A judge calls for a better management of the time sharing

Marie-Eve Dumont

Friday, 14 July, 2017 23:03

UPDATE
Friday, 14 July, 2017 23:03

Look at this article

In spite of the judgments which accrue from the business of time sharing, consumers are still taken in by the sales tactics and remain prisoners of the contracts, complains to a judge that calls for changes to the law.

“There would be a net benefit to regulate the vacation time-share in the [Act on the protection of the consumer] to protect more and more clearly the affected consumers,” wrote judge Richard Landry of the small claims Court, in a recent decision in favor of customers, Sylvain Boileau and Geneviève Audet, Mascouche.

He adds that ” in spite of the judgments that accumulate, the proponents of timeshare holidays abound and the legal world remains puzzled by these operations “.

In fact, many judgments have been rendered since 2015 in Quebec against the companies that offer vacation time-share, also called time sharing. The Newspaper has also exposed the tactics used by these companies to attract their customers and sell them contracts for thousands of dollars that can last for tens of years.

30-year contract

The couple went to an information session at the offices of Destination Holiday to Laval in July 2015 after you have filled a coupon in a restaurant and ” won ” a stay.

The three-hour session shows them images of travel destinations all more beautiful the ones than the others, which may be available to them if they subscribe to a “membership” Resort Condominium International (RCI).

“They are successful so much to make us believe it is fantastic, that it is the 7th wonder of the world, that one ends by believing in it,” says Mr. Boileau.

The couple finally came out with a contract value of 8990 $, in addition to the maintenance charges to pay only $ 666 for two years, for a period of 30 years.

But upon returning home, the couple regrets his decision. Mr. Boileau had already had debts of $20,000.

“We really didn’t have the means to pay for it “, let-t-he fall.

Cage lobster

They are trying by all means to get rid of the contract, without success. We even tried to transfer it to another client or to rent.

The judge compared the process in which the couple ended up in a cage with a lobster as “the bait is supposed to draw that leads people to be present at the meeting, which is the cage in which they will be practically unable to stand out,” he wrote.

The company representative Vacation Destination Plus has attempted to demonstrate that the couple had signed in full knowledge of the facts, which was rejected by the judge.

“If the products offered are so attractive […], why, then, use as many tricks and gimmicks to attract people and make them sign it under pressure ? Ask the question is to answer it “, he insisted in his judgment.