Timeshare Trade organisations, like other associations inherently exist to assist its Members in pursuing economical and just practices which (amongst other things) would limit exposure, avoid adverse impacts and justly amend unfair practices. Such considerations are taken so as to avoid a liability and enhance the reputation of their Membership.
The Resort Development Organisation (RDO) claims to be a legitimate Organisation in the timeshare industry and indeed has many Members who pay subscriptions, so as to provide a benefit to them. In doing so, they (amongst other things) have independently investigated and adjudicated on the position of sickness. Timeshare owners who are ill and are advised not to travel to their timeshare resort by a doctor should be released from any forward contractual obligations the owner is allegedly bound to.
The RDO have determined that if a timeshare owner is too sick to obtain benefit from their timeshare, the forward obligation is unfair and/or onerous. As a consequence of that belief, they deem it fair and reasonable to excuse owners from the contracts including the consequential forward obligations.
With regards to the RDO’s position in the industry, and equally taking on board their advice in respect to the “sick”, the Court will lend much weight to the fair and reasonable approach. The Court will apply a test of reasonableness and (to avoid doubt) we embrace the RDO’s advice and the meaning behind it.
That being the case, resorts can be invited to accept termination of timeshare contract.
Equally, if a resort is not a Member of the RDO can still rely upon the industry advice in such circumstance.
Duty of Care
The resort is a constitutional organisation operating in timeshare and has a clear duty to keep abreast of issues surrounding timeshare and the contractual arrangement which underpin it. The resort would, or ought to have known of the above matters and equally should have advised its Members accordingly.
Last modified: 8th February 2016