DVC can ban owners now

[Cfabar1]

https://wdwnt.com/2024/07/new-florida-law-allows-dvc-ban-unruly-owners/

Per WDWNT DVC can now ban "unruly" owners... I wonder what that means, and how much latitude DVC will have to ban owners who act in a way they don't agree with...

I think about those ears bloggers people who were banned from the parks but still able to access their DVC points, for example....

I don't cause trouble when I am there, but am nervous about what rights I am losing as a deeded owner.

 

[CarolynFH]

This law, which applies to all timeshares in Florida, is to cover situations similar to this one: https://wdwnt.com/2023/01/disney-va...espassed-due-to-beach-club-being-home-resort/. I can’t imagine that you’d behave in a way that would get you banned, so I don’t believe you’re losing any rights.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

Good…??
If I threaten my wife or neighbors, I can also be removed from my house.

Seems reasonable to me, at least in the short term. I’m not sure about a long term banning.

 

[Jwaire]

I don't cause trouble when I am there, but am nervous about what rights I am losing as a deeded owner.

My first reaction, is it's Florida—so who knows if the law is actual legal until it gets adjudicated in court.

However, seems like Disney should be forced to buy your contract back, if they banned you permanently.

Also, don't assault cast members even annoying or pushy ones. There's always an alternative. If you feel wronged, go to the front desk and ask for the GM. You'd be surprised how helpful they can be.

 

[CarolynFH]

My first reaction, is it's Florida—so who knows if the law is actual legal until it gets adjudicated in court.

The same law already exists for hotel operators, and someone can be barred from their home by a protective order if they commit domestic violence, so what do you think would be the grounds for a challenge to this law?

 

[CarolynFH]

However, seems like Disney should be forced to buy your contract back, if they banned you permanently.

Yes, or force you to sell or otherwise divest yourself of your ownership.

 

[QueenofPrideRock]

However, seems like Disney should be forced to buy your contract back, if they banned you permanently.

I don't know ... if your behavior is egregious enough to get banned, this feels to me like it should be part of the consequences of your actions. (As in Disney should not have to pay the banned guest. But agreed that stripping of ownership somehow would be appropriate.)

 

[Cfabar1]

I don't know ... if your behavior is egregious enough to get banned, this feels to me like it should be part of the consequences of your actions. (As in Disney should not have to pay the banned guest. But agreed that stripping of ownership somehow would be appropriate.)

I'm not exactly sure what the contract outlines, but what I do worry about is broad interpretation of this that could result in Disney just kicking people out for causing a "disturbance", but alas....

 

[Maistre Gracey]

My first reaction, is it's Florida—so who knows if the law is actual legal until it gets adjudicated in court.

Yeah… we are just a bunch of stupid country bumpkins down here…

 

[Dis507]

I've read that article as well as the rules for the Condo association several times now and based on my non-legal mind, they are saying that during your stay should you act in a manner that is inappropriate, aka violates the rights of others or commit an illegal act, the condo association/timeshare owner (DVC) can now take action to remove you from the property and end your stay early based on your booking, as any other hotel operator would be able to do. It doesn't call out anything that says they have the immediate right to ban you from the property for any period of time.

Having said that of course if you do something egregious enough, the association could take legal action to have you permanently removed, but that would take legal action and they would need to compensate based on your level/share of ownership. Since it is a legally deeded property.

But that of course is my non-legal take on it. I would leave it to the more legal minded folks on this board to weigh in if I'm missing something or not reading it right.

 

[Chuck S]

I'm 100% for this law, considering the way I've seen some people act at a DVC Resort. I saw a guy, years ago, threaten to punch a front desk CM, after his wife requested a particular room and it wasn't available. Using the typical "Do you know how much I PAID for this timeshare?" and "I pay your salary through my dues!" Security was called, and they said DVC would contact them regarding their membership.

I'm wondering if this is part of the reason CFW cabins are doing a trust?

 

[john7994]

As a DVC owner, this doesn’t cause me any concern or worry. I have seen multiple articles / interpretations of this around the internet from the extreme to the tame - seems like something that I wouldn’t personally need to give a second thought about.

 

[CarolynFH]

I'm not exactly sure what the contract outlines, but what I do worry about is broad interpretation of this that could result in Disney just kicking people out for causing a "disturbance", but alas....

The actual text of the legislation is found in this article from DVC News: https://dvcnews.com/dvc-program-men...an-be-evicted-under-new-florida-timeshare-law. I think the behavior would have to be pretty serious.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Yeah… we are just a bunch of stupid country bumpkins down here…

I believe the comment was more towards the recent trend in the state to sign legislation into law, leaving the determination of constitutionality for later. So much so that the appellate courts more or less start each session with "Oh, it's you again".

 

[Maistre Gracey]

I believe the comment was more towards the recent trend in the state to sign legislation into law, leaving the determination of constitutionality for later. So much so that the appellate courts more or less start each session with "Oh, it's you again".

Yeah, that’s the way I took it. Thus my comment.

 

[drusba]

The assumption being made, apparently even by the article cited in the original post, is that this new law is actually something new. All it does is clarify statutes that have been in effect for many years and actually makes no real changes to timeshares, such as DVC.

Timeshares have long been legally deemed to be "public lodging" facilities under Florida law, Fl. Stat. §509.242(1)(g), which, of course, also includes hotels and vacation resorts. The "operator" of any such facility has long had the right to have an unruly guest, or one having illegal drugs, ejected, including by calling the police, and even banned from using the resort. As to what kinds of acts that actually covers, think of it this way: the unruly acts are generally those kinds of acts for which one could call the police, e.g., Fl. Sta. §509.141.

The only thing the new statute does is clarify that the "operator" of the timeshare resort can include not just the association or the association's board, but also the "managing entity" designated for the resort, i.e., it clarifies that entities such as DVCM can call the police and kick you out. Note most believed that was true before but someone thought clarification was needed, and I am guessing it is because someone not long ago, who was ejected from a timeshare and likely arrested, tried to argue otherwise.

 

[CarolynFH]

The assumption being made, apparently even by the article cited in the original post, is that this new law is actually something new. All it does is clarify statutes that have been in effect for many years and actually makes no real changes to timeshares, such as DVC.

Timeshares have long been legally deemed to be "public offering facilities" under Florida law, Fl. Stat. §509.242(1)(g), which, of course, also includes hotels and vacation resorts. The "operator" of any "public offering facility" has long had the right to have an unruly guest, or one having illegal drugs, ejected, including by calling the police, and even banned from using the resort. As to what kinds of acts that actually covers, think of it this way: the unruly acts are generally those kinds of acts for which one could call the police, e.g., Fl. Sta. §501.141.

The only thing the new statute does is clarify that the "operator" of the timeshare resort can include not just the association or the association's board but also the "managing entity" designated for the resort, i.e., it clarifies that entities such as DVCM can call the police and kick you out. Note most believed that was true before but someone thought clarification was needed, and I am guessing it is because someone not long ago, who was ejected from a timeshare and likely arrested, tried to argue otherwise .

Thanks for the clarification! I think part of the issue was whether someone who was an owner of the property in question could be removed and/or banned from property they owned, albeit that their ownership covered only a tiny piece of the property.

 

[QueenofPrideRock]

I'm not exactly sure what the contract outlines, but what I do worry about is broad interpretation of this that could result in Disney just kicking people out for causing a "disturbance", but alas....

Oh totally, but I would think (and hope) there's a sliding scale before you get fully banned / trespassed / etc. And if you've made it to ban status, you should be aware of the consequences.

But this is all pretty hypothetical anyway