Davids DVC: Rental reimbursement or rescheduling?

[McCrae]

It would be great if you could post that.

I would like, but I won’t because it could be used to identify me.

i asked specific questions in connection to contract completion, liability to David’s and what my liability would be in the renter either took court action or succeeded in a credit card charge back. I received in writing confirmaction from David’s that I would no future liability. Any credit card back or Court action would be against David’s and not the owner.

 

[dsnymnkyuncle]

It does get complicated quite quickly doesn't it?

Yet I am not sure which advice you mean, so much has been offered on different 'side or povs'. I am not posting advice I am trying to ask questions and clarify my own thinking. When I joined to board it was to become better informed and get other views on what I could/should/would do. That has been accomplished. Even in disagreement there are lots of top opinions here.

I see Dave as being generally consistent. After the 'check in' date (what ever that means) is past then things change. Suing prior to the breach, an anticipatory breach is not really a great idea. Yet if I lived in FL and if I lost value on my points I might to that just to have a filing date prior to any filing date of Dave while we wait to see what happens. I am not sure I would agree Dave has that option. Their Company is at stake and getting to agree to help nicely, or getting help with a veiled threat (sent only it seems to people who are past the 'check in day') makes sense to me. I would not do it but I can understand and acknowledge it is rational, maybe legal for Dave to do.

I have not received anything from Dave about re-renting points to someone other than than original/current renter. And that is in an email asking for help.

The approach David’s are taking appear to contradict the document on advice posted. David’s request to let them re-rent points to another renter and not the original renter could if the legal advice is correct create a position where points have been re-rented and the owner still has an obligation to the original renter.

 

[dsnymnkyuncle]

You have nailed it here. Great post to think about.

At some time when I am bored I might google Dave's attorney and post what I find. As opposed to Dave and his attorney's we have the Disney gorilla who has attorney's that are not only experienced with these things but experienced enough to know they don't need empty threats or innuendo. I am not sure Disney attorney's would allow a statement like the statement from Dave you posted to be disseminated without clearing it in advance.

I think it is highly unlikely those guys are time share much less FL time share. Fl real estate law. As I posted a couple of weeks ago choice of law, jurisdiction and venue are highly fact specific and complicated. IMO it would take an experienced and practicing attorney hours to just put a draft together. Clearly nobody is doing that for free.

I don't see anyway Dave would go after Disney. I don't expect Disney to allow any actions that would precipitate a class action into which Dave or someone else might jump. But I also firmly believe Disney will find a solution I think is fair. they always have (DVC wise/resort wise/restuarant wise) in every thing in which we have interacted.

Yet I would still file in Fl and not serve the lawsuit just to protect myself if I was in the (as of today) people at risk. I can't explain why but I feel that who files first files best.

I’ve been around these boards a while. Most times I am annoyingly forthright, sometimes a ridiculous SJW and a bit of a drama queen (I’m French speaking, it comes with the territory ). I am *not* known to be a disseminator of misinformation. All that said, just so that we know where we stand.

I have no idea which doc this info they inserted into their email to me came from. I don’t believe the lawyers are timeshare-specific lawyers. I would be interested in knowing how much the law firm understands about points/UY timeshares, & specifically if they understand that David’s knows the precise expiration date & limitation of every point they “buy.”

 

[AaronEuth]

I know the subject of this thread is David's but I have rented points out for an early June reservation through another leading broker, and this is the email I just received from them, which I thought some might be interested in for comparison:

Hi (my name),
The global pandemic known as the corona virus has recently affected every aspect of everyone’s daily life. Due to the pandemic, Disneyland and Disney World closed the parks indefinitely. Many people have vacations that have been affected. We are currently working with these guests to ensure that everything is done to have the best outcome possible for everyone. One of your guests has been affected and needs your help. We are sorry to put this additional burden on you, but this is uncharted territory for all of us.
The guests are considering postponing their trip, and were wondering what your home resort is when your points expire so they can find a travel date before then.
Rest assured per your agreement, no matter what the outcome, the intermediary agreement will be honored and all funds due to you will be paid. We appreciate your help with this matter.
Thank you,

A friendly and reasonable request and I replied that of course I'm happy to do anything I can to help with rescheduling the trip.

I reached out to my October renter and gave them the details of the points expiring at the end of July 2021 (edited to correct year). I let them know I would be happy to rebook if they want new dates but the sooner they let me know the more options they will have in regards to availability.

I explained we would have to do everything through the broker but made it clear any resistance to change was not in my end.

 

[McCrae]

It does get complicated quite quickly doesn't it?

Yet I am not sure which advice you mean, so much has been offered on different 'side or povs'. I am not posting advice I am trying to ask questions and clarify my own thinking. When I joined to board it was to become better informed and get other views on what I could/should/would do. That has been accomplished. Even in disagreement there are lots of top opinions here.

I see Dave as being generally consistent. After the 'check in' date (what ever that means) is past then things change. Suing prior to the breach, an anticipatory breach is not really a great idea. Yet if I lived in FL and if I lost value on my points I might to that just to have a filing date prior to any filing date of Dave while we wait to see what happens. I am not sure I would agree Dave has that option. Their Company is at stake and getting to agree to help nicely, or getting help with a veiled threat (sent only it seems to people who are past the 'check in day') makes sense to me. I would not do it but I can understand and acknowledge it is rational, maybe legal for Dave to do.

I have not received anything from Dave about re-renting points to someone other than than original/current renter. And that is in an email asking for help.

Just to clarify I am not referring to you giving advice. I meant the legal opinion that you had attached in a previous response.

My reservation was 2 weeks ago. David’s have also made it clear in correspondence to me that any help I give would be voluntary.

 

[CarolMN]

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. ...(snip).....

100% NOT true. Sponsors have no input into what other businesses may be discussed on the DIS. Please do not spread this incorrect information. This is from the pinned thread at the top of every DIS DVC forum:

From the DIS Guidelines:

7. ADVERTISING

The advertisers/sponsors who you see on the DIS are carefully chosen. ...

We do welcome discussion of DIS advertisers/sponsors as well as other businesses that you have information or questions about. ...............(snip)............

Suggestion that DIS advertisers and sponsors have influence over how the forums are run is far from the truth. They are provided advertising space on the DIS and, if they have registered usernames, will have an "Approved Advertiser" icon in their profile. Otherwise, they play no role in what may be posted on the DIS about them or their competitors.

From the DIS Guidelines:

FILTERED WORDS, NAMES and URLS

The DIS is a privately owned web site and we reserve the right to restrict any outside commercial ventures at our discretion. We will not discuss the reasons behind why specific websites are filtered and any discussion regarding the word filter may be deleted.

Here are some of the DVC resale brokers often mentioned on the DIS:

The Timeshare Store (a DIS sponsor) - http://www.dvc-resales.com
Fidelity Resales - http://fidelityresales.com/
DVC by Resale - http://www.dvcbyresale.com/
Selling Timeshares - http://www.sellingtimeshares.net
DVC Magic Resales - http://www.DVCmagicresales.com
DVC Resale Market - http://www.dvcresalemarket.com/

Here are few other options for DVC resale purchases:

Timeshare Users Group - http://www.tug2.net (Also a great resource for information about other Timeshare programs)
Timesharing Today - http://www.tstoday.com
Redweek - http://www.redweek.com
Ebay - http://www.ebay.com

...and here are some other sites frequently posted on the DIS DVC Forums:
Owners Locker - http://www.ownerslocker.com
DVC Request - http://www.DVCrequest.com
DVC News - DVCNews.com

If you wish to promote a business or site not mentioned in this post or without posting a link, please recognize that you will be doing so at your own risk.

Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

 

[Galun]

I have no idea which doc this info they inserted into their email to me came from. I don’t believe the lawyers are timeshare-specific lawyers. I would be interested in knowing how much the law firm understands about points/UY timeshares, & specifically if they understand that David’s knows the precise expiration date & limitation of every point they “buy.”

They just said they had their "lawyer" look at it. Which means nothing. I can say I have my "lawyer" look at it and thinks that the intermediary breached the contract and I get to keep both the 70% and the points.

It only matters if they really try to sue you. If they do try it, pretty soon they will go out of business because owners will find out and they won't have points to broker anymore. Oh, and if they try to sue you, good luck doing it from Canada, filing to individual owners all over the world, and then try to collect if they somehow win.

It's an empty threat. Actually, it's not really a threat. They simply stated that their lawyers looked at it (which you may interpret as expert opinion), and hope that you will voluntarily return the money. Don't stress over it. If I were you I'd just ignore it.

 

[starry_solo]

They just said they had their "lawyer" look at it. Which means nothing. I can say I have my "lawyer" look at it and thinks that the intermediary breached the contract and I get to keep both the 70% and the points.

It only matters if they really try to sue you. If they do try it, pretty soon they will go out of business because owners will find out and they won't have points to broker anymore. Oh, and if they try to sue you, good luck doing it from Canada, filing to individual owners all over the world, and then try to collect if they somehow win.

It's an empty threat. Don't stress over it. If I were you I'd just ignore it.

They aren't required to file in Canada, where they are based.

Quote from contract:
11. This agreement shall be governed in all respects by the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein. All parties hereto agree to submit to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Ontario with respect to any disputes relating to, or legal actions brought in respect of, any matters under this agreement.

So, they could, hypothetically file numerous small claims lawsuits (filing fee isn't that much) in the county where the owners are and use the law of Canada (since that was agreed to by the parties). Of course, who knows that the laws of the Province of Ontario and Canada are in connection with this...

Small claims court could allow parties to appear telephonically. I'm a member of other forums and groups and there was a dispute over payment for services rendered (transaction done via Facebook) between two pin traders. The unhappy pin trader filed the small claims action electronically in the county where the other pin trader was located and the whole action occurred via telephone. So, it can be done. Will it?

 

[Galun]

They aren't required to file in Canada, where they are based.

Quote from contract:
11. This agreement shall be governed in all respects by the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein. All parties hereto agree to submit to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Ontario with respect to any disputes relating to, or legal actions brought in respect of, any matters under this agreement.

So, they could, hypothetically file numerous small claims lawsuits (filing fee isn't that much) in the county where the owners are and use the law of Canada (since that was agreed to by the parties). Of course, who knows that the laws of the Province of Ontario and Canada are in connection with this...

Small claims court could allow parties to appear telephonically. I'm a member of other forums and groups and there was a dispute over payment for services rendered (transaction done via Facebook) between two pin traders. The unhappy pin trader filed the small claims action electronically in the county where the other pin trader was located and the whole action occurred via telephone. So, it can be done. Will it?

Yes, my wording was unclear. I meant filing from Canada remotely to possibly hundreds to thousands of jurisdictions (if they claim they have 2000 affected reservations and growing). And collection will still be an issue.

The moment news gets out that they are filing in small claims causing owners even the slightest bit of further aggravation, their business is done (if it isn't already), so I don't think they will do it. All they will do is continue to ask nicely, hinting that their lawyers looked at it and what not. I do maintain this opinion.

 

[McCrae]

They aren't required to file in Canada, where they are based.

Quote from contract:
11. This agreement shall be governed in all respects by the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein. All parties hereto agree to submit to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Ontario with respect to any disputes relating to, or legal actions brought in respect of, any matters under this agreement.

So, they could, hypothetically file numerous small claims lawsuits (filing fee isn't that much) in the county where the owners are and use the law of Canada (since that was agreed to by the parties). Of course, who knows that the laws of the Province of Ontario and Canada are in connection with this...

Small claims court could allow parties to appear telephonically. I'm a member of other forums and groups and there was a dispute over payment for services rendered (transaction done via Facebook) between two pin traders. The unhappy pin trader filed the small claims action electronically in the county where the other pin trader was located and the whole action occurred via telephone. So, it can be done. Will it?

i would bet that whilst this is a sensible option very few courts would act this way.

 

[cmrdgrs]

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 know this is off topic, but since others have chimed in, hopefully the owner will be reasonable.

More on topic though, this is another thing renters should look for in a rental agreement with a broker. Will the broker allow a "sublease" -- I have seen posts in the past that brokers won't allow a sublease (why I don't know). For me, another deal breaker for using a broker for a rental.

 

[Sandisw]

I know this is off topic, but since others have chimed in, hopefully the owner will be reasonable.

More on topic though, this is another thing renters should look for in a rental agreement with a broker. Will the broker allow a "sublease" -- I have seen posts in the past that brokers won't allow a sublease (why I don't know). For me, another deal breaker for using a broker for a rental.

My agreement with broker does not allow sublease. If I rented on my own, I would also not allow a sublease.

 

[ziravan]

I know the subject of this thread is David's but I have rented points out for an early June reservation through another leading broker, and this is the email I just received from them, which I thought some might be interested in for comparison:

Hi (my name),
The global pandemic known as the corona virus has recently affected every aspect of everyone’s daily life. Due to the pandemic, Disneyland and Disney World closed the parks indefinitely. Many people have vacations that have been affected. We are currently working with these guests to ensure that everything is done to have the best outcome possible for everyone. One of your guests has been affected and needs your help. We are sorry to put this additional burden on you, but this is uncharted territory for all of us.
The guests are considering postponing their trip, and were wondering what your home resort is when your points expire so they can find a travel date before then.
Rest assured per your agreement, no matter what the outcome, the intermediary agreement will be honored and all funds due to you will be paid. We appreciate your help with this matter.
Thank you,

A friendly and reasonable request and I replied that of course I'm happy to do anything I can to help with rescheduling the trip.

I would have bent over backwards to honor such a request. I did honor that same request with my current affected renter. In this case, the broker has asked for help directly related to both the issue at hand and my particular renter.

David’s started out this way asking owners to “listen to their hearts” but he has moved on to using the threat of lawyers as a coercion prop.

By and large most owners want to help out, and most renters I think would be reasonable about finding a solution. Had David’s matched up as many of them as possible, the outliers would have been more manageable and he probably would have been able to save his business.

Now, he’s just encouraged otherwise willing owners to dig in their heels and otherwise willing renters to call their CC companies seeking redress they won’t find at David’s.

 

[CraigInPA]

Cases filed in FL will be heard in FL pursuant to FL choice of law and venue provision. IMO there is no way a FL judge allows this to leave FL. The real estate is in FL. Most transaction were in FL. As you posted a few days ago, LAW controls CONTRACTS.

So, David's is going to engage an attorney in Florida who will file a suit in Florida, despite the venue specified in the contract to be litigated is Canada? Unless the renter or owner is also in Florida, I think the Judge in Florida would be convinced that David's is venue shopping against his own contract, and dismiss the suit after the first motion to change venue.

 

[CraigInPA]

They aren't required to file in Canada, where they are based.

Quote from contract:
11. This agreement shall be governed in all respects by the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein. All parties hereto agree to submit to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Ontario with respect to any disputes relating to, or legal actions brought in respect of, any matters under this agreement.

I doubt that any small claims court (or any court for that matter) in the US would accept a filing from a Canadian corporation which requires the decision to be based upon the laws of the Province of Ontario and Canada. I suppose it is possible that his arguments could be based upon Canadian law, and not Ontario law, which would allow him to file elsewhere in Canada, but filing in the US puts the choice of law to US law.

 

[Galun]

I know the subject of this thread is David's but I have rented points out for an early June reservation through another leading broker, and this is the email I just received from them, which I thought some might be interested in for comparison:

Hi (my name),
The global pandemic known as the corona virus has recently affected every aspect of everyone’s daily life. Due to the pandemic, Disneyland and Disney World closed the parks indefinitely. Many people have vacations that have been affected. We are currently working with these guests to ensure that everything is done to have the best outcome possible for everyone. One of your guests has been affected and needs your help. We are sorry to put this additional burden on you, but this is uncharted territory for all of us.
The guests are considering postponing their trip, and were wondering what your home resort is when your points expire so they can find a travel date before then.
Rest assured per your agreement, no matter what the outcome, the intermediary agreement will be honored and all funds due to you will be paid. We appreciate your help with this matter.
Thank you,

A friendly and reasonable request and I replied that of course I'm happy to do anything I can to help with rescheduling the trip.

Do you mind sharing which broker this is? I think you can name brokers, as we are freely discussing Davids here.

If this was the broker’s approach from the very beginning, I am going to consider renting out my points through them in the future.

 

[Sandisw]

Do you mind sharing which broker this is? I think you can name brokers, as we are freely discussing Davids here.

If this was the broker’s approach from the very beginning, I am going to consider renting out my points through them in the future.

As long as the link to the broker is shared, and not just the name.

 

[dsnymnkyuncle]

While I usually follow your posts I am lost here.
How does a small claims or other US court 'accept' or 'not accept' a filed case?

So no matter who files you agree that filing in FL - a non exclusive jurisdiction - would replace Canadian and/or Ontario law with US law/

I doubt that any small claims court (or any court for that matter) in the US would accept a filing from a Canadian corporation which requires the decision to be based upon the laws of the Province of Ontario and Canada. I suppose it is possible that his arguments could be based upon Canadian law, and not Ontario law, which would allow him to file elsewhere in Canada, but filing in the US puts the choice of law to US law.

 

[Grumpy by Birth]

David’s started out this way asking owners to “listen to their hearts” but he has moved on to using the threat of lawyers as a coercion prop.

This doesn't bode well for retaining any goodwill with owners for possible future business (assuming any can even be salvaged at this point).

 

[Marionnette]

This doesn't bode well for retaining any goodwill with owners for possible future business (assuming any can even be salvaged at this point).

That’s for sure! I‘m probably not the only one to have bookmarked this thread so that I can link to it in later discussions.