Not a day goes by without consumers asking us about claims, and of course their own possibility to claim.
Most of the times they ask because they have been on the phone with yet again another company promising the moon and explaining how easy it is to get their claim done in no time and walk away with thousands of euros.
The fact that most of these company’s cold call, does not always ring an alarm bell with the consumer, while this should really be the first warning sign.
Cold calls are not allowed under the current Data Protection Law, and certainly there are no lists or databases of timeshare owners, accessible to anybody to extract the information and start calling!
Then there is also the misinformation which is telling people “half” truths, statements based on real facts but with additional facts that are based on nothing and used to convince the consumer they can claim or even that they have to claim.
Example of these half-truths is the statement recently posted on the Internet: ‘TUI was the owner of Anfi between 2001 and 2004 so really you can claim your money back from TUI.”
Statements like this don’t seem to be based on actual facts. These are weak arguments to push confused timeshare consumers towards a claim for which they need to pay thousands of Euros upfront and the outcome is not that guaranteed as they have been told on the initial call or zoom meeting.
Don’t get me wrong, nobody is denying here that there are claims in court. That is jurisdiction, that is the law.
But letting consumers believe that “everybody” can claim, even when they purchased in a completely different era, a different product or from a different sales company, that is misrepresentation.
Coming back to the TUI story, we are not sure what the actual intentions are behind these statements. TUI was the owner of 51% of Anfi, so at the same time why would you not say you could claim back from the other half who owned it as well?
Maybe because TUI sounds familiar in the ears of the consumer? Maybe when people hear TUI they think, ‘yes, there is still money to claim back’
But why was TUI never mentioned before in any of the court rulings for those consumers who actually bought between 2001 and 2004?
Surely a judge would be more than clear on who should be paying the money when the ruling is announced?
If TUI were legally responsible for the sale of the contracts, as they were the controlling body of the Anfi Group, why was this never noted before by any judge?
Are they insinuating the judges have “overlooked” this detail all the time?
Or is it because TUI was not the sales company mentioned in the purchase agreement?
We have seen these court claims for several years now,
But, why pointing the finger at TUI at this moment in time? What is the real reason behind this article about TUI right now?
Have the claims companies run out of clients or convincing arguments to get the Anfi owners on board?
The article isn’t very clear either, as after making all kinds of statements and mentioning rumors why TUI left Anfi, they change the tune of the article and state ‘This may also mean they are also liable for the claims against Anfi…’
‘May’? So, after all nothing is that sure?
You ‘may be able to get your money back’ is not really good enough when you are expected to pay close to 10k upfront.
Of course, the court claim is never guaranteed, but certainly after all these years of claims it sounds very unlikely the judges overlooked the TUI liability.
Please, when you are considering claiming against your resort, whatever resort it is, do get the facts right before making any decision on who to go on board with.
Contact us: firstname.lastname@example.org