Changes to Home Resort Rules and Regulations?

[Deb & Bill]

Here come the newbie questions.....

Why would I ever allow a broker to talk me into letting him be an associate on my account? (Granted, I'm not an owner, I'm an associate, but I'm a daughter-in-law).

What sort of "perks" come with having the DVC designation on your card? I assume something with the Community Halls, but anything else?

Sorry for the hijack....

Some members don't want to use their points sometimes, so they make reservations for non-members. But if they don't want to take the time to market their points, they can hire this other member (who does this all the time) to do this for them. But he has to have access to the points to make the reservation when he finds someone who wants them. And time can be of the essence. So the members who need to rent out their points, hire him, add him as an associate and he does all the work for a cut of the proceeds.

Member perks such as pool hopping are not supposed to be for non-members renting a reservation from a member. By not telling MS that the member rented out the reservation, the non-member gets the DVC member notation o their KTTW. So they can get the discounts and perks - unless the savvy CM asks to see the Blue Member ID.

 

[LoveKermit]

So, we need DH's parent's "Blue Member Card"?

What sort of discounts? It seems like those are fading too.....

While I get it, that broker thing makes feel like I need a shower.

 

[vicki_c]

So, we need DH's parent's "Blue Member Card"?

What sort of discounts? It seems like those are fading too.....

While I get it, that broker thing makes feel like I need a shower.

You could always be asked to show the blue member card to get any discount. But the one thing you absolutely can't get the discount on without the member card is the AP discount.

There are various dining and shopping discounts - they change often and are listed in a booklet you get at check-in. As far as I've seen, most of those locations don't ask for the blue member card.

I thought for access to the lounge at BLT you had to show your blue member card and your KTTW card but I'm not sure if that's correct or still the case - can't keep track.

The only meaningful (to me) discount that has gone away recently was the free valet parking. And we didn't have to show our blue card for that in the past.

 

[yitbos96bb]

That was exactly my thinking as well: Cut back on commercial-type renting that may be cutting into Disney's sales.

I can think of a few people that would be adversely affected by this change.

Does the POS allow for this restriction to be added on though? ie: Could it be retroactive? Or could some members be grandfathered in?

I've always wondered if they are going to cut down on renting completely... how I'm not sure... I mean, any renting is in violation of the spirit, but those of us who simply rent out some unused points to one or two people are obviously not the same. Do you institute 0 tolerance to curb the behavior or do you try and crack down on the abusers, while leaving the little guys who use most of the their points with the ability to flout the rule?

 

[Dean]

I've always wondered if they are going to cut down on renting completely... how I'm not sure... I mean, any renting is in violation of the spirit, but those of us who simply rent out some unused points to one or two people are obviously not the same. Do you institute 0 tolerance to curb the behavior or do you try and crack down on the abusers, while leaving the little guys who use most of the their points with the ability to flout the rule?

Legally they can't prevent renting as long as they themselves are doing so. I wouldn't agree that renting is outside the spirit, IMO, there really isn't a "spirit" but a set or rules and regulations and state laws. The "spirit" is more in the eye of the beholder.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

That clause has also been around as long as I can remember. Apparently if you tell Member Services that the reservation is a rental, they can actually arrange for the "DVC Member" notation to be omitted from the room key. The occupant would then not be eligible for any member perks.

Of course, there's little motivation for members to ever do this. Sounds much better to advertise the rental as including "access to most DVC member perks!"

Somewhere along the line the part about not getting compensation and your guests then getting the perks didn't stick with me. There must be some way to spin the "enhancement" of paying and not getting the perks.

Member perks such as pool hopping are not supposed to be for non-members renting a reservation from a member. By not telling MS that the member rented out the reservation, the non-member gets the DVC member notation o their KTTW. So they can get the discounts and perks - unless the savvy CM asks to see the Blue Member ID.

But according to this document a Blue Member ID shouldn't be required. Otherwise, guests that haven't paid (relatives, whatever) that according to this should get the perks may be denied. Having it on the KTTW is about the only way. I wouldn't say it's a savvy CM as they may not be following the rules by requiring it. The members are currently the only one's that can stop this - OR DVC needs to get another system in place.

 

[SSR]

I've always wondered if they are going to cut down on renting completely... how I'm not sure... I mean, any renting is in violation of the spirit, but those of us who simply rent out some unused points to one or two people are obviously not the same. Do you institute 0 tolerance to curb the behavior or do you try and crack down on the abusers, while leaving the little guys who use most of the their points with the ability to flout the rule?

My memory may be fuzzy on this, but I recall Disney explaining (either in the Welcome Package or the Rules and Regs) that someone who rents points once or twice a year would "likely not" be considered renting commercially. The inference I got from that is that if you do 20 rentals a year, they're going to be onto you, but if you do it once or twice, you're OK (wink, wink). This makes sense from their perspective because I'm sure some people consider the ability to rent points once or twice a year as a valuable benefit to ownership, thus increasing the price DVC and the market can charge for the membership interest.

 

[wildernessDad]

So if DVC is going to effectively bust up commercial renting practices, perhaps those who are renting for non commercial reasons should up their rates.

I've always thought that $10/point was too low.

 

[dianeschlicht]

I've heard that there are some brokers out there who will rent points for you. To do it, you have to name them as an associate on your account. Looks like this new rule is trying to stop that.

I agree, and I also agree with the new policy. I've never figured out why ANYONE would agree to place a total stranger on their contract as an associate anyway! It would scare me!

 

[chalee94]

I thought for access to the lounge at BLT you had to show your blue member card and your KTTW card but I'm not sure if that's correct or still the case - can't keep track.

DVC members can't go to the lounge unless they are staying at the BLT, so the KTTW card is sufficient.

 

[drusba]

For perks that exist (a diminishing list), it is usually just dependent on what Disney personnel check. Those who check in with a DVC reservation get a room key designating them as DVC and most often for any perks all you need to show is that room key because no one asks for your official DVC card and that is even usually true for restaurant discounts (to the extent they exist). Thus, renters get room keys and can get perks even though they are not supposed to. Even if you told MS you were renting when making the reservation I doubt they would issue different types of room keys.

There have been many historical threads on the issue of renting. As noted, you are allowed to rent as long as it is not for commercial purposes, which essentially means you cannot be in the business of renting and for which Disney has provided a definition/presumption by not allowing you to make more than 20 reservations per year absent innocent explanation. Until a few years ago, Disney itself was more or less passive about renting, generally just ignoring activities that indicated there were professional renters. Then, it adopted the 20 reservation restriction. It also eliminated one-way unlimited transfering of points, adopting the current rule that you can make only one transfer per year, in or out (which was actually the rule years ago before they changed it to allowing unlimited transfer either in or out but not both). Renters had two ways to rent before the rule changes: by using their points and making reservations in the purchasers name, which is not a transfer of points, or simply transfering points if the purchaser was a member. The 20 reservation rule put some minimal restriction on the first type of renting and the one transfer rule essentially eliminated professional renters from using the transfer method.

The "broker" is a fairly new business enterprise for DVC but I remember first hearing about them a couple years ago. The broker becomes an associate member of the member's account and then gets the rental and charges a fee (percentage) for it. I recall even seeing brokers having websites advertising their service. I doubt there is really much "danger" in allowing one to be on your account: they cannot get the personal info of the member such as SSN and the member can remove an associate member at any time.

Members have varying views on renting, with many against it entirely, many condemning it for the professionals, including the brokers, but accepting and happy with the member being able to rent once in a while, and some at least who do not mind professional renters or brokers even though they are not themselves professional renters or brokers, although some of those draw the line at predatory renting where the professional at 11 months out makes 30 reservations for Christmas week and then rent out those particualr reservations. You can imagine, if not a participant, that many of the old threads on this issue had some heat to them (and, of course, compromises of views were never reached). In any event, Disney in the last few years has started in the direction of curbing renting and the new associate rule goes after the brokers. I am sure one of the problems Disney perceived with the brokers is that they were advertising their services and thus using the "Disney" name to do so. Disney can act to stop others from using its name but that is a pain in the butt to get it done and has to be done broker by broker. The new associate rule effectively kills the business model.

 

[bumbershoot]

Do you institute 0 tolerance to curb the behavior or do you try and crack down on the abusers, while leaving the little guys who use most of the their points with the ability to flout the rule?

Well I don't think that renting points is a bad thing...after all, we were going to rent points before we decided to just buy! It would have been the gateway, but it turns out we didn't need it, LOL.

But since the commercial renting part is disallowed, it seems to me that THIS is an excellent way to stop the naughty ones while allowing what IS allowed! I was actually quite glad to read this thread, because it seems they are NOT "throwing out baby with the bathwater", and actually came up with a good solution!

My memory may be fuzzy on this, but I recall Disney explaining (either in the Welcome Package or the Rules and Regs) that someone who rents points once or twice a year would "likely not" be considered renting commercially. The inference I got from that is that if you do 20 rentals a year, they're going to be onto you, but if you do it once or twice, you're OK (wink, wink).

Same explanation just last March!

 

[DVC Mike]

But since the commercial renting part is disallowed, it seems to me that THIS is an excellent way to stop the naughty ones while allowing what IS allowed! I was actually quite glad to read this thread, because it seems they are NOT "throwing out baby with the bathwater", and actually came up with a good solution!

Commercial Renters are those members who buy up an excessive amount of points of their own for the express purpose of renting them out for profit. The new rules regarding associates will do exactly nothing to solve that problem. We'll still have the commercial renters booking prime reservations as spec bookings they hope to rent out at a nice profit.

The new rules mostly impacts the member who occasionally has to rent out excess points or loose them, since DVC is trying to eliminate a service which provides this.

The one member this rule targets operates a service where he allows other DVC members who won't be able to use all their points rent them out without the hassle of dealing with the people renting the points (i.e., you don't have to talk with them, you don't have to try to book a reservation, add the dining plan, handle Magical Express, etc.) You just make a call, and a check arrives in the mail -- a convenient and I would say valuable service for some.

I've never used that service (I've never even rented out my points before), but I wouldn't label that service as "commercial renting" as defined in the POS.

Disney made the new rule for bthe express purpose of trying to eliminate a growing threat to their own rental profit stream (i.e., CRO). The new rule doesn't appear to benefit DVC members, but it may benefit the Walt Disney World Company's finances.

 

[Dean]

Commercial Renters are those members who buy up an excessive amount of points of their own for the express purpose of renting them out for profit. The new rules regarding associates will do exactly nothing to solve that problem. We'll still have the commercial renters booking prime reservations as spec bookings they hope to rent out at a nice profit.

The new rules mostly impacts the member who occasionally has to rent out excess points or loose them, since DVC is trying to eliminate a service which provides this.

The one member this rule targets operates a service where he allows other DVC members who won't be able to use all their points rent them out without the hassle of dealing with the people renting the points (i.e., you don't have to talk with them, you don't have to try to book a reservation, add the dining plan, handle Magical Express, etc.) You just make a call, and a check arrives in the mail -- a convenient and I would say valuable service for some.

I've never used that service (I've never even rented out my points before), but I wouldn't label that service as "commercial renting" as defined in the POS.

Disney made the new rule for bthe express purpose of trying to eliminate a growing threat to their own rental profit stream (i.e., CRO). The new rule doesn't appear to benefit DVC members, but it may benefit the Walt Disney World Company's finances.

I suspect we all have our own definition of commercial renter but DVC's released "definition" is far more liberal than most on DIS would like to believe.

 

[Chuck S]

Commercial Renters are those members who buy up an excessive amount of points of their own for the express purpose of renting them out for profit. The new rules regarding associates will do exactly nothing to solve that problem. We'll still have the commercial renters booking prime reservations as spec bookings they hope to rent out at a nice profit.

The new rules mostly impacts the member who occasionally has to rent out excess points or loose them, since DVC is trying to eliminate a service which provides this.

The one member this rule targets operates a service where he allows other DVC members who won't be able to use all their points rent them out without the hassle of dealing with the people renting the points (i.e., you don't have to talk with them, you don't have to try to book a reservation, add the dining plan, handle Magical Express, etc.) You just make a call, and a check arrives in the mail -- a convenient and I would say valuable service for some.

I've never used that service (I've never even rented out my points before), but I wouldn't label that service as "commercial renting" as defined in the POS.

Disney made the new rule for bthe express purpose of trying to eliminate a growing threat to their own rental profit stream (i.e., CRO). The new rule doesn't appear to benefit DVC members, but it may benefit the Walt Disney World Company's finances.

I disagree. No one can doubt that the website, and others like it, were commercial ventures. They basically bought points in bulk from several members. Transferred or packaged them as necessary (for instance, making 3 nights of a reservation with points from one member, and several more days from another member and offering them as a single vacation), and acted as a commercail vacation broker. How does that not meet the definition of the term commercial renter? There is just more tha one type of commercial. The vacation packager and those single owners with lots of points that make more than 20 reservations per year. DVC addressed the 20 rental limit a few years ago. Now they are addressing the vacation brokers/packagers.

 

[DebbieB]

The one member this rule targets operates a service where he allows other DVC members who won't be able to use all their points rent them out without the hassle of dealing with the people renting the points (i.e., you don't have to talk with them, you don't have to try to book a reservation, add the dining plan, handle Magical Express, etc.) You just make a call, and a check arrives in the mail -- a convenient and I would say valuable service for some.

I've never used that service (I've never even rented out my points before), but I wouldn't label that service as "commercial renting" as defined in the POS.

Disney made the new rule for bthe express purpose of trying to eliminate a growing threat to their own rental profit stream (i.e., CRO). The new rule doesn't appear to benefit DVC members, but it may benefit the Walt Disney World Company's finances.

There's one more step to that - you have to name the broker as an associate on your account. I can't imagine turning over access to my account to someone I don't really know. Plus what if there are problems associated with the rental - it could come back to you. If this isn't "commercial renting" I don't know what is. They are making a business out of renting your points.

 

[bumbershoot]

but I wouldn't label that service as "commercial renting" as defined in the POS.

I would. I do.

And I'm glad that it has been addressed in this way.

Now interestingly...I'm actually only the Associate on my husband's DVC (we thought that in order to be a full member I'd need to be on the financing paperwork and as a SAHM I couldn't possibly help the financing) even though I'm the one who researched it all LOL, set up "his" DVC account, access it, etc etc make sure the payments are being made and so on..... if for some reason we decided to buy, in the same way with me as Associate, 4 more bits of DVC, I guess I'd be in trouble!

 

[DVC Mike]

And I'm glad that it has been addressed in this way.

I can't see why people would be glad this change has been made.

The new rule doesn't appear to benefit DVC members; in fact, I see only the opposite. The only possible beneficiary is the Walt Disney World Company's profits.

How can eliminating a service which helps DVC members be beneficial for DVC members? The new rules mostly impacts the member who occasionally has to rent out excess points or loose them.

I guess if you've taken a hard stance or philosophical view that all renting is "wrong", than maybe you'd be glad that this rule change was introduced, as it will make it harder to members to rent out their excess points as they'll have to do all the footwork themselves.

But, since renting is specifically allowed in the DVC POS, members have the option of unloading excess points rather than simply loosing them.

 

[Sandisw]

I can't see why people would be glad this change has been made.

The new rule doesn't appear to benefit DVC members; in fact, I see only the opposite. The only possible beneficiary is the Walt Disney World Company's profits.

How can eliminating a service which helps DVC members be beneficial for DVC members? The new rules mostly impacts the member who occasionally has to rent out excess points or loose them.

I guess if you've taken a hard stance or philosophical view that all renting is "wrong", than maybe you'd be glad that this rule change was introduced, as it will make it harder to members to rent out their excess points as they'll have to do all the footwork themselves.

But, since renting is specifically allowed in the DVC POS, members have the option of unloading excess points rather than simply loosing them.

There may be a drawback to members who have points they can not use and no longer have an avenue to rent them easily (ie: using a broker/whatever you want to call it).

But, we all agreed, when we signed our contract, that renting out points in a way that assumes it is a "business" is against the rules. Personally, I won't be renting my points so for me it does not really matter, but I would much rather see DVC follow the rules then pick and chose when they want to enforce the terms of our contract.

I do like the fact that they changed the wording to indicate that banking, in the first UY of a contract, will be permitted at DVC's discretion. For someone who might be adding on beyond my banking deadline, I am happy to know that they have the power to approve it if they want and I have something to point to as a negotiating tool.

 

[logan115]

I can't see why people would be glad this change has been made.

The new rule doesn't appear to benefit DVC members; in fact, I see only the opposite. The only possible beneficiary is the Walt Disney World Company's profits.

How can eliminating a service which helps DVC members be beneficial for DVC members? The new rules mostly impacts the member who occasionally has to rent out excess points or loose them.

I guess if you've taken a hard stance or philosophical view that all renting is "wrong", than maybe you'd be glad that this rule change was introduced, as it will make it harder to members to rent out their excess points as they'll have to do all the footwork themselves.

But, since renting is specifically allowed in the DVC POS, members have the option of unloading excess points rather than simply loosing them.

I agree 100% with Mike. If I have points I can't use and have the option of having someone else handle the renting for me, and I still get a close to market price for my points without dealing with the headaches that sounds like a nice option to have.

Am I crazy about putting someone on my account for a short period of time as an associate, not really, but that's a decision I'd have to make after researching said person and their history.

For a second, forget about the individual that this will likely have the biggest impact on. What's the difference to me as an owner if I rent my points out to someone for a trip (making the calls to MS myself, booking DME and DDP for them, etc) for $10, or if I rent them to Goliath the Potentially Commercial Renter for $10 by making him/her an associate on my account, and he/she then rents them to someone else for $13 pt ?

I'm still getting my $10 either way. If Goliath was taking all of these points and making spec ressies that would be one thing, but I don't believe this to be the case.

For the record I don't plan on renting often, when we purchased our contract this year it had banked points we couldn't use and I did rent them out. While I did have a great experience (and a bit of fun helping this person plan their trip), I'm not sure that it's something I want to do on a frequent basis.

Now if DVC wants to put Goliath out of business, they could offer to pay $10/pt to members that can't use their points, but I think we all know how unlikely that is to happen. Assuming many owners would rather deal directly with DVC, but because they don't do this it offers an opportunity for someone else to fill the gap.

Chris