Maxwell: Barbs fly in timeshare fight

Industry, exit companies claim each is the problem. Let them fight.

Florida is in the midst of a rumble in the timeshare jungle.

In one corner is the timeshare industry itself, which critics say is notoriously shady, relying upon high-pressure sales tactics to bait customers into making hasty decisions with never-ending contracts and always-escalating fees.

That’s according to the timeshare-exit companies anyway — the firms that say they can help buyers get out of their stinky contracts.

But to hear the timeshare industry tell it, the exit companies are the real problem — preying upon vulnerable timeshare customers by charging gobs of money for bad advice and contract-breaking promises they can’t really deliver.

The battle between these two titans is escalating as the exit companies gain traction, and punches are being thrown in rival guest columns in the Orlando Sentinel and other Florida papers.

In one column, an exit-company exec throws around words like “deceptive” and “fraudulent” while declaring: “The $10 billion timeshare business needs immediate reform.”

In response, the head of a national timeshare group says his rival’s industry is the one with “unscrupulous” behavior and “bad actors” who “need stricter regulations, more oversight.”

So each side says the other is shady. And each says regulators should crack down on the other.

Here’s an idea: Maybe they’re both right.

In fact, after watching both sides try to beat the snot out of each other, I’m re

minded of the scientist in “Godzilla” who saw two monsters preparing for battle and said: “Let them fight.”

Heck, maybe we can even help you guys along by drafting some basic regulations that say neither one of you can hose consumers.

“That’s exactly what’s needed,” said Lisa Schreier. She should know. Schreier’s a former timeshare saleswoman turned consumer advocate who has authored books on the industry and runs a blog with advice for buyers.

Schreier’s convinced both sides need reform. But the Clermont resident also believes consumers should be more savvy and just say no to high-pressure sales tactics.

I agree. When my wife and I subjected ourselves to a timeshare pitch several years ago, I actually laughed out loud when the final deal was offered. It just seemed so ridiculous, I couldn’t see why anyone would bite.

They wanted something like $20,000 for one week a year, plus $1,000 a year in “maintenance fees” … which seemed like an insane amount of “maintenance” on a unit I’d be using one week a year.

And here’s the real kicker, which is common for timeshare pitches: We had to agree to sign the contract on the spot. We weren’t allowed to take home the paperwork, run it

by an attorney or anything else.

Man, I don’t buy a pair of running shoes without doing research. I sure as heck wasn’t signing a never-ending contract without due diligence.

When I explained that to the saleswoman, she curtly responded: “Then why are you even here?”

“Because,” I explained, “one of your aggressive pitch people snagged us in the mall and begged us to come spend a free night at your resort with ‘no strings attached.’”

This was an easy no for us. But many people get swayed. Schreier said her days in the industry convinced her “this was a stupid way to sell anything.”

“As a consumer, I would never buy anything like this,” she said. “Consumers need to take some responsibility.”

Amen. As a general rule: I’d avoid any industry that relies on you not taking time to consider a purchase.

Still, government plays a role in cracking down on questionable business practices and has done so with everything from used cars to “payday” lending rates.

Schreier had a basic reform idea for each side of this industry as well. She says timeshare companies should be forced to give customers longer than 10 days to cancel their contracts, noting many buyers don’t even see the properties they purchase or sometimes even get to view their online accounts within that time.

And she said exit companies should be forced to put clients’ money in an escrow account that doesn’t get released until the company has done what it promised.

Both those ideas seem solid, for starters anyway.

Some companies already have good practices. Disney, Schreier said, is the gold standard for allowing customers to study the deal without committing on the spot.

And while timeshare ownership doesn’t appeal to me, I know many people enjoy and find value in it.

I also know it’s pretty obvious that the exit industry never would have thrived if there wasn’t such a demand among buyers who felt trapped.

But reform is definitely needed. (Remember: Both sides agree on that point … with regards to the other guy, anyway.)

The key is that reform must come from consumer advocates — not industry lobbyists who too often write legislation for the lawmakers who also cash their campaign checks.

If both the timeshare and exit industries have valuable products and services, they shouldn’t have anything to fear by offering consumers more transparency and guarantees for customer satisfaction.

“Give consumers a way out,” Schreier said. “And let them see the man behind the curtain.”