Commerical Use Policy Update - New Thread!

[BeachClub2014]

The wording you have referenced is under the specific section ‘member benefits and privileges’ and is referring only to whether or not member benefits pass to guests or not. Given that there are no member benefits which do pass to guests that I can think of, it is largely irrelevant.

Not at all irrelevant. Although the language is referencing member benefits that may be transferrable to a guest, it clearly says that the member has the responsibility to notify MS if the guest is a renter.

Nowhere else in the HRR does it say that rentals must be notified to DVC.

The HRR clearly states that it is the member's responsibility to notify MS if the guest is renting.

So I think this is a red herring to be honest.

Okay.

The HRR also says that “club members may make a reservation on behalf of a Guest.” There is no other reference to members be required to qualify whether it is a rental.

Except for the one that I highlighted.

 

[JackosinDIS]

Not at all irrelevant. Although the language is referencing member benefits that may be transferrable to a guest, it clearly says that the member has the responsibility to notify MS if the guest is a renter.

Yes, in the context of whether or not the member benefits transfer to guests.

I see what your are saying, but my view is that the possibility of DVC using this particular clause of the HRR to actually enforce or lock out a member is extremely remote, as it is out of context and is not covered any other section which concerns making reservations for guests.

However, nothing at all would stop them from plastering this wording all over the HRR if they wanted to. Who knows, maybe they could even update the check box when booking to say something useful like ‘is this reservation a rental?’

 

[BeachClub2014]

Yes, in the context of whether or not the member benefits transfer to guests.

That's not the way it is worded, but we can agree to disagree on that point.

I see what your are saying, but my view is that the possibility of DVC using this particular clause of the HRR to actually enforce or lock out a member is extremely remote, as it is out of context and is not covered any other section which concerns making reservations for guests.

It appears that way in the current DVC world. However, the point is that the language is reflected in policy. DVC doesn't seem to put much effort into enforcing its policies, or there wouldn't be a plethora of commercial rentals. There has been a significant level of discussion and debate about established policy, which I found interesting within that context. You'll note that I didn't suggest that DVC would enforce that clause, but I bet they could if they chose to do so.

However, nothing at all would stop them from plastering this wording all over the HRR if they wanted to. Who knows, maybe they could even update the check box when booking to say something useful like ‘is this reservation a rental?’

True. I think they should modify the check box as you suggest. It would sure make things clearer, wouldn't it?

 

[sndral]

I won’t try to predict what DVC’s next steps will be, however I see evidence that things started changing this spring,
1) they announced you could transfer banked & borrowed points - let’s call that the carrot & behind the scenes, unannounced, they ended their practice of allowing members with more than one membership to transfer more than once which was a rule they’d been ignoring in those cases - let’s call that the stick. Allegedly that decision to enforce a long existing but ignored rule was because renters were abusing the loophole. I don’t think that it’s a coincidence that they decided to enforce the one transfer rule just a couple of months before the June changes.
2) In June they updated the online booking language https://cdn1.parksmedia.wdprapps.disney.com/media/dvc/DVC-Terms-and-Conditions-2025-5-15-25.pdf to include a definition of personal use (which makes no reference to the number 20.)
3) also in June they started requiring that you attest to personal use every time you booked or modified a reservation online or over the phone. That’s a new enforcement procedure - if you don’t attest to personal use you can’t make or modify a reservation.
Since the new definition & attestation only started last month I suspect we’ll have to wait until renters/guests start checking in for reservations made by owners who attested to personal use to see whether this new language/requirement is toothless or foreshadowing that DVC intends to follow the model of other timeshare systems & crack down on rentals via cancellations or membership locks.

 

[Brianstl]

I won’t try to predict what DVC’s next steps will be, however I see evidence that things started changing this spring,
1) they announced you could transfer banked & borrowed points - let’s call that the carrot & behind the scenes, unannounced, they ended their practice of allowing members with more than one membership to transfer more than once which was a rule they’d been ignoring in those cases - let’s call that the stick. Allegedly that decision to enforce a long existing but ignored rule was because renters were abusing the loophole. I don’t think that it’s a coincidence that they decided to enforce the one transfer rule just a couple of months before the June changes.
2) In June they updated the online booking language https://cdn1.parksmedia.wdprapps.disney.com/media/dvc/DVC-Terms-and-Conditions-2025-5-15-25.pdf to include a definition of personal use (which makes no reference to the number 20.)
3) also in June they started requiring that you attest to personal use every time you booked or modified a reservation online or over the phone. That’s a new enforcement procedure - if you don’t attest to personal use you can’t make or modify a reservation.
Since the new definition & attestation only started last month I suspect we’ll have to wait until renters/guests start checking in for reservations made by owners who attested to personal use to see whether this new language/requirement is toothless or foreshadowing that DVC intends to follow the model of other timeshare systems & crack down on rentals via cancellations or membership locks.

It does almost feel like they are slowly building to bring the hammer down, but given the history I won’t really believe it until I see it has happened. If they really are building to the hammer, letters threatening further escalation will start going out to members they believe might be violating a policy in August or September.

 

[Mouseforward]

True. I think they should modify the check box as you suggest. It would sure make things clearer, wouldn't it?

Just doing this would’ve saved us 200 pages of posts. Then we would’ve been clear with what their intention is; and it would’ve made it believable that they’re going to do after commercial renting.