WRITING Wednesday's story on timeshare companies got me thinking on what else we can do to lick this problem.
Timeshare, for the uninitiated, is a scheme where you fork over money for the right to stay in holiday homes or hotels all over the world at discounted rates. Usually it requires a sizeable upfront investment, followed by maintenance fees.
There are legitimate companies which operate such schemes, but there have been others making the news for the wrong reasons.
Consumers have complained about companies such as Leisure Group Marketing, Emperor's Resort International, and Global Europ (note: no website), alleging pressure tactics and false claims.
Timeshare has been a veritable thorn in the side of consumers for a long time. It has been the most complained-about industry for the past decade, and the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) usually receives over 2,000 complaints about it every year.
There have been recent moves to stem bad practices, with amendments to the Consumer Protection Fair Trading Act (CPFTA) taking effect last month. To counter pressure selling, the cooling-off period has been extended from three days to five, so buyers now have more time to reconsider their investment.
There is also now a 60-day refund period for contracts cancelled during this cooling-off period.
But clearly, this isn't enough. Some companies can be shut down, but they can pop up again months later under a new name, according to Mr Seah Seng Choon, Case's executive director.
And as seen in the Maxmega case, where customers of other timeshare companies were called by Maxmega employees, there is a possibility that they share or transfer client databases as well.
So what's to be done?
Some readers have said that Case needs to be more proactive at catching these companies. But as a non-government, non-profit organisation that has limited legal power, its hands are tied somewhat. The very furthest it can go is to take out an injunction against a company if they find it has breached any part of the CPFTA.
So the ability to stamp out this problem really lies with lawmakers. There needs to be proper legislation to make it more difficult for companies to get away with unfair practices.
Mr Seah told me that Case has been pushing for a new Timeshare Act since last year, and the officials at the Ministry of Trade and Industry are still considering the viability of this plan.
I can understand the need for cautious deliberation, but I hope for consumers' sakes that they crack the whip on this.
Despite frequent media reports on timeshare complaints, the number of complaints has only dropped by about 16 per cent in the last four years, from 2,724 complaints in 2004 to 2,280 last year.
That's just not good enough. At this rate, we'd have to wait another 20 years before complaints even halve!
Not only do legislators need to act quicker, more stringent rules have to be imposed.
For starters, how about barring directors of timeshare companies which have previously received injunctions for unfair practices from setting up new timeshare companies?
Or how about ruling that every timeshare company must get a yearly Case audit of their practices? If they fail, they cannot continue operating until they can prove they are trustworthy.
Some things on the audit's checklist could include: being transparent to customers on their company assets and membership size, not engaging in pressure selling, and giving reasonable termination clauses in contracts.
To be sure, consumers need to do their part as well and do relevant checkups on companies before they sign on the dotted line. One simple way is to check with Case whether there has been a significant number of complaints lodged against a company before signing up with them.
But if we really want to get serious on timeshare, it boils down to the law of the land. And that law needs to get tough — fast.