Davids DVC: Rental reimbursement or rescheduling?

[quandrea]

Thank you ! I’m usually more colorful but I don’t want to be kicked off the DIS I love ❤ the DIS
There is no love between David and me - more and more I see him as Daddy Warbucks or Scrooge McDuck sitting on his pile of cash laughing at the poor renters !

Agreed. Reading all these horror stories. I will never rent out points with him again. I have 289 points that may expire. I’d rather that happen than use his services.

 

[SherylLC]

Thank you for this I have been pondering this and I just don’t believe a word they say ! We will be on a permanent break as I’ve made it crystal clear I Will Not be under the terms of his new contract
He can go pound sand

Yes, I'm so glad Robinb spoke up from the "view from her high-horse" that she admits she embraces! I made original changes 4-5 months ago and all of us have been through a lot since then. We're all just trying to survive this weird, new, scary world. I was willing to change another reservation at first, but now that I remember David's terms, I realize that if I do that I'll be liable for a heck of a lot more than just the monies I received for the rental! Several times more if I have to pay it back plus possibly airfare, incidentals, replacement accommodations etc. for a family of five! I 100% believe that without a vaccine the pandemic will resurface again (and likely will before a vaccine is made available) so this is not a gamble I am willing to make.

David's messed up. He didn't allow for pandemic. He's not alone. Not many of us thought we needed to consider it. He had a unprotected business model and is now is trying to pull his business out but is doing it on the shoulders of owners whose goodwill may end up being ruinous for them. Messy situation. Renters are on the short stick of it but owners should not be bullied/shamed or otherwise pressured to put their necks and pocketbooks on the line for an unknown.

 

[spinchy]

Well, under new contracts OWNERS are liable not only for cost of reservation but also expenses (airfare, new accommodations, etc.). He has no reason not to entice renters into a new contract.

Owners will only be liable for those extra costs if they are responsible for cancelling the reservation (or losing the reservation for non-payment of dues, etc).

 

[Bearval]

I don't really understand why everyone is ignoring the fact that renters are being offered cash refunds less a $3 per point rebooking fee on rebooked rentals. That's not a voucher. It's not 100% of your money back either but it's better than a kick in the butt which is really all you're entitled to under the contract.

You are wrong concerning your statement that a renter was entitled to nothing under the contract if you are referring to the time DVC was closed. They paid for a room and would have been in default if the chose not to go, problem was no room was provided. This is why those who chose to do a chargeback are winning their claims.

 

[SherylLC]

Owners will only be liable for those extra costs if they are responsible for cancelling the reservation (or losing the reservation for non-payment of dues, etc).

I admit I may be wrong on this. I hope I am. But I am still not willing to go into an agreement where one party has accepted under certain conditions but the other party is bound by different conditions. My understanding is the new contracts make owners liable under force majuere, but I am getting older, LOL, and could be mistaken.

 

[spinchy]

I think he could be but again, a travel restriction doesn’t amend or take away from the contract signed, So, strictly speaking, the room reservation is there,

Normally, that type of issue would be covered under travel insurance but some are having trouble as its COVID, On the other hand, maybe those under the restriction can file a claim on those grounds?

I am sure he wouldn’t want chargebacks, but honestly, I think with resorts open, he would win as nothing in the contract is being breached with the room still booked,

These comments are not meant to be harsh toward a renter, but they chose to rent for the discount and assumed the risk. IMO, I bet most renters have no issue in giving owners the extra if it means they have a chance to get the bulk of their funds returned...knowing It’s them asking for the exception,

As a renter, I was more than happy to lose a portion of the money paid to get that exception. My expectation was that some of that was for the owner.
As an owner, I haven't yet been asked to make a change, but I'd be unwilling to do it unless Davids was giving me a portion of that money.

Being on both sides of the issue, I agree with your last point completely.

If David's isn't afraid of losing more charge backs, the only other reason for doing this is customer satisfaction. He's creating a lot of extra work for his staff (for not a lot of extra money) buy opening the door to these changes now that the resorts are open. I wonder if it's a combination of pressure from forums like this and a fear that credit card companies might still allow charge backs going forward. Either way, from my renter perspective, I'm glad he's at least trying to help people who want/need to back out now. He certainly doesn't have to at this point. And owners don't have to agree to help out. So thanks to all who choose to!

 

[spinchy]

I admit I may be wrong on this. I hope I am. But I am still not willing to go into an agreement where one party has accepted under certain conditions but the other party is bound by different conditions. My understanding is the new contracts make owners liable under force majuere, but I am getting older, LOL, and could be mistaken.

I've just been through the process with them from the owner side. Under force majeure, we'd agree to pay back the money already given to us by David's. Which may be issue enough to make you not want to do business with them. But the parts about extra costs (travel, finding comparable accommodations, etc) only apply if we are responsible for the room not being provided.

 

[Sandisw]

As a renter, I was more than happy to lose a portion of the money paid to get that exception. My expectation was that some of that was for the owner.
As an owner, I haven't yet been asked to make a change, but I'd be unwilling to do it unless Davids was giving me a portion of that money.

Being on both sides of the issue, I agree with your last point completely.

If David's isn't afraid of losing more charge backs, the only other reason for doing this is customer satisfaction. He's creating a lot of extra work for his staff (for not a lot of extra money) buy opening the door to these changes now that the resorts are open. I wonder if it's a combination of pressure from forums like this and a fear that credit card companies might still allow charge backs going forward. Either way, from my renter perspective, I'm glad he's at least trying to help people who want/need to back out now. He certainly doesn't have to at this point. And owners don't have to agree to help out. So thanks to all who choose to!

Very good points and I am thinking it may end up being his new business model because issues with COVID will be around for awhile and he opened the door in allowing this and I think it will be hard to change it in the future.

Again, owners who choose to go with him will know what they are agreeing to and that will work if they decide to still rent. I won’t again because I don’t like his contract, but as long as the new model works for renters and owners, more power to them!

 

[Bearval]

I admit I may be wrong on this. I hope I am. But I am still not willing to go into an agreement where one party has accepted under certain conditions but the other party is bound by different conditions. My understanding is the new contracts make owners liable under force majuere, but I am getting older, LOL, and could be mistaken.

My question is if you are a renter and the owner cancels your reservations who goes after the owner for restitution? Is this spelled out in the contract? Does David reimburse the renter and he sues the owners for the room ,airfare and other expenses? Or does he tell the renter they have to sue? I would like to see how this would play out especially of the owner is not based in the U.S. even if it was in the U.S. this would most likely exceed the limits of small claims courts. Also what recourse would you have with an overseas owner who may have even sold his timeshare?

 

[Marionnette]

You are wrong concerning your statement that a renter was entitled to nothing under the contract if you are referring to the time DVC was closed. They paid for a room and would have been in default if the chose not to go, problem was no room was provided. This is why those who chose to do a chargeback are winning their claims.

I believe that’s true regarding reservations which were cancelled during the shutdown.

Now that resorts are open, David’s is giving the renters two options should they decide not to travel. Option #1 is to accept a full-price voucher, which I believe is what is being offered to international travelers who cannot visit the USA. Option#2 is to accept a cash refund minus $3/point, which I believe is being offered to both foreign and domestic travelers who wish to cancel. Both are contingent on the owner re-renting the reservation. If the owner chooses not to re-rent the reservation or points, then under the previous intermediary agreement the owner still gets paid. But if the owner elects to re-rent their reservation or points, David’s will pay them $2/point for their efforts.

So think about it. In option #1, the renter gets a full-price credit, but under David’s new rental prices, it costs $1-$3 more per point versus a year ago. The renter will pay that much more for the same reservation when they redeem their voucher. Or they will shorten their trip by a day or two, which ultimately results in a leftover credit that gets forfeited. A win for David’s.

In Option #2, David’s keeps $3/point from the original renter. They charge the new renter $1-$3 more per point under their new 2020 price structure. They pay the owner $2/point and keep $2-$4 per point for their efforts. They are returning their commission to the original renter ($4.50/point) but they are collecting it from the new renter on the back end. Another win for David’s.

ETA: And if the owner cannot/will not re-rent the reservation or points, David’s gets to keep the original commission, the owner is still entitled to payment under the original “no refunds” terms of the agreement. The reservation would sit empty and unused. But the renter? It sounds as if they would be SOL.

 

[WDWEPCOT]

Daddy Warbucks !! Sitting on his cash ! He’s not helping anyone but himself - I’ve found his staff to be rude and very demanding since this covid started on both the renter and owner sides since I’ve had horses in both races !
ymmv - but I for one am so done with him ! I have one rental checking in 9/5 I hope to be paid but if not so be it because as far as I’m concerned he can keep the 3 30% he owes me and we can all walk away - which I’ve told him in writing which he promptly ignored - strong arm tactics don’t work with me and I told he mgr that!

 

[New Mouse]

Owners will only be liable for those extra costs if they are responsible for cancelling the reservation (or losing the reservation for non-payment of dues, etc).

That is not what the contract says.

 

[Marionnette]

That is not what the contract says.

You’re reading the contracts incorrectly.

From the Intermediary Agreement that both renter and owner get after the reservation is secured:

15. Should accommodations not be available on date of arrival due to an action or omission by the Owner, including but not limited to negligence on the part of the Owner and, after communication with the Intermediary, suitable comparable accommodations, as determined by Intermediary in Intermediary’s sole discretion, for the same dates cannot be secured by the Owner, the parties agree that Renter will be due a refund limited to the amount paid which is _______________ US Dollars which refund shall be the responsibility of Owner. In the event that the suitable comparable accommodations, as determined by Intermediary in Intermediary’s sole discretion, are available for a sum greater than the original amount paid by the Renter, the difference in value shall be the responsibility of the Owner.

From the Intermediary Agreement that the owner gets when offering up their points if the owner fails to maintain the reservation:

​

7. The DVC Owner further agrees with the Intermediary to make full restitution to the Intermediary and a guest with an active reservation for any and all costs related to a cancellation of that reservation caused by or relating to the failure of the DVC Owner to honour the reservation or otherwise not comply with any obligation or responsibility of the DVC Owner under this agreement including, without limitation, any legal fees, costs and expenses associated with the collection of said costs.

But in the event of a force majeure that is beyond the control of all parties (also from the owner’s intermediary agreement):

10. In the event of a Force Majeure (as defined in this paragraph), each party shall be excused from any future performance of obligations under this agreement; provided, however that if Intermediary has paid 70% of the funds collected for the reservation from Guest to DVC Owner pursuant to 4(f) of this Agreement, DVC Owner will return to Intermediary the full amount it has already received from Intermediary, as soon as is reasonably possible after the conditions(s) constituting the Force Majeure event is/are notified by Intermediary to DVC Owner. A Force Majeure is an event beyond the Intermediary’s reasonable control which renders performance of a rental reservation with respect to DVC Owner’s rented points impossible or substantially impaired, including without limitation, acts of God, acts of government, embargoes, war, riot, epidemic, pandemic, natural disaster, governmental order restrictions and Disney Vacation Club closures or cancellation of reservations.

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

[spinchy]

That is not what the contract says.

unless you have a different contract than the one I received, it is very specifically what the contract says

 

[SherylLC]

I've just been through the process with them from the owner side. Under force majeure, we'd agree to pay back the money already given to us by David's. Which may be issue enough to make you not want to do business with them. But the parts about extra costs (travel, finding comparable accommodations, etc) only apply if we are responsible for the room not being provided.

I hear you and I believe you. But given that the likelihood of force majeure coming into play again very soon, as an owner I'm better off with the original contract.

 

[WDWEPCOT]

# 15 is my problem - included but not limited to - talk about leaving a door open on that one
Keep in mind - he stated as an owner I would be under terms of my original contract - but he slips this in AND he has stated it is the DVC Owners who were responsible for the closing of the resorts during - can’t be trusted !

 

[SherylLC]

# 15 is my problem - included but not limited to - talk about leaving a door open on that one
Keep in mind - he stated as an owner I would be under terms of my original contract - but he slips this in AND he has stated it is the DVC Owners who were responsible for the closing of the resorts during - can’t be trusted !

and this part: "as determined by Intermediary in Intermediary’s sole discretion"

 

[robinb]

I was going to reschedule this weekend for the latest renter, but I just emailed David and said that I can't take on the risk. I will stand by the contract I signed.

So you're not going allow David's to re-rent the points?

 

[Minniesgal]

So you're not going allow David's to re-rent the points?

I wouldn't with those new terms and conditions.

 

[AquaDame]

I wouldn't with those new terms and conditions.

I had thought someone mentioned keeping their original contract on the owner's side..? Is he no longer doing that?

I finally sent the email asking mine to be tossed into the olympic sized pool of dedicated reservations. I've been assuming the money is lost since WDW is not showing any signs of closing again, even going so far as to announce even shorter hours, so if it doesn't work oh well. At least I did SOMETHING to try to mitigate losses.