Disney Vacation Club Management LLC and The Walt Disney Company

[Shamus]

There have been many posts on these boards lately (generally in regards to COVID-19) where the poster is claiming Disney Vacation Management LLC (DVCM) and The Walt Disney Company (TWDC) are not related and the latter has no responsibility for DVCM.

People try to make it sound like DVCM is an isolated 3rd party. I saw one post even compare the two as Wendy's and McDonalds. Sorry - I don't want to be harsh - But that's just totally wrong!

DVCM is one of the many subsidiaries of TWDC. That means that ultimately it is owned and controlled by TWDC. Yes there are some financial and legal benefits that this relationship creates, but please stop saying the two are totally separate and that TWDC has no responsibilities in DVCM matters.

Just trying to help set the record straight here instead of posting the same information 20 times over elsewhere on these boards.

 

[Sandisw]

Here is the exact language from the POS. They are affiliates, yes, but completely separate entitles than TWDC or WDPR , or any other division.

It seems pretty clear they are separate and under no obligation to get involved in any way

 

[Shamus]

Here is the exact language from the POS. They are affiliates, yes, but completely separate entitles than TWDC or WDPR , or any other division.

It seems pretty clear they are separate and under no obligation to get involved in any way

I think it would be had to argue that Iger and Chapek aren't ultimately socially responsible for DVCM's actions. It is no different then their responsibilities for actions of other TWDC subsidiaries like ABC or PIXAR. However, since you bring up the POS we'll leave any Social and Ethical responsibilities out of the discussion for now.

As I touched on before, subsidiaries provide for limited financial and legal benefits (separations). TWDC provides the POS clause you provided to highlight those separations. However, by exercising operational control over their subsidiary (DVCM) the parent company (TWDC) may have opened itself up from any protection it had (“piercing the corporate veil”). But that's all arguable and something for the lawyers to have fun with. I'm not saying that has even occurred, (although the decisions around this closing bring that into question) but what is pretty clear is that the legal separation they claim in the POS is by no means absolute.

 

[Sandisw]

I think it would be had to argue that Iger and Chapek aren't ultimately socially responsible for DVCM's actions. It is no different then their responsibilities for actions of other TWDC subsidiaries like ABC or PIXAR. However, since you bring up the POS we'll leave any Social and Ethical responsibilities out of the discussion for now.

As I touched on before, subsidiaries provide for limited financial and legal benefits (separations). TWDC provides the POS clause you provided to highlight those separations. However, by exercising operational control over their subsidiary (DVCM) the parent company (TWDC) may have opened itself up from any protection it had (“piercing the corporate veil”). But that's all arguable and something for the lawyers to have fun with. I'm not saying that has even occurred, (although the decisions around this closing bring that into question) but what is pretty clear is that the legal separation they claim in the POS is by no means absolute.

Possibly, but I was simply giving the backdrop to those that share what our remedies may or may not be,

Unless I misunderstood your initial post, you were making the point that those that state those distinctions are not providing an accurate and legal picture.

So, per the guidelines of the contract, we have agreed to allow them to waive liability.

Until something happens that invalidates that clause, statements that say TWDC or WDPR have no obligation to bail out DVCM, BVTC, or DVD, remain accurate.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

An additional issue is that DVCM is not really responsible to make owners whole. They're a management company.

 

[Shamus]

Possibly, but I was simply giving the backdrop to those that share what our remedies may or may not be,
Unless I misunderstood your initial post, you were making the point that those that state those distinctions are not providing an accurate and legal picture.

Not sure what part of my earlier statement Possibly was referring to?
Anyway - Thanks for sharing the POS.
And Yes - Some statements by others were inaccurate, while others were just totally wrong. (ie McDonalds/Wendys)

So, per the guidelines of the contract, we have agreed to allow them to waive liability.

I would say by signing we have agreed to waive any "implied liability".

Until something happens that invalidates that clause, statements that say TWDC or WDPR have no obligation to bail out DVCM, BVTC, or DVD, remain accurate.

Yes - However, some would argue that the "something" has already occurred.

What I am trying to bring to light by all this is that some people say "They are Separate Companies so TWDC has no liability".
Unfortunately that statement is not necessarily true and the period is not the end of the conversation.

 

[Sandisw]

The possibly was your statement that the lawyers would have to be involved to determine if there is something to invalidate their legal responsibility.

Not sure what has happened to bring it into question, at least from the standpoint of the POS...which is all I, as an owner, have to rely on. So far, my reading and understanding is there isn’t any explicit breach to the contract, nor anything that Would allow us to claim we have a right to anything beyond that,

 

[Shamus]

The possibly was your statement that the lawyers would have to be involved to determine if there is something to invalidate their legal responsibility.

Not sure what has happened to bring it into question, at least from the standpoint of the POS...which is all I, as an owner, have to rely on. So far, my reading and understanding is there isn’t any explicit breach to the contract, nor anything that Would allow us to claim we have a right to anything beyond that,

I don't want to drift to far off from the DVCM/TWDC relationship discussion but I understand that the entire topic of any liability of the parent is premature when liability of the subsidiary hasn't even been established.

That being said, the questions I have seen raised in relation to a possible breach of contract by DVCM include the actual closing of the resort and also the handling of canceled points. Were both these issues truly and properly handled in the best interest of the members?

I don't know the answer to those questions and I think that's an argument taking place in many other threads and therefore doesn't necessarily need to be hashed out here. But if liability is established one would naturally question what if any actions by the parent played a role.

 

[Sandisw]

I don't want to drift to far off from the DVCM/TWDC relationship discussion but I understand that the entire topic of any liability of the parent is premature when liability of the subsidiary hasn't even been established.

That being said, the questions I have seen raised in relation to a possible breach of contract by DVCM include the actual closing of the resort and also the handling of canceled points. Were both these issues truly and properly handled in the best interest of the members?

I don't know the answer to those questions and I think that's an argument taking place in many other threads and therefore doesn't necessarily need to be hashed out here. But if liability is established one would naturally question what if any actions by the parent played a role.

Well, Florida declared the state of emergency before closure and under the emercency powers of the POS, they were allowed to shut down, The move made for points does fall within their power based on the terms of Home Resort Rules.

But, you are correct that one must decide if the motive is appropriate or if someone is willing to challenge those specific documents and what they say.

My opinion is obviously that they have done all things within their power. It will be interesting to see the final income. While I am not confident that Disney will get involved, DVCM seems to be saying they are trying to ensure loss of points is minimal.

ETA: I also read that something related to the new Terms and Conditions that language was either changed or updating in terms of DVC and owner being an individual relationship...or something like that...thought that was interesting...trying to find the exact part now!

 

[bookwormde]

Not sure what part of my earlier statement Possibly was referring to?
Anyway - Thanks for sharing the POS.
And Yes - Some statements by others were inaccurate, while others were just totally wrong. (ie McDonalds/Wendys)

I would say by signing we have agreed to waive any "implied liability".

Yes - However, some would argue that the "something" has already occurred.

What I am trying to bring to light by all this is that some people say "They are Separate Companies so TWDC has no liability".
Unfortunately that statement is not necessarily true and the period is not the end of the conversation.

The primary reason corporations set up subsidiary LLCs is to limit liability (and there can be some tax benefits)

Has anyone every found the articles of incorporation for DVCM, they should give some clearlity on the corporate purpose and by extension the relationship

 

[_auroraborealis_]

The primary reason corporations set up subsidiary LLCs is to limit liability (and there can be some tax benefits)

This is also why Disney has gone wild for a timeshare model. They also shift the liability/risk of the properties to captive ownership.

 

[bookwormde]

Also as I understand it most timeshare HOAs are non stock (membership owned) not for profit entities.

Does anyone have different info

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Also as I understand it most timeshare HOAs are non stock (membership owned) not for profit entities.

Does anyone have different info

The HOA may be, but they contract with DVCM for management. DVCM is for-profit.

 

[bookwormde]

The HOA may be, but they contract with DVCM for management. DVCM is for-profit.

DVCM would be the HOA if it aligns with other timeshares, though they have 1 for each resort typically with an overlaying management system

 

[CarolMN]

The HOA may be, but they contract with DVCM for management. DVCM is for-profit.

DVCMC may be for profit, but they are limited to what they can charge DVC members for their services (which limits that profi). IIRC, it's a percentage of the resort's operating budget.

That price cap is why we now have online booking. Labor is expensive and membership grew to the extent that enough additional MS reps were needed to exceed the amount DVCMC was entitled to charge. Online booking significantly reduced the number of MS reps needed to take care of member booking.