Sales Accreditation could it work?

Started by Mavo, October 14, 2009, 16:58:27

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mavo

Ramy Filo had flown in from Australia to speak at the recent seminar. His company were major shareholders in Dial an Exchange and ran the DAE operation down under. He spoke about the effective running of resorts and had one or two ideas that had developed in Australia that were not being used in Europe. (A bit boring for us the consumer)

There had been regular talk of a sales accreditation system being put in place and Ramy stated that there was an internet course operating in Australia for sales to follow and he felt that this was being used effectively.
I am sure that innovators will be looking at this and also a similar module that runs in America.

This sales accreditation was one of the main initiatives being rolled out and driven forward by David Lilley.
Further discussions took place around this idea and it seemed that developers would be interested in this but only if it were to gain government approval.
TATOC as the only consumer led body agreed to explore the idea.

I have many reservations about this idea as I believe that the UK government would insist that any devised course would have to be audited and assessed by a certified body such as BSI (British Standards Institute) or similar. This in itself would create costs and any course would have to be written up by a steering group or such.
Companies with a vested interest would be pushing for advantageous clauses, that  would favour them over their competitors.
It would have to be vetted by government and there the problems would begin as the draft went to and fro.
 Having spent a number of years doing a similar exercise I know how long these things take once government is involved and the few weeks talked about seem to me to be unrealistic.  A suitable written and agreed programme could take anything up to 4 years and sales would not just be allowed to sail through any course in a matter of weeks.
Demonstrations of competence would have to be shown over a long period of time and it could take companies and staff 12 to 18 months to acquire accreditation.
The government would insist that any failings would have to be self policed.  TATOC would probably be expected to police this, bringing a whole new raft of problems with it.
Crack downs on transgressors could possibly lead to court actions under restriction of trade with people being accused of favouritism too.
We would still have the problem of sales in countries outside the UK, countries that do not come under the control of our government and we have to accept that sales conducted abroad seem to be the most complained about by purchasers.

Try as I might, I cannot see a workable plan coming out of this.
I hope I can be proved wrong as it is a good idea.    
 


tonyc

Mavo

You say: "The government would insist that any failings would have to be self policed.  TATOC would probably be expected to police this."

Who - precisely - would expect TATOC to police this?  Please explain precisely what official Government accreditation TATOC have with reference to the appropriate official directives!  Let us stick to the authority TATOC have; not the authority they (or you) might like them to have.

 

Mavo

quote:
Originally posted by tonyc

Mavo

You say: "The government would insist that any failings would have to be self policed.  TATOC would probably be expected to police this."

Who - precisely - would expect TATOC to police this?  Please explain precisely what official Government accreditation TATOC have with reference to the appropriate official directives!  Let us stick to the authority TATOC have; not the authority they (or you) might like them to have.





If and I say again if this were to turn in to something positive. I believe that it could only have credibility by being fronted by a consumer led body.
That said the simple fact is that whatever body fronted such a project, they would have to police it.
Can you nominate another body within the industry?
Nobody connected to the timeshare industry has any government accreditation and I have never said they do.
I have voiced my opinions as to the feasibility of such a project.
I have said why I have reservations.
If this has any chance of working then whichever body or organization drives it forward, they will, at some stage have to get into bed with government.
I know. Not a pretty thought. The seedy industry colluding with the seedy seat of power.

 Your question was. "Who - precisely - would expect TATOC to police this?"
The answer to your question is. Whatever government body or desk it lands on.

tonyc

Mavo

You say:  "Your question was. 'Who - precisely - would expect TATOC to police this?'  The answer to your question is. Whatever government body or desk it lands on."

That is no answer!  It is once again a presumption on your part that Government will automatically hand the job to TATOC.  Why?  Why shouldn't they set up an official organisation (a quango) to do so?

All this talk of TATOC is very good.  But let us not forget, they have existed for 25 mainly fruitless years.  So why should they be given any acceptability by the Government?

The simple fact of the matter is that it is up to the Timeshare Industry itself to get its act in order.  No-one else.  It is an absolute disgrace that you can go to a Timeshare presentation and sign up to them without clear definition as to what your responsibilities are.  You go to a presentation and you are basically told a pack of lies about the future - not least your management fees obligations - and then, unscrupulous Timeshare Companies can put up those management fees by any percentage that see fit and you have no clear ability to refuse to pay them and walk away from the Timeshare.  When a timeshare operator significantly changes the "playing field", be it by large increases in mf costs or changing the resort portfolio, it should be forced to - once again - canvas the membership and allow any member who is not prepared to commit to the "new" portfolio to walk away.  Can you name any other facility that can charge you to join and then charge you what it likes for years ahead and you have no alternative other than to pay what they demand?  You have no right to walk away!

As you know, I am a member of DRI.  I am basically happy with DRI.  I have had good holidays with them and have always defended their mf increases as being legitimate.  However, there is a growing number that is objecting to the increases and that is not happy with their membership.  They should have the right to decide not to pay mf's anymore and walk away from them.  Timeshare should be like any other service provider.  If they don't compete and offer value-for-money, the consumer should have the right to refuse to deal with them!

The Timeshare industry as it currently operates deserves to die.  And if it doesn't get its act together quickly, it will!
 

Mavo


Tony
If this accreditation scheme was to be written and rolled out then this government or the next one would ask that it was self policing. All such schemes/courses/certification systems in this country are to my knowledge.

Forget quangos. Funding is already being drastically cut to the existing ones and many are having to amalgamate to survive. Help the Aged and Age Concern are two of the more recognisable ones to recently join forces.

As I have said, I have worked and still work on similar projects involving government agencies and at the moment we are looking at the tricky issue of self policing an industry. This is at the demand of the Department of Transport.

In the absence of any other consumer led body that I know of then TATOC are the only ones who could realistically run this scheme. (*I note that you offered no alternative). TATOC are already working with government agencies and Brussels so at the moment they seem to be the only ones with their feet under government tables.
I have said earlier in posts around this seminar when people have questioned things. "I have no interest in past performance as it has no tangible influence on future achievement"

We all know what is wrong with the industry. Your post tells us nothing new in that respect. It simply confirms what we already know and the New Directive covers the presentation in that the purchaser will have to "sign off as understood" the agreement in several key places. This signing of understanding should cover the front end problems but what the industry has to be prepared to do is to make sure that the contract terms are not anbiguous and thus create loopholes.
We have seen the results of the last directive which was watered down to such a degree by developers that the industry now finds itself in the position it is in today.
The seminar was about trying to come up with new ideas to drive the industry forward but there has to be a will on the part of the developers to change. Some developers are recognising the need to change. So why not encourage them and test that will? There is nothing to lose
I would love to be able to say that we on here could do it and push the industry into reinventing itself but having seen the many ideas brought up on timesharetalk and being a part of some of them I have to recognise that very few of our ideas are ever taken on board and used by developers.
We as consumers have to work with what we have got. We can push to improve it or create an alternative.
I know which I see as the more realistic option.  


tonyc

quote:
Originally posted by Mavo



Forget quangos. Funding is already being drastically cut to the existing ones and many are having to amalgamate to survive. Help the Aged and Age Concern are two of the more recognisable ones to recently join forces.

In the absence of any other consumer led body that I know of then TATOC are the only ones who could realistically run this scheme. (*I note that you offered no alternative). TATOC are already working with government agencies and Brussels so at the moment they seem to be the only ones with their feet under government tables.

I have said earlier in posts around this seminar when people have questioned things. "I have no interest in past performance as it has no tangible influence on future achievement"




Tom

Gibberish!

Firstly, on the subject of quangos - every incoming Government proposes to reduce the number of quangos in existence.  The one thing you can guarantee is that they do reduce them initially but that by the time they cease to govern there will be more than there were when they entered Government.

Second, try reading what I have written.  I have given plenty of scope for consideration of who might be involved in policing.  Otherwise, why would I mention quangos or the need for the Timeshare developers to get their own house in order?  You are so far up TATOC's rear quarters that you have lost sight of daylight!

I also repeat a previous comment; TATOC have been around the bazaars for a quarter of a century, so what have they achieved?  You say they are the only ones with their feet under Government tables, so why have they achieved absolutely nothing to date?

And as for the comment "I have no interest in past performance as it has no tangible influence on future achievement", if that is the way you see things then you should apply it to half of the companies you keep slagging off in "Shark Alley".  Why should their past performance be a complete guide to their future achievement?  Stop being selective in your arguments!  TATOC have achieved very little in 25 years, so why should anyone believe that their projection is the panacea to the problems of timeshare?  What it needs is a complete turnaround in attitude by the timeshare developers.  Or they will go the same way as the dinosaur!  In my view, TATOC is not the solution and it never will be!  Others might have a different view and they, like me, are entitled to those views.  As far as I am concerned the problem lies with the Timeshare developers and the solution must lie with them as well.

There is only a flourishing market for the "sharks" because of the greed of the Timeshare developers.  They have created the market by their refusal to allow disillusioned timeshare consumers a sensible way out of the minefield without penalty.  If there was a proper exit strategy, there wouldn't be a market for the "sharks" to operate.  And does anyone seriously believe that the latest "move"(?) by DRI will alter matters?  Future timeshare owners are put off from entering the market because they see no return - not even little return - on their investment.  Why enter into a market place that has fallen into disrepute?  One where your investment can be written off as soon as you have paid the money out?  One you will find it very difficult, if not impossible, to untie yourself from?  The Timeshare developers have shot themselves in the foot!  The market has dried up because of their greed.

If you were to be more impartial with your attitude towards TATOC, I would not be forced to be so confrontational.  Stop trying to force your views down others' throats.  Give us the facts and let us decide for ourselves if TATOC represents the best way forward.  They may well be - but they are not the only parties involved and your unblinkered support does you little credit.

You and I have never openly disagreed before, but in this there is no common ground!        

 

Mavo

I have been to a seminar. I have posted a report on individual speakers. I have stated what I believe could work. I have stated what I believe will not work and qualified it with reasoning. I cannot do any more.
Quite frankly at this moment in time I wish I had not wasted my money on behalf of timeshare users.
But then again someone has to care and try to make a difference.
I am not a quitter as some of you know!

tonyc

No Tom, you are not a quitter.  And long may that be so!  I would not have taken exception to your comments if they had been prefaced with an acknowledgement that in the past TATOC has not really been very effective or successful in its stated aims and objectives (they are all on their website for all to see) but a belief that they are determined to be more effective in the future and that we should all give them a chance to re-invent themselves.  But, no, you charged in with a belief that they were basically the only "flagship" we should pin our hopes on.  My belief is that TATOC as was - no way!  They are "toothless tigers" with a high opinion of themselves.  Let them convince the "timeshare consumer world" that they deserve a fair wind and some support.  You should not be doing it for them - Harry Taylor is the CEO, let him do it!
 

Doggy50k

I feel I must jump in on this one now.

TATOC could be the body to lead this, however I have my sincere doubts about their capabilities.  This is partly based on past performance, but mostly on my opinion of their current post holders.

Harry Taylor promised much in the run up to his election as a DRI Member Director but has failed (in mine and many others opinion) to deliver.  He refuses to conduct any business in the open except to have a dig at those of us whom try to hold him accountable for his role.  He insists on only dealing with the membership by post and phone and will not post general advice on forums.

His conduct as stated above makes me doubt his commitment to the membership of DRI, and therefore this follows on into his commitment to the membership of TATOC.

Perhaps it is just me - I dont trust politicians - as is proven by their conduct they are ususally in if for what they can get out of it.  In my opinion Harry would make a good politician.

"You know; the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering."

Mavo

Sorry Guys but I do not wish to get involved in a pessimistic debate.  It cannot serve any purpose whatsoever.
The simple fact is that timeshare has to change or die.
The pessimists view is to decry every effort to keep it alive whilst making no effort themselves to give it the kiss of life. Some, it would seem, are even prepared to block the route of the possible life saving ambulance.

I will continue to support anyone who is at least making some kind of effort, however feeble that effort may be.


tonyc

Admirable aims, Tom.  I sincerely hope that you are successful in your endeavours and that both Graham and I will be proven wrong.  But will you please stop your comments suggesting that there are some (a total dig at me) who are even prepared to BLOCK the route of the possible life-saving ambulance?  TATOC is not that - and it never will be.  At best, if properly managed, it will be the vehicle for delivering the first-aiders.  And, given the current incumbents, I doubt it will even succeed in that!  Your histrionics do little to convince me.

The Timeshare developers have created this mess and it is up to them to retrieve the situation.  They have the powers to play fair, but do they have the ethics?  If they don't change, then they will find that the new memberships dry up.
 

tonyc

quote:
Originally posted by Mavo



I will continue to support anyone who is at least making some kind of effort, however feeble that effort may be.






To the best of my knowledge TATOC have not yet made any kind of effort.  Surely all you have received so far is an assurance from a TATOC Director (not the CEO) that they are seeking to get more involved in the real problems of timeshare and not just the periphery (ie the scammers preying on members deperate to unload).  Let us see actions, not just hear words.
 

hal540uk

Hi
Having just returned from budget meetings I am now in a position to respond to your postings and add to some, both positive and negative. I will post within the next few days.
One thing I will say in response to my role as member director. I have answered questions as to what I would do if elected and I have done just that, with members privately, quietly and effective in most cases. Not responded to negatives and insults on forums but got on with the job and always put the points of view championed by members forward, abet with a limited amount of success in maintenance fees.
Most forums have its  positive contributors but also a hard core of negative contributors who will never be satisfied.  I will not, now or never will pander to those people. If some say that is arrogant, so be it. I will not say things that I do not believe in.
Harry
Time and tide waits for no man

Powered by EzPortal