Davids DVC: Rental reimbursement or rescheduling?

[Yinn]

“Due to the complexity of the point system and the fact that Owners may have to bank or borrow points in order to secure your reservation, cancellations, upgrades and date modifications are not permitted.”

In my post above, I brought up the point that the broker is not allowing the owners to work with renters! I believe that this is to keep owners happy so that they will stay with him. Yes, you might think that the statement in the contract states that the lack of availability of accommodations is not "due to an action or omission by the owner", but there is no place in the contract stating that owners cannot work with renters to refund or reschedule the reservation. I don't blame owners wanting to keep the money for their points, but if Disney is returning their points (points that can be used later), then I think it is double-dipping and they should (ethically) try to help the renter get what they paid for.

As an owner, I can tell you I am NOT happy. The contract at this point is thrown out the window with Davids. Doesn't matter if you're the owner or the renter. As a renter, you're not getting money. As an owner, you're being asked for money. We're both on the losing end of this.

I do agree with you on the double dipping, but unfortunately a lot of people aren't. And even more in the upcoming months will not be double dipping and unfortunately just dealing with expiring points.

Let's look at a longer term. If you have to make a banking decision this month because you have a rental later on in September with an October UY. Do you hold? If I was the owner, I'd be inclined to cancel the reservation and bank my points so I'm not left holding the bag. Or heck if I was bent on keeping my agreement, I'd probably want to cancel the reservation. Bank the points. Then borrow next year's points. Remake the reservation, just to protect myself should this last a while..

 

[disneypharm]

I replied just before you did. The problem with doing that is even if the owner refunds 100% of what they received. The renter would only get 56% of what they paid. There's no easy way to a compromise without David's willing to part with cash.

If the owner pays back the 70% (or whatever the correct math is and if they can reuse the points) back to the broker, then the broker should part with their commission too.

 

[Yinn]

If the owner pays back the 70% (or whatever the correct math is and if they can reuse the points) back to the broker, then the broker should part with their commission too.

Should being the key. They're not, they're not parting with any cash.

 

[fsjking]

Should being the key. They're not, they're not parting with any cash.

If you refund David's and cancel the reservation, it gives the Renter a much stronger case for a chargeback though.

 

[disneypharm]

Should being the key. They're not, they're not parting with any cash.

YES!!

 

[disneypharm]

If you refund David's and cancel the reservation, it gives the Renter a much stronger case for a chargeback though.

The problem is if the chargeback is not successful, both owner and renter will be out of luck. In that case, I know why owners are not willing to return their cash.

 

[Yinn]

The problem is if the chargeback is not successful, both owner and renter will be out of luck. In that case, I know why owners are not willing to return their cash.

That’s exactly right. My renter has been VERY good. And I am not looking to screw them over. I’m just not willing to give Davids cash unless I know it’ll go to the renter.

If my renter confirms they got a check or a credit to their card. Then by all means I’m on board. But I refuse to make a concession for only Davids benefit.

 

[disneypharm]

That’s exactly right. My renter has been VERY good. And I am not looking to screw them over. I’m just not willing to give Davids cash unless I know it’ll go to the renter.

If my renter confirms they got a check or a credit to their card. Then by all means I’m on board. But I refuse to make a concession for only Davids benefit.

I agree with you. Based on what was posted earlier today, Davids is no longer asking owners for money, so where is he getting the money for all these vouchers? This is more concerning to me, making me think that these vouchers are definitely not backed by any funding!!

 

[fsjking]

That’s exactly right. My renter has been VERY good. And I am not looking to screw them over. I’m just not willing to give Davids cash unless I know it’ll go to the renter.

If my renter confirms they got a check or a credit to their card. Then by all means I’m on board. But I refuse to make a concession for only Davids benefit.

And if they refund the renter and the owner doesn't refund, then what? You may be willing to, but this thread has shown that there are owners who are going to use this to their advantage and double dip. In those cases David's is left holding the bag. Enough of those, and everyone is screwed when they go bankrupt.

 

[Grumpy by Birth]

If a owner has received any payment for points for a reservation, And that reservation can not be honored due to an act of God, that renter should be refunded the money if the points are returned to the owner. Period. Where is the integrity here? This is part of the risk when one decides to “rent” their points. I don’t know how people can live with themselves.

Based on the comments here, I surmise that some owners feel that the status of the points they rented becomes the renters "problem" once they rent those points (hence, a lot of discussions over the semantics of renting "points" versus renting a "reservation").

Let's say I have points that are going to expire and I can't use them. I decide to enter into the rental market so I don't just lose those points. When a renter agrees to rent from me for a reservation on their desired dates, does the contract state that their reservation is being obtained using points that are about to expire and that THOSE points are the ONLY points the renter has any claim to?

Let's say I agreed to provide a reservation using 100 points. I book the reservation with 100 points that are about to expire. Along comes a pandemic and the resorts are closed. Am I on the hook to use 100 new points to book a new reservation for the renter? In other words, did they rent a reservation worth 100 points from me, or did they rent those SPECIFIC (expiring) 100 points?

The scenario above is already a bit hazy with a direct rental. Then it gets even more convoluted when you bring a broker into the equation. The broker ostensibly DID pay me for those SPECIFIC (expiring) points. They knew the status of those points when they agreed to the transaction. They then offered the accommodations to the renter using those (soon to be expired) points. But where in any of this does the renter know that they are paying for points that have an expiration date? Doesn't their contract with the broker just indicate the amount they're paying for a reservation that "costs" that many points?

Under normal circumstances, I suppose the "no refunds" clause makes the expiration date moot. If the renter cancels, the owner still gets paid for those points, so there's no impact of the points expiring. If the owner cancels, the renter gets a refund. But with the resort being closed, now suddenly we have to determine who is left holding the bag if those points are about to expire.

In my book, it is the broker. They paid the owner 70% up front for points with the full knowledge that those points had a short shelf life. They, in turn, find a renter to book a reservation using those points so that they can earn a commission on the transaction. It seems to me that the broker assumed the risk of paying for "stale" points, speculating that they would earn a return (their commission) on brokering a rental agreement.

Muddy the water even further with the arguably shoddy contract that this particular broker employed (omitting resort closure in the list of conditions where "no refunds" applies puts them on the hook for refunds), and I just don't see how either the owners or the renters should be the ones to lose out. The broker assumed the risk by essentially contracting to obtain "stale" points that they could "flip" for a profit. Sorry if it sounds harsh, but the broker gambled and lost.

ETA: One of the big issues with all of this is that the broker was gambling with other people's money. The most likely scenario I see emerging from this is that renters are out 100% of what they paid, owners are out 30% of what their expiring points were "worth" and the broker goes bankrupt.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

Based on the comments here, I surmise that some owners feel that the status of the points they rented becomes the renters "problem" once they rent those points (hence, a lot of discussions over the semantics of renting "points" versus renting a "reservation").

Let's say I have points that are going to expire and I can't use them. I decide to enter into the rental market so I don't just lose those points. When a renter agrees to rent from me for a reservation on their desired dates, does the contract state that their reservation is being obtained using points that are about to expire and that THOSE points are the ONLY points the renter has any claim to?

Let's say I agreed to provide a reservation using 100 points. I book the reservation with 100 points that are about to expire. Along comes a pandemic and the resorts are closed. Am I on the hook to use 100 new points to book a new reservation for the renter? In other words, did they rent a reservation worth 100 points from me, or did they rent those SPECIFIC (expiring) 100 points?

The scenario above is already a bit hazy with a direct rental. Then it gets even more convoluted when you bring a broker into the equation. The broker ostensibly DID pay me for those SPECIFIC (expiring) points. They knew the status of those points when they agreed to the transaction. They then offered the accommodations to the renter using those (soon to be expired) points. But where in any of this does the renter know that they are paying for points that have an expiration date? Doesn't their contract with the broker just indicate the amount they're paying for a reservation that "costs" that many points?

Under normal circumstances, I suppose the "no refunds" clause makes the expiration date moot. If the renter cancels, the owner still gets paid for those points, so there's no impact of the points expiring. If the owner cancels, the renter gets a refund. But with the resort being closed, now suddenly we have to determine who is left holding the bag if those points are about to expire.

In my book, it is the broker. They paid the owner 70% up front for points with the full knowledge that those points had a short shelf life. They, in turn, find a renter to book a reservation using those points so that they can earn a commission on the transaction. It seems to me that the broker assumed the risk of paying for "stale" points, speculating that they would earn a return (their commission) on brokering a rental agreement.

Muddy the water even further with the arguably shoddy contract that this particular broker employed (omitting resort closure in the list of conditions where "no refunds" applies, puts them on the hook for refunds), and I just don't see how either the owners or the renters should be the ones to lose out. The broker assumed the risk by essentially contracting to obtain "stale" points that they could "flip" for a profit. Sorry if it sounds harsh, but the broker gambled and lost.

Lots of scenarios and spin in your comment. The fact is, through no fault of the renter, they were not able to use a reservation they paid for. Don’t care how the reservation was made, with what points, at what point the points are returned ( if that was possible), etc. That is all on the owner. The renter is due a refund...period. The owner owes this to the renter. The owner then can go after David’s.

Much the way a refund goes at any retailer. My package did not come for which I paid in advance for. Said merchant refunds the money. Then it is on the merchant to try and obtain credit from the vendor.

 

[DVCindy]

I agree with you. Based on what was posted earlier today, Davids is no longer asking owners for money, so where is he getting the money for all these vouchers? This is more concerning to me, making me think that these vouchers are definitely not backed by any funding!!

I can verify that he is still asking for the owners to return the 70%. I got another email today for my 2nd renters due to check in early May. It’s the exact same email I received a couple of weeks ago regarding my April renters - which has still not be resolved. I have asked David’s several times to please allow me to work with the renters but they told me I would be violating the terms of my agreement, and they want me to wait until DVC cancels the reservation and then we will move to the next step.

 

[Madame]

Lots of scenarios and spin in your comment. The fact is, through no fault of the renter, they were not able to use a reservation they paid for. Don’t care how the reservation was made, with what points, at what point the points are returned ( if that was possible), etc. That is all on the owner. The renter is due a refund...period. The owner owes this to the renter. The owner then can go after David’s.

Much the way a refund goes at any retailer. My package did not come for which I paid in advance for. Said merchant refunds the money. Then it is on the merchant to try and obtain credit from the vendor.

That’s ridiculous. The owners rented their points through David’s for protection and “peace of mind.” Why go through a broker at all if owners are personally on the hook?!? And why in the world would this business model even exist?

 

[BWV Dreamin]

I can verify that he is still asking for the owners to return the 70%. I got another email today for my 2nd renters due to check in early May. It’s the exact same email I received a couple of weeks ago regarding my April renters - which has still not be resolved. I have asked David’s several times to please allow me to work with the renters but they told me I would be violating the terms of my agreement, and they want me to wait until DVC cancels the reservation and then we will move to the next step.

Obviously Disney has to cancel the reservation first. Then, you have the renters info. You can get them their refund. Don’t need David to do that.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

That’s ridiculous. The owners rented their points through David’s for protection and “peace of mind.” Why go through a broker at all if owners are personally on the hook?!? And why in the world would this business model even exist?

Well owners take that chance when renting through a broker, just like the renter does. Does not mitigate what should be done. You brokered a deal with your points. The renter is simply purchasing a reservation.

 

[Marionnette]

“Due to the complexity of the point system and the fact that Owners may have to bank or borrow points in order to secure your reservation, cancellations, upgrades and date modifications are not permitted.”

In my post above, I brought up the point that the broker is not allowing the owners to work with renters! I believe that this is to keep owners happy so that they will stay with him. Yes, you might think that the statement in the contract states that the lack of availability of accommodations is not "due to an action or omission by the owner", but there is no place in the contract stating that owners cannot work with renters to refund or reschedule the reservation. I don't blame owners wanting to keep the money for their points, but if Disney is returning their points (points that can be used later), then I think it is double-dipping and they should (ethically) try to help the renter get what they paid for.

I would agree that it’s “double dipping” IF the points are returned to the owner in the same condition that they were in at the time that they were rented. Unfortunately, that’s not always the case.

I got “lucky” compared to other owners. My “renter” is my niece and her husband. They were due to arrive in the middle of May. I contacted her at the beginning of April and then again last week to encourage her to reschedule. I have a September use year and some of those were 2019 points which needed to be banked by 4/30., Some were borrowed from 2020 and DVC put them back into the 2020 use year. Only 2 were banked in from 2018 (I’ll be losing those on Aug 31). I was able to re-book her for November, although not in her original resort and accommodations.

I would have done the same for some who rented directly from me, but I might not have refunded the cost of the 2 points that I lost.

Now consider that instead of this being my niece, let’s pretend that this was a rental thru David’s. I would not have been able to contact the renter to see if they wanted to reschedule their trip. I would not have been able to cancel the reservation. I would have had to wait until Disney canceled it in May. At that point, I would have been past my banking deadline and those points would be toast as of August 31. The borrowed points would have gone back into the 2020 use year according to what DVC is currently doing. And the two banked points would still be lost. So, out of the “returned” points, fewer than half would actually be usable at full value for a future reservation and the remainder would be severely “distressed” and virtually un-rentable before they expire. Would it be “double-dipping” if I didn’t return what David’s had paid me up to this point if more than half of those points are useless due to David’s unwillingness to do their job as an intermediary and work with both the renter and myself to reschedule?

 

[Grumpy by Birth]

Lots of scenarios and spin in your comment. The fact is, through no fault of the renter, they were not able to use a reservation they paid for. Don’t care how the reservation was made, with what points, at what point the points are returned ( if that was possible), etc. That is all on the owner. The renter is due a refund...period. The owner owes this to the renter. The owner then can go after David’s.

Much the way a refund goes at any retailer. My package did not come for which I paid in advance for. Said merchant refunds the money. Then it is on the merchant to try and obtain credit from the vendor.

Wow. Absolutely ZERO "spin." I have no vested interest since I'm not a renter, nor have I rented to someone. I don't disagree that the renter is due a refund. But from who? They paid the broker for the reservation. The broker should be the one refunding them since that's who they paid. Why is it on the owner to provide the refund and go after David's rather than the renter going after David's?

This is the problem with the convoluted 3-way contracts being used. The owner has fulfilled their obligation to David's. The renter has fulfilled their obligation to David's. David's has not fulfilled their obligation to either the owner OR the renter.

The owner did provide to the broker what they were paid for and the expiration date of those points was disclosed to the broker. The owner, in fact, has not gotten paid all of what the broker owes them. David's guarantees the owner that they will get paid whether or not the renter checks in. David's guarantees the renter that they will get a refund if the reservation is cancelled (i.e., not provided)... although this is another instance where the contract is lacking because it only addresses the contingency of the reservation being cancelled by the owner, not the resort being closed.

Either way, it's the broker who made guarantees to both parties that they were/are unable to honor. Both the owner and the renter are getting screwed by the broker in this fiasco.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

I would agree that it’s “double dipping” IF the points are returned to the owner in the same condition that they were in at the time that they were rented. Unfortunately, that’s not always the case.

I got “lucky” compared to other owners. My “renter” is my niece and her husband. They were due to arrive in the middle of May. I contacted her at the beginning of April and then again last week to encourage her to reschedule. I have a September use year and some of those were 2019 points which needed to be banked by 4/30., Some were borrowed from 2020 and DVC put them back into the 2020 use year. Only 2 were banked in from 2018 (I’ll be losing those on Aug 31). I was able to re-book her for November, although not in her original resort and accommodations.

I would have done the same for some who rented directly from me, but I might not have refunded the cost of the 2 points that I lost.

Now consider that instead of this being my niece, let’s pretend that this was a rental thru David’s. I would not have been able to contact the renter to see if they wanted to reschedule their trip. I would not have been able to cancel the reservation. I would have had to wait until Disney canceled it in May. At that point, I would have been past my banking deadline and those points would be toast as of August 31. The borrowed points would have gone back into the 2020 use year according to what DVC is currently doing. And the two banked points would still be lost. So, out of the “returned” points, fewer than half would actually be usable at full value for a future reservation and the remainder would be severely “distressed” and virtually un-rentable before they expire. Would it be “double-dipping” if I didn’t return what David’s had paid me up to this point if more than half of those points are useless due to David’s unwillingness to do their job as an intermediary and work with both the renter and myself to reschedule?

Dont you have all of the renters contact info when making the reservation going through David? You have to because the owner has to make the reservation.

 

[DVCindy]

Obviously Disney has to cancel the reservation first. Then, you have the renters info. You can get them their refund. Don’t need David to do that.

The refund should be coming from David’s, not me. Obviously

 

[yankeesfan123]

David’s is trying to pass off to the renters that they’ll be offering a voucher whether or not the owner returns the money. I’m sure there will be some owners who will refuse to return the money.