There seems to have been a lot of noise with regards to Timeshare products over the last week or so. Consumers seem to be questioning more and more, the validity of these products.
Below is an article published earlier this year which we hope, will allow you to gain a true understanding of Credits, Points, Vouchers, Pure Points and Fractional Points.
In timeshare many products are sold as financial systems. The TCA believes that these systems should be regulated by the FCA.
That said a variety of new products are being presented in the holiday industry in the form of “currency access products”. The title suggests that these are all equal and similar products where as in reality they are not. Produced in the timeshare and associated holiday industry are visually related but are not particular to the same regulations.
In short, some products may not be covered by the same regulations. (I.e. the electronic money regulations) the original point systems are covered by.
The Sellers of these products aim to sell you a currency and those currency systems are broken down into units of virtual money which they call “credits” etc.
It is our opinion that they are currencies and those currencies are represented by monitory units. That being so, you may believe that all currencies are subject to the same regulations others are required to comply to however, they are not .
Under the regulations it states:-
“The electronic money regulations 2009/110/ec, electronic money is money to the value as represented by a claim on the issuer, which is stored electronically issued upon receipt of funds of an amount not less in value than the monetary value issued and accepted as a means of payment by undertakings, other than the issuer”.
It appears in some transactions that the issuer is the company and the user is the Consumers. That being so, there is no other party!
It is of course a type 2 “closed loop” currency but these currencies are probably not subjected to E.U “electronic money regulations”.
I do accept they should be, but in reality as they do not confirm to the description of the electronic currencies (as stated in the regulations) someone would have to spend significant amounts to try and establish that they were, or that the issuers had in their mind, an intension to avoid the rules and orchestrated the avoidance of purpose.
Even that proposition is a long shot. The only body who might take that sort of an action would be the government or its satellite institutions. In any event that only settles one issue with the product Consumers buy into.
The products being sold proffered as a vehicle for Consumers to obtain leisure products. It’s a real product and may suit some but certainly not everyone.
Whether or not those products are worth the sums paid are clearly subject to an appraisal by the Buyer who acquires them. Some will believe that the product is great and fills a need, others will not. Again it could be viewed as unwise to challenge the contract on this issue as the realisable benefit is a matter for the willing Buyer /willing Seller to determine, not the Court.
Therefore, we are left with the events leading up to the presentation and representations in the selling process.
These matters are covered by the “Unfair Trading Regulations” and the TCA believes that it is these regulations which merit meaningful consideration so that a Consumer can formulate the answer as to whether or not they have been miss-sold the product they acquired.
Firstly you have to consider, how you were introduced to the product i.e. “the advertising”
Clearly the Seller has a product to sell and will (via an abundance of forums) advertise their products to Consumers. After considering the offering represented in the adverts, Consumers would naturally consider the offering and respond to those advertisements if they felt that they wanted to purchase the product. They may even wish to attend a presentation of the offering, but they do so with an intension to find out more. They do this; so as to come to a reasoned conclusion as to whether or not that product is what they want to buy. This process is called baiting is lawful and proper.
The main complaints are that the process of baiting Consumers is switched when the Consumer attends the presentation.
For instance, if the purpose of attending a presentation is to get rid of something and you are told that yet when you arrived, they will not do that unless you acquire a product you had never contemplated acquiring before attending; at that point the bait has been switched.
In the event that you sort unfettered advice on a particular issue and the advice came with a caveat that unless you acquired a product you did not envisage acquiring (before you attended) again you have been subjected to bait and switch.
Baiting and switching is unlawful and the Courts will adopt a strict approach in such matters. If the Court does determine that you have been subjected to the unfair practise of baiting and switching, the contract you signed could very well be declared void.
In the presentation
Sellers have to be very careful not to misrepresent the products they wish to sell to you. Again the Courts know the Seller has a greater need to sell than most Consumers have a need to buy, so protection has been put in place in the form of a Regulation to protect you.
For instance, if in this case you are told that the product is an investment or a property which is yielding value or that it is the best value and that it’s been proven as a fact, you are entitled to rely upon those representations as being truthful claims. If they are later proven to be false and you have been duped, the Court will take a dim view.
In many cases Consumers will only come to the realisation that they were duped after the purchase. At that realisation the clock starts to tic as to the time limits available to bring a claim.
In short and subject to other factors you may only have 6 years in which to action a claim under the Limitation Act.
The claim.
Consumers generally do not want to issue Legal proceedings and have apathy to Legal confrontation. In some cases that apathy is misplaced. If you limit your claim to £10,000 you have no need to employ solicitors or Paralegal companies as you can represent yourself in your local smalls claims Court. It’s not that hard!
If you win you will keep all the money you claimed and if you lose you will not and I repeat you will not have to pay the other side’s adverse costs. The more people that use the small claims Court, the less you and others will be duped, as the Legal costs they are faced with and financial damages (the bad Sellers will face) will be disproportionate and seriously affect their profits.
If you require help there are many people/ institutions and associations which will assist you.
So claim if you believe you were duped! Don’t wait for others.
All the bad traders have to do is litter the internet with advertisements and others in the 50,000,000 strong countries will never know about your experiences. So action your claims, inform the authorities and stop duping wherever it exists.
For more information regarding this article or assistance in any other timeshare related issues please contact the TCA on 01908 881058 or email: info@TimeshareConsumerAssociation.org.uk