Davids DVC: Rental reimbursement or rescheduling?

[Matty B13]

So sorry to hear about this. Is it possible to find another interested party in the dates and effectively “sub-lease” the reservation and have the owner change the name(s) on the reservation? You might have to offer it at 60-70% of what you paid but if it’s allowed I would pursue something like this if it were me.

I don’t think a lot of owners would agree to a sublease of a reservation.

 

[fsjking]

Please don't think all UK owners are the same, regardless of David's contract I would have contacted the renters to see if we could do anything .

Don't worry, I don't. It's clearly a few bad apples here. I think most owners, regardless where they are from, will try to work with their renters and/or the broker.

 

[davper]

Looks like he finally got smart and amended his contract. Here is a section from the updated sample on the site.

"12. 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 collected 100% of the funds for the reservation from Renter, Intermediary will provide to Renter a Credit which is limited in value to the amount paid for the reservation which is _______________ US Dollars on such terms and conditions as determined by Intermediary in its sole discretion, as soon as is reasonably possible after the condition(s) constituting the Force Majeure event is/are notified by Intermediary to Renter and Owner. A Force Majeure is an event beyond the Intermediary’s reasonable control which renders performance of a rental reservation with respect to 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."

No mention of what happens on the Owner's side of the transaction?

 

[rkstocke5609]

It is still up to the owner, though, and they may not be willing to change the names.

But, it would be a great solution for a renter in this situation!

I’m curious. Why would an owner be unwilling to change the name(s) on a reservation? Just the hassle? Or is there something I’m not considering?

 

[Sandisw]

I’m curious. Why would an owner be unwilling to change the name(s) on a reservation? Just the hassle? Or is there something I’m not considering?

Some owners have a no change contract and don’t want to do a new contract, because ultimately, once names are changed, the deal is no longer with the original renters,

It really becomes a new rental. Technically once it’s changed, the original renter could then try to recover a refund and say they didn’t get the reservation paid for,

 

[Matty B13]

I’m curious. Why would an owner be unwilling to change the name(s) on a reservation? Just the hassle? Or is there something I’m not considering?

If the new renter damages the room who is responsible for paying for the damages if they skip out?

 

[rkstocke5609]

Some owners have a no change contract and don’t want to do a new contract, because ultimately, once names are changed, the deal is no longer with the original renters,

It really becomes a new rental. Technically once it’s changed, the original renter could then try to recover a refund and say they didn’t get the reservation paid for,

Ah, I get it. You would think that potential problem could be resolved by having the original renter sign something that acknowledges they have forfeited their rights to the substitute renter that they have found - but, I am definitely no legal expert of any kind.

 

[Krandor]

No mention of what happens on the Owner's side of the transaction?

My bet is the new version will be the owner has to return the 70%.

 

[Mumof4mice]

My bet is the new version will be the owner has to return the 70%.

I read "each party shall be excused from any future performance of obligations under this agreement" to mean there is no requirement for further action by the owner. Owners keep the points with diminished value and the ~50% payment already received as compensation. Renters are issued travel credits.

 

[Sandisw]

Ah, I get it. You would think that potential problem could be resolved by having the original renter sign something that acknowledges they have forfeited their rights to the substitute renter that they have found - but, I am definitely no legal expert of any kind.

Anything can happen if the owner wants to allow it, but in most cases, owners decide to make things non refundable or changeable so they don’t have to deal with extra,

All one can do is ask the owner for options. Some may not care and Some others might.

 

[Sandisw]

I read "each party shall be excused from any future performance of obligations under this agreement" to mean there is no requirement for further action by the owner. Owners keep the points with diminished value and the ~50% payment already received as compensation. Renters are issued travel credits.

What is interesting though, as it is not included in the owner contract. You would think it would be spelled out there as well, Maybe that is coming

 

[LAX]

After reading this I'm so glad as an owner I've only ever rented my points through the other broker. All those contracts already specifically stated disease/pandemics in the no cancel clause. I'm a June use year and thankfully had mostly borrowed points for a renter's April reservation and was able to help them out with a re-scheduled reservation in the fall. But I was assured that even if I didn't, I'd still get paid my additional 25% even though the guest couldn't check in.

I have wondered why there aren't complaints about other brokers. Having their bases well covered is certainly a good reason. But, I thought the volumes at other brokers are so much lower that the few that want to complain don't even know about DIS.

LAX

 

[Krandor]

What is interesting though, as it is not included in the owner contract. You would think it would be spelled out there as well, Maybe that is coming

I expect it's coming. Is David even really renting new points right now or just dealing with the closures?

 

[LAX]

I expect it's coming. Is David even really renting new points right now or just dealing with the closures?

If there are still suckers (both owners and renters) out there, I supposed he would!

LAX

 

[Phatscott25]

I have wondered why there aren't complaints about other brokers. Having their bases well covered is certainly a good reason. But, I thought the volumes at other brokers are so much lower that the few that want to complain don't even know about DIS.

LAX

I wouldn't know about their volume but they appear to be a pretty big operation. I think they're not discussed on here because they're not allowed because David used to be sponsor. I initially went with them because they pay more pp then Davids and more upfront. But I've had nothing but positive experiences with them and I've done quite a few rentals over the years.

 

[ziravan]

I don’t think a lot of owners would agree to a sublease of a reservation.

My contract explicitly forbids it. I might make an exception in this case, but I typically don’t want a middleman agreeing to terms with me and then reselling a reservation at a mark up.

Also, it opens the door to scammers to let someone use my points like that.

I don’t want someone else brokering my points. If I did, I’d have used David’s.

 

[CraigInPA]

Looks like he finally got smart and amended his contract. Here is a section from the updated sample on the site.

"12. 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 collected 100% of the funds for the reservation from Renter, Intermediary will provide to Renter a Credit which is limited in value to the amount paid for the reservation which is _______________ US Dollars on such terms and conditions as determined by Intermediary in its sole discretion, as soon as is reasonably possible after the condition(s) constituting the Force Majeure event is/are notified by Intermediary to Renter and Owner. A Force Majeure is an event beyond the Intermediary’s reasonable control which renders performance of a rental reservation with respect to 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."

What I find interesting is that this new contract does not require the owner to refund the deposit payment (70%) in the event of a Force Majeure, but it also doesn't say that the owner gets to keep it either. It excuses the Intermediary from paying the 30% final fee, which apparently will be used to fund the "Credit" for the renter. In his email today to Owners affected by the closure, David's states that his attorney's opinion is that the Owner must re-pay the 70%. One has to wonder if the omission in the new contract is on purpose, either to not freak out owners if David's demands a refund from them, or to hide the fact that his correspondence to owners today is at odds with his latest contract.

There's no way I'd rent my points with them ever again. This is all just too shady.

 

[McCrae]

It would seem they’ve changed their mind about that

Thats interesting. I have it in writing from them that my contract has been completed and that even if "my renter" succeeds with a charge back against them I will owe David's nothing.

 

[Madame]

What I find interesting is that this new contract does not require the owner to refund the deposit payment (70%) in the event of a Force Majeure, but it also doesn't say that the owner gets to keep it either. It excuses the Intermediary from paying the 30% final fee, which apparently will be used to fund the "Credit" for the renter. In his email today to Owners affected by the closure, David's states that his attorney's opinion is that the Owner must re-pay the 70%. One has to wonder if the omission in the new contract is on purpose, either to not freak out owners if David's demands a refund from them, or to hide the fact that his correspondence to owners today is at odds with his latest contract.

There's no way I'd rent my points with them ever again. This is all just too shady.

Either shady or completely and utterly incompetent. Either way...

 

[McCrae]

What I find interesting is that this new contract does not require the owner to refund the deposit payment (70%) in the event of a Force Majeure, but it also doesn't say that the owner gets to keep it either. It excuses the Intermediary from paying the 30% final fee, which apparently will be used to fund the "Credit" for the renter. In his email today to Owners affected by the closure, David's states that his attorney's opinion is that the Owner must re-pay the 70%. One has to wonder if the omission in the new contract is on purpose, either to not freak out owners if David's demands a refund from them, or to hide the fact that his correspondence to owners today is at odds with his latest contract.

There's no way I'd rent my points with them ever again. This is all just too shady.

I didn’t receive the email you refer to.