🔗 Share this article

Prosecutors have labeled it as one of the largest deceptions of its nature in the United Kingdom.

Altogether 14 people have been convicted for their part in a multi-million pound scheme to defraud in excess of 3,500 vacation property investors.

The affected individuals were keen to terminate age-old timeshare contracts and tried to find assistance.

Most were in the age range of 60 and 80. Over 500 of them parted with over £10,000, and one individual paid more than £80,000.

Those affected were exposed to aggressive sales meetings lasting up to six hours. They were left out of pocket, owning valueless fake "points" and continued to be locked into costly holiday ownership agreements they could no longer use.

The Business Behind the Scam

The firm at the core of the scam was the organization in question. They accepted people's money to fund the directors' lavish lifestyle of exclusive education, high-end properties and personal aircraft.

The individual at the top of the organization, the main defendant, was sentenced to a seven-and-half year sentence in January for deceptive scheme.

In the latest development, his spouse Nicola was part of the concluding cases to receive sentencing.

She received a two-year deferred imprisonment at the London court after admitting illegal fund handling.

The outcome represents a long time coming and signifies a significant success for the people who spoke out, the police and prosecutors.

The Way the Inquiry Started

I first heard about the firm was in the summer of 2016. I was working in the reporting team of a news organization, making investigative features.

A colleague noted that his mum had inherited the ownership of a timeshare apartment in the Spanish coast and, after long-term use, had started seeking to exit the contract.

It is important to recall how popular holiday ownership had grown with UK travelers in the last decades of the 20th century.

Vacation properties permitted individuals to occupy the identical property annually, or exchange their vacation periods with other owners who had apartments in different locations. About 600,000 holiday enthusiasts took up that opportunity.

The initial boom was paired with a lot of accounts about dishonest operators mis-selling units. They became a staple on consumer shows.

The common holiday ownership agreement tied investors in for long periods.

At that time, those holders who had experienced their guaranteed place in the sunshine for 20 or 30 years were advancing in years, and a significant number were attempting to wave goodbye to their vacation investments.

A number had health issues and found it difficult to access their units. Others just thought they'd achieved their goals from them. And others had died, in frequent situations passing on their heirs to take over the deals - including their annual payments and upkeep costs.

The Investigation Develops

It was at this point the family member had been placed. She searched the web for options and found the organization, a business whose website promised to release her from her agreement.

But, having made a payment and scheduled a consultation with them, her relatives had doubts.

Additional investigation showed hundreds of people claiming they had handed over cash and achieved no result from the service. In fact, they had suffered financially. Significant sums.

The reporting group started looking into what was going on. It quickly became clear that there were questionable operators operating in the vacation property industry.

One lawyer had many grievance cases preparing to take action against the company.

The team interviewed individuals who had used the firm and they each reported similar experiences. They assumed the business would acquire their investment off them but when they went to a consultation (for which they submitted funds initially) they were advised there was no re-sale value.

Instead, they were pushed - actually pressured - to invest additional funds acquiring "the firm's incentive scheme", linked to the business's umbrella group, the parent organization.

The precise definition was somewhat vague. They appeared to be a kind of currency, providing discount travel and services and retail offers.

And they were seemingly "transferable with fellow investors, eventually.

Investing money at the time would lead to an future return that would pay for SMT's fees and leave the property owner with a gain, freed at last from their pesky deal.

An unrealistic promise? Indeed, it was.

A 'Deceptive Scheme'

Assuming these reports were correct, this was a major deception.

The technique is termed a "bait-and-switch."

A business - specifically the organization - "baits" the client by promoting a specific service only to then say that's not available, pushing the client towards an alternative, lesser option.

Such practices are unlawful. Armed with all the accounts we had gathered, we made the case to secretly film one of the company's meetings.

This takes time, effort, and strong justifications for why this is the sole method to gather the evidence needed to prove wrongdoing.

With approval secured, our compact group set up a consultation with one of the firm's agents in the location.

Acting as a member of the public wanting to help his mother released from her timeshare contract|holiday ownership agreement