web analytics

KwikChex Ltd is a company owned and controlled by Mr C Emmins, he is the person who has “controlling significance”, therefore it is his mind which manages not only the KwikChex website but that of the “Timeshare Task Force” and “Timeshare Business Check” as well.

In doing so, he has investigated a plethora of companies offering services and products to timeshare consumers. Many of those companies seek to assist Timeshare consumers to terminate contracts and/or resell them to others. It appears but is not confirmed that he also adds comments and authority about those who instruct him.

The work KwikChex Ltd does is entirely financed by the Resort Development Organisation [RDO], who dictates the terms of KwikChex’s commission. That contractual commission is not disclosed, however having experienced as to what KwikChex does and what they report on, I can state, the main thrust of the commission, is to identify and sometimes investigate and challenging companies who, elect not to be members of either TATOC or the RDO.

This in some way, infers that RDO members are legitimate, have proven that legitimacy by simply being a member of the RDO or TATOC.

Therefore, the websites discussed, have been created for a purpose and the purpose is fulfilled by KwikChex.

Those who are investigated by KwikChex are not Timeshare Resort Sellers, RDO Timeshare re-sellers or RDO Members, KwikChex purpose is to targets anyone who are not RDO members be they part of the legal profession or others the.

In Respect to the Legal Profession

They do not in any way accept any subjection to either TATOC, the RDO or its affiliates. They have their own professional bodies, are in subjection to those bodies and them alone. If it is suggested that the legal possession should be in subjection to the timeshare industry, then clearly it would be a perversion of reality.

In Respect to the Re-Sellers

Some companies elect to resell timeshare in Consumer-v-consumer transactions, in so doing they can join the RDO and TATOC, however, it’s not mandatory. I accept that if an RDO or TATOC member does join they [in doing so] accept the terms of the membership, however those who elect not to join the membership, may not accept the truncated terms of membership, in part or at all.


I equally accept that should the RDO and TATOC have concrete evidence that an enterprise is harmful to consumers they serve, they do have the right to issue a warning. If necessary, alerting those consumers about the firm who do perpetrate such proven acts. However, should they elect to eviscerate companies on shoddy evidence they expose themselves to legal claims?

Who are the RDO

As it is the RDO who have financed the “Timeshare Task Force” and “Business Check”, it follows they have and are spending considerable sums and for a purpose.

The RDO do class themselves as the “legitimate” timeshare industry, accordingly, its members claim they are part of that “Legitimate” Timeshare Industry which conveys a credibility, however, the word “litigate” is a word the RDO adopt and does not in any way flow from any governmental mandate. The RDO, in short, is an industry organisation, it has certain member resorts, who clearly believe that a need exists to create a collective voice to represent their own collective interests.

By the RDO own submissions, their membership is just above 6 % of all the European timeshare resorts and only 10 % in the UK, therefore we are not exactly dealing with a representative body who represent the “entire” industry, but are dealing with a fragment of resorts. As the 90% of others resorts believe they do not have a requirement to become members, they clearly believe the benefits of being associated with TATOC or the RDO is not advantageous. Does that warrant [by implication] that the 90% are “illegitimate”?

I think Not!

The Great

To eliminate any conjecture, the concept of timeshare [as first devised] is great.  The consumer pays an upfront charge and to obtain the permanent right to holiday in a particular resort, at a stated moment in time and in chosen accommodation. The holiday accommodation contract is for-ever and as promised will deliver holiday accommodation at low cost.

Many resorts contain many happy timeshare owners, who elect a committee, to officiate over the affairs of the resorts clubs, they love and cherish. They operate ethically, lawful and are not in conflict with their members.

That is great in timeshare and long may it last. Those Resorts do not come across the desks of many Law Firms as they deliver what they promised to deliver.

Some Members of the RDO

The RDO do represent:-

Silverpoint [who constantly featured on Crime share and who have been, the subject of many legal actions presented by consumers].

Diamonds Resorts [ who were reported by the New York Times as being “downright nasty”].

Club la Costa [who were affirmed by the high court as involved in the creation of an unfair relationship with supporting banks]

And RCI [whereby the UK courts were astounded and the way they treat their consumers].

All are members of the RDO, all have received admonishments which have attracted blight which they all have a wish to dilute.

Further, other members of the RDO have equally been the subject of many litigations in the UK and Europe. In this backdrop and having created the “Timeshare task force” and not wishing to over-egg the pudding, the RDO has created a task force, in timeshare, yet only identify none RDO members as potential “crooks”!

It is clear and very apparent that some of the RDO members have been adjudicated as selling unlawful contracts, operating unethically, in contravention of consumer protection regulations and should be admonished and taken to task. Is it the case that the RDO don’t take responsibility and merely create a corresponding force against the innocent, to avoid responsibility, confuse the issues and disseminate blight against those they infer are “illegitimate” when not.

The corresponding impact is that all timeshare is bad including those resorts which are great!

In calling themselves “legitimate” whilst the great are “illegitimate” they are likening themselves [in the dating game] as being the pretty girl when they are the runt batting above their weight]

The simple question is “why is the “task force” not able to do what it suggests it is a commission to do?

How can it claim “sterling” credibility amid a delusion?

Should the RDO clean up its act, assert control over its members admonish them for infractions and admit when admission is required or is it delivering a miserable meal to spin self-regulation and firing a broadside against those who are innocent members of Royal Assent Institutions or Legal professional bodies.

Is it the case that by doing what they are doing, they merely disseminate the “blight” against everyone, so as to mask the actions of their own members?

Outside the RDO and in the clutches of TATOC, we also see MacDonald’s Resorts [MRL] who like others have elected [for personal gain] to interfere with the many club constitutions they themselves created.

In the past, MRL has sued consumers and peddled the position that the contractual obligations they authored are lawful, have pursued a pipeline of yearly fees [many of which are supported by unlawful contracts], have claimed those fees are needed and to protect the fundamental consumer’s assets which MRL eventually took off Consumers.

In 2014 and on notice that some MRL contracts contravened Spanish law, they set about [with TATOC] the alleged consumer association a “land grab” [the assets of the club members] and offer them in return a convoluted Points System which diminished their rights and any equitable interest they had and financially maintained. Hailed as “groundbreaking” by TATOC [who did support MRL], MRL achieved the rouse, which has caused a litigation group action to be formed by the very loyal consumers they had.

Noteworthy is a deafening silence on the “Task Force” website with respect to TATOC and MRL. In fact, it states “are you members of TATOC” which inferred that to be members, grants some credibility with is far from the truth in the minds of many MRL consumers.

No investigation appears to have taken place by the “task force” and no investigative view has been published.

Some of the actions of the timeshare developers [particular the RDO members], have caused spectacular breaches of laws and regulation, caused consumers financial harm, resulting in many 1,000’s of claims, yet the alleged “task force” seek not to admonish them, but does, those who assist their member’s consumers.

In support of the “Timeshare Task Force” and “Business Check”, the RDO have created “mindtimeshare”, “Go Timeshare”, “The Timeshare Council”, “The Timeshare Consumer Association Portal” [TCA] and, financially supports “TATOC”. There, are much more websites, magazines, publications and developer website in existence [ however to many to mention]. In this puddle of industry websites, all bleat “they care”, all state “they support consumers” and all “commend one another ” in an attempt to add more credibility to themselves. It can be likened to a salesman telling the buyer that they have not been duped as other sellers agree.

For instance, and to make the point Doctors do not eviscerate the plumbers on their association website, neither do the midwife investigate the doctors or the Bricklayers associations smear the Bakers

In normal life and in the bowels of “standard trading activities”, a seller creates a website and promotes its-self, canvasses consumers and to buy the wares they offer. In timeshare, we have the sometimes “bad” promoting the “bad” and to potentially sell “bad” which I aver is ugly.

Not content with doing this, potential racketeering can migrate to the bastions of power, in that the “bad” can be consulted and in respect to the consumer rights the governments want to enact for the benefit of consumers. This can be classed as infiltrating the minds of lawmaker’s, deluding them on mass and into the belief that all is well when the opposite is potentially true.

In the past and at present, all is not well in timeshare, products have been morphed change and constructed to erode the rights and when lawmakers do refute the advice of the claimed “legitimate” industry, they, in turn, amend the contracts, resell others which are not fully transparent, do not convey substantial benefit to the consumers and in some cases perpetrate downright “scams”.

This is quite a reasonable statement to make, as what we do see in reality is that timeshare consumers are running around believing on mass, they have been mis-sold which does and has generated an abundance of legal claims against those who seek to aver that all is well in a timeshare, when not.

It is for these reasons that I say the “task force” does not grant to Mr Emmins the power to effectively enforce and protect the consumers, as an imbalance is prevalent.

No matter how much money the RDO “chucks” at the adventure and no matter how much Mr Emmins tries to assist the consumers, he is shackled by the very employer who represents that it is doing something.

For the entire concept to work effectively, all should be investigated, all should be scrutinised and all should be subject to independence. I say this with respect to Re-sellers alone, as the legal profession is already in subjection to independent scrutiny.

Finally, and to make sense on this alleged assistance, one has to make known that in the field of timeshare claims, a lot of companies are operating unlicensed, unregulated and who covertly, intend to scam you. Many are that of ex-timeshare salesmen, who have created a product which nobody wants, nobody has sort and nobody needs, these products are bolted onto legal services which on many occasions are not delivered.

Maybe Mr Emmins has the right intention, maybe he does want to assist, however by shackling him and preventing him from doing a “damn good job” is indicative of the mindset of the RDO, its partner TATOC and those who lend an ear to them.

The absolute truth is that no Paralegal company can sue another in High Court on your behalf, they cannot represent you in most Courts and they are required to give reasoned and good advice. Only a person who has sworn allegiance to the court can represent you, however, they do need the assistance of the paralegals so as to mitigate the costs to an acceptable level.

That being so when the “Task Force” do investigate they should eviscerate the unregulated and leave the regulated and licence alone. The “Task Force” does not presently investigate at an arm’s length, they are neither independent nor autonomous. Parts of the timeshare industry are guarded and when in an association, they are protected by those they pay.

In doing so,  the members expect and receive a benefit in return and that benefit is by way of assistance in matters which trouble them, not consumers. One such matter is protection from advancing statues, regulations and legal actions and against their members. As the law firms are in many cases effective in delivering compensation to consumers which are paid for by [on some occasions]  RDO members, they rightfully are troubled by the actions of Paralegals and Solicitors, however, they should not brazenly and collectively “cat call” them to confuse.

Reports of unfair practices are necessary and needy, and of course, KwikChex should expose them. Equally so should law firms. KwikChex can and should report them to their regulators or licencing body and with the assistance of Law Firms. If they are not regulated or do not retain a licence, they should be exposed and reported to the trading standards.

“Timeshare Task Force” infers it is a force and a department constructed for the protection of timeshare consumers, yet is incapable of delivering that service. In saying this they are approachable can and do help and should if commanded too, take centre stage.

The task force avers credibility, implies an authority which at present is unreal. In saying all this, what they do, does add some benefit to the consumer, but equally adds confusion. The nature of the timeshare product is a hive for disputes, they did exist, they exist today and will exist tomorrow and until there is a coming together many will suffer, many will become upset, many will scream “scam” and many will be investigated.

Therefore Mr Emmins does provide a service, that service does have benefit but could be better if he is let off the leash.

Posted on: 22nd March 2017