Why timeshare exchanges fail so relentlessly to deliver on choice and availability

In its early years, timeshare was typically sold as “fixed weeks”: you went to the same resort, stayed in the same apartment, and holidayed in the same week each year. Exchange programmes were introduced to add choice and flexibility. Yet, in conversations with TAC helpline operatives, timeshare owners almost universally report frustration with how exchange systems work—even when they’re otherwise content with their membership.

So where do timeshare exchange systems go wrong?

Over-promised at the point of sale

There are three main active timeshare exchange companies: Interval International (II), Resort Condominiums International (RCI) and 7 Across (formerly Dial an Exchange). II has been bought by Marriott Vacation Club (MVC). RCI and 7 Across are both owned by hotel and timeshare giant Wyndham.

 

A major reason for dissatisfaction is that exchange benefits are usually explained by a timeshare salesperson focused on closing a deal. That salesperson will never have to deliver on what was implied, and the buyer may not discover any exaggerations for at least a year—long after the commission has been spent.

It suits everyone involved… except the customer. The resort signs up a new member, the salesperson earns their money, and the exchange brand (often RCI) gets talked up to the point where few new members are likely to refuse to join. The exchange company has plausible deniability: they didn’t speak to the buyer, so they can argue they didn’t mislead them.

Expensive fees for “flexibility”

Something rarely stressed by commission-driven sales reps is the true cost of using exchange systems.

There’s the cost to join, plus annual membership fees whether you exchange or not. You may pay extra to exchange to a different country or a different time of year. There are also fees to “bank” (save for another year) your week, or to borrow from the future.

 

 

These fees simply don’t apply to most holidaymakers. If someone paid £1,000 for a week in Spain last year and then chose a £1,000 week in Portugal this year, there’s no penalty for changing plans. In that sense, a timeshare exchange user often pays extra money to have more restrictions placed on their holidays.

Limited availability at the resorts people actually want

The most popular destinations and resorts get booked first: ski resorts in winter, Disney, and luxury Spanish resorts such as Anfi in summer. Put simply, if you want to go somewhere, the odds are plenty of other people do too.

Many buyers in lower-standard resorts did so after being told they could exchange into the best ones. But owners in top resorts are naturally less willing to give up prime accommodation for anything other than an equivalent standard.

The result: even when exchange customers provide first, second and third choices, their first-choice resort is often not granted.

Long booking windows—with no guarantee

Linked to the availability problem, members are often expected to book up to two years ahead for popular resorts and destinations. Even then, there’s no guarantee of securing your first choice.

Marriott Vacation Club" />

 

 

Timeshare customers complain that they often don’t know what they’ll be doing two years in advance, or even what kind of holiday they’ll want.

Points owners who still can’t get the dates they need

Many people were “upgraded” to points on the promise of greater flexibility. But unlike owning a week that fits their real-life needs (for example, school holidays or annual workplace shutdowns), they now have to take a chance on getting the weeks they want through exchange systems.

 

 

The switch to points also allowed resorts to sell far more memberships to people who needed a specific time of year than they were able to accommodate. Points owners regularly report calling at 9:00am on the morning their year-long booking window opens, only to be told they’re already too late and the resort is full.

Weeks rented to non-owners

Many see Wyndham’s ownership of RCI (and Marriott’s ownership of Interval International) as a conflict of interest. These exchange companies are believed to allow users from other customer bases to access timeshare units, which can make availability even tighter for owners trying to exchange.

Because many timeshare resorts now advertise units on mainstream booking sites to increase revenue, the member who has paid for ownership can sometimes only access their “home” resort by booking through those same sites.

Complicated and inflexible compared with normal travel

A regular holidaymaker has the world at their fingertips. If they want a weekend break in two weeks’ time, 10 days at the beach in June, a week skiing in December, or to hire an RV and tour the countryside, they open Google, click and book.

And if they don’t want a holiday this year, they book nothing and pay nothing.

Compare that with the timeshare owner. They must choose far in advance and follow the rules that come with exchanging: depositing their own week on time, listing first/second/third choices, registering within strict timeframes, and paying each additional fee by the deadline.

Changes can be so difficult that owners often don’t even try. Yet they still pay every year, whether they travel or not.

Shocking customer reputation

Online reviews of RCI and II are best summed up as abysmal. Out of a possible five stars on TrustPilot, Better Business Bureau and Consumer Affairs, they consistently receive the lowest possible rating of one star. Many comments say the one-star rating is only because it’s not possible to give zero.

Common themes include: lack of help securing an exchange (this customer had been waiting for over two years); rudeness and dishonesty (this customer cites “fraud and consumer abuse and stealing from hard working taxpayers”); and repeated attempts to extract more money (or, as this poster writes, “constant new ways to screw customers”).

“Deposit first” — then take your chances

Finally, one aspect of exchanging often shocks owners the first time they try to use it: you have to deposit your week first before requesting (let alone confirming) an alternative destination.

That’s right: your week must be given up first, before you have confirmation of any of your exchange choices. If you don’t get the destination you wanted, you no longer have access to your own week because it’s already been deposited into the system.

This can leave the unlucky owner forced to accept whatever happens to be available, rather than the holiday they actually wanted.

At that point, the only possibility of getting back into their own resort may be via an external exchange—meaning another hefty fee for the privilege.

Fed up with failed timeshare holidays?

If you’re a timeshare owner who feels trapped in an expensive holiday system, get in touch with our team at the Timeshare Advice Centre (the marketing arm of European Consumer Claims). In most cases we can help you escape your timeshare contract, and depending on the circumstances may be able to claim compensation if you were mis-sold.