Commerical Use Policy Update - New Thread!

[JulieBeeRN]

Thanks for the clarification. I was on page 120 of the other thread and gave up when I saw this one. Looks like we average 14-16 reservations (including maybe 1 rental) in a rolling 12 month period. Close enough that I probably should keep a closer eye on it; although we had already decided that we aren't going to rent for a couple years bc we ended up having to borrow points.

 

[wdw_explorer]

I know many are familiar with this, but I want to know exactly what counts as a reservation against the 20 allowed. I often book 3 rooms when we travel - one for me and my wife and one each for my 2 daughters (with their families). We typically do split stays, so this is a total of 6 reservations.

The original reservations are made more than 7 months out using home resort points. Often at 7 months we switch hotels depending on availability. In that case, we would rebook so a total of up to 12 reservations have been placed, although only on 6 of those reservations did we actually stay.

From Disney's point of view is the above count as 6 reservations or 12?? In other words do reservations that have been cancelled count against the 20?? When we modify the reservation instead of cancel and rebook does that no longer count as an additional reservation??

Many times my daughters also plan their own vacations with their families (both are associate members) and often cancel and rebook those based on work circumstances. We have to book well in advance to get anything but as everyone knows busy schedules often necessitate rebooking.

To summarize:
1) Does cancelling a reservation count against the 20 allowed? Or does it open up a new spot for a future ressie?
2) Does modifying a reservation count against the 20 or is the reservation count unchanged in a modification?

Sorry for the basic question but it seems the rule of 20 reservations is again front and center and I just want to make sure I am counting correctly!!

Thanks!!

 

[Mouseforward]

I know many are familiar with this, but I want to know exactly what counts as a reservation against the 20 allowed. I often book 3 rooms when we travel - one for me and my wife and one each for my 2 daughters (with their families). We typically do split stays, so this is a total of 6 reservations.

The original reservations are made more than 7 months out using home resort points. Often at 7 months we switch hotels depending on availability. In that case, we would rebook so a total of up to 12 reservations have been placed, although only on 6 of those reservations did we actually stay.

From Disney's point of view is the above count as 6 reservations or 12?? In other words do reservations that have been cancelled count against the 20?? When we modify the reservation instead of cancel and rebook does that no longer count as an additional reservation??

Many times my daughters also plan their own vacations with their families (both are associate members) and often cancel and rebook those based on work circumstances. We have to book well in advance to get anything but as everyone knows busy schedules often necessitate rebooking.

To summarize:
1) Does cancelling a reservation count against the 20 allowed? Or does it open up a new spot for a future ressie?
2) Does modifying a reservation count against the 20 or is the reservation count unchanged in a modification?

Sorry for the basic question but it seems the rule of 20 reservations is again front and center and I just want to make sure I am counting correctly!!

Thanks!!

I would doubt canceled reservations count, especially swapped 7 month waitlists. The policy does not define reservation but it benefits neither DVC or the owner to count canceled reservations. If mods counted, than most walkers would be in Disney Jail so we can safely assume that mods don't count ( also the text says total reservations).

It looks like completed reservations count , and pending reservations.

I can individually confirm that multiple reservations for family count ( based on my discussions with MS Supervisor) but it is nothing to worry about as your not renting to family for cash so the worst thing is you get flagged and just show that they are your family.

One interesting thing is being an associate member on account A and having an actual account B of your own means it is 20 for both A and B combined. So once a child gets their own membership I would remove them as an associate if you dont want to get flagged.

 

[tidefan]

It will be fun! Its a Virgin Voyage cruise...same one I sailed on in Feburary! Adult only cruise and lots and lots of fun.

I am still hopeful that more people will contact and write DVC to ask them to give us more information because I do think the more they hear from owners, the more likely we are to get even more info!!!

Which ship???

We are cruising Viring Voyages next week as well!

 

[Genie+]

Looks like I can buy/add-on a BWV resale contract and do nothing other than rent out standard view studio or 2BR, as long as I:

Keep my total number of reservations under 20 on a rolling yearly basis

Keep using half of my total annual points on reservations that are clear personal use.

That would keep me below both radars.

 

[Mouseforward]

Looks like I can buy/add-on a BWV resale contract and do nothing other than rent out standard view studio or 2BR, as long as I:

Keep my total number of reservations under 20 on a rolling yearly basis

Keep using half of my total annual points on reservations that are clear personal use.

That would keep me below both radars.

I would say following the 2008 updated in 2011 policy you would be correct. However, since they announced six months ago that this is under investigation and staff has been assigned to address, I don’t think this 2011 policy is going to be DVC’s only effort.

 

[sndral]

It was defined. Bold is mine....

The policy is that all reservations in excess of 20 shall be presumed to be the use of vacation accomodations for commerical purposes in violation of the Declaration and Membership Agreement, and is referred to in the rest of the document as the "Multiple Reservations Rule".
…

“…[a]ll reservations in excess of 20 shall be presumed to be…for commercial purposes….”
Legally a presumption is a fact required to be assumed once another fact is established. In this sentence the ‘other’ fact is 20 reservations, thus once that threshold is reached the owner is in violation unless they can rebut the presumption.

…

ETA: Here is the clause in the 2011 policy that supports that DVC can add to the policy, including something like the use rental income exceeding dues as a basis for enforcement, along with the 20 reservations rule.


View attachment 980299

This paragraph makes it clear that 20 is not some magic number & thus anything under that number is ok, however I wonder if it is the only activity MS is authorized to automatically act on ATM.
I recall that when the ‘rule’ of 20 first surfaced (2008?) owners in violation were sent letters, so I assume if DVC decides to act on other activity which is deemed to be for commercial use those suspected of engaging in commercial use will likewise receive warning letters questioning their pattern of use.
It’s been seven months since they said they were doing something about commercial renting & so far all we’ve seen is the required attestation of personal use, which isn’t going to do squat to stop the availability problems created by rampant commercial renting IMO.

 

[IMMkXLVI]

That was a fast reply from the confirmation they received your request.

It is however I would have preferred a written letter on DVC letterhead and mailed to me vs an email.

 

[Mouseforward]

But, I think as long as the 2011 policy exists, they can't act in terms of cancelations until one reaches 20 total...not rentals, but 20 across all memberships.

I can see your reasoning here. But this is one area where I think we disagree. Probably because I’m looking at this through the lens of an HOA board.

The POS/ and our contracts ban commercial renting. Policies are subject to, and have to follow our founding documents. What a policy is and what the first two pages of this document state is, this is the master association directing and coordinating with the individual building associations to release this policy to direct the actions of the management staff. Section 8, as you posted clearly states that this is not the exclusive level of enforcement for the no commercial renting clause.

So I interpret this as member services must report anyone with greater than 20 reservations for review, I don’t see this as limiting their actions to enforce the no commercial renting clause in other areas. The existing rules in the foundation documents cannot be limited by a policy document. So I don’t think you can assume that they can’t enforce anything under 20 rentals.

 

[Mouseforward]

This paragraph makes it clear that 20 is not some magic number & thus anything under that number is ok, however I wonder if it is the only activity MS is authorized to automatically act on ATM.

This is a very good question. It seems to have clear direction on the greater than 20.

Clearly, this is not had much effect since 2011 if the problem is still occurring.

This is why I suspect we’re about to see additional direction given to the management staff. However, until they get this additional direction, it may be the only policy they are currently enforcing.

 

[Genie+]

I would say following the 2008 updated in 2011 policy you would be correct. However, since they announced six months ago that this is under investigation and staff has been assigned to address, I don’t think this 2011 policy is going to be DVC’s only effort.

If DVC decides to we can rent out up to our total cost of dues, and they use a rough calculation for rental proceeds, sounds like I may still be fine.

Keep my total number of reservations under 20 on a rolling yearly basis

This part deals with 2011

Keep using half of my total annual points on reservations that are clear personal use.

This part deals with the newer concept of proceeds not to exceed total annual dues.

Unless the second parts turns out different than suspected, or there is a 3rd criteria, maybe that BWV purchase/activity could still fly?

I own 200pts VGF/BWV and plan to keep using those on reservations with the owner as guests, using somewhere between 3 and 6 reservations per year. So if I buy another 200pts at BWV and bang out 4 or 5 BWV standard studio confirmed reservations per year, it seems little risk DVC will do anything about it. At least until a 3rd criteria pops up.

Which if I did get pushback my family would be more than happy to use the points themselves anyway. That’s the biggest risk of them all actually! We’d buy points to rent out and end up using them instead lol.

 

[mkatsy]

This is a very good question. It seems to have clear direction on the greater than 20.

Clearly, this is not had much effect since 2011 if the problem is still occurring.

This is why I suspect we’re about to see additional direction given to the management staff. However, until they get this additional direction, it may be the only policy they are currently enforcing.

Or Sandi was going to charge them $50 a day so they ripped this out of a dusty binder and sent it. I’m sure legal has to review anything they put in writing, maybe they’re just not ready to release updated documents. Once you put it out there, you can’t take it back.

 

[TCRAIG]

So. I am against commerical renting. I own a lot of points. I have done a few rentals (4). But I have done ALOT of reservations for myself. In a 12 month period not counting anything cancelled/rebooked I have had 15 reservations. I am nowhere near a commercial renter and I think this 20 reservation rule is outdated for when people didnt go to the parks as often, when there was less resorts so not as many split stays. I have 3 trips where I did a split stay so I have 6 reservations for it. I have another trip where I booked 2 studios since a 2 bed was unavailable.

Is only reservations where a stay occurred that will be counted as 20 or will reservations made and then cancelled count, I assume not.

Edit to add I am not saying this isnt the rule, but rather that I am disappointed this is the rule as a large point holder who goes to the resorts alot.

I just be the Guinea Pig for the 20 rule…I counted last night, my My Dashboard has 29 reservations across all my (5) memberships…all but 4 are in my name as lead…the rest are for family or friends. I do mostly split stays and I book a night or 2 at DHHIR before and after my WDW stay to split the driving. I don’t charge family but my friends want to pay so I’m thinking something nominal ($7.) PP but if DVC has a problem with it, it’s free and they can reciprocate by getting me a nice chocolate sundae at Ghirardelli’s. All of the ‘not me’ reservations have a second reservation with me as the lead guest for the same time as my family.

 

[ShaneDJ]

It’s been seven months since they said they were doing something about commercial renting & so far all we’ve seen is the required attestation of personal use, which isn’t going to do squat to stop the availability problems created by rampant commercial renting IMO.

====
(Sandi said): I am not, and never have been, convinced that even with enhanced enforcement that you are going to see a major change in the overall market, because I believe that the bulk of the owners who are renting are doing so for "non-commercial" purposes.
====

The board at the December 2024 condo meeting said that commercial renting is not widespread:

"All of the board members agreed that commercial rental activity is just a small portion of all member reservations."

https://dvcnews.com/dvc-program-men...mmercial-renting-walking-during-condo-meeting

If commercial renting is only a small percentage of the availability problem, then it seems that the majority of the availability problem (if there is one) is due to the large number of DVC customers simply using their memberships and/or members exercising their rights to rent for "personal use" (which includes renting out a large portion of their points...even enough to cover their annual dues).

In other words, if the commercial renters are just a small percentage ("just a small portion of all member reservations"), then the problem is more due to members properly renting out their points for "personal use" or just using their points. And we likely will NOT see availability open up or increase by stopping commercial renting.

 

[Sandisw]

I can see your reasoning here. But this is one area where I think we disagree. Probably because I’m looking at this through the lens of an HOA board.

The POS/ and our contracts ban commercial renting. Policies are subject to, and have to follow our founding documents. What a policy is and what the first two pages of this document state is, this is the master association directing and coordinating with the individual building associations to release this policy to direct the actions of the management staff. Section 8, as you posted clearly states that this is not the exclusive level of enforcement for the no commercial renting clause.

So I interpret this as member services must report anyone with greater than 20 reservations for review, I don’t see this as limiting their actions to enforce the no commercial renting clause in other areas. The existing rules in the foundation documents cannot be limited by a policy document. So I don’t think you can assume that they can’t enforce anything under 20 rentals.

It is not MS who reports anyone. I was told that several times now.

But, let me clarify…I do not believe they can do anything to owners until they reach 20 because the language says you can make as many as your want up to 20.

Now, they can watch an account and see what happens, but if I have been told, in writing that I can hold up to 20, then that is the policy.

As I said, how do they know if an owners has 5 reservations in the name of others that those are rentals? Or that the rest of the reservations that will be booked won’t be in the owners name?

They don’t and I think if they say to someone “yes. It’s says you can make as many as you want up to 20” but because we have the right to use other thingss, we can simply violate our own written. Policy.

Like holding…if they can do what you are suggesting then it means they can apply that anytime they feel like it without changing the written rule?

The write the rules and can change the rules but if they want to take away something they tell owners they can do, then they need to change the policy to reflect that.

And everything that was said at the HOA in December matches this written policy 100%.

 

[Sandisw]

“…[a]ll reservations in excess of 20 shall be presumed to be…for commercial purposes….”
Legally a presumption is a fact required to be assumed once another fact is established. In this sentence the ‘other’ fact is 20 reservations, thus once that threshold is reached the owner is in violation unless they can rebut the presumption.


This paragraph makes it clear that 20 is not some magic number & thus anything under that number is ok, however I wonder if it is the only activity MS is authorized to automatically act on ATM.
I recall that when the ‘rule’ of 20 first surfaced (2008?) owners in violation were sent letters, so I assume if DVC decides to act on other activity which is deemed to be for commercial use those suspected of engaging in commercial use will likewise receive warning letters questioning their pattern of use.
It’s been seven months since they said they were doing something about commercial renting & so far all we’ve seen is the required attestation of personal use, which isn’t going to do squat to stop the availability problems created by rampant commercial renting IMO.

I have said many time that they can act once an owner is at 20 for those under 20, and based on what I was verbally told, it may be something they plan to do.

But I contend that they can’t actually stop any reservations from being made until it’s 20…or cancel any reservations within 20 until that happens.

And MS has confirmed to me many times now that as long as the owners agrees it’s for personal use, the reservation will be confirmed and that they don’t make any determinations.

They dont know how it gets flagged to be reviewed by the business affairs division, but that is who is responsible for enforcement.

They can certainly change it and add that you can do it unless they see something commerucsl but I contend that they can’t have one written policy and simply do something in conflict with it because they said it’s not an exhaustive list.

All I know is I was not expecting this to still be the policy, but it was sent to me with the statement. “Attached is a copy of our policy against the use of vacation points for commercial purposes”