Commerical Use Policy Update - New Thread!

[Cyberc1978]

It seems pretty obvious to me that Disney has the legal right to crack down on renting and that they are positioning themselves to do so with their new check box. They could have cracked down without the checkbox, but they’ve decided to give fair warning. I have no doubt at this point that Disney will come down on renters. The question is just how far they will go. The thing that jump out at me in Disney communications is the idea that renting on the internet constitutes commercial activity, which does knock out most renters.

I do find some of the rental companies quite smug when they repeatedly state that they are not doing anything wrong. In an overall moral sense that may be true, but let’s be honest they’ve always been operating in a grey legal area. I don’t know that I would be able to sleep at night if my livelihood depended on renting out dvc points in mass.

Right now all we have is an updated T&C and updated text attached to a checkbox. The checkbox is not new it’s been there for as long as I can remember.

Since no policy or rules have changed I frankly don’t understand why DVC haven’t started the enforcement weeks, months or even years ago?

That’s is IF an enforcement is actually coming?

After the system upgrade which resulted in a huge clusterF… DVC should allegedly have gotten some new tools. No one no what the new tools are…. Except for DVC.

However ASSUMING the system upgrade gave them new tools to discover commercial renters one would think that’s all that was needed to start enforcement - apparently not - have in mind the system upgrade was done mid April, that’s more than 3,5 months ago. Since then all we’ve got is updated T&C and updated website text.

We all know by reading the POS that 0 renting is allowed for the LLC’ - if DVC can’t enforce LLC renting by now how should they be able to enforce on anyone else?

Maybe we should turn the discussion around and talk about WHY DVC shouldn’t or haven’t enforced at all obviously there would be a good reason.

From the looks of it some sort of system support worked in the past since members were contacted in the late 2000’ unless it were done manually. With much less members to go through that’s definitely an option, now we have more than 200,000 which would make a manual process incredibly time consuming.

After the system upgrade one should assume that Disney at least NOW would be able to run a query and get ie all LLC’ which owns more than 1,000 points and have more than 20 reservations. Reality is that DVC most likely have had that capability for years but decided not to use it, or maybe they did but didn’t care.

Afterall now the deluxe resorts are getting filled and those staying are buying park tix. It’s no fun to have a resort which is only maybe half full, and those that did stay there were DVC members and guests who booked through Disney at a heavy discounted price.

I’m sure that Disney have run the numbers and what they are seeing is maybe that renters at deluxe resorts are spending much more money in the bubble than regular paying guests at a deluxe resort are. If Disney got the renters to book as a regular paying guest their numbers are maybe showing that the same guest would spend much less in the bubble or not stay onsite afterall. Afterall the same money can only be spent once.

I know that DVC has an obligation to uphold the contract and I think that they do as a whole. However unless there are some sort of incentive for DVC to spend their management fee $$ on something they are most likely not doing it.

It’s not as if more people would pay to book the deluxe resorts and more would go to parks If renting all in all was shutdown. Disney, the parks and deluxe resorts are only reachable for the upper middleclass. They need to decide if they want to do Disney at a less cost when renting or travel abroad. If renting went away then doing Disney would cost more, they would need to decide if moderate hotels were in their flavor or staying offsite where the accommodation is just as nice as the deluxe or maybe even better. Could also be that without renting they travel more abroad, would you prefer to visit Italy in Epcot or actually go to Italy - I don’t think the actual cost difference is that big. In that case Disney would be out of much more money that they potentially are with renting.

 

[Sandisw]

Right now all we have is an updated T&C and updated text attached to a checkbox. The checkbox is not new it’s been there for as long as I can remember.

Since no policy or rules have changed I frankly don’t understand why DVC haven’t started the enforcement weeks, months or even years ago?

That’s is IF an enforcement is actually coming?

After the system upgrade which resulted in a huge clusterF… DVC should allegedly have gotten some new tools. No one no what the new tools are…. Except for DVC.

However ASSUMING the system upgrade gave them new tools to discover commercial renters one would think that’s all that was needed to start enforcement - apparently not - have in mind the system upgrade was done mid April, that’s more than 3,5 months ago. Since then all we’ve got is updated T&C and updated website text.

We all know by reading the POS that 0 renting is allowed for the LLC’ - if DVC can’t enforce LLC renting by now how should they be able to enforce on anyone else?

Maybe we should turn the discussion around and talk about WHY DVC shouldn’t or haven’t enforced at all obviously there would be a good reason.

From the looks of it some sort of system support worked in the past since members were contacted in the late 2000’ unless it were done manually. With much less members to go through that’s definitely an option, now we have more than 200,000 which would make a manual process incredibly time consuming.

After the system upgrade one should assume that Disney at least NOW would be able to run a query and get ie all LLC’ which owns more than 1,000 points and have more than 20 reservations. Reality is that DVC most likely have had that capability for years but decided not to use it, or maybe they did but didn’t care.

Afterall now the deluxe resorts are getting filled and those staying are buying park tix. It’s no fun to have a resort which is only maybe half full, and those that did stay there were DVC members and guests who booked through Disney at a heavy discounted price.

I’m sure that Disney have run the numbers and what they are seeing is maybe that renters at deluxe resorts are spending much more money in the bubble than regular paying guests at a deluxe resort are. If Disney got the renters to book as a regular paying guest their numbers are maybe showing that the same guest would spend much less in the bubble or not stay onsite afterall. Afterall the same money can only be spent once.

I know that DVC has an obligation to uphold the contract and I think that they do as a whole. However unless there are some sort of incentive for DVC to spend their management fee $$ on something they are most likely not doing it.

It’s not as if more people would pay to book the deluxe resorts and more would go to parks If renting all in all was shutdown. Disney, the parks and deluxe resorts are only reachable for the upper middleclass. They need to decide if they want to do Disney at a less cost when renting or travel abroad. If renting went away then doing Disney would cost more, they would need to decide if moderate hotels were in their flavor or staying offsite where the accommodation is just as nice as the deluxe or maybe even better. Could also be that without renting they travel more abroad, would you prefer to visit Italy in Epcot or actually go to Italy - I don’t think the actual cost difference is that big. In that case Disney would be out of much more money that they potentially are with renting.

I think it is interesting that we haven’t seen more if they were going to change rules, policies, or use metrics for what makes a pattern that is in addition to the offical policy.

I can only think of two reasons as to why we have not heard or seen evidence of enforcement yet.

One…they have decided that owners who don’t exceed more than 20 reservations in a 12 month period, regardless of who is on those reservations are not using their membership for a commercial purpose and thus aren’t going to bother anyone who isnt in violation of that.

Two…because of the threshold they set with that policy, lowering it or adding other things is not as legally easy as some think it is and they are still dealing with all of that before doing more.

I know I’ve mentioned it but that 2021 FL 718.111 law…wasn’t there when the current policy was enacted so any changes that could be coming, will need to comply with that.

The biggest thing is that DVC themselves, outside the 2011 policy, has not actually given owners clear guidance of what level or type of renting they see as out of bounds.

I did actually ask them to explain to me how limiting renting to family and friends, which is what MS has either told or implied, to owners would meet a reasonable definition of commercial purpose as well as not be in conflict with that law and the response was “ Owners can rent to anyone, not just family and friends…as long as it’s occasional and not a pattern”.

Saying you can’t “frequently or regularly” rent…which is the language of T and C, doesn’t mean a thing without DVC giving it context as to what it looks like in terms of actions by owners.

Whether they give us that context in updated rules or policies or through enforcement, it’s a guessing game for everyone.

Personally, I think DVC wants it that way.

 

[Cyberc1978]

I found this online.

I assume that this applies to DVC, but my legal knowledge in this area is none existent

If it does the rules that we members need to adhere to needs to be easy to understand. At best our updated terms and conditions is anything but easy to understand. We all understand the words but the context the should be understood with is very unclear. I’m referring to “frequent and regularly” renting is not allowed. We all have our own and different understanding what it means - that does not comply with the text below.

It states that HOA rules :To be enforceable, HOA rules should align with the association’s governing documents, comply with state and federal laws, follow the proper approval process, and be written in a way that is easy to understand and apply consistently.

Source: https://www.fsresidential.com/florida/news-events/articles/unenforceable-hoa-rules-in-florida/

Thoughts?

 

[MICKIMINI]

I made two reservations yesterday, for our son and DIL overlapping our October 2025 trip. I used OTU (2 nights) from our direct and (2 nights) from a resale. The CM didn't seem to care that they were not listed on the resale. She was talking to herself and said "oh, yes, they are on the contract" even though they are not on the one she was booking at that moment. All are the same UY. She pulled up their info and that seemed to satisfy her. She only read her script once, when using direct points. (Edit: son and DIL are on the direct)

Since I was challenged last week when booking DH and I (ridiculous), this was a different take. It answers the question to me anyway, that there should be no issue with booking them on any of our resales even though they are not listed as members. Currently, I have 6 reservations for October and 1 waitlist. In November, I plan to make reservations for 2026 which will evolve from 11 to 7 months. I could hit the "danger zone" at 7 months with multiple changes. Bring it!

Oh, and back in 1996 when we first bought OKW, bringing friends and family was a big selling points from Bob, our original guide. Our first three trips were in 3BR Grand Villas with family and friends. Seems like the entire point of Disney trips is enjoying with our families, right?

I just wanted to share this since we have definitely gotten into the weeds and every unique interaction provides another clue as to what they are or are not thinking.

 

[VGCgroupie]

I made two reservations yesterday, for our son and DIL overlapping our October 2025 trip. I used OTU (2 nights) from our direct and (2 nights) from a resale. The CM didn't seem to care that they were not listed on the resale. She was talking to herself and said "oh, yes, they are on the contract" even though they are not on the one she was booking at that moment. All are the same UY. She pulled up their info and that seemed to satisfy her. She only read her script once, when using direct points. (Edit: son and DIL are on the direct)

Since I was challenged last week when booking DH and I (ridiculous), this was a different take. It answers the question to me anyway, that there should be no issue with booking them on any of our resales even though they are not listed as members. Currently, I have 6 reservations for October and 1 waitlist. In November, I plan to make reservations for 2026 which will evolve from 11 to 7 months. I could hit the "danger zone" at 7 months with multiple changes. Bring it!

Oh, and back in 1996 when we first bought OKW, bringing friends and family was a big selling points from Bob, our original guide. Our first three trips were in 3BR Grand Villas with family and friends. Seems like the entire point of Disney trips is enjoying with our families, right?

I just wanted to share this since we have definitely gotten into the weeds and every unique interaction provides another clue as to what they are or are not thinking.

Yes, it makes me wonder if some MS agents actually have their own feelings about renting and thats where some comments stem from. We cant know since DVC is basically silent on the matter

 

[Mouseforward]

I made two reservations yesterday, for our son and DIL overlapping our October 2025 trip. I used OTU (2 nights) from our direct and (2 nights) from a resale. The CM didn't seem to care that they were not listed on the resale. She was talking to herself and said "oh, yes, they are on the contract" even though they are not on the one she was booking at that moment. All are the same UY. She pulled up their info and that seemed to satisfy her. She only read her script once, when using direct points. (Edit: son and DIL are on the direct)

Since I was challenged last week when booking DH and I (ridiculous), this was a different take. It answers the question to me anyway, that there should be no issue with booking them on any of our resales even though they are not listed as members. Currently, I have 6 reservations for October and 1 waitlist. In November, I plan to make reservations for 2026 which will evolve from 11 to 7 months. I could hit the "danger zone" at 7 months with multiple changes. Bring it!

Oh, and back in 1996 when we first bought OKW, bringing friends and family was a big selling points from Bob, our original guide. Our first three trips were in 3BR Grand Villas with family and friends. Seems like the entire point of Disney trips is enjoying with our families, right?

I just wanted to share this since we have definitely gotten into the weeds and every unique interaction provides another clue as to what they are or are not thinking.

Are they affiliate members ? The rule counts all contracts you are a member of and an affiliate of so if your kids were affiliates then they may not be questioned ( which kind of makes sense)

 

[MICKIMINI]

Are they affiliate members ? The rule counts all contracts you are a member of and an affiliate of so if your kids were affiliates then they may not be questioned ( which kind of makes sense)

Our son and DIL are listed as full owners on our direct only. My interaction with a CM last week was contrary to this week's CM who said members can no longer make reservations for friends and family. That is ridiculous. I challenged her and said politely that I would be using our resales to book family as the verbiage didn't change, just what CM's are telling members. She dropped it at that point. @VGCgroupie, I think you are correct! It seems to me that CM's are putting their own spin on these interactions. DVC please clarify!

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

So now they have to weigh their options carefully, especially given the bad publicity the company has received on the web from their high ticket pricing, Lightning Lane pricing, and the political wishy washiness of the Chapek era. The last thing DVC needs is DVC Owners blogging about how DVC has taken away the right to rent any reservations, and that DVC is basically now like any other timeshare, but more expensive.

This is exactly what people argued about DAS reform/crackdown, and the actual crackdown was much harsher than almost anybody imagined. I would say (many of) the DAS people being kicked out of the program were far more sympathetic.

Are they affiliate members ? The rule counts all contracts you are a member of and an affiliate of so if your kids were affiliates then they may not be questioned ( which kind of makes sense)

Yeah, that seems obvious to me too— if they are actually ON any of your contracts, pretty clear they are friends and family, even when using other contracts— isn’t this how the system should work?

 

[Mommb]

I made two reservations yesterday, for our son and DIL overlapping our October 2025 trip. I used OTU (2 nights) from our direct and (2 nights) from a resale. The CM didn't seem to care that they were not listed on the resale. She was talking to herself and said "oh, yes, they are on the contract" even though they are not on the one she was booking at that moment. All are the same UY. She pulled up their info and that seemed to satisfy her. She only read her script once, when using direct points. (Edit: son and DIL are on the direct)

Any individuals who are on any contract with you are clearly “friends and family” and not people to whom you are selling points solely to make money. Whether they are on the contract you are using for their reservation doesn’t make a difference as long as you clearly have a relationship with them.

DVC has repeatedly and consistently said that booking vacations for friends and family is fine, so you can clearly do just that even if you make more than 20 reservations a year. The unresolved question is how many reservations you can make that are not for people you have previously travelled with or booked for before triggering a review.

 

[MICKIMINI]

Any individuals who are on any contract with you are clearly “friends and family” and not people to whom you are selling points solely to make money. Whether they are on the contract you are using for their reservation doesn’t make a difference as long as you clearly have a relationship with them.

DVC has repeatedly and consistently said that booking vacations for friends and family is fine, so you can clearly do just that even if you make more than 20 reservations a year. The unresolved question is how many reservations you can make that are not for people you have previously travelled with or booked for before triggering a review.

I understand your point, but I was challenged last week, specifically regarding using my resales for my son and DIL. I did not let it go and the CM backed off. I had to point out that I would make reservations for them on the contract of my choosing (direct or resale). We've been members since 1996 so I have seen all the changes and knew I was right!

 

[Mouseforward]

I understand your point, but I was challenged last week, specifically regarding using my resales for my son and DIL. I did not let it go and the CM backed off. I had to point out that I would make reservations for them on the contract of my choosing (direct or resale). We've been members since 1996 so I have seen all the changes and knew I was right!

If you remember the screenshots of the chat, I had posted- it only took me a very specific pushback to get member services to fold and admit that occasional renting is fine. This is why many of us are not happy that they choose to put member services in the position of bluffing to give the impression they’re doing something

 

[DL1WDW2]

Do not believe DVC would put this onto the Castmember response to their member guests… or even on a FAQs section when making reservations.
I think that would be very stressful and not necessary .
The cast members always remind me they want to help and prefer we ask for their assistance before making a mistake that has to be repaired.

 

[Sandisw]

If you remember the screenshots of the chat, I had posted- it only took me a very specific pushback to get member services to fold and admit that occasional renting is fine. This is why many of us are not happy that they choose to put member services in the position of bluffing to give the impression they’re doing something

They also confirmed it to me in their answer as well. It would have been very easy for them to state the same thing that MS is telling people if indeed, they had actually updated the rules to define renting to someone who is not a family or friend as being something that fits the standard of being an owner who is using their membership for commercial purposes.

But, they didn't....they admitted that you can rent to anyone. It still comes down to the patterns one is doing and whether or not DVC decides those patterns are no longer appropriate.

Lots of ideas and definitions of what people feel or want DVC use to say an owner is violating the commerical purpose clause but only one that matters is how DVC defines it and so far, they only seem to want to put into writing that the current policy is the 2011 policy....

 

[Sandisw]

Do not believe DVC would put this onto the Castmember response to their member guests… or even on a FAQs section when making reservations.
I think that would be very stressful and not necessary .
The cast members always remind me they want to help and prefer we ask for their assistance before making a mistake that has to be repaired.

The problem is that what some of the CM's are telling people, or implying to people is misleading. That is what some people are upset about.

Some of the information MS is giving owners is that you can only use your membership for yourself, family and friends...implying that renting can only be done to family and friends.

That is simply not true and DVC management confirmed it to me that it was not true.....here is the exact quote:

" Occasional renting is okay and when you rent occasionally in a manner that is not a pattern, you can rent to anyone. It is not just limited to friends and family."

ETA: updated post - removed info that confused answe… this was to agree that what DVC is having MS do has been unfair to them.

 

[Sandisw]

I found this online.

I assume that this applies to DVC, but my legal knowledge in this area is none existent

If it does the rules that we members need to adhere to needs to be easy to understand. At best our updated terms and conditions is anything but easy to understand. We all understand the words but the context the should be understood with is very unclear. I’m referring to “frequent and regularly” renting is not allowed. We all have our own and different understanding what it means - that does not comply with the text below.

It states that HOA rules :To be enforceable, HOA rules should align with the association’s governing documents, comply with state and federal laws, follow the proper approval process, and be written in a way that is easy to understand and apply consistently.

Source: https://www.fsresidential.com/florida/news-events/articles/unenforceable-hoa-rules-in-florida/

Thoughts?

This relates to an HOA and we are a COA…so honestly, not sure.

At least we all can agree that the one thing the 2011 policy does is make it very clear that if you are over 20 reservations in a 12 month period, you know that DVC will cancel any in excess of that for engaging in commercial behavior, unless you prove you are not.

Obviously, there are different interpretations of what can happen if you don’t even get to 20…and plenty of posts on that already!

 

[DL1WDW2]

I don’t know what you are arguing about anymore.
But you must be right if it is worth this effort to clarify your interpretation .

 

[Sandisw]

I don’t know what you are arguing about anymore.
But you must be right if it is worth this effort to clarify your interpretation .

I was giving context to why people are upset with DVC, not the CMs, right now.

DVC has put CMs in a position that some of us feel has been unfair to CMs and that DVC should be giving clear answers to owners.

So, agreeing with you that what they are doing to CMs has not been necessary.

I cleaned up my post to take out the confusing parts.

 

[lowlight]

Oh, and back in 1996 when we first bought OKW, bringing friends and family was a big selling points from Bob, our original guide. Our first three trips were in 3BR Grand Villas with family and friends. Seems like the entire point of Disney trips is enjoying with our families, right?

"With friends" is different than "for friends", and "in villas with friends" is different than "at home" while a friend is in your villa. I think if you look at a timeshare like DVC logically, it's meant to be used as a personal use product for your family and friends who are vacationing with you at the same time. I don't think there's a person in the world who cares that you rent a 3BR grand villa and go with 5 of your family and 6 of your friends, or that you rent three 1 BR villa's and you're in one, and friends are in the other one. It's the people who have a product they almost never personally use, and suddenly their 12 aunts and 45 friends are basically the owners of the timeshare points that's questionable.

 

[Mouseforward]

It's the people who have a product they almost never personally use,

I do think personal usage should always be considered, Someone who does not use their points and just rents would fail to meet any definition in the POS.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

I do think personal usage should always be considered, Someone who does not use their points and just rents would fail to meet any definition in the POS.

Seems like it should be very easy to flag and warn (if not immediately crackdown) on anyone who has not had their name on at least 33% of their rentals over the past 5 years. Wouldn’t fix the whole problem but would be a strong start.