Recommendations and general advice.
e.g I have recommended a 1 bed St Mellion in Cornwall week 38, a benefit to them is they enjoy golf.  I have also highlighted the benefits of other Exchange Companies to Mr & Mrs Jones. I have abided by all the regulations as required. Copies of any notes or diagrams have been photo copied so Mr & Mrs Jones have an easy reference for referring back to our meeting.

Would anyone have objected to signing to anything like this when you were first sold a timeshare?

Is there anything you would add?

Perhaps this could have helped if we had something like this to refer back to as in all fairness sometimes our circumstances change and through time we may not remember all the reasons why we signed up at the time.

If best advice with licensing had been in force we would not have the sales problems we have now. The public would also have more trust in timeshare again and would feel more comfortable dealing with a Licensed salesperson.

Selling companies don't have to wait for someone to enforce this why don't you instigate the fact find yourself? Show yourself to be a leader with initiative and implement this yourself. That coupled with an updated selling process away from the tired old sales presentations that most are still using born out of the eighties, coupled with the right product that has exit options will obtain the lions share of timeshare sales. Maybe were start attracting a younger generation with the right marketing.

No doubt next year I will be asking the same question! Why is there no company that will look at this as I believe this could pay for itself if set up correctly.
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Carolinian on July 22, 2015, 09:56:07
If they are not a firm of solicitors or regulated by the Ministry of Justice, then they are unregulated. The consumer before  dealing with any Company should be capable of ascertaining the position. Both the Law Society and the Ministry of Justice have lists of regulated firms, along with easy to use search facilities and helplines. When discussing diversity in the legal market one needs to bear in mind that certain activities such as the conduct of litigation are activities that can only be undertaken by a regulated person (section 12 of the Legal Services Act 2007). All I am saying is that if you are qualified to provide legal services, act in client's best interests and are insured why would you not want to be regulated?

In my state of North Carolina, unauthorized practice of law is a criminal misdemeanor, and if money is charged, then it becomes the felony of False Pretenses.  The State Bar has an office that tries to ferret out those operating illegally in the practice of law.
Title: Re: Licensing salespeople what a difference this would make!
Post by: Carolinian on July 22, 2015, 10:30:59
In the United States, timeshare salesmen have been licensed since the beginning.  Timeshare is considered real estate, and is typically sold as an undivided interest in a particular apartment or sometimes of the whole resort, and trasferred by deed.  Each timeshare project is required to register with the Real Estate Commission and designate a broker in charge, who has a Real Estate Broker's license issued by the Commission.  All timeshare salesmen on the project must also have Real Estate Salesman's licenses issued by the Commission, and be working under the designated broker.  A Real Estate Salesman is not allowed to operate on his own, but always, timeshare or otherwise, has to operate under a specific Real Estate Broker.  To get a license as a Real Estate Salesman, a one semester Community College course and passage of a state exam is required.  To get a license as a Real Estate Broker, it requires four semester courses offered at Community Colleges and passage of a state exam.  There are also good character requirements like lack of a record of criminal convictions.

These requirements apply to resellers as well as developers.  If someone is reselling timeshare weeks at a North Carolina resort, the North Carolina Real Estate Commission considers it has jurisdiction no matter where the reseller is located.  Some years ago, the HOA at a coastal NC resort sold about a hundred association owned weeks to a reseller located in Nevada called Triple Crown Finance which was not licensed in NC and began reselling the weeks.  Triple Crown had sold most of them before caught, but the NC Real Estate Commission came down on them and stopped any further sales.

Many of the sleazy practices in timeshare sales still go on, in spite of these licensing requirements, and the choke point is generally the broker, who has more to lose if his license is revoked than the salesmen.  Having attended timeshare presentations in both the US and Europe, I think it helps a good bit to require licensure, but I do not think it cures everything.  If a licensure scheme does not have something like the broker overseeing the whole operation, I suspect it would not accomplish much at all.

All timeshare projects in sales in the state, also have to have an annual license issued by the NC Real Estate Commission, and this includes the committees of member-run resorts which are reselling foreclosure and deedback weeks.  The project license has to list the project broker, and contain information on any exchange programs the resort participates in, as well as lots of other information.

The Real Estate Commission can get quite involved in resort scams.  At Bodie Island Beach Club, the original developer had sold out to a subsequent developer, and a group of members complained to the Commission on issues of how resort funds were being used, management issues (the subsequent developer was managing the resort himself), and the subsequent developer's contention that he did not have to pay maintenance fees on developer owned weeks.  The Commission launched an investigation which resulted in the subsequent developer relinquishing his Real Estate Brokers license, turning over management of the resort to the members, agreeing to reimburse the association for thousands of dollars, and divesting himself of all the weeks he owned at the resort.

It was the North Carolina Real Estate Commission that also forced RCI to back down on some of the most customer unfriendly aspects of its points program.  The Commission first declared that GPN (the original name of RCI Points) had to register as a resort developer instead of being classified as an exchange program and refused to allow the sale of points in the state until that was done.  Under the original GPN rules, it was difficult to get out after you got in, requiring specific steps and having to wait ten years to do so.   To allow GPN to operate as an exchange program, the Commission demanded that members be able to get out after three years and that the procedures to do so be made much more user friendly,  Blackwell Brogden, the timeshare guy at the NC Real Estate Commission also started contacting other states and got others interested in cracking down on RCI's points program, too.  The end result was that RCI waved a white flag and did everything the NC Real Estate Commission demanded, and did it across their entire program, not just for North Carolina.
Title: Re: Licensing salespeople what a difference this would make!
Post by: charlie1 on July 22, 2015, 12:30:15
Licensing was introduced into the Financial Services Industry over 20 years ago. This was a big step in the right direction and made it more difficult for the undesirables to be licensed with checks for criminal backgrounds and they had to sit Independent exams and pass.  This was just not multiple-choice questions. We had case studies to work through and make had to make recommendations based on a given scenario.

This encouraged new salespeople to consider Financial Services as a career and I personally found better-suited individuals considering what they now perceived as a real career path.

Licensing has evolved over the years but there are still some rogues that slips through but this is usually the lone wolf that sets up a small practice and takes short cuts. The big ones are the banks for example Stephen Green CEO for HSBC Bank. It has been claimed that the bank was laundering hundreds of millions for the worlds largest drug cartel. They got a fine! Check it out.

The USA as Carolinian has posted are a long way ahead of us in the licensing department. I spent a little time out there to see how we could benefit from their experience. There was a lot of positives and some sales forces actually video the last presentation as the consumer is taken through the process by a senior manager. However what I have found when over in the USA to my experience they do not complete a Fact Find with best advice in mind.

For example if a Fact Find was completed and the salesperson had to list what the prospective new owners holiday objectives were and then how your product would support this we would have far less cancelations If the prospective owner signed and agreed with this.

The salesperson should list all the timeshare owner’s current timeshares that they own. If they intend to part exchange one of those weeks for their timeshare product this should be justified as to the reason why and how there new member would be better off a result.

When best advice was about to be introduced into the Financial Services Industry. The Industry thought that this was then end! Instead we went from strength to strength!

New Clients

The Industry was encouraged to seek out new clients that had no real financial services planning. We had started to introduce new flexible contracts with shorter terms or with break options. This really turned the Industry around.

Marketing

Timeshare marketing departments are really lazy and have no idea about real marketing, as most seem to just try to upgrade existing owners with new contracts or promote a fear factor you "better do this with us to avoid xyz".

Licensing and flexible contracts changed all that and introduced a new attitude that had a ripple effect through out all departments in the financial sector.  Mistakes are still being made but there are less of them and most now leave an easy paper trail to follow.

The Industry would turn around if an effective licensing program was introduced and allowed to evolve. Exit options will come about in some shape form or another.

Those timeshare companies that have a little initiative should move on this and create a larger market share for themselves if they reviewed the following just for starters.

Marketing
to suitable consumers that would ideally suit their new flexible contract. Create a USP!
Sales practices upgrade from past tired sales procedure. The sales person should just be a part of the process. They need to understand relationship selling and how to provide relevant advice to the individual.
New Contracts flexible with exit options
Existing contracts reviewed to introduce exit options that would work with the new contracts.
Give them an experience they wont forget. This could be their only holiday what could you do to make that holiday a memorable experience. Sometimes just teaching some staff to smile would help. Get staff to appreciate that there most important task of the day is when they have contact with a consumer.

All this will fail with most resorts as it starts and ends with leadership. http://www.timesharetalk.co.uk/index.php/topic,18773.0.html  see reply 4
Title: Re: Licensing salespeople what a difference this would make!
Post by: martyboy02 on July 24, 2015, 13:27:16
Some valid points and very interesting.

How about the usual predictable "Jaw jaw" from the RDO, why don't they insist or make it mandatory for it members to implement a licencing scheme with the learning objectives and examinations set by the RDO, instead of the "Give us your money and you're in" policy? :P
Title: Re: Licensing debate get involved! Misrepresentation review this link in 1st post.
Post by: Marvin on July 24, 2015, 20:11:18
As a lawyer, I must say that my main concern is the number of unregulated "para-legal" companies that are operating. .....

All these Paralegals will go on to the next thing as soon as Timeshare cleans it act up. 
Title: Re: Licensing salespeople what a difference this would make!
Post by: Carolinian on July 25, 2015, 06:20:58
Licensing laws can be helpful is going after developers who commit fraud against members, as is happening in the current court case by the New York Attorney General in fraud case against the developers and others at the Manhattan Club:

http://www.timeshareforums.com/forums/showthread.php/146750-NY-AG-Schneiderman-dials-up-the-pressure-in-Manhattan-Club-fraud-case
Title: Re: Licensing salespeople what a difference this would make!
Post by: Marvin on July 25, 2015, 12:18:30
Licensing laws can be helpful ,its going after developers who commit fraud against members, as is happening in the current court case by the New York Attorney General in fraud case against the developers and others at the Manhattan Club:

http://www.timeshareforums.com/forums/showthread.php/146750-NY-AG-Schneiderman-dials-up-the-pressure-in-Manhattan-Club-fraud-case

This is why we need to go for the developers - the ethos comes from the top.  We need some legal "balls" in the UK to stop this continual trail of damage. The weapon of " It's like timeshare only better" continually wastes the courts time with cases.

Title: Re: Licensing salespeople what a difference this would make!
Post by: Lifensoul on July 25, 2015, 16:44:52
Or you get an anomaly, as in Lakeview, where you have the developer(VK) who played the role of management/maintenance, paid by the committee at the expense of the unsuspecting/helpless ordinary members. Followed by the committee, apparently after many years of money down the VK drain 'rescuing' the club and currently at odds with the developer (LVCCL) for apparent unpaid monies, with those laughingly known as TRUSTEES and Aroma hovering in the background.......all this of course written without prejudice.
So who out of all these hyenas in this particular case should we be seeking protection from???

Surely only the legal system will be able to sort this one out