It has been described as one of the largest frauds of its kind in the UK.
In all 14 defendants have been sentenced for their role in a multi-million pound scheme to defraud in excess of 3,500 holiday ownership owners.
The targets were keen to exit decades-old timeshare contracts and sought out help.
Most were from 60 and 80. Over 500 of them lost over £10,000, and one individual paid more than £80,000.
Those targeted were exposed to intense sales meetings lasting up to six hours. They were left out of pocket, possessing worthless fake "points" and still bound by costly vacation property deals they could no longer use.
The business at the heart of the scam was Sell My Timeshare (SMT). They accepted people's money to support the directors' luxurious way of life of exclusive education, luxury homes and private jets.
The man at the top of the company, the main defendant, was given a 90-month jail time in January for deceptive scheme.
Recently, his spouse one of the co-defendants was part of the concluding cases to learn their fate.
She received a two-year long suspended prison term at the London court after confessing to illegal fund handling.
The outcome represents a lengthy process and represents a major victory for the people who spoke out, the authorities and prosecutors.
The first knowledge of the firm was in the that particular year. I was working in the research department of a broadcasting service, producing current affairs features.
A friend mentioned that his parent had assumed the use of a holiday property in a European resort and, after long-term use, had started seeking to terminate the agreement.
It should be noted how common vacation properties had grown with English tourists in the eighties and nineties.
Timeshares enabled people to use the identical property every year, or exchange their vacation periods with other owners who had properties in alternative destinations. About 600,000 holiday enthusiasts accepted that option.
The early surge was linked to a many accounts about unscrupulous sellers deceptively promoting units. They became a staple on consumer shows.
The standard vacation property deal bound owners for decades.
At that time, those owners who had used their regular accommodation in the sun for decades were getting older, and a large proportion were looking to say farewell to their holiday properties.
Several had health issues and couldn't get to their properties. Some just felt they'd enjoyed sufficient use from them. And some had deceased, in frequent situations bequeathing their heirs to inherit the contracts - including their regular contributions and service charges.
This was the situation the friend's mum had ended up. She searched the web for solutions and came across SMT, a enterprise whose online presence claimed to release her from her deal.
Yet, having submitted funds and booked a meeting with them, her family smelled a rat.
Additional investigation revealed many victims reporting they had handed over cash and received no benefit out of it. In fact, they had been left out of pocket. Substantial amounts.
The reporting group began investigating what was occurring. It quickly became clear that there were dubious individuals active in the vacation property industry.
An attorney had hundreds of individual complaints aiming to litigate against the company.
Reporters contacted people who had dealt with the organization and they each reported similar experiences. They believed the firm would purchase their timeshare off them but when they attended a meeting (for which they paid up front) they were advised there was no potential buyers.
In place of that, they were pushed - in fact pressured - to spend more money acquiring "Monster Rewards", named after the business's umbrella group, the parent organization.
The nature of these rewards was somewhat vague. They sounded like a kind of currency, providing discount travel and benefits and consumer discounts.
And they were apparently "transferable with additional holders, at a future date.
Paying cash immediately would lead to an eventual payoff that would pay for the company's charges and result in the property owner with a gain, freed at last from their troublesome agreement.
An unbelievable offer? Well, yes.
Assuming these reports were accurate, this was a massive scam.
It's what is called a "deceptive marketing."
Someone - specifically the company - "baits" the customer by advertising a defined offering and then state it cannot be provided, pushing the individual towards another, inferior product or service.
Such practices are unlawful. Armed with all the evidence we had assembled, we argued to secretly film one of the company's meetings.
This takes commitment, energy, and clear arguments for why this is the exclusive approach to obtain the evidence required to confirm deceptive practices.
Armed with that permission, our small team arranged a meeting with one of the company's representatives in the location.
Posing as a ordinary individual aiming to get his mum out of her timeshare contract|holiday ownership agreement
Maya Sterling is a film critic with over a decade of experience, passionate about uncovering hidden gems in cinema.