Anyone extending their OKW contract?

[Debbie H]

If I were sitting on 2000 points and paying $8,000 a year in annual maintenance today, I think I'd be much more concerned that come 2042, annual maintenance is going to be $10 to $15/point and I'd be paying $20,000 to $30,000 a year!

We took that all into consideration when we purchased. We did not consider another 15 years because there is nothing in our contract concerning an extension. Trust me when I say, we get more than $8000 worth of vacations per year.

 

[JimC]

I agree with DVC92. I think the legality of it all is in question. There is nothing in our contract regarding an extension.

If a contract is silent on something it does not necessarily mean that it is illegal to do it.

 

[JimC]

If I were sitting on 2000 points and paying $8,000 a year in annual maintenance today, I think I'd be much more concerned that come 2042, annual maintenance is going to be $10 to $15/point and I'd be paying $20,000 to $30,000 a year!

That is only an issue if there is no adjustment in the costs of everything else. In the context of 2042 dollars that may be just as much a value then as the $8,000 is today.

 

[Debbie H]

If a contract is silent on something it does not necessarily mean that it is illegal to do it.

In my business, medicine, if it isn't documented, it didn't happen. I am talking about the legality of the way it was done. Did you vote on it? Did I? Did anyone else? I'm sure it was the powers that be at DVD who claim to have our best interest at heart. I think the only interest anyone at DVD has is what is best for DVD. I read on another thread that the guide (even though I really don't think they have any power) told this guy who just bought a few months ago that when they were doing this, they hadn't thought about them and he would see what he could do. The guide suggested email, but I am under the impression that we can't bring that up on the boards. (why I have no clue). It sounds as if they really didn't think this through. Just imho. I still want to see documentation besides a flashly card with a light in it.

DVC92 sounds as if he knows what he is talking about and knows the legality of all this. I'm looking forward to reading more of his posts.

 

[rsinj]

.

 

[DVC92]

Because someone you don't know who posts on an anonymous messageboard regarding a legal issue sounds like he knows what he's talking about is hardly a reason to believe him. I will ask again, who here is a real estate attorney who has reviewed the documentation or what is transpiring? The closest I've seen is a friend who posed it to the real estate attorney and the one who sounds like he knows what he's talking about just kept rambling right over it.

Let me ask, what are "you all" going to do about it? Post about it, rambling how it's not legal (in your minds), piss and moan about it, or speak with an attorney, pay for the legal advice, and take legal action to protect (what you believe) are your rights?

In the end, I say you will all simply go with the flow and just keep your 2042 contracts as they are not taking the extension - and that's fine. All the nonsense, theorizing, and raising a stink how DVC is screwing everyone is all for naught. Just think, only 5 more months of watching it!

This discussion board allows people to express their opinions with others. It seems most people who make statements attempt to support them with some sound reasoning. Whether you agree or not, that's fine, but it does stimulate thought and focus the issues. You made a conclusory statement concerning the legality of Disney's action. Instead of politely attempting to justify your conclusion, you hurl an insulting tirade. The discussion here doesn't mean legal or other action is not being pursued.

 

[CarolAnnC]

Ok a pause here to make a couple of points.

1) This is not the Debate Board. Everyone is free to make their opinions known and opinions are just that - they are not facts required to be substantiated by attorneys.

2) This thread is borderline right now and I would hate to see it closed since for the most part it has been stimulating and an enjoyable discussion. If there is any further argumentative, baiting or sarcastic posting there will be infraction points awarded. Please take this as a warning.

Now if we can get back to the discussion topic at hand, that would be great.

 

[DVC92]

I agree with DVC92. I think the legality of it all is in question. There is nothing in our contract regarding an extension.

Thanks for your support.

Please check your private messages.

 

[beccasmom]

We will be in our mid-80-'s, God willing. We expect (and pray) to still be vital and still traveling then, but who knows? We will be passing this one by. We might have given it a second thought if we were about 15 years younger though.

 

[JimC]

In my business, medicine, if it isn't documented, it didn't happen. I am talking about the legality of the way it was done. Did you vote on it? Did I? Did anyone else?....

I understand, medical practices and procedures are different. My wife and I both have health care experience.

We signed over to DVC the governance provisions of our ownership. That is why the meetings are conducted as they are. I think it makes sense for DVC to operate the program that way, particularly with the special district (RCID) situation.

I still have some difficulty understanding the uproar on this. But we each must do what we believe is best. It has been a thought provoking thread -- as have a number of others on this topic of the OKW extension. There certainly have been plenty of differing views and that makes for good discourse.

 

[Debbie H]

Because someone you don't know who posts on an anonymous messageboard regarding a legal issue sounds like he knows what he's talking about is hardly a reason to believe him. I will ask again, who here is a real estate attorney who has reviewed the documentation or what is transpiring? The closest I've seen is a friend who posed it to the real estate attorney and the one who sounds like he knows what he's talking about just kept rambling right over it.

Let me ask, what are "you all" going to do about it? Post about it, rambling how it's not legal (in your minds), piss and moan about it, or speak with an attorney, pay for the legal advice, and take legal action to protect (what you believe) are your rights?

In the end, I say you will all simply go with the flow and just keep your 2042 contracts as they are not taking the extension - and that's fine. All the nonsense, theorizing, and raising a stink how DVC is screwing everyone is all for naught. Just think, only 5 more months of watching it!

I understand what Carol wrote, but I must add that we are trying to keep this as a discussion and just because some of us don't agree with others does not mean some comments should be insulting. No one knows who knows who on these boards. Some of us have been owners very early on and believe it or not met each other. So, lets agree on disagreeing and keep the insults for another place.

 

[Debbie H]

Thanks for your support.

Please check your private messages.

Your welcome!

 

[Debbie H]

The fact remains that the majority of OKW contracts do not have any extension clause in them.

I know ours does not have the extension clause, do the later ones and if so, when did that start? I would assume that for the people who have the contracts with the extension provision in them, they do not have a problem with it because it was documented. You would think that somewhere along the line DVD would have added an addendum to the earlier contracts. I just don't like being blind-sided with something I do not fully understand.

 

[disneymayz]

I am sorry , I have read most of this tread and am not getting the legal issue. Is it not as simple as we have a choice:
1) pay 15/point and get another 15 years
or
2) do not pay anything, sign paper saying you do not want it, and it expires 2042

I think that Disney prob. has one of the best lawyers so i would think that they are doing everything legal.

I am not asking for a big history on the way contracts are worded. Would just like a short and sweet explaination if poss.

Thank you

 

[Debbie H]

I am sorry , I have read most of this tread and am not getting the legal issue. Is it not as simple as we have a choice:
1) pay 15/point and get another 15 years
or
2) do not pay anything, sign paper saying you do not want it, and it expires 2042

I think that Disney prob. has one of the best lawyers so i would think that they are doing everything legal.

I am not asking for a big history on the way contracts are worded. Would just like a short and sweet explaination if poss.

Thank you

Well, #1 it is not written into the earlier contracts. It says 2042 it ends.

#2 for anyone who does not extend, they just devalued the investment. Anyone who does not extend and wants or needs to sell their points in say 5 years, will not get much out of them, especially when there are contracts out there with the additional 15 years.

#3 Just because they are Disney, does not mean they do everything legal. Frankly I don't think any company does, ie, Enron, Tyco. I'm sure they had the best lawyers too. I think it is a mistake to think they do everything legally.

#4, pay in full by 2/29/08 and it is $15 a point, pay 3/1/08 and it is $25. And what about all those people that bought 1 month ago or more on resales? They got royally scr***d!

That is just a few of the things.

 

[Disney Doll]

DH & I have had this cinversation. We, too, will be in our 80's when the contract ends.

Our only thought is that it would make the contract hold its value better with the extension. So...if we had to sell it somewhere in the future, it would be worth more with the extension.

Also, then your heirs would get the benfit of it for a longer time.

Those are the 2 "pros". The con is the cost.

Basically, we have no idea.

 

[Disney Doll]

You guys are assuming that Disney will allow the 42's to pass ROFR. I think they will ROFR them all and slap on the extention thus forcing the conversion as families exit the system (and making a nice profit in the process). I wouldn't be suprized if they could manipulate the price after Febuary of the 'enhanced' contracts to maintain the $25 price difference.

In fact that may make all the prices jump (in anticipation of other extentions).... and allow them to charge really big bucks for the CRV.....

You are probably right. DH's theory is that the price per point of OKW resales will decrease dramatically for those contracts not extended.

 

[disneymayz]

Well, #1 it is not written into the earlier contracts. It says 2042 it ends.

#2 for anyone who does not extend, they just devalued the investment. Anyone who does not extend and wants or needs to sell their points in say 5 years, will not get much out of them, especially when there are contracts out there with the additional 15 years.

#3 Just because they are Disney, does not mean they do everything legal. Frankly I don't think any company does, ie, Enron, Tyco. I'm sure they had the best lawyers too. I think it is a mistake to think they do everything legally.

#4, pay in full by 2/29/08 and it is $15 a point, pay 3/1/08 and it is $25. And what about all those people that bought 1 month ago or more on resales? They got royally scr***d!

That is just a few of the things.

All my opinions are based regarding my non-wealthy family that will be going to Disney World for another 35 years and staying at a Deluxe Villa. The DVC purchase that will have paid for itself (based on todays room rates and 4% increase in dues) in 2012. In 5 years we will be over $1000 ahead of what it would have cost us to go on cash.

We bought reslae (70 points) in July '07. We paid $80/point. Add the 15 and we are at what Disney is going to be selling it for. As I stated earlier in this thread we will pay $1050 to extend and will get 15 more years. I am getting 50 years for $7000.

70 points lets us go (if we only stayed OKW) 2 years off 1 then 3 off 1 then 2 off 1 then 3 and so on. And all of this with out having to pay $16,000 to get into DVC. We do not have that kind of money and resale was the only way we could get "in".

I understand what the concern is for people that do not want to extend now.
As for the value going down. I am looking forward to that. If it was selling and passing at $80, then it may go down to $65/point for 2042 contracts. I would buy more points and lose them in 2042. This will make it a bonus for the people that want to buy resale for add ons. I also think that Disney may not let them sell for that low.

Illegal, whithin the company there is stuff that is happing illegal. Again my opinion is , that with this many "outside" Disney people being affected they have looked at the legal stuff.

AGAIN this is my opinion and I know and understand that EVERY family is diff.

 

[DVC92]

70 points lets us go (if we only stayed OKW) 2 years off 1 then 3 off 1 then 2 off 1 then 3 and so on. And all of this with out having to pay $16,000 to get into DVC. We do not have that kind of money and resale was the only way we could get "in".

I understand what the concern is for people that do not want to extend now.
As for the value going down. I am looking forward to that. If it was selling and passing at $80, then it may go down to $65/point for 2042 contracts. I would buy more points and lose them in 2042. This will make it a bonus for the people that want to buy resale for add ons.

A word of caution on thinking everything Disney does is good and just. You may stand to personally benefit from Disney's questionable extension endeavor at the expense of fellow members when they wish to sell their 2042 ownership interests if those resales drop in price. However, if you are not able to expand your ownership interest by buying up those resales on the cheap, there are actions DVC might undertake in the future that are surely within their legal purview that may not be beneficial to someone with only 70 points. How will you see Disney if they choose to suspend banking and borrowing privileges, which Disney maintains the right to do at any time? Such action would appear to be extremely detrimental to someone with a small yearly allocation of points. This is not to say that I don't wish you and everyone else enjoys whatever ownership interest they have to the fullest for as long as they wish, only that Disney abides by my contract under Florida law.

 

[georgeat]

What is it that people do not understand about "CHOICE"? Everyone can make a choice. If the ship is sinking get off as soon as possible. But if you think it will be safe stay aboard.