Arguing what would happen in a court separate from what the contract says without going to court and without directly applicable case law in FL really doesn't have much meaning.
But the total hasn't changed as it is based on the non locked off villas.
I just find it interesting that DVC felt the need to overdub and change what had been sent out to people already...
Do you honestly think that would fly as an explanation in a legal proceeding? I don’t know the answer (I have a Masters in French lit & Classics), but I’d bet no, especially since...
Any change or no change would be based on the non locked version. This is per the POS AND FL statute.
Absolutely. I know we're going in circles but this is clear cut as I read it. Specifically FL statue says the lockoff's are counted as a full villa unless designated otherwise, DVC has NOT designated otherwise. The points formulation is clearly laid out as being derived from the full villa accounting. The lockoff premium was there from the get go. There is no wording that specifically precludes the increase of the lockoff premium. As a contractual matter, I see it as open and shut. Now we never know what will happen if something gets to court so my interpretation is that it says what it says unless one can prove otherwise. The option is always there to go the legal route. But remember that the POS also has the requirement of waiver of a jury trial which stacks the odds further in their favor. Certainly if one can prove they did this for nefarious reasons, I'm there with you. But I still find it difficult to think anyone would want to continue to subjugate themselves to a system they distrusted so much, esp when they have an easy out.
The chart yes but not the legal points structure.
I don't read or hear it that way. General statements don't define specific situations. Plus when you purchase you acknowledge that verbal representations are non binding.
Not that I'm aware of, like the rest of you I'd like to know specifically why they did this and have enough information to understand it fully.
My interpretation, having dealt with them over the years, is the single best explanation is they didn't have the stomach/backbone for the complaints. This is a trend I've seen from them for years though I thought it'd changed/gotten better. Personally I prefer consistency. But I can't 'speak for them and historically they don't release much info even when I feel they should. It's just speculation on our part, a partial answer should come in the next couple of years as we see what they do or don't do.
It doesn't state otherwise and the POS specifically says what it says which is very clear on how the points are formulated..
BTW - since Disney may monitor these boards - if you are reading this and in need of a data analyzer -one that could make the system better without resorting to unfair practices - I would be willing to relocate. (I currently manage about 35 people and ~$5 million worth of project budgets so I have the background in project management as well.) Resume and references available upon request.
so if you change your tune in 6 months from now, we'll all know you sold out!
Fear of a lawsuit that they didn't want to take a chance they would lose and then have to follow rules dictated by the outcome of the lawsuit. There may be other things discovered that they have done in the past that they may have to unwind.
