Welcome to Timeshare users forum.

In order to view the timeshare forum and guides you must first Register.

FREE to register and FREE to participate

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Good for the Goose?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Good for the Goose?

    Through an opportunity recognised by one of our Moderators we would like to publish a blog by Lisa Ann Schreier who has for many years campaigned and written many articles championing the cause of Timeshare Users and is righfully described as The Timeshare Crusader. Lisa Ann dedicates much of her time to campaigning against the maverick developers and the practices that they adopt which are responsible for and have generated the negative publicity and public mistrust that now pervades what could and should be a great holiday/vacationing product.

    Lisa Ann`s blog with thanks to her for the permission to publish on our forums:-

    Friday, February 8, 2019

    There Aren’t Enough Cliches To Describe These Proposed Laws
    The people who run the very large timeshare industry in Florida have proposed some significant changes to the existing laws as they pertain to the so-called timeshare exit companies.

    You can read the entire proposed bill here: http://m.flsenate.gov/session/bill/2...text/filed/pdf

    Now while I agree that consumers are being ripped off at an alarming rate by the vast majority of these firms, some, if not most of the proposals being put forth are laughable. If this isn’t a case of the pot calling the kettle black, I don’t know what is.

    While these proposed rules and oversights directed at timeshare exit companies, are well intended and do provide some protection for consumers, I feel strongly that they go above and beyond current rules and oversights in place for the timeshare industry. If the legislature chooses to implement these rules, I ask that similar rules be implemented for the timeshare developers engaged in the sale of timeshare interests, whether weeks or points.

    In particular I find that if the consumer is to be provided with a copy of the agreement to review at least 1 business day before the purchaser is to sign the agreement (Lines 316-318), the same methodology must be implemented by the developer attempting to sell a timeshare interest. It’s important to remember that the current paradigm of a “90 minute sales presentation after which the consumer is forced to make a purchasing decision or forfeit their right to make a decision in the future without benefit of seeing, much less reading the contract, POS, etc.” was instituted 40 years ago by the timeshare industry and can be easily changed if they wanted to change it.

    Additionally I find that if exit companies are to perform “random recording and testing of the oral representations made by employees or independent contractors
    engaged in sales or other customer service functions, if the provider uses telemarketing” the timeshare developer should do the same as a way to protect the interests of the consumer.

    If a consumer is to be informed about options before dealing with an exit company, then should timeshare developers not give out similar options to consumers, such as AirBnB, etc? At the very least, the timeshare seller should be required to make it clear that they are working in the interests of the developer, such as a real estate agent must disclose they are a seller’s agent.

    These are just a few of what I consider salient points of this proposed legislation that deserve a very careful review. As I said, at first glance it seems both innocuous and a boom to consumers. Read it again.

    Of course, none of these proposed rules and oversights would be necessary for timeshare exit companies if in fact the timeshare developers themselves offered viable alternatives for consumers who for one reason or another, do not want their timeshare interest any longer. The timeshare industry has done everything in its power to suppress a secondary market, thereby opening the doors for these exit companies to thrive as consumers feel they have no other choice.


    *Lisa Ann asks for and would be grateful if you would post your thoughts and comments on not just the idea of the proposed legislation but whether or not some of the proposals should or could be adopted by the developers themselves? Hence the topic name "Good for the Goose."
    Last edited by helpmate2; 11-02-2019, 11:11 AM.

  • #2
    Should guests wish to comment on the above post they must first register and be approved as members.

    *The forum is heavily monitored and members must abide by the T`s and C`s in order for us to run a healthy and friendly site.

    Comment


    • KEITH HURST
      KEITH HURST commented
      Editing a comment
      The blog looks like she has been reading my mail , lost for words, the timeshare industry is even sicker than I thought , I think its time for me to find a darkened room and go to sleep until they go away. Just one last point if the Timeshare industry did have to abide with the conditions of the proposed act then ANY PROBLEM CAUSED BY THE EXIT COMPANYS. WOULD CEASE TO BE A PROBLEM
      Last edited by KEITH HURST; 11-02-2019, 04:14 PM.

  • #3
    This is the reason I saw the link between it and a couple of the other topics. That said the proposed bill does generate some interesting thoughts and I am sure that for some people, like yourself Keith, those thoughts will not all be positive ones.

    Comment


    • KEITH HURST
      KEITH HURST commented
      Editing a comment
      Thanks for the inclusion of this topic on the forum as you say I do have strong views on the industry .timeshare is in principle very good but in practise can leave a lot to be desired

  • #4
    Having had a quick read through this proposed bill HB435 it appears to me that there must have been a lengthy consultation with the developers. Is it possible to find out if there has been any consultation with Timeshare Users or even bona fide Release Agencies?
    Secondly I also note liberal use of the word Relief. I wonder if this is accidental or intended?
    No doubt more observations will come to mind at my second reading. I do have one already waiting but I wonder if someone else will draw attention to it?

    Comment


    • #5
      It does smack somewhat of developers involvement and they may well be relying on the notion that users seeking relief may be devoid of a collective voice and likewise the small number of bona fide release organizations.

      Comment


      • #6
        I am astonished at the *hypocrisy of organizations who justify complaints against themselves with phrases along the lines of.... We cannot be held responsible for the activities of our sales people or the sales people we contract out to.
        How on earth can these people think that they have the ability to regulate others when they are incapable of or are unwilling to regulate themselves.
        Whilst I do accept the need to regulate the Exit/Relief Agents I have to question, given their poor track record, the ability of the developers to do so.
        Transparent consultations should and could have taken place between legislators and the consumers who are the people most affected by the many bad practices that prevail, not just around the industry of timeshare but within the industry itself.

        It is no good painting the window frames if the wood is rotten.

        *Hypocrisy:- The practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.

        Comment


        • #7
          They do seem to be putting the cart before the horse and will not accept that they are the only people who can resolve a problem that is of there own making until they take there head out of the sand there will be no change .We can only hope that there elected reps are better than ours. Take you.r choice (as they used to say) Its Bob Hope or no Hope take your pick
          Last edited by KEITH HURST; 13-02-2019, 11:43 AM.

          Comment


          • #8
            Originally posted by KEITH HURST View Post
            They do seem to be putting the cart before horse and will not accept that they are the only people who can resolve a problem that is of there own making until they take there head out of the sand there will be no change .We can only hope that there elected reps are better than ours. Take you.r choice (as they used to say) Its Bob Hope or no Hope take your pick
            Do you think that the developers do not recognise the hypocrisy within the situation or do you think that they either do not care or have been engaging in rolling out dubious policies for that long that they think, one more will not make much difference seeing as they appear to have been getting away with so much for so long?

            It really is baffling to me that this seems to be put forward to Representatives as a solution to an area of the exit problem and is so blatantly pointing at faults elsewhere whilst totally ignoring their own failures to keep their house in order and create, not only, viable exit strategies but create the value of secondary sales that their representatives sold us all.

            Comment

            Working...
            X