Does David's tell you if the renter cancels?

[MICKIMINI]

Travel insurance doesn't cover pandemics, so it wouldn't really help.

My apologies - I thought I read recently on disboards that some travel insurance would pay if purchased before a certain date (I think it was January 2020).

 

[Cyberc1978]

Travel insurance doesn't cover pandemics, so it wouldn't really help.

Not correct. At least some with CFAR covers.

 

[WDWEPCOT]

I also have rented points to Aulani and don’t wish to spend my time locked in my room - even if I could get out most things are closed . Once home I would be home for another two weeks and can't afford that
I also have points rented out with Dave’s with a check in of 4/4 - I have not heard from them - the money I received is tied up in my Hawaii cruise and Aulani rental. Yes I asked Dave’s to recommend travel ins companies and he did - yes I purchased ins - no it does not cover this
Am I willing to refund ? No not unless I can obtain my money back from DCL as I did what Dave advertises - rent your points to pay for a cruise - that money is gone - would I rebook ? Yes - am I going to lose my points - yes - no one is going to be made should except The Travel Industry when they get bailed out - the rest of us are going to be left somewhere in between - holding airfare we can’t use - rented DVC we can’t use etc it’s a horrible situation no one saw coming all because we wanted to take a Vacstion
Going forward I know I won’t rent out my points nor will I rent them - I have never liked prepaying anything and never will
I wish everyone good luck and ask to do what you think is best because in the end it is you that you have to live with - I myself want to help my renters and hope the person who I rented from helps me .

 

[CaliAdventurer]

To not refund or reschedule a renter directly or with a broker is shortsighted. In doing so, you degrade the very business model you are using to profit. If no one trusts to rent, the prices will have to drop to entice people to take the risk. Do the right thing for them and for you.

 

[CaliAdventurer]

Maybe the issue wont be that big, I heard that Trump is considering opening back up the country again.

At least not big for Davids or other brokers if the country opens back up and resorts will too. That way only a smaller number of renters will be impacted in March. By little I mean a small number compared to what it could or will be if April will see cancellations too.

ps. I'm not going into the discussion about the right or wrong in opening the country at this point.

I wouldn't expect interstate and international travel and resorts to just open their doors. Likely, young workers without health issues will go back to WORK. If we stay closed down too long we could lose many more of the most socioeconomically vulnerable; if open it all too soon, the healthcare system will collapse and say goodbye to grandma. This will be a very, slow and measured "reopening" when it happens. Likely, we need the capacity to test millions quickly.

 

[foodiddiedoo]

Not correct. At least some with CFAR covers.

Makes sense but I would have needed that when I booked my vacation (within 30 days) and that was last September. At that time, I'm sure most people wouldn't have purchased CFAR insurance since it's much more expensive than regular travel insurance and no one would have foreseen this pandemic at the time. So by the time Covid-19 started to become an actual issue I was well past that window.

 

[foodiddiedoo]

Also, does anyone truly believe that Aulani will only be closed until March 31st, when Oahu will remain basically shut down until at least April 30th? I wonder if Disney is trying to close the resort for a short period of time and plans to extend to reduce system capacity issues for people trying to reschedule/get a refund?

 

[Cyberc1978]

To not refund or reschedule a renter directly or with a broker is shortsighted. In doing so, you degrade the very business model you are using to profit. If no one trusts to rent, the prices will have to drop to entice people to take the risk. Do the right thing for them and for you.

I do think that most would want to help if they can. However if their points are expiring and they spend the money, how can they refund or re-book? You can't give back whats not there.

If DVC allowed them to they could bank to RCI and then offer the renter to book a new vacation through RCI. That way the renter still gets a vacation, not a Disney one but still.

 

[Mickey of the Villages]

I think that is why this discussion is so difficult. With resorts closed the renter is not getting the reservation so the argument can’t be they aren’t entitled to some sort of restitution because they did not cancel.

The legal question is who has to be held responsible for that since Disney made the decision, taking it out of the hands of owneers.

It is a situation no one...owners, brokers or renters...accounted for when they made these contracts, That is what I see as the huge wrench in this system.

When renters are successful in getting money back via CC disputes, the broker is now on the hook. if that happens in a lot of cases, it will be difficult moving forward for them.

i can’t imagine that any broker won’t have a clause now, for owners and rentals alike, that doesn’t detail what happens for resort closures. If the renter has to agree to forfeit all funds, then the price they pay is going to have to be substantial and current rates, IMO, don’t support that. If the owner has to agree to give up something, like maybe the 30%, there will be less willing to go that route.

I don’t know the answer other than I think this is going to have a big impact on the rental market.

I agree that this is a difficult discussion.

Again, I'm neither a renter nor owner who has rented points.

The contract cannot require that the owner do anything more than make a reservation, right? I mean all the owner has is points so all the owner could ever do is make a reservation.

Reasonable renters must be aware of situations in which the resorts could close, right? What if there was another 9/11-type attack, what if there was a meteorological event (tornado, hurricane), what if there was a war and it interrupted the resorts. These are all risks that could have affected a renter. We must presume renters were aware of these risks, right?

I haven't read the contract but it seems to me that the only thing the owner could contract for is a reservation using her points. That's all she had to offer. The renter must have understood that's all the owner had to offer. The owner does not offer a reservation AND a warranty that the resort will be open the day of the reservation. That's what insurance is for.

Do you believe that the owner warrants that the resort will be open? Is there evidence of this in the contract?

 

[TCRAIG]

Going forward - rather than the Broker holding 30% til check in date - they hold 50% - which would be refunded IF the resort closes. That way - at least owners get 1/2 at booking and renters refunded 1/2 if DISNEY cancels...I would go for that..

 

[foodiddiedoo]

Going forward - rather than the Broker holding 30% til check in date - they hold 50% - which would be refunded IF the resort closes. That way - at least owners get 1/2 at booking and renters refunded 1/2 if DISNEY cancels...I would go for that..

Doesn't that make for the broker not making any money?

 

[Krandor]

I don't think the brokers will make it out of this. With this being two separate contracts I think they are going to be on the hook to both parties.

However, even if that isn't the case, they are between a rock and a hard place. If the renters all dispute they are likely to run out of money and go bacnkrupt. If they force the owners to pay up when the owners didn't do anything wrong (and who may not even have the money anymore to refund), then owners who lose out on money and points are not going to use them again (and even if this gets sorted out owners and renters both may be hesitant to use such a service in the future).

I don't see how any of the current brokers survive. It is possible afterwards new brokers could emerge with different contracts like the suggestion above where in a situation like this both parties get 50% back and the parties know that up-front.

 

[CraigInPA]

Going forward - rather than the Broker holding 30% til check in date - they hold 50% - which would be refunded IF the resort closes. That way - at least owners get 1/2 at booking and renters refunded 1/2 if DISNEY cancels...I would go for that..

If this is the "new model", it's not going to generate a lot of owners wishing to rent through a broker due to the heightened risk of getting less than their maintenance fees in the event that some event occurs that interferes with the rental.

 

[Krandor]

Doesn't that make for the broker not making any money?

The 70% and 30% to the owners that is referred to isn't 70% of the amount the renter pays but 70% of the renters payment minus commissions.

 

[fsjking]

Just because he opens the country (ie, imports/exports/international travelers) doesn't mean the individual states would fall in line though. I can't see the NY Governor budging, I don't live there but he seems like a stubborn sob. And if individual states do their own thing, it may create further complication.

I think I read FL was requiring travelers from the northeast to quarantine for 14 days upon arrival (rumor, did not confirm factually) I think for the purposes of this thread, we'd be in the same place.

Owner: Park was open, they no showed. Where's my money?
Renter: Um, why would I fly in to Florida just to quarantine myself for the entire vacation?

If the president says open back up, and Disney says they are going to open, I'd bet money the 14 day quarantine would disappear overnight. Disney does have a decent amount of power in the state.

[

I am not trying to be argumentative, so please don't take this post in that way.

I disagree that there was no consideration. The consideration the owner gives is giving up her right to use the points for the benefit of a reservation for someone else. That is all the owner can ever do in this situation because the owner has no control over any other aspect of this.

The object of this contract is a reservation made with the points belonging to the owner. That was done (I presume). In order to guard against risk of loss the renter must buy insurance or live with all risks known or unknown.

Again, I'm not trying to be a stinker and folks can disagree but I thought I would raise this side of the argument.

Except the owners are getting refunded their points by DVC. You can get into argument of whether their points are about to expire, but I think that that proves irrelevant in court. The owner is required to provide a reservation. They chose to make the reservation to the renter on a date their points were soon to expire. Even though it is of no direct fault of their own, they are being "made whole" by DVC. I think a court would require them to make the intermediary whole, and they the renter.

 

[fsjking]

If this is the "new model", it's not going to generate a lot of owners wishing to rent through a broker due to the heightened risk of getting less than their maintenance fees in the event that some event occurs that interferes with the rental.

You won't get your maintenance fees at all if you don't rent or just use the points yourself.

 

[Sandisw]

I agree that this is a difficult discussion.

Again, I'm neither a renter nor owner who has rented points.

The contract cannot require that the owner do anything more than make a reservation, right? I mean all the owner has is points so all the owner could ever do is make a reservation.

Reasonable renters must be aware of situations in which the resorts could close, right? What if there was another 9/11-type attack, what if there was a meteorological event (tornado, hurricane), what if there was a war and it interrupted the resorts. These are all risks that could have affected a renter. We must presume renters were aware of these risks, right?

I haven't read the contract but it seems to me that the only thing the owner could contract for is a reservation using her points. That's all she had to offer. The renter must have understood that's all the owner had to offer. The owner does not offer a reservation AND a warranty that the resort will be open the day of the reservation. That's what insurance is for.

Do you believe that the owner warrants that the resort will be open? Is there evidence of this in the contract?

The contracts do not account for resort closures, I don’t believe a reasonable renter went in assuming that non refundable with no cancellations would include the resort being closed, I know I would not, I am an owner with a contract to rent a reservation with my points and in no way thought about that,

The owner contract does say that they owe restitution if there is a “failure” to deliver the reservation. But it has always been implied that meant through the owners fault. This is not owners fault per se, DVCM acts on our behalf, so is there an implied understanding it could be on the owner? Most that have weighed in here with a strong understanding of the law indicate it doesn’t.

So, we are back to three contracts, none which specifically say how to deal with this. IMO, renters have a case to expect something back..whether that is money or a rescheduled reservation. How and who provides it, I don’t know, but for those that fight it via CC, the broker will.

That is why I really believe it’s going to impact going forward because I can not believe any owner or broker providing contracts that don’t have this spelled out. I know I will.

 

[foodiddiedoo]

I don't think the brokers will make it out of this. With this being two separate contracts I think they are going to be on the hook to both parties.

However, even if that isn't the case, they are between a rock and a hard place. If the renters all dispute they are likely to run out of money and go bacnkrupt. If they force the owners to pay up when the owners didn't do anything wrong (and who may not even have the money anymore to refund), then owners who lose out on money and points are not going to use them again (and even if this gets sorted out owners and renters both may be hesitant to use such a service in the future).

I don't see how any of the current brokers survive. It is possible afterwards new brokers could emerge with different contracts like the suggestion above where in a situation like this both parties get 50% back and the parties know that up-front.

Yes, I unknowingly picked the worst time to rent for the very first time (that's what you get for planning in advance i guess). After this experience I would be very loathe to rent again. I might end up being pleasantly surprised, but I am absolutely prepared for the worst.

 

[foodiddiedoo]

The 70% and 30% to the owners that is referred to isn't 70% of the amount the renter pays but 70% of the renters payment minus commissions.

Ah gotcha, I'm still a newbie to this .

 

[Maistre Gracey]

I agree that this is a difficult discussion.

Again, I'm neither a renter nor owner who has rented points.

The contract cannot require that the owner do anything more than make a reservation, right? I mean all the owner has is points so all the owner could ever do is make a reservation.

Reasonable renters must be aware of situations in which the resorts could close, right? What if there was another 9/11-type attack, what if there was a meteorological event (tornado, hurricane), what if there was a war and it interrupted the resorts. These are all risks that could have affected a renter. We must presume renters were aware of these risks, right?

I haven't read the contract but it seems to me that the only thing the owner could contract for is a reservation using her points. That's all she had to offer. The renter must have understood that's all the owner had to offer. The owner does not offer a reservation AND a warranty that the resort will be open the day of the reservation. That's what insurance is for.

Do you believe that the owner warrants that the resort will be open? Is there evidence of this in the contract?

IMO, this is backwards. It seems it’s the owner should be the one to understand the resorts could close, and bear the responsibility.
Let’s say you had a room reservation (you are the renter) at the Yacht Club. Disney is the owner, you are the renter. Disney closes the Yacht Club. Should Disney keep, or refund your money?