It has been described as one of the largest frauds of its type in the UK.
In all 14 defendants have been sentenced for their part in a multi-million pound plot to defraud in excess of 3,500 holiday ownership investors.
The targets were eager to exit long-standing timeshare contracts and sought out support.
Most were in the age range of 60 and 80. In excess of 500 of them surrendered in excess of £10,000, and a single victim paid in excess of £80,000.
Those affected were subjected to high-pressure sales meetings extending for six hours. They were left out of pocket, owning useless fake "points" and still bound by expensive holiday ownership agreements they often use.
The firm at the core of the scheme was Sell My Timeshare (SMT). They accepted clients' cash to fund the directors' lavish standard of living of exclusive education, high-end properties and exclusive air travel.
The man at the top of the firm, the main defendant, was sentenced to a seven and a half year sentence in January for deceptive scheme.
On Friday, his wife one of the co-defendants was among the last group to hear their sentences.
She was given a two-year long suspended prison term at the judicial venue after confessing to money laundering.
It has been a long time coming and represents a major victory for the victims who came forward, the law enforcement and prosecutors.
The initial awareness of SMT emerged during the that particular year. The position was in the research department of a media outlet, producing current affairs programmes.
A colleague mentioned that his parent had taken over the use of a holiday property in the Spanish coast and, after decades of vacations, had begun looking to get out of the agreement.
It is important to recall how popular vacation properties had grown with UK travelers in the eighties and nineties.
Holiday ownership permitted people to occupy the equivalent unit every year, or exchange their time slots with fellow investors who had apartments in alternative destinations. Roughly 600,000 holiday enthusiasts accepted that opportunity.
The early surge was paired with a lot of reports about rip-off merchants mis-selling units. They became a staple on investigative TV programmes.
The common vacation property deal locked buyers for many years.
At that time, those investors who had enjoyed their assigned property in the sunshine for a long time were ageing, and many were looking to say farewell to their vacation investments.
A number had declining mobility and couldn't get to their units. Some just felt they'd enjoyed sufficient use from them. And a portion had deceased, in numerous instances passing on their loved ones to take over the deals - including their regular contributions and service charges.
This was the situation the friend's mum had found herself. She browsed the internet for options and came across SMT, a enterprise whose website promised to terminate her contract.
Yet, having made a payment and arranged an appointment with them, her loved ones had doubts.
Additional investigation showed hundreds of people claiming they had handed over cash and received no benefit from the service. In fact, they had suffered financially. Substantial amounts.
The investigative unit commenced probing what was occurring. It soon emerged that there were dubious individuals working within the vacation property industry.
An attorney had hundreds of individual complaints waiting to sue the company.
We spoke to people who had dealt with the organization and they each reported similar experiences. They thought the business would buy their property away from them but when they went to a consultation (for which they paid up front) they were informed there was no re-sale value.
Rather, they were encouraged - actually compelled - to spend more money acquiring "the company's points system", linked to the outfit's parent company, the overarching entity.
The nature of these rewards was somewhat vague. They seemed similar to a type of exchange medium, giving access to discount travel and amenities and shopping deals.
And they were seemingly "transferable with fellow investors, at a future date.
Paying cash at the time would produce an long-term benefit that would cover the firm's costs and leave the timeshare holder ahead financially, released finally from their pesky agreement.
An unrealistic promise? Well, yes.
Based on these descriptions were correct, this was a massive scam.
It's what is called a "misleading sales."
Someone - in this case the company - "lures the client by marketing a specific service but then to state it cannot be provided, directing the customer to another, inferior product or service.
This is against the law. Armed with all the evidence we had gathered, we argued to covertly record one of the company's meetings.
The process requires time, effort, and strong justifications for why this is the only way to gather the evidence needed to prove wrongdoing.
Armed with that permission, our compact group organized a meeting with one of the firm's agents in Stratford-Upon-Avon.
Posing as a potential client wanting to assist his parent out of her timeshare contract|holiday ownership agreement
Elena Voss is a seasoned journalist and editor with over a decade of experience in digital media, specializing in global affairs and tech trends.