Can I seperate my 2BR

[Dean]

I think a lot of things we sort of took for granted with MS are slowly changing.

I have a Food and Wine reservation at BWV that I had decided to modify by dropping the first night. I made the call and after speaking with the MS CM decided I didn't want to take a chance on losing my reservation. The CM said that she would have to cancel my whole reservation and that it could 'disappear' to the wait list.

Now I've been around long enough and have dropped nights in the past. But, now I'm afraid to take a chance of losing my room. I don't know what they are doing down there - maybe a supervisor could do it, but I think I'll leave my reservation alone.

Rule number one, never take anything for granted with a timeshare. Everything you know or think you know could change tomorrow. However, on this subject, you've got someone who called and were not allowed to drop part of a lockoff in real time.

 

[bandjbaine]

Newest edition to the saga... I called again today just to see if i got someone more helpful...Today's cast member was much more helpful and put me on hold to speak with a supervisor. She then came back and said I could take off one day and make it to a 1br the last day of our stay. She also said that she did want me to be aware they cannot guarantee it be the same room. It is possible but not guaranteed. I asked if there was a chance it might go to someone else on a waitlist and risk me loosing it. She said no, it's not put back into the regular inventory while they are making the change. Given the new info, I didn't want to commit ( have to decide if potential for moving rooms that morning is worth the 8 points I'll get back and be able to bank). Hopefully if I call back and get someone different tomorrow if I decide to change it- I won't get a third response!

 

[dianeschlicht]

Really, it seems fair to not separate a 2 bedroom. What if someone else had been denied a one bedroom or studio because it was being used by you as a two bedroom? Or what if someone else really needs a 2 bedroom lock-off but was denied..now you have one you don't want, but you want to separate it. Shouldn't it fairly go to someone on a waitlist, rather than allow you to separate it? If there are no one bedrooms or studios currently showing as available, why should someone be allowed to separate a lock-off and bypass the reservation system?

I agree with Chuck. That's why we have the system we do. It really does make it fair to all when booking. If everyone booked a 2 bedroom "Just in case" and then wanted to drop half of it later on, it would cause a huge problem for booking 1 bedrooms and studios as well as additional 2 bedrooms.

 

[mjc2003]

Really, it seems fair to not separate a 2 bedroom. What if someone else had been denied a one bedroom or studio because it was being used by you as a two bedroom? Or what if someone else really needs a 2 bedroom lock-off but was denied..now you have one you don't want, but you want to separate it. Shouldn't it fairly go to someone on a waitlist, rather than allow you to separate it? If there are no one bedrooms or studios currently showing as available, why should someone be allowed to separate a lock-off and bypass the reservation system?

But every time somebody books a lockoff isn't somebody being "denied" a 1br or a studio? Especially at a resort like BWV where they are all lock offs, each time a 1br or studio is booked somebody is effectively being "denied" a 2br, correct? I'm sorry if I'm missing your point, Chuck.

This is exactly opposite from the historical perspective. Historically one could drop days at the beginning or the end (or both) without canceling but not split a lockoff. I've even been able to separate a single reservation into 2 without having to cancel. Personally I think each and every change should be a cancelation and rebooking, that those on the wait list are more deserving than those holding something different but related.

So each change should be a cancelation and rebooking, meaning if I have a 7 night reservation but need to make it 5 nights b/c something came up, I should have to cancel the entire thing? That would be a change, no? Or if I need to change the names on a reservation, should one have to cancel and rebook? That too would be a change?

I agree with Chuck. That's why we have the system we do. It really does make it fair to all when booking. If everyone booked a 2 bedroom "Just in case" and then wanted to drop half of it later on, it would cause a huge problem for booking 1 bedrooms and studios as well as additional 2 bedrooms.

Can't you already book a studio and a 1br "just in case"? What's the difference? If I book a 1br and a studio at BWV because I'm not sure which one I need and I have the points, how is that any different?

Here's the biggest issue being ignored, at least as it relates to my scenario. I have a 2br lockoff. I no longer need the 1br. This is for my sister, in October, at BCV. In a million years I would never be able to cancel the entire thing and rebook a studio for 7 nights. So my options are to keep the 2br or release the 1br to somebody who is waiting. Canceling the 2br is not an option, so if that was my only choice I'd just keep the 2br. Point being, I would never cancel the 2br b/c my sister needs a place to stay. At least this way somebody gets a room they're waiting for, if MS didn't allow me to split the lockoff then nobody gets their waitlist.

The notion that all changes should be canceled presupposes that the person holding that room is willing to take a chance that nobody in their right mind would take. We have flights, dinner reservations, and have bought our passes. Why would I ever risk losing the room? I'd just keep it, and under that scenario nobody wins.

 

[dianeschlicht]

But every time somebody books a lockoff isn't somebody being "denied" a 1br or a studio? Especially at a resort like BWV where they are all lock offs, each time a 1br or studio is booked somebody is effectively being "denied" a 2br, correct? I'm sorry if I'm missing your point, Chuck.



So each change should be a cancelation and rebooking, meaning if I have a 7 night reservation but need to make it 5 nights b/c something came up, I should have to cancel the entire thing? That would be a change, no? Or if I need to change the names on a reservation, should one have to cancel and rebook? That too would be a change?




Can't you already book a studio and a 1br "just in case"? What's the difference? If I book a 1br and a studio at BWV because I'm not sure which one I need and I have the points, how is that any different?

Here's the biggest issue being ignored, at least as it relates to my scenario. I have a 2br lockoff. I no longer need the 1br. This is for my sister, in October, at BCV. In a million years I would never be able to cancel the entire thing and rebook a studio for 7 nights. So my options are to keep the 2br or release the 1br to somebody who is waiting. Canceling the 2br is not an option, so if that was my only choice I'd just keep the 2br. Point being, I would never cancel the 2br b/c my sister needs a place to stay. At least this way somebody gets a room they're waiting for, if MS didn't allow me to split the lockoff then nobody gets their waitlist.

The notion that all changes should be canceled presupposes that the person holding that room is willing to take a chance that nobody in their right mind would take. We have flights, dinner reservations, and have bought our passes. Why would I ever risk losing the room? I'd just keep it, and under that scenario nobody wins.

The problem is not what you think it is. The problem goes back to when you originally made the reservation. Sure, someone gets a benefit of you cancelling part of the reservation, but it means another studio or 1 bedroom that would have been available at the 11 or 7 month booking window was not there when someone else needed it. They may have decided NOT to buy airfare and tickets based on the inability to book either a 1 bedroom or studio at that time.

 

[Minniesgal]

Seems to me if the OP has a 2 bedroom booked and only needs a 1 bedroom but doesn't want to cancel and risk having nothing it is fair on other members to alow her to split as it frees up a studio for someone else to use which may well just sit unused in her reservation if they don't allow her to split.

 

[mjc2003]

Sure, someone gets a benefit of you cancelling part of the reservation, but it means another studio or 1 bedroom that would have been available at the 11 or 7 month booking window was not there when someone else needed it. They may have decided NOT to buy airfare and tickets based on the inability to book either a 1 bedroom or studio at that time.

But Diane, I did NEED the 2br when I booked. My brother only recently canceled. No matter how many ways this is scrutinized, I was always going to be booking a lockoff at the 11 month window b/c that's what I needed at that time. By your rationale, anybody who makes any reservation at the 11 month window who then later cancels is doing another member an injustice, b/c they are taking a room that somebody else potentially needed?

Again, let's take the idea of me canceling and trying to rebook off the table b/c I would never allow that to happen, can't take the risk. Do you think it's better that a 1br sits unused for a week at BCV in October versus me being able to open it up to another member? Because that's really all this boils down to.

Seems to me if the OP has a 2 bedroom booked and only needs a 1 bedroom but doesn't want to cancel and risk having nothing it is fair on other members to alow her to split as it frees up a studio for someone else to use which may well just sit unused in her reservation if they don't allow her to split.

Bingo

 

[Deb & Bill]

Seems to me if the OP has a 2 bedroom booked and only needs a 1 bedroom but doesn't want to cancel and risk having nothing it is fair on other members to alow her to split as it frees up a studio for someone else to use which may well just sit unused in her reservation if they don't allow her to split.

If you need to downsize your villa, you downsize the villa. You don't just cut a part of it off. You book a smaller villa.

Think about the opposite. You need a larger villa, you can't just add the studio to a one bedroom. You have to cancel and rebook a larger villa based on availability.

In the situation you suggest, the member has bypassed all the other members who wanted a one bedroom villa by booking a larger one and then dropping the studio. You only want a studio, but none are available so you book a two bedroom lockoff. And then cancel the one bedroom portion. Can't be done.

I think mjc2003 was just lucky for some reason.

 

[mjc2003]

If you need to downsize your villa, you downsize the villa. You don't just cut a part of it off. You book a smaller villa.

Think about the opposite. You need a larger villa, you can't just add the studio to a one bedroom. You have to cancel and rebook a larger villa based on availability.

In the situation you suggest, the member has bypassed all the other members who wanted a one bedroom villa by booking a larger one and then dropping the studio. You only want a studio, but none are available so you book a two bedroom lockoff. And then cancel the one bedroom portion. Can't be done.

I think mjc2003 was just lucky for some reason.

But Deb, if a lockoff is available then a studio would also be available. Conversely, if no studios are available then no lockoffs are available...

 

[kamik86]

If you need to downsize your villa, you downsize the villa. You don't just cut a part of it off. You book a smaller villa.

Think about the opposite. You need a larger villa, you can't just add the studio to a one bedroom. You have to cancel and rebook a larger villa based on availability.

In the situation you suggest, the member has bypassed all the other members who wanted a one bedroom villa by booking a larger one and then dropping the studio. You only want a studio, but none are available so you book a two bedroom lockoff. And then cancel the one bedroom portion. Can't be done.

I think mjc2003 was just lucky for some reason.

You seem to be making the assumption that they only wanted the 1 bedroom and then booked the 2 bedroom when the 1 wasn't there. That is not the case. They booked the 2 bedroom originally and then wanted to drop part of it much later.

In this case it is no different then someone booking a room at 11 months when they aren't sure if they can go yet and then dropping it once they realize at 6 months that they can't go. Yes in either case someone who may have gotten the room if it was always available isn't going to get it, but then someone else that either catches it online or waitlisted it will.

From disney's perspective what the OP wants to do should be allowed because at this point either
A) OP keeps the 2 bedroom but only has 4 (or less) people using it.
B) OP drops part of the 2 bedroom and now up to 4 additional people will be able to stay in the hotel.

Which one of those makes disney more money?

Disney doesn't care if those additional people werent the same ones they would have had there if the OP never booked the room in the first place...

 

[LisaS]

Newest edition to the saga... I called again today just to see if i got someone more helpful...Today's cast member was much more helpful and put me on hold to speak with a supervisor. She then came back and said I could take off one day and make it to a 1br the last day of our stay. She also said that she did want me to be aware they cannot guarantee it be the same room. It is possible but not guaranteed. I asked if there was a chance it might go to someone else on a waitlist and risk me loosing it. She said no, it's not put back into the regular inventory while they are making the change. Given the new info, I didn't want to commit ( have to decide if potential for moving rooms that morning is worth the 8 points I'll get back and be able to bank). Hopefully if I call back and get someone different tomorrow if I decide to change it- I won't get a third response!

Given that they were offering to let you take off only one day, that suggests they looked at room inventory and existing wait lists and made a judgement call on what they could do for you. If that's the case, if you call back you could very well get a different answer since the circumstances that led to that decision could change.

One of the problems with letting people break up a 2BR lockoff is that there could be someone wait listed for a 2BR for some of those nights. Breaking it up takes a 2BR out of inventory entirely, making it less likely that those on the wait list will get one. If someone books a 2BR and later does not want a 2BR, it should go to someone on the waiting list for a 2BR. If there is no one waiting for a 2BR for those nights, then breaking it up makes sense so that those waiting for a 1BR or studio get their WL filled. I could see MS handling this on a case-by-case basis which would explain why some people are allowed to break up a 2BR lockoff and others are not.

 

[Chuck S]

You seem to be making the assumption that they only wanted the 1 bedroom and then booked the 2 bedroom when the 1 wasn't there. That is not the case. They booked the 2 bedroom originally and then wanted to drop part of it much later.

In this case it is no different then someone booking a room at 11 months when they aren't sure if they can go yet and then dropping it once they realize at 6 months that they can't go. Yes in either case someone who may have gotten the room if it was always available isn't going to get it, but then someone else that either catches it online or waitlisted it will.

From disney's perspective what the OP wants to do should be allowed because at this point either
A) OP keeps the 2 bedroom but only has 4 (or less) people using it.
B) OP drops part of the 2 bedroom and now up to 4 additional people will be able to stay in the hotel.

Which one of those makes disney more money?

Disney doesn't care if those additional people werent the same ones they would have had there if the OP never booked the room in the first place...

Disney and DVC are legally two separate entities and their focal interests are not always mutual.

DVC/DVD does not care how many people are in a room, as long as they do not exceed maximum allowed occupancy. They really don't care if I book grand villa using my points and if I am the only occupant.

You are correct in the regard that it should be the same as if you book a two bedroom, and then cancel. If you book a dedicated two bedroom, and want a one bedroom, your only option is to cancel and rebook. It should be the same format for a lockoff.

It would be like saying if there is no studio available when you want to book, then book a lockoff and drop the one bedroom at a later date. In reality, a portion of the available lockoff units are designated in the system as a two bedroom units.

If this were not the case, there would be no such thing as them being cheaper point-wise than booking a one bedroom and studio, as there is certainly no discount for booking two studios or two one bedrooms...so why should a lockoff be the same price point-wise as a dedicated, unless there were some set aside specifically for that purpose and/or why are resorts where there are no dedicated two bedroom units charging cheaper points for a "two bedroom" reservation when no two bedroom unit actually exists?

 

[Dean]

So each change should be a cancelation and rebooking, meaning if I have a 7 night reservation but need to make it 5 nights b/c something came up, I should have to cancel the entire thing? That would be a change, no? Or if I need to change the names on a reservation, should one have to cancel and rebook? That too would be a change?

Changing the names would not be a change of the reservation but changing nights or unit sizes as in this thread would be and yes, my opinion is it should be a cancelation and rebooking in both situations instead of just the one (unit size) it's historically been. It's the philosophical position I've held for years and posted on here when applicable. I seem to be in the minority here on DIS but that's OK.

 

[Sammie]

Yes you can do this, if you have difficulty getting the agent to understand, ask for them to get a lead manager to assist.

I did verify this and yes you can let go of any section of 2 bedroom lock off as long as you let go of it for the entire reservation.

You do not have to cancel and re-book, they simply remove the section that you do not want, either the one bedroom or the studio.

 

[bandjbaine]

I will keep you posted on what they let me do. In my case I would much rather fill the 2br I booked but due to a friend losing their job it just wasn't possible. Some other family are able to sttend instead but not for the whole time. If they allow me to break it up, that will be great. I think it gives me flexibility if I have to cancel. I think there are others that would take advantage or maybe I should say use to their advantage their knowledge of the system ( like walking a reservation) but I really believe most are like me with simpler intentions. As I said I like having some flexibility if I have to change something. It's always disappointing when a plan doesn't work. In my last 8 years of travels, this is a first for me. Like I said I think most who end up in this situation don't intend to be there.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I can see where abuse of this could happen but I also see where there could be benefits in allowing this so I haven't quite decided if I view this is a positive, a negative or just a change.

....... that those on the wait list are more deserving than those holding something different but related.

I can understand the view that every change should be a cancel and rebook (although I disagree ) but I don't understand the part of those on the wait list are more deserving. How are you certain? For example they could be someone that just 2 hours prior decided to throw up a hail mary to try and get an AKV concierge studio. They might have booked at 4 months out, had to take SSR and then decided to waitlist xxxx and yyyy resort just to see if they got lucky. If waitlists had a cost or were only available to people who were not able to get a reservation at all then maybe I could understand point but not with waitlists as they are. And there are no guarantees that the person who receives a room on a waitlist will necessarily keep it. They may have ended up booking a resort of last choice, thrown out their next top 2 picks, what they get is their second from the top so they re-waitlist their top etc. etc. There are several scenarios that would make me question a broad assumption they are more deserving.

Given that they were offering to let you take off only one day, that suggests they looked at room inventory and existing wait lists and made a judgement call on what they could do for you.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding but I think they that is what the OP ended up requesting and it wasn't that MS was only going to allow it for a certain part of the trip.

 

[Dean]

I can see where abuse of this could happen but I also see where there could be benefits in allowing this so I haven't quite decided if I view this is a positive, a negative or just a change.



I can understand the view that every change should be a cancel and rebook (although I disagree ) but I don't understand the part of those on the wait list are more deserving. How are you certain? For example they could be someone that just 2 hours prior decided to throw up a hail mary to try and get an AKV concierge studio. They might have booked at 4 months out, had to take SSR and then decided to waitlist xxxx and yyyy resort just to see if they got lucky. If waitlists had a cost or were only available to people who were not able to get a reservation at all then maybe I could understand point but not with waitlists as they are. And there are no guarantees that the person who receives a room on a waitlist will necessarily keep it. They may have ended up booking a resort of last choice, thrown out their next top 2 picks, what they get is their second from the top so they re-waitlist their top etc. etc. There are several scenarios that would make me question a broad assumption they are more deserving.

I think that's one of the differences in how some of us look at things compared to others. I keep the emotion and personal situation out of it and only look at the process as much as possible. Remember the WL is ordered so if someone 2 hours ago went on the WL and it at the top, that means there were no others ahead of them. Maybe I didn't word it well so I'll state from the opposite direction. I don't see that anyone that holds something close to what they end up wanting (different dates or unit size) should have any special claim to something they don't need but want something close. IMO they should have to make the choice of using what they actually have or take their chances on a cancelation and rebooking. The other person on the wait list could be a commercial renter looking to profit from it and my view would be unchanged. The word deserving was not related to individual circumstance but the broad principle of who should be first.

 

[Sandisw]

Yes you can do this, if you have difficulty getting the agent to understand, ask for them to get a lead manager to assist.

I did verify this and yes you can let go of any section of 2 bedroom lock off as long as you let go of it for the entire reservation.

You do not have to cancel and re-book, they simply remove the section that you do not want, either the one bedroom or the studio.

Well, as mentioned, I was not allowed, and it was checked with a supervisor, so its not consistent by any means.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I think that's one of the differences in how some of us look at things compared to others. I keep the emotion and personal situation out of it and only look at the process as much as possible. Remember the WL is ordered so if someone 2 hours ago went on the WL and it at the top, that means there were no others ahead of them. Maybe I didn't word it well so I'll state from the opposite direction. I don't see that anyone that holds something close to what they end up wanting (different dates or unit size) should have any special claim to something they don't need but want something close. IMO they should have to make the choice of using what they actually have or take their chances on a cancelation and rebooking. The other person on the wait list could be a commercial renter looking to profit from it and my view would be unchanged. The word deserving was not related to individual circumstance but the broad principle of who should be first.

I believe that I interpreted your use of the word deserving correctly but apparently my response did not reflect that. I have no concern about the who would be getting the room beyond the fact that they would have been looking for a room after the other person who has it booked. Considering that, it then seems appropriate to me that someone who booked first would retain the priority on that room even in a different configuration if DVC allows a split. But I think I differ in thought from you in that I do not think it's a given that if a 2BR lockoff goes back into inventory that it will positively go to someone waitlisted for a 2BR lockoff. I believe there are strong possibilities that if there are waitlists for a studio or 1BR that people on those lists are also prospects to receive the room(s) released based on the dates they each went on their respective waitlists.

I don't have any issues if the requirements are a complete cancel and attempt to rebook because the owner has the option to keep the room even if it's more than they need. But theoretically I still don't agree that a person on a waitlist is automatically more deserving of that room (or part of it) because of several things - My belief that the room has the potential to be split on the waitlist to a studio and a 1BR, the fact that an owner can have up to 2 waitlists meaning they have not been restricted to one single room type like the original booking and lastly that they would be booking later than the original person.

If waitlists were restricted to those who have no existing reservation instead of including those who wish to replace a reservation I might have a different opinion but that is not the criteria to waitlist.

There remains the potential for abuse so I still remain unclear if this is an enhancement though.

 

[LisaS]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding but I think they that is what the OP ended up requesting and it wasn't that MS was only going to allow it for a certain part of the trip.

I was basing it on the bolded fragment from this post by the OP, but in re-reading the entire paragraph I see that the OP mentions two scenarios, dropping the 2BR for two nights or dropping it for just one night. So OP, did you ask to drop two nights and MS told you that they would allow you to drop only one, or did you ask to drop only one night?

My problem is - due to the banking and borrowing I did and the timing w my use year I really only want to drop it for 2 of the 4 nights otherwise it's just points lost. I knew when I made them it was a possibility now I just have to find the best way to minimize any loss. The one thing I learned I wasn't aware of when I made it was that I couldn't just drop part of the two br. That was my plan going in, seemed simple enough. Oh well! I think I either take the risk on our last night of the res and drop the 2br and rebook a studio- I keep 18 points that I can bank but will loose 3 pts or take a bigger risk an d try to drop last 2 nts of the 2 br and rebook1 br and loose nothing and have my 18 bankable points.....hmmm. Pretty comfortable w it if wait list runs once a day. Suppose I'll see what they tell me at member services before I make the final decision.