If anyone is interested I have sent a letter to
DVC asking it to reconsider what it has done. We will see what happens. Pertinent portions of the letter are quoted here (note not mentioned below is that I also raised, or more or less reserved the ability to later raise, that total points for resorts have been increased but did not spend time on that issue):
BWV Reallocation
At BWV, the points needed for all standard view rooms – studios, 1BRs, and 2BRs – are increased from 2019 for 2020 for every season of the year except for a one point per night decrease for 2BRs for Monday through Thursday during Dream season. The preferred (including boardwalk) view studios have remained the same for Adventure season and increased for every other season, preferred 1BRs increase in Adventure, Choice and Premier season, and decrease in Dream and Magic season. The preferred view 2BRs are decreased for all seasons except Premier season (the shortest season of the year). The Grand Villas are decreased for all seasons.
The pertinent language of §3.3 [of the BWV DVC Member Agreement] is as follows:
"In order to meet Club Members’ needs and expectations as evidenced by fluctuations in Use Day demand at the Condominium experienced by DVCMC during a given calendar year, DVCMC may, in its sole discretion, increase or decrease the Home Resort Vacation Point requirements of a given Use Day within a given Vacation Home during the given calendar year…;provided, however, that the total number of Home Resort Vacation points existing within a given Unit at any time may not be increased or decreased because of such reallocation…. Any increase or decrease of the Home Resort Vacation Point Reservation requirement for a given Use Day pursuant to DVCMC’s right to make this Home Resort Vacation Point adjustment must be offset by a corresponding decrease or increase for another Use day or Use days….This right to reallocate Home Resort Vacation Points is reserved by DVCMC solely for adjusting the Home resort Reservation Component to accommodate Club Member demand.
A. A Point Increase in a Vacation Home Must Be Met by a Like Point Decrease in the Same Vacation Home.
Section 3.3 provides that DVCMC may “increase or decrease the [point] requirements of a given Use Day within a given Vacation Home during a calendar year,” but if it exercises that right as to a particular use day for a particular vacation home, the change made “must be offset by a corresponding decrease or increase in another Use day or Use days.” The clear sense of that second portion is that it refers back to the first. The offset required must be for the same vacation home. Raising points for studios in one season requires DVCMC to reduce points by an equal amount for the same studios in another season or seasons. The clause does not say, as DVCMC apparently believes, that it can offset a use day increase in one vacation home, such as a studio, with a decrease in a different vacation home, such as a 2BR. If that were allowed, the section would not say the use day change made must be offset by a change in “another” use day and instead would specifically say that offsetting decrease could be in a different vacation home.
The BWV
point chart proves how wrong DVCMC’s position is. It raises the points needed for all studios, and all standard 1BRs and 2BRs, for essentially every use day of the year and then attempts to offset that with decreases in different vacation homes, the preferred 2BRs and Grand Villas, for the
same use days of the year. The language requiring offsetting decreases on “another” use days is inexplicably stricken from the clause by what DVCMC has done and DVCMC’s interpretation renders the applicable clause meaningless.
B. The Point Charts Improperly Change the Total Points Applicable to Each Unit.
Section 3.3 provides that the total number of points in any given unit cannot be increased or decreased by a reallocation. A unit is usually one or more contingent vacation homes. Unit is defined as meaning the same as a condominium unit and a timeshare unit in the applicable statutes. See Fl Stats. §§718.103(27), 721.05(41). It is the unit in which a purchaser gets a percentage ownership interest and a set number of points. It is the unit that is subject to the “one-to-one use right to use right requirement ratio,” §721.05(25).
That prohibition against increasing or decreasing total points applicable to a unit is consistent with the requirement that any increase or decrease of points required for use days in a particular vacation home must be met with an equal decrease or increase in the same vacation home. Such assures that the particular vacation homes in the unit do not have any changes where points are increased but not then equally decreased in other use days so as to avoid any changes in total points applicable to the unit.
BWV consists of numerous units. There are units that are applicable to the standard view rooms and different ones applicable to preferred view rooms. The BWV point chart shows that DVCMC has raised the applicable points for all standard view vacation homes that exist in all the units that have standard view vacation homes, which is not allowed by §3.3. Likewise, with the reduction of the preferred 2BR lock-offs and Grand Villas, it appears the total points applicable to units with preferred view rooms in them have improperly been decreased.
Other Reallocations
Other resorts have the same kind of improper reallocations, where DVCMC assumed it could meet point increases in one type of vacation home with decreases in another on the same use days, and could change the total points applicable to a unit.
An obvious one is the reduction of points needed to reserve AKV value 1BRs and 2BRs throughout the year (value studios remained unchanged) and thus points for those those rooms have lowered without any required increase for other use days. The value units consist of only value vacation homes. Thus, the total points applicable to those units decreased and were apparently shifted to other units, which therefore were improperly increased. The savanna view Grand Villas stayed the same for adventure and choice season but decreased for the other seasons with no required increase on any use days. At Jambo, the Grand Villas make up their own units and thus total points were necessarily decreased for those units and apparently shifted to other units. Also, the studios other than value were raised for every use day of the year and thus have no required offsetting decrease in different use days.
The changes at the Polynesian resort improperly raised studios year-round, which was met by a point decrease in the bungalows for the same (not “another) use days year-round. Moreover, the bungalows are in separate units from the studios and thus the total points applicable to each and every unit in the resort changed. The changes at BLT include having all lake view studios, 1BRs, and 2BRs, go up for almost the entire year with no required decrease on different use days. All the lake view units containing those lake view vacation homes have applicable points improperly increased. Changes at Saratoga Springs include an increase in points needed for the Treehouses, studios, 1BRs and preferred Grand Villas year-round with offsetting decreases in most of the same (not “another”) use days for 2BRs. The treehouses are their own units and thus the points applicable to those units are improperly increased. At Copper Creek, the total points for the cabins, which are their own group of units, went down and studios and 1BRs all went up with no required offsetting decreases on different use days. At Boulder Ridge and OKW studio and 1BR points increased year-round, allegedly offset by a 2BR decrease in many of the same (not “another”) use days. At VGF the same occurred and the Grand Villas, their own units, were also raised with no offsetting decrease in total points applicable to the unit. At Beach Club, studios and 1BRs went up year-round, allegedly offset by a same year-round decrease for 2BRs.
The Point Changes Appear Arbitrary
Many of the changes appear arbitrary and do not properly address a change in use day demand or accommodate Club Member demand, the required bases for making any change. The decrease in points needed for AKV value rooms is non-sensical since those rooms have tended to book full at 11 months out, i.e., no decrease was needed. DVCMC increased the points for 1BRs throughout the year at the resorts but 1BRs have usually been the last rooms to fill, i.e., they needed no increase to meet any excess demand. At SSR, OKW and AKV, 1BRs are open most of the year well beyond 7 months out, and are usually open at other resorts at 7 months out during Dream, Magic, and Premier season, and much of Adventure season, but for no discernible reason DVCMC concluded those needed an increase in points year-round to diminish demand. Studios just normally have higher demand, and despite that studios are open much of the year at SSR and OKW at 7 months out, and open at many of the other resorts at 7 months out during Dream, Magic and Premier seasons, and the majority of Adventure season, DVCMC increased their points year-round. The points needed for Grand Villas were lowered year round at BWV even though those have high demand and usually fill before 7 months out. Moreover, no change in demand could possibly be accomplished by lowering high point Grand Villas year round by only two points per week. It does not appear DVCMC even considered differences in demand during the seasons in making changes. It appears that the main objective of this reallocation was not to address changes in demand or to accommodate Club Member demand, but simply to raise, without a reasonable basis for doing so, the points needed year-round for studios and 1BRs.
