Are the Days of Walking a DVC Reservation Numbered?

[thanxfornoticin]

You keep saying it's within the current rules but in most cases it's not. The booking system allows it but not the rules.

They make the rules, then they made the booking system fit the rules as best as they can. They are 2 separate things. Computer programs aren't perfect. Just because the system lets you do it does not mean it is within the rules

It might be an unpopular unintended consequence of the ownership rules, but walking does not actually break any DVC rules! Owners can book at 11 months at their home resort and owners can modify. That's essentially what walking is, like it or not. Could changes be made to curb it? I guess we'll see. But no one is breaking DVC rules and the online system doesn't change the rules for walkers. You cannot book before 11 months.

 

[Sandisw]

It just seemed weird they went out of their way to mention the last 60 days of a Use Year, and made that a separate point. If it’s like normal holding point bookings, why bother mentioning and using the word any. Maybe you could’ve pushed back but I bet that 3BR GV was alot more FUN! Lol.

It think because that is the only penalty we have, they want to include that beyond the 60 day and expiring restriction, no other applies.

That language has always been there, well before restrictions.

 

[Tatebeck]

Please show me in the rules where it says you have to confirm you want that day as an actually day to visit.

And, this has been around well before a computer system. You called MS, told them what you wanted to book and they booked it.

You called the next day and moved it. No asking why…

If you want to keep saying it’s the rule, then show me the rule that says what you are saying.

It seems to me your contention is that DVc can stop or prevent any booking if they don’t like the reason why someone booked it.

That is simply not true. An owner’s reason for booking a room are irrelevant. I can booked today any room within the window just to be a jerk. DVC can’t stop me.

AGAIN, it doesn't say that it has to be a day that you "want to visit" - as you said you can leave the room empty if you wish. They never say anything about desire to physically stay in a room. The rules are very specific in their wording.

I have posted it many times but here you go again... "Members may call Member Services or make a reservation online via the DVC Website no earlier than eleven (11) months prior to the desired check in day for a reservation"

Each reservation can only have 1 check in day. The definition of a check in day is the day your reservation will start. You cannot choose or ever have 2 check in days for a reservation.

You choose your desired check in day, then that determines if you are able to book yet.

If I start walking a reservation today solely for a stay next Christmas, my desired check in day is 12/25 and is over 11 months away. If I want to lie and say that my desired check in day is different to secure a reservation that I can modify forward later, I have now broken the 11 month FCFS rules. If Disney believes I have done so, they can now choose to do something about it or not.

Before they added the computer system and changed to check in day booking, there was no walking. You could not call before other members were eligible to book and extend your stay. You were calling each day and competing for any other members that wanted to book that day and any days further into the window, but you were NOT allowed in any way to book the day 11 months out ahead of anyone else.

And yes DVC can stop or prevent any booking if they feel it was not made within the rules.
"Use of Vacation Homes and recreational facilities for commercial purposes or any purpose other than the personal use described herein is expressly prohibited"

It does not say for any personal use, but any personal use "described herein" the rules. If you make a reservation, and they feel it was not for personal use, or was not within the rules (even if it was for personal use), then they can choose to do something about it if they wish, also as part of the rules. Just because they have chosen not to do anything doesn't mean that they can't do something.

"DVC Operator shall have the right to temporarily modify, adjust, or amend these Rules and Regulations, or suspend enforcement of, or make exceptions to enforcement of or adherence to, these Rules and Regulations"

 

[Sandisw]

AGAIN, it doesn't say that it has to be a day that you "want to visit" - as you said you can leave the room empty if you wish. They never say anything about desire to physically stay in a room. The rules are very specific in their wording.

I have posted it many times but here you go again... "Members may call Member Services or make a reservation online via the DVC Website no earlier than eleven (11) months prior to the desired check in day for a reservation"

Each reservation can only have 1 check in day. The definition of a check in day is the day your reservation will start.

You choose your desired check in day, then that determines if you are able to book yet.

If I start walking a reservation today solely for a stay next Christmas, my desired check in day is 12/25 and is over 11 months away. If I want to lie and say that my desired check in day is different to secure a reservation that I can modify forward later, I have now broken the 11 month FCFS rules. If Disney believes I have done so, they can now choose to do something about it or not.

Before they added the computer system and changed to check in day booking, there was no walking. You could not call before other members were eligible to book and extend your stay. You were calling each day and competing for any other members that wanted to book that day and any days further into the window, but you were NOT allowed in any way to book the day 11 months out ahead of anyone else.

And yes DVC can stop or prevent any booking if they feel it was not made within the rules.
"Use of Vacation Homes and recreational facilities for commercial purposes or any purpose other than the personal use described herein is expressly prohibited"

It does not say for any personal use, but any personal use "described herein" the rules. If you make a reservation, and they feel it was not for personal use, or was not within the rules, they can choose to do something about it if they wish, also as part of the rules.

"DVC Operator shall have the right to temporarily modify, adjust, or amend these Rules and Regulations, or suspend enforcement of, or make exceptions to enforcement of or adherence to, these Rules and Regulations"

I am going to agree to move on. No one is saying DVc can’t change rules. But you don’t change rules unless the rules don’t work.

And you absolutely could walk when the phone system was in place. It did not start with online. It just became easier.

MS never stopped anyone from changing rooms. Owners were booking a week and the calling back and moving it again.

Leave it there.

 

[Tatebeck]

I am going to agree to move on. No one is saying DVc can’t change rules. But you don’t change rules unless the rules don’t work.

And you absolutely could walk when the phone system was in place. It did not start with online. It just became easier.

MS never stopped anyone from changing rooms. Owners were booking a week and the calling back and moving it again.

Leave it there.

Ohhh I was under the impression they switched to online booking at the same time they switched from check out to check in booking? Did they do one before the other? Then there may have been phone walking before online walking. I will admit I don't know as much about the old system as I was not a member during that time.

They may do something without changing the rules, but just by changing how the booking system works or how they enforce things. Or they could change or clarify some rules because some members find them too ambiguous. But being ambiguous does help DVC in some ways because they are the ones who get to decide if you have broken their rules and whether to enforce or not. But right, we have no information about any specifics yet, just "more to come"

 

[Sandisw]

Oh I was under the impression they switched to online booking at the same time they switched from check out to check in booking? Did they do one before the other? Then there may have been phone walking before online walking. I will admit I don't know as much about the old system as I was not a member during that time.

They may do something without changing the rules, but just by changing how the booking system works or how they enforce things. Or they could change or clarify some rules because some members find them too ambiguous. But being ambiguous does help DVC in some ways because they are the ones who get to decide if you have broken their rules and whether to enforce or not. But right, we have no information about any specifics yet, just "more to come"

The move to check out to check in happened in 2007 or 2008.

I have been an owner since 2009. The 11 month plus 7 day check in was in place then.

Online system started on 2013? When the rule was book check out day, they had the opposite situation to waking.

It was never intended for owners to book day by day. But, what was happening to people who were waiting to book the whole trip from check out day, they were finding missing days because owners had decided to book day by day.

It was just like walking in reverse. Was not against the rules but it was not what was intended so they changed it.

Once it changed, again, they assumed it would be better since owners could book a whole trip at once, never thinking about the concept of walking.

Online system made it much easier to do and why it common practice now.

When people had to call, some might have felt “guilty” because they had to talk to a real person so not as many did it.

But, they definitely did…but back then, you didn’t have as many owners, as many smaller contracts, and as many resorts.

Basically, both ways of bookings had loopholes in them that owners exploited because you can’t enforce a rule that requires one to prove intent.

That’s why I believe that any changes…and I am not convinced we will see them…will not be done unless they don’t end up with a situation that the average owner sees as worse.

IMO, limits to changing a reservation has a high probability of being seen as a negative rather than a positive for owners who don’t know about the concept of walking and don’t understand why DVC would do it.

With the attention to commercial renting, I’d expect that will stay priority in 2025.

 

[Tatebeck]

The move to check out to check in happened in 2007 or 2008.

I have been an owner since 2009. The 11 month plus 7 day check in was in place then.

Online system started on 2013? When the rule was book check out day, they had the opposite situation to waking.

It was never intended for owners to book day by day. But, what was happening to people who were waiting to book the whole trip from check out day, they were finding missing days because owners had decided to book day by day.

It was just like walking in reverse. Was not against the rules but it was not what was intended so they changed it.

Once it changed, again, they assumed it would be better since owners could book a whole trip at once, never thinking about the concept of walking.

Online system made it much easier to do and why it common practice now.

When people had to call, some might have felt “guilty” because they had to talk to a real person so not as many did it.

But, they definitely did…but back then, you didn’t have as many owners, as many smaller contracts, and as many resorts.

Basically, both ways of bookings had loopholes in them that owners exploited because you can’t enforce a rule that requires one to prove intent.

That’s why I believe that any changes…and I am not convinced we will see them…will not be done unless they don’t end up with a situation that the average owner sees as worse.

IMO, limits to changing a reservation has a high probability of being seen as a negative rather than a positive for owners who don’t know about the concept of walking and don’t understand why DVC would do it.

With the attention to commercial renting, I’d expect that will stay priority in 2025.

Oh yeah then they definitely had phone walkers for a while lol.

Definitely on board with taking out the major commercial renters then seeing if any further modifications are necessary to their system as-is.

 

[Chili327]

AGAIN, it doesn't say that it has to be a day that you "want to visit" - as you said you can leave the room empty if you wish. They never say anything about desire to physically stay in a room. The rules are very specific in their wording.

- - - - - - -
Each reservation can only have 1 check in day. The definition of a check in day is the day your reservation will start. You cannot choose or ever have 2 check in days for a reservation.

You choose your desired check in day, then that determines if you are able to book yet.

If I start walking a reservation today solely for a stay next Christmas, my desired check in day is 12/25 and is over 11 months away. If I want to lie and say that my desired check in day is different to secure a reservation that I can modify forward later, I have now broken the 11 month FCFS rules. If Disney believes I have done so, they can now choose to do something about it or not.
- - - - - - - - -
Before they added the computer system and changed to check in day booking, there was no walking. You could not call before other members were eligible to book and extend your stay. You were calling each day and competing for any other members that wanted to book that day and any days further into the window, but you were NOT allowed in any way to book the day 11 months out ahead of anyone else.

And yes DVC can stop or prevent any booking if they feel it was not made within the rules.
"Use of Vacation Homes and recreational facilities for commercial purposes or any purpose other than the personal use described herein is expressly prohibited"

It does not say for any personal use, but any personal use "described herein" the rules. If you make a reservation, and they feel it was not for personal use, or was not within the rules (even if it was for personal use), then they can choose to do something about it if they wish, also as part of the rules. Just because they have chosen not to do anything doesn't mean that they can't do something.

"DVC Operator shall have the right to temporarily modify, adjust, or amend these Rules and Regulations, or suspend enforcement of, or make exceptions to enforcement of or adherence to, these Rules and Regulations"

I didn't want to edit out the rest of your post, but you keep coming back to this, & I'm surprised because it's one of those things that you CANNOT EVER PROVE what a persons original intent is/was, so it is pointless and irrelevant to any rule making, or debate, its completely irrelevant. lol

In your example for Christmas next year, you can NOT assume someone's original idea wasn't to check in on Nov 18th, & then they changed their mind to go for Xmas instead. THAT is the point, there is no way for you or anyone else to EVER determine that (especially Disney).

So I'm not sure why it keeps coming up as breaking a rule, when it isn't something anyone could ever prove... And even if they could prove it, what would be the difference if someone actually did intend to go in Nov, then changed their mind to go for Xmas, how would you possibly treat them different or know any different.??

 

[tx911]

I didn't want to edit out the rest of your post, but you keep coming back to this, & I'm surprised because it's one of those things that you CANNOT EVER PROVE what a persons original intent is/was, so it is pointless and irrelevant to any rule making, or debate, its completely irrelevant. lol

In your example for Christmas next year, you can NOT assume someone's original idea wasn't to check in on Nov 18th, & then they changed their mind to go for Xmas instead. THAT is the point, there is no way for you or anyone else to EVER determine that (especially Disney).

So I'm not sure why it keeps coming up as breaking a rule, when it isn't something anyone could ever prove... And even if they could prove it, what would be the difference if someone actually did intend to go in Nov, then changed their mind to go for Xmas, how would you possibly treat them different or know any different.??

It's pretty clear that walking is not against the rules as written.

I see it as a perversion of the normal booking system in order to gain personal advantage over other users. As such it is undesirable in my mind. If it becomes a big enough issue, DVC may do something about it that none of us like.

 

[Sandisw]

It's pretty clear that walking is not against the rules as written.

I see it as a perversion of the normal booking system in order to gain personal advantage over other users. As such it is undesirable in my mind. If it becomes a big enough issue, DVC may do something about it that none of us like.

This subject comes up every year and this is pretty much the take.

The rules allow it but some want the system change to curb or get rid of it. I do agree with you that if they do change the bookings rules. It’s likely that even those that don’t like waking might not get a better system.

Cancel and rebook for all date changes is what I fear most.

 

[Tatebeck]

I didn't want to edit out the rest of your post, but you keep coming back to this, & I'm surprised because it's one of those things that you CANNOT EVER PROVE what a persons original intent is/was, so it is pointless and irrelevant to any rule making, or debate, its completely irrelevant. lol

In your example for Christmas next year, you can NOT assume someone's original idea wasn't to check in on Nov 18th, & then they changed their mind to go for Xmas instead. THAT is the point, there is no way for you or anyone else to EVER determine that (especially Disney).

So I'm not sure why it keeps coming up as breaking a rule, when it isn't something anyone could ever prove... And even if they could prove it, what would be the difference if someone actually did intend to go in Nov, then changed their mind to go for Xmas, how would you possibly treat them different or know any different.??

Again, it is similar to commercial use. Only the member knows if when they bought a contract or when they made a reservation it was specifically for commercial use. Disney cannot read minds and know what the intent was. All they can do is look at the data they have and decide how it seems or what they (Disney) think is going on. They are the ones who get to determine if they consider it commercial activity or if it breaks booking rules, not you. It is possible that if they tried to enforce the rules more heavily that some legitimate booking members get their reservations cancelled. It is also possible that people breaking the rules will make it through. No system is perfect.

If it happens once its probably fine and they legitimately had to change dates. They obviously do not want to stop all modifications because it would be very restrictive. But if they notice that the same thing happens every year, IE once they have a strong pattern of activity, it becomes less of a guessing game and more likely.

It's pretty clear that walking is not against the rules as written.

I see it as a perversion of the normal booking system in order to gain personal advantage over other users. As such it is undesirable in my mind. If it becomes a big enough issue, DVC may do something about it that none of us like.

We'll just have to agree to disagree as well. In my mind it is very clear that it is against the rules as written, but parts of the rules are left ambiguous by design, so that Disney can decide when they think something has gone too far

There is specific wording in the rules that leads me and others to believe that walking is against the rules. I have seen nothing posted from the rules that says it is okay however.

 

[tx911]

We'll just have to agree to disagree as well. In my mind it is very clear that it is against the rules as written, but parts of the rules are left ambiguous by design, so that Disney can decide when they think something has gone too far

There is specific wording in the rules that leads me and others to believe that walking is against the rules. I have seen nothing posted from the rules that says it is okay however.

What I mean is, there's ambiguity. They don't come out and say specifically you can't do x, y, and z.
But I agree with you that the "spirit" of the rules is, don't walk.

 

[Leight19]

There is specific wording in the rules that leads me and others to believe that walking is against the rules. I have seen nothing posted from the rules that says it is okay however.

Idk why I keep letting myself get drug into this discussion but there absolutely is nothing in the rules that say walking is against the rules. You are leaning on the word “desired” to somehow jump to the conclusion that means it bans walking when it’s clearly allowed. If you call today and ask Dvc to walk the room for you they will walk it because it’s not against the rules to walk it.

 

[Sandisw]

Again, it is similar to commercial use. Only the member knows if when they bought a contract or when they made a reservation it was specifically for commercial use. Disney cannot read minds and know what the intent was. All they can do is look at the data they have and decide how it seems or what they (Disney) think is going on. They are the ones who get to determine if they consider it commercial activity or if it breaks booking rules, not you. It is possible that if they tried to enforce the rules more heavily that some legitimate booking members get their reservations cancelled. It is also possible that people breaking the rules will make it through. No system is perfect.

If it happens once its probably fine and they legitimately had to change dates. They obviously do not want to stop all modifications because it would be very restrictive. But if they notice that the same thing happens every year, IE once they have a strong pattern of activity, it becomes less of a guessing game and more likely.

We'll just have to agree to disagree as well. In my mind it is very clear that it is against the rules as written, but parts of the rules are left ambiguous by design, so that Disney can decide when they think something has gone too far

The reason it’s not the same as commercial renting is that the language for that says it prohibited and what actions an owner does could be deemed a violation.

You can not compare the two because the language of one is very clear.

While DVC can decide to not to enforce a rule…like the currently do with transfers, the contract outlines what will happen if you are caught.

But DVC has to be able to tell you the rule you broke in order to take action. And since the rules under the heading about changes and cancellation of a reservation say nothing about DVC being able to do cancel a room, then they have no authority to do it.

Even if we go with your opinion regarding the word desired, the rules would have to state they have the right to cancel your room if they feel you booked rooms with bad intent.

ETA: There is language in the rules under the heading “Cancellations and Changes”. Thst section discusses what happens when you cancel a trip and what outcomes occur. Because it does not have any rules listed to penalize an owner for changes..it means there currently are none

In order for DVC to penalize an owner for walking…changing the dates of a reservation…they would need to include that in the rules…they did not and that is why walking breaks no rule.

ETA 2: the rules for OTU points don’t say you can buy them for a fake trip and then cancel so you have them online to use at 8 am. It just says you must buy them when making a reservation.

 

[Chili327]

If you call today and ask Dvc to walk the room for you they will walk it because it’s not against the rules to walk it.

I'd say that is definite proof that walking is NOT against the rules, whatsoever.

 

[Tatebeck]

The reason it’s not the same as commercial renting is that the language for that says it prohibited and what actions an owner does could be deemed a violation.

You can not compare the two because the language of one is very clear.

While DVC can decide to not to enforce a rule…like the currently do with transfers, the contract outlines what will happen if you are caught.

But DVC has to be able to tell you the rule you broke in order to take action. And since the rules under the heading about changes and cancellation of a reservation say nothing about DVC being able to do cancel a room, then they have no authority to do it.

Even if we go with your opinion regarding the word desired, the rules would have to state they have the right to cancel your room if they feel you booked rooms with bad intent.

ETA: There is language in the rules under the heading “Cancellations and Changes”. Thst section discusses what happens when you cancel a trip and what outcomes occur. Because it does not have any rules listed to penalize an owner for changes..it means there currently are none

In order for DVC to penalize an owner for walking…changing the dates of a reservation…they would need to include that in the rules…they did not and that is why walking breaks no rule.

Interesting, I haven't heard this argument before. So you are saying they have to specifically list what they can do as punishment for each section and each type of rule violation?

In my searches I have never seen that they say "we will cancel reservations if we think it is commercial activity" but they have indeed cancelled rooms they felt were being used in a commercial activity. Did I miss this wording in the rules somewhere? Serious question, as I may have just missed it.

 

[Tatebeck]

Idk why I keep letting myself get drug into this discussion but there absolutely is nothing in the rules that say walking is against the rules. You are leaning on the word “desired” to somehow jump to the conclusion that means it bans walking when it’s clearly allowed. If you call today and ask Dvc to walk the room for you they will walk it because it’s not against the rules to walk it.

I'd say that is definite proof that walking is NOT against the rules, whatsoever.

I still disagree. It just means that they are not assuming your intentions and/or choosing not to enforce that part of the rules, which is their right according to the rules.

 

[Sandisw]

I'd say that is definite proof that walking is NOT against the rules, whatsoever.

Exaclty! If you call today with another owner to transfer points and tell them that you are getting paid, the CM will not process the transfer because you are not allowed to get paid.

 

[Tatebeck]

Exaclty! If you call today with another owner to transfer points and tell them that you are getting paid, the CM will not process the transfer because you are not allowed to get paid.

But just like asking for a walking modification, they will let you transfer if you say nothing about the reason and just ask for it, even if the reason was technically against the rules (ie receiving money for the transfer)

 

[VGCgroupie]

Again, it is similar to commercial use. Only the member knows if when they bought a contract or when they made a reservation it was specifically for commercial use. Disney cannot read minds and know what the intent was.

No not even close to the same. If you buy 100 points and rent out all 100 points every year that is not going to be labeled commercial use. 100 points is insignificant. If you buy thousands of points with your LLC you clearly know what you are doing and so does Disney.