header-logo header-logo

When timeshares turn to nightmares

01 February 2018 / David Partington
Issue: 7779 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail
nlj_7779_partington

Timeshare contracts can trap the unawares into lengthy commitments. David Partington presents some innovative means of escape

  • Raises potential ways to tackle timeshare contracts under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.
  • Introduces the idea of proceeding against lenders who finance such contracts under s 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

This is a brief introduction to what is a hugely complex topic, defending liability or seeking redress in respect of timeshare contracts. Before I do that, I need to explain two matters. One is the central ‘mischief’ of timeshare contracts. The second is the structure of such contracts.

The central mischief is that clients find themselves bound to very long contractual obligations with no express ‘exit’ provisions, although there are various policies which some companies say they operate in cases of extreme hardship, old age (say 75 years) or death. At the same time the client is bound to pay an annual management fee in the nature of a service charge, whether or not they are able to access the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll