Commerical Use Policy Update - New Thread!

[theMoreDisneytheBetter]

20 is a lot if you fly here, but when you live here it really isn’t. Every year we do marathon weekend, July 3rd (we were at VGF yesterday), at least one night of wine & dine, the Halloween party, the Christmas party, Memorial Day, Mother’s Day, sometimes Labor Day, and now we may add Saratoga when we visit epic universe, plus Birthdays & our anniversary. If we have to book two studios or have extended family visiting we could easily hit 20. … I missed one, every year I have a mandatory work conference on I-drive and I stay at Saratoga because everyone goes to DS after for dinner and drinks.

That’s why I said “more likely than not” - not that it can’t happen but most (as in more than 50%) of owners probably don’t use their memberships this way. So for owners who are local or who drive and have a lot of reservations under their own names (or their name plus family members they repeatedly travel with) can easily justify this pattern, but 15 reservations each under a different name with no repeats over the years would be a lot more suspicious.

Honestly visiting WDW that often sounds pretty amazing.

 

[Cyberc1978]

I agree and really not sure what reason DVC would have to spend additional money to search beyond the system when all the info on what an owner does is in their account.

Search, flag, review and decide if the owner has violated the commercial use policy as written, which right now is the 2011 one.

Yeah that was my thought too.

 

[Cyberc1978]

Interesting I just read that the dvcrentalstore.com is telling their guests if asked during checkin that they refer to themselves as guests of “DVC investments LLC” and not a renter.

I guess that’s how they skirt the rules.

 

[VGCgroupie]

Interesting I just read that the dvcrentalstore.com is telling their guests if asked during checkin that they refer to themselves as guests of “DVC investments LLC”

I guess that’s how they skirt the rules.

How would this skirt the rules?

 

[Cyberc1978]

How would this skirt the rules?

Because only officers and employees are allowed to use the points from an LLC and renters are definitely not.

 

[mkatsy]

Interesting I just read that the dvcrentalstore.com is telling their guests if asked during checkin that they refer to themselves as guests of “DVC investments LLC” and not a renter.

I guess that’s how they skirt the rules.

Well that’s interesting, wouldn’t they be the guest of the DVC owner that rented them the points?…. Oh, NVM ….

 

[mkatsy]

Because only officers and employees are allowed to use the points from an LLC and renters are definitely not.

Well I guess we know what the $200,000 worth of Saratoga was earmarked for now I WANT to get audited … come at me, bro

 

[Mouseforward]

Well that’s interesting, wouldn’t they be the guest of the DVC owner that rented them the points?…. Oh, NVM ….

But their only facilitators ....

 

[Cyberc1978]

But their only facilitators ....

Yup and then some…..

 

[Cyberc1978]

Well that’s interesting, wouldn’t they be the guest of the DVC owner that rented them the points?…. Oh, NVM ….

Yes that’s correct - unless they are both the owner and intermediary.

 

[xdan0920]

The more I think about this, the more pissed off I become. I’ll be sending daily emails to member services about this.

I’ll now be pushing for all renting to be eliminated. I will be pursuing a vote, and campaigning for the rank and file to vote to put a halt to all renting.

 

[Cyberc1978]

The more I think about this, the more pissed off I become. I’ll be sending daily emails to member services about this.

I’ll now be pushing for all renting to be eliminated. I will be pursuing a vote, and campaigning for the rank and file to vote to put a halt to all renting.

Dont get me wrong I can understand the frustration but since renting is allowed and any limitation would require a membership vote it’s high unlikely to ever happen. Even if it did happen according to Florida statutes only those owners favoring the limitation would it apply to.

ETA: asking DVC to go after the LLC’s would however be more likely to happen if more owners asked for it - maybe DVC already have plans for it.

 

[Mouseforward]

I’ll now be pushing for all renting to be eliminated.

You could not win a vote on this thread with that policy, never mind the membership.

 

[pangyal]

I’m a little confused about this policy, in all honesty. We make well over 20 reservations a year for ourselves, including split stays three or even four ways in one trip, and rent out on occasion. So, if renting is allowed, how would they have the right to cancel any rentals that fall within the first twenty reservations of any given time period, when 95% of our overall reservations are only us? How is that in any way following the policy of cracking down on commercial renting, when the actual metric should be the overall percentage of self-named versus non self-named reservations?

 

[Sandisw]

The more I think about this, the more pissed off I become. I’ll be sending daily emails to member services about this.

I’ll now be pushing for all renting to be eliminated. I will be pursuing a vote, and campaigning for the rank and file to vote to put a halt to all renting.

Emails are great but honestly, given that I had been given the run around from January to get this offical policy, I’d consider sending your concerns via certified letter.

That’s what it took to make it to legal and whomever else it was that needed to review and act on my request.

 

[Brianstl]

Dont get me wrong I can understand the frustration but since renting is allowed and any limitation would require a membership vote it’s high unlikely to ever happen. Even if it did happen according to Florida statutes only those owners favoring the limitation would it apply to.

ETA: asking DVC to go after the LLC’s would however be more likely to happen if more owners asked for it - maybe DVC already have plans for it.

my guess is that complaints from the hotel side played a big part in getting DVC to finally to enforcing their own rules. For the last couple of months every other commercial I get is from David’s, DVC rental store, etc. talking about saving 50-75% off Disney’s rate. I don’t see how they can’t consider that direct competition.

 

[Mouseforward]

I’m a little confused about this policy, in all honesty. We make well over 20 reservations a year for ourselves, including split stays three or even four ways in one trip, and rent out on occasion. So, if renting is allowed, how would they have the right to cancel any rentals that fall within the first twenty reservations of any given time period, when 95% of our overall reservations are only us? How is that in any way following the policy of cracking down on commercial renting, when the actual metric should be the overall percentage of self-named versus non self-named reservations?

It's a old 2008 attempt that obviously did not work. I am waiting for new ideas that were promised 6 months ago.

Remember in 2008 there was a lot of energy - BLT magically appeared overnight, Jambo house , Treehouse conversion. It was a different time in DVC. Now we have PIT, Laekshore Lodge, The cabins ... I see some parallels.

 

[Sandisw]

I’m a little confused about this policy, in all honesty. We make well over 20 reservations a year for ourselves, including split stays three or even four ways in one trip, and rent out on occasion. So, if renting is allowed, how would they have the right to cancel any rentals that fall within the first twenty reservations of any given time period, when 95% of our overall reservations are only us? How is that in any way following the policy of cracking down on commercial renting, when the actual metric should be the overall percentage of self-named versus non self-named reservations?

Here is my take on this..the policy as written allows them to cancel above 20 as a violation unless you can prove none are rentals.

However, I do think that the clause that allows them to review the 20 and decide if it appears commercial is the one that states this is not an exhaustive list.

Which means they can add things in addition to the policy…and IMO, the information that I was given about owners being able to offset dues would fit into that area, assuming I was not lied to.

But if they review your 20 and feel there are too many rentals that make you appear to be commercial, then can say it looks like a pattern of rental activity and act.

However, nothing requires them to act within 20 if they don’t think the pattern of owner vs non owners appears commercial.

Given that the board stated pretty clearly that they wanted to go after large point owners who they deemed commercially renting because it was a frequent occurrence, and have never said or done anything that the target was different,,,,pure spectulation here…the use of this offical policy and whatever other metric is used will be against those owners.

So, they don’t have to cancel anything if they review and decide it’s obvious an owner renting within their right, even if they have exceeded the 20.

Basically, it all remains in their court. As I mentioned earlier, previous interpretations by DVC of this policy was to leave the first 20 alone.

Whether that is how they will handle it? No idea but I won’t be surprised at all if the only ones who get targeted are your LLCs and those who have so many points that they are clearly in it as a business.

 

[Mouseforward]

ayed a big part in getting DVC to finally to enforcing their own rules. For the last couple of months every other commercial I get is from David’s, DVC rental store, etc. talking about saving 50-75% off Disney’s rate. I don’t see how they can’t consider that direct competition.

Or be smart about it and realize they have to cut the rate for rooms, I think they basically know that they have an issue that expenses are high and they can't offer the rooms at a competitive rate. Loews PB has better rates at most times and they have better rooms.

 

[GoingSince1990]

The more I think about this, the more pissed off I become. I’ll be sending daily emails to member services about this.

I’ll now be pushing for all renting to be eliminated. I will be pursuing a vote, and campaigning for the rank and file to vote to put a halt to all renting.

I'm guessing that you have never been in the situation of being unable to visit Disney as planned for some reason and realizing that instead of forfeiting 200 points (for example) you can rent them out with minimal effort at DVC Rental Store or anywhere else and pocket an easy $3600. And the vast majority of people here are fine with that kind of renting; it's the deliberate spec bookings of in-demand villas at peak times, in other words true commercial renting, that people tend to take issue with.