Commerical Use Policy Update - New Thread!

[Sandisw]

I wouldn’t bet the bank on that. When has Disney ever “contacted a customer” to discuss when they’ve thought that rules were being violated before penalizing? They certainly didn’t contact all the third party tour guides to “discuss” before trespassing them.

All the reports we have seen about enforcement over the years included owners being contacted.

The situation tour guides is completely different. There is no contract involved.

 

[Brian Noble]

I think Disney would disagree that no contract was involved.

https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/tickets-terms-conditions/

 

[Brian Noble]

Based on advice I have been given

Off topic, but....

Am I the only one who reads this and immediately thinks Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas?

“That sounds like real trouble,” Gonzo warns him. “You’re going to need plenty of legal advice before this thing is over. As your attorney, I advise you to rent a very fast car with no top. And you’ll need the cocaine. Tape recorder for special music. Acapulco shirts. Get the hell out of LA for at least 48 hours. It blows my weekend; cause naturally I’m going to have to go with you. And we’re going to have to arm ourselves – to the teeth.”
https://www.acmi.net.au/stories-and-ideas/fear-and-loathing-in-las-vegas-as-your-attorney/

 

[Sandisw]

I think Disney would disagree that no contract was involved.

https://disneyworld.disney.go.com/tickets-terms-conditions/

I meant that there was no contract in the same way that DVC has it....the terms and conditions allow TWDC to trespress someone for violation their rules and they don't have to give notice....

The board has given DVCMC the power to enforce our contract and even the policy in place mentions having to "satisfy to the board's satisfaction" that all 20 are for you, family or friends, defined in the policy as personal use" before being allowed to make the 21st and beyond.

And, we know that DVC has indeed let owners know and contacted them to give them a chance to explain.

We have nothing from DVC, so far, that they intend to do anything that is not considered reasonable enforcement based on the policy they have chosen, as of today, to keep in place....

It would have been pretty easy for them to have update it. It is still very possible that the reason it did not get updated is because DVC has decided that enforcing the policy they way it is written...which allows them to use all reservations attached to an owner on any and all memberships they are either an owner or associate, is enough to go after those are clearly violating it.

I think the longer we go without any other changes in practice or in updates to this policy or HRR....I can't imagine the T & C will be updated again when they just rolled out an updated version June 1st....the more it points to maybe DVC simply enforcing the rules they already have in place as to what consitutes a commericial enterprise, practice, and purpose.

 

[achinforsomebacon]

That is a lot of responsibility to put on one person who owes none of us anything. She doesnt know us personally and shouldn't take any risks to share a document with us. If DVC was wanting everyone to easily have this info it would be easy to obtain and/or they would've just said yes. I am willing to bet virtually none of the posters here are going to go to the trouble of requesting the document by certified mail. (I know I havent)

I'm not pushing for her to post it. My thought is that if they didn't want it to be posted, they would have just said so one of the many times she's asked or had her sign something stating it wouldn't be shared. I don't see the harm at this point but I understand and respect her choice to not to post it.

I personally won't be sending a certified letter for it because we don’t rent our points and it has no direct impact on me. I just like to keep up to date on things.

 

[Sandisw]

I'm not pushing for her to post it. My thought is that if they didn't want it to be posted, they would have just said so one of the many times she's asked or had her sign something stating it wouldn't be shared. I don't see the harm at this point but I understand and respect her choice to not to post it.

I personally won't be sending a certified letter for it because we don’t rent our points and it has no direct impact on me. I just like to keep up to date on things.

Thank you for understanding! I don't rent points either but I chose to do all of this to help gather information for others as well to ensure that whatever information I have regarding the contract is coming first hand from DVC. Like you, I want to be well informed on policies and practice, including if changes are going to happen.

Only way that enforcement will matter to me is if they decide to come up with what I consider "unreasonable" definitions for it all...

 

[muppets3d]

Thank you for understanding! I don't rent points either but I chose to do all of this to help gather information for others as well to ensure that whatever information I have regarding the contract is coming first hand from DVC. Like you, I want to be well informed on policies and practice, including if changes are going to happen.

Only way that enforcement will matter to me is if they decide to come up with what I consider "unreasonable" definitions for it all...

You've gone to a lot of effort (and expense because mailing certified letters is not really cheap) to just get the run-around it seems from my perspective, to be quite frank.

 

[xdan0920]

Thank you for understanding! I don't rent points either but I chose to do all of this to help gather information for others as well to ensure that whatever information I have regarding the contract is coming first hand from DVC. Like you, I want to be well informed on policies and practice, including if changes are going to happen.

Only way that enforcement will matter to me is if they decide to come up with what I consider "unreasonable" definitions for it all...

https://www.disboards.com/threads/dvc-t-c-personal-use-only-thread-to-discuss.3968373/post-66209181

This is a little dishonest IMO. And makes me question your motives.

 

[Sandisw]

https://www.disboards.com/threads/dvc-t-c-personal-use-only-thread-to-discuss.3968373/post-66209181

This is a little dishonest IMO. And makes me question your motives.

Not that I owe you or anyone else an explanation and it’s against board rules to post these types of comments.

However, I am going to answer. You obviously you didn’t get that was done for the purposes to see if rules had changed and whether or not I would be denied the right to change a name if I stated it was a rental.

I have done exactly two rentals in my 16 years as an owner.

 

[sndral]

Whenever there’s change there’s a tendency for confirmation bias to cloud understanding IME.
For example, we have numerous examples of Disney taking action suddenly & w/out warning - be it DAS, unauthorized tour guides, enforcing one transfer in the DVC realm, FP to LL, etc.. Thus, there’s evidence that Disney (including DVC) can act decisively & w/out much notice when they choose to do so. It remains to be seen whether they’ll take decisive action to limit commercial use of DVC, but just because it’s always been one way is no bar to Disney deciding to do things differently.

I wouldn’t bet the bank on that. When has Disney ever “contacted a customer” to discuss when they’ve thought that rules were being violated before penalizing? They certainly didn’t contact all the third party tour guides to “discuss” before trespassing them.

This is an interesting parallel & example of how Disney can act when they are targeting third parties profiting in competition w/ the mouse, third party guides were violating Disney’s rules & in shutting them down their less culpable customers were harmed, similar to what would happen if DVC decided to act against commercial renters. In law enforcement you don’t advise the target that you’re investigating them & you certainly don’t inform them that you’re about to swoop in & arrest them. You gather your evidence & then you act.
My own confirmation bias clouds my judgement, even though I’m convinced based on my reading of the documents that DVC could be far more aggressive in controlling commercial exploitation of the system, I have serious doubt that they will take steps to do so because they’ve done nothing for literally decades.
In my mind there are 3 issues, the first is can they act - & a fair reading of all of the documents including the 2008/11 doc.s enable them to act IMO. The second is will they act, & third is, if they act, how will they do so.

 

[lowlight]

Whenever there’s change there’s a tendency for confirmation bias to cloud understanding IME.
For example, we have numerous examples of Disney taking action suddenly & w/out warning - be it DAS, unauthorized tour guides, enforcing one transfer in the DVC realm, FP to LL, etc.. Thus, there’s evidence that Disney (including DVC) can act decisively & w/out much notice when they choose to do so. It remains to be seen whether they’ll take decisive action to limit commercial use of DVC, but just because it’s always been one way is no bar to Disney deciding to do things differently.

This is an interesting parallel & example of how Disney can act when they are targeting third parties profiting in competition w/ the mouse, third party guides were violating Disney’s rules & in shutting them down their less culpable customers were harmed, similar to what would happen if DVC decided to act against commercial renters. In law enforcement you don’t advise the target that you’re investigating them & you certainly don’t inform them that you’re about to swoop in & arrest them. You gather your evidence & then you act.
My own confirmation bias clouds my judgement, even though I’m convinced based on my reading of the documents that DVC could be far more aggressive in controlling commercial exploitation of the system, I have serious doubt that they will take steps to do so because they’ve done nothing for literally decades.
In my mind there are 3 issues, the first is can they act - & a fair reading of all of the documents including the 2008/11 doc.s enable them to act IMO. The second is will they act, & third is, if they act, how will they do so.

This is pretty much what I wrote a few weeks ago. I do believe they can act, almost entirely without impunity (not just on a legal level, but on a "what are you going to do about it level"), to eliminate what they deem in their reasonable determination constitutes commercial renting. They have stated, unequivocally, at the December 2024 meeting that they will act. How will they act? That goes back to what both you and I have said- in law enforcement, they would have already had the list of suspects before they announced a word. The announcement of the enforcement would be the hammer coming down, not some check box and posturing. I have no idea what DVC is doing, and not in some 4d chess "they are making moves to confuse us so they can catch even more renters" way. I literally think DVC has no idea what they are doing, and I'll go back to what I learned in training- inaction costs. "The best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing is nothing."

 

[muppets3d]

This is pretty much what I wrote a few weeks ago. I do believe they can act, almost entirely without impunity (not just on a legal level, but on a "what are you going to do about it level"), to eliminate what they deem in their reasonable determination constitutes commercial renting. They have stated, unequivocally, at the December 2024 meeting that they will act. How will they act? That goes back to what both you and I have said- in law enforcement, they would have already had the list of suspects before they announced a word. The announcement of the enforcement would be the hammer coming down, not some check box and posturing. I have no idea what DVC is doing, and not in some 4d chess "they are making moves to confuse us so they can catch even more renters" way. I literally think DVC has no idea what they are doing, and I'll go back to what I learned in training- inaction costs. "The best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing is nothing."

To a rank-and-file employee, often the best thing to do is nothing. Tall poppy syndrome.

 

[lowlight]

To a rank-and-file employee, often the best thing to do is nothing. Tall poppy syndrome.

Oh definitely, if you don't make the big bucks, keep your head down. Let's hope DVC has actual leadership and isn't taking a showing of hands to decide enforcement actions.

 

[Brianstl]

Oh definitely, if you don't make the big bucks, keep your head down. Let's hope DVC has actual leadership and isn't taking a showing of hands to decide enforcement actions.

I tend to think some kind of enforcement is coming. Disney for a decade plus now has been all about getting every dime possible out of the parks and resorts. If I was an accountant working for Disney I would be implementing a plan for Disney to capture as much of the dollars that are presently going to point rentals. I would imagine they view it as easy pickings.

 

[muppets3d]

I tend to think some kind of enforcement is coming. Disney for a decade plus now has been all about getting every dime possible out of the parks and resorts. If I was an accountant working for Disney I would be implementing a plan for Disney to capture as much of the dollars that are presently going to point rentals. I would imagine they view it as easy pickings.

They let it be for long enough, bookings for cash were strong and attendance was robust. Direct sales met expectations as well I would guess. But by all reports this is a "slow summer" so now they're looking under the couch cushions for pennies they're leaving behind.