Commerical Use Policy Update - New Thread!

[Mouseforward]

It would be easy to argue they are not acting in the best interest of the community by not enforcing the their own rules that buyer had the expectation would be enforced at the time of purchase and it has created a situation that is detrimental to the class.

Again, find something that says you’re guaranteed a low-cost studio. It’s first come first serve. You have no way to say that there are not providing you with what’s in the contract.

 

[Sandisw]

I don’t think that law restricted other timeshare companies from going after previous owners who rent the in what they determine to be in a commercial fashion in the last few years.

My understanding is that any amendment that is seen as further limiting owners right to rent has to be voted on and then those that don’t vote yes, are exempt.

From that point on, all new owners would be covered. In the case of DVC, I think it will come down to whether they decide they want to say certain actions are now out of bounds and whether those would fall under this.

Until they actually add more definitions to what counts…whether in actual updated documents or through enforcement, owners are still allowed to do all the same things.

 

[xdan0920]

I agree with you. At first I thought they were gearing up for something, but now I don’t think they will enforce a thing. It just doesn’t have anything to do with them not being legally able to. Maybe they realize with Riviera and PIT not sold out, a huge stinker at CFW, and another huge stinker at LSL coming up, they would rather those contracts sell to commercial renters than not at all. It’s a bit like a Ponzi scheme where there has to be constant investment or the product dies, so development can never really stop, except they are running out of desirable locations to plop these things down. Or maybe they are big dummies, that’s also a distinct possibility.

This is where I’ve landed as well. They aren’t acting bc they don’t feel it’s in DVDs best interest to act. Sure it would be in the best interest of the rank and file DVC member, but who cares?

 

[Sandisw]

Again, find something that says you’re guaranteed a low-cost studio. It’s first come first serve. You have no way to say that there are not providing you with what’s in the contract.

To add, when it comes to this topic, DVC has an official policy of what constitutes commercial and that has been in place since 2008, so any owner who has bought since then bought with that policy in place.

We also know how DVC interpreted the policy and enforced the policy in the past.

While there are specific actions people would like to see DVC include in their definitions of what a pattern looks like, so far, it doesn’t seem like DVC is in any rush to add additional metrics for commercial.

And maybe that is the point? They have something to back up their position if owners were to claim they aren’t meeting their obligations?.

I agree that there is plenty of contract language on DVCs side to support that no specific rooms type was ever guaranteed.

 

[muppets3d]

Again, find something that says you’re guaranteed a low-cost studio. It’s first come first serve. You have no way to say that there are not providing you with what’s in the contract.

If it were truly first come first serve, then okay. But it's not. Mega point owners have these rooms locked up in walks almost year-round. I know walking is a separate (but related, at least in my view) issue.

We all bought DVC (or any points-based timeshare) knowing that unless we buy a dedicated week, we're not guaranteed any particular accommodation. But something tells me the DVC guides aren't telling prospective owners about how basically all studios are gone resort-wide at 8AM 11 months before December 1 for example. I even tried to get an AKV studio (Not even a value or club studio - just a resort view studio) - they were gone. It was a bloodbath this year.

 

[mkatsy]

If it were truly first come first serve, then okay. But it's not. Mega point owners have these rooms locked up in walks almost year-round. I know walking is a separate (but related, at least in my view) issue.

Newly released dates are not available to everyone. DVC created this when they began allowing confirmed reservations to extend outside the booking window. Additionally, their failing to enforce the point cap exacerbates the issue by allowing wealthy members to buy privilege.

 

[Brianstl]

Again, find something that says you’re guaranteed a low-cost studio. It’s first come first serve. You have no way to say that there are not providing you with what’s in the contract.

You can keep on screaming this all you want, but you are missing the most important thing in the founding documents. All members are guaranteed that ownership use is reserved for personal use. Now I will direct the jury to dozens of websites that clearly indicate that the board has failed their fiduciary duty to enforce this on the buyers behalf.

 

[Mouseforward]

You can keep on screaming this all you want, but you are missing the most important thing in the founding documents. All members are guaranteed that ownership use is reserved for personal use. Now I will direct the jury to dozens of websites that clearly indicate that the board has failed their fiduciary duty to enforce this on the buyers behalf.

And I will direct you to the parts of the contract that allow renting and say prove it. Prove they are commercial based on an ad. You lose.

 

[Brianstl]

And I will direct you to the parts of the contract that allow renting and say prove it.

Renting is of course allowed. Renting for a commercial purpose has not been allowed ever and has always been excluded from personal use going back to the very first founding document at OKW. Which is the most important document in any case like this.

 

[Sandisw]

Renting is of course allowed. Renting for a commercial purpose has not been allowed ever and has always been excluded from personal use going back to the very first founding document at OKW. Which is the most important document in any case like this.

But we know that the POS gives DVC the right to define what it means to rent to the level that rises to be commercial.

Since owners have had a policy on what constitutes it since 2008, and it explains when it kicks in…wouldn’t that be the what guides all of this?

 

[muppets3d]

Newly released dates are not available to everyone. DVC created this when they began allowing confirmed reservations to extend outside the booking window. Additionally, their failing to enforce the point cap exacerbates the issue by allowing wealthy members to buy privilege.

Not to mention unlimited modifications of existing reservations, so once you nab a start date you can keep modifying forever until you get to the date you want (or you get to the end of your use year, which ever comes first).

 

[lowlight]

You would have to prove the damages, you would need a contract clause, or an statement in writing that you are guaranteed a low point studio which does not exist. So DVC can say that some rooms are limited in number and you agreed to a contract stating that it was first come first served.

We have timeshare companies with tiers where people on lower tiers have sued since they can't get any reservation.

If you could please stop trying to redirect this conversation to be about "low point studios", that would be great. I'm not sure if you think it's some sick burn or something, but it's pretty trite at this point. I was never a huge point owner, but I owned almost 400 points before I sold most of my contracts and certainly never tried to get a value room (never owned at AKL)- I usually went preferred because I like nice views, although that changed towards the end as the views weren't worth it at Riviera. Does that make "lower tier" or "lower caste"? Maybe, I'm not sure. I don't consider any rooms at VGF to be cheap, but maybe for you they are. I'd be even more up in arms if I did own at AKL or wherever else the cheapie studios you consider us peasants whining are located.

DVC was advertised as an owners club for personal use. First come, first served, no commercial renting allowed. DVC actually is a renters club, where it's easier to get a significant portions of the rooms on the rental market than as an owner. First come, first served to those with the points, bots, and time to walk it at the start of their use year all the way until reservation time. This product is nothing like it's presented, and part of that is natural marketing ploys, and part of that is because there is a malignant tumor within the product that DVC has willfully let grow and take over the whole body.

 

[Brianstl]

But doesn’t the POS give DVC the right to define what that looks like? What rises to the level of someone using membership that way?

They have a policy in place for it and they have told owners what it is.

So, if owners believe they have failed in their duties when it comes to this topic, why wouldn’t it be against what the adopted policy?

They have some leeway, but the fact that the board has done zero enforcement for years is where the failure of fiduciary duty. That is why I think will see some kind of action on take place. How much? I don’t know, but board members themselves have got to do something to protect themselves from potential liability.

 

[Mouseforward]

If you could please stop trying to redirect this conversation to be about "low point studios", that would be great. I'm not sure if you think it's some sick burn or something, but it's pretty trite at this point. I was never a huge point owner, but I owned almost 400 points before I sold most of my contracts and certainly never tried to get a value room (never owned at AKL)- I usually went preferred because I like nice views, although that changed towards the end as the views weren't worth it at Riviera. Does that make "lower tier" or "lower caste"? Maybe, I'm not sure. I don't consider any rooms at VGF to be cheap, but maybe for you they are. I'd be even more up in arms if I did own at AKL or wherever else the cheapie studios you consider us peasants whining are located.

DVC was advertised as an owners club for personal use. First come, first served, no commercial renting allowed. DVC actually is a renters club, where it's easier to get a significant portions of the rooms on the rental market than as an owner. First come, first served to those with the points, bots, and time to walk it at the start of their use year all the way until reservation time. This product is nothing like it's presented, and part of that is natural marketing ploys, and part of that is because there is a malignant tumor within the product that DVC has willfully let grow and take over the whole body.

The only rooms that are problem to book are low point Studios, so when you’re discussing this, that’s what you’re discussing.

No one’s having any issue booking PV Studios at 11 months.

 

[Sandisw]

They have some leeway, but the fact that the board has done zero to enforcement for years is where the failure of fiduciary duty. That is why I think will see some kind of action on take place. How much? I don’t know, but board members themselves have got to do something to protect themselves from potential liability.

We know that enforcement has happened and the last one I read about was within the last year or two?

The one hurdle I see could be that the policy allows DVC the power to decide if an owner who has more than 20 provided satisfactory proof to DVC to allow more.

I know there is debate on whether DVC can enforce and cancel even if you don’t get to 20, but the actual policy only discusses over 20 and we know that DVC has always enforced only over 20.

Coming at this from from the boards point of view, as long as they have this policy, have confirmed it is the offical one, and decide that they want to allow people to hold 20, no matter who they are for, don’t they just have to tell owners they are enforcing it as written?

Take spec renting…if the board decided to tell owners it’s an acceptable way to rent within the rules and is not considered commercial use, then it’s not.

I guess my point was that if we think DVC can use that power to make very strict rules, without even having to define them anywhere why wouldn’t that same power be there to jeep the definitions broad?


ETA: I am not saying they won’t update rules and go after owners for this, or any of the other things people would like to see them do.

 

[lowlight]

But doesn’t the POS give DVC the right to define what that looks like? What rises to the level of someone using membership that way?

They have a policy in place for it and they have told owners what it is.

So, if owners believe they have failed in their duties when it comes to this topic, why wouldn’t it be against what the adopted policy?

Ok, let's throw it back at you. If the 2008/2011 policy is the only policy on the books, and they aren't enforcing it, are they being derelict in their duties?

 

[lowlight]

The only rooms that are problem to book are low point Studios, so when you’re discussing this, that’s what you’re discussing.

No one’s having any issue booking PV Studios at 11 months.

That's where you're wrong.

 

[Sandisw]

Ok, let's throw it back at you. If the 2008/2011 policy is the only policy on the books, and they aren't enforcing it, are they being derelict in their duties?

Yes, absolutely. And I have always said that they should enforce whatever commercial use rules that they have.

This is why I went to the lengths I went to to have DVC provide me with the offical policy because now, as owners, we at least have something specific that can be pointed to that appears to have been or still is being ignored.

Some believed that this policy wasn’t even in play anymore so now we know it is.

While I get that some hoped that DVC was planning to go after other things, and they may still be planning it, at least owners have one thing very specific and well defined to use in their communications with DVC to back up their concerns.

The hard part, of course, is proving it if DVC says they are enforcing it

ETA: Even if all they do is go after LLCs and stop owners from having more than 20, then it will go a long way for those truly in it for commercial purposes.

ETA2: Its also why I have said I will never be okay with DVC being given a pass to not be clear and specific when it comes to what owners can and can not do.

 

[Sandisw]

The only rooms that are problem to book are low point Studios, so when you’re discussing this, that’s what you’re discussing.

No one’s having any issue booking PV Studios at 11 months.

I agree they are a big target if we are talking about the context of those who are renting to levels that clearly make them in it for commercial purposes.

But to be fair, there are times when all rooms are hard, including PV.

To address that, DVC may need to do more in terms of point charts…and then again, I’m not sure what they can do to ever make demand during early December match supply, of all types and views of studios.

 

[Mouseforward]

I’m not sure what they can do to ever make demand during early December match supply, of all types and views of studios.

The only thing that could do is raise the points- the actual holiday week is easier to book than the beginning of the month due to a huge jump in points . I thought they had raised early December about five years ago?