I don't know exactly how David's is structured or how the credit card companies, but playing devils advocate, if I were him, I'd make it known that I am not a travel agent selling travel. I am a broker. I am the middle man. I agree that the renter's should be made whole. But I think the responsibility is on the owners.
He is also the author of the contracts and in litigation the ambiguity of a contract goes against the person who provides the contract. He is stuck and is trying to get people to agree to a new contract with different language. Also to the best of my knowledge he is not demanding owners return payment received because he really can't since there was no cause in the old contract unless the owner themselves canceled.
He carries the ACTA accreditation right on his website (Association of Canadian Travel Agencies). Don't think he'd get away with that. And renters are only being offered the voucher, no refund possible at all is what I was told. He's using however many of those 70%s he can get his hands on to fund the vouchers I believe.
I also believe he is setup as a sole proprietary. If this is true he is fighting to keep from going into personal bankruptcy since all of his personal assets are on the line.
The problem with him trying to get PayPal to clawback the funds is that he is going to have to prove he is entitled to it and I don't believe the language in the contracts he used will prove that for him.
Well based on BBB reviews and forums I found the rental company I used did the same random things as David's except much slower to make a decision to issue credits.
PayPal might be getting ready to clawback funds from him for renters who paid with paypal.
I'd be a lot more inclined to cut David's some slack if it weren't for those added conditions. They essentially force the renter to agree to get nothing in the case of another closure. That's just a ridiculous stipulation IMO and renters are being told "take it or leave it." You either risk getting nothing with the voucher or you turn down the voucher and get nothing.
I would demand a refund and not accept the voucher that he is hoping you will. He is counting on people agreeing to the new contract. From what I understand the " no refunds " clause is enforced if the cancelation is caused by the renter and this is clearly not the case. You cannot agree to new terms a d have a successful chargeback.
Also remember he limited the ability of the owners to mitigate their losses by telling them not to cancel. Some owners at the time they did this still could have canceled and banked their points. (DVC later allowed this to happen anyway) this IMHO was only done for his self interest since the renter would be due a refund and the owner could have salvaged their points but the agency would have not made any commission. He would have been better off telling the owners who wanted to cancel to do so and get the money refunded.
Huge changes are not required. A simple and quick fix can easily be made to the existing contract. Making sure that renters are better informed about the no refunds clause and making sure it’s not open to interpretation.
I meant to deal with the current Covid issue
So, basically adding the paragraph he has added to the voucher contract: "In the event of a global pandemic, natural disaster, force Majeure or any other event outside the reasonable control of David's Vacation Club Rentals, this Credit remains non-refundable and no modification, cancelations or rebooking will be permitted."
The problem with this is who is going to want to rent a DVC room knowing they could lose thousands? That is why the language on the new contracts in my opinion stick it to the owners. The secondary rental market is going to see big changes with owners and renters not wanting to rent under the current and new conditions. Going forward will be interesting
