DVC Club Level and Home Resort Survey

[zavandor]

The statute creates the rules for creating a valid trust, many of which provisions were created to protect purchasers of the trust. As to the requirement that a valid trust requires transfer to it of an entire unit/accommodation or all use rights therein, there is nothing in the statute that says that rule can be waived, ignored, or changed by any developer. DVD cannot make an amendment to the existing declarations that would allow for only partial interests in a unit to be given to the trust, even if the members agreed with it.

But then, how is it possible that other systems have enrolled individual weeks? Marriot did that, I believe.

 

[Sandisw]

But then, how is it possible that other systems have enrolled individual weeks? Marriot did that, I believe.

I am going to take a guess, but IANAL like @drusba. If what is there as part of the trust is reserving the week, as it was sold, then it is the full unit as that would cover the room for those specific days...its 100% of the usage. I don't know enough of how units are declared in those systems, but it is possible that each accomodation is its own unit. With DVC, a unit can be made up of more than one room...take VGF...BPK was declared as just two units....

With points based units, like we have...our right revolves around having access to that unit 365 days a year, and not specific dates, up to the fractional share we own....and I know that we have access to all units, but once a resort is sold out...or all the declared units are sold out, then the bulk of the units are owned by owners.

In my thinking, because of that, the trust can't open up booking to all units of the resort, or pull out specific units it chooses, and offer those as part of a trust.

As I shared, I think they could technically declare all the new units at Poly tower immediately to the trust and then only sell them that way...not as deeded.. Which is also way I think they have enough new projects coming up that messing with the sold out resorts, and risk having to defend, won't happen anytime soon, even if this actual trust gets up and running in the next few years.

 

[Cfabar1]

I am going to take a guess, but IANAL like @drusba. If what is there as part of the trust is reserving the week, as it was sold, then it is the full unit as that would cover the room for those specific days...its 100% of the usage. I don't know enough of how units are declared in those systems, but it is possible that each accomodation is its own unit. With DVC, a unit can be made up of more than one room...take VGF...BPK was declared as just two units....

With points based units, like we have...our right revolves around having access to that unit 365 days a year, and not specific dates, up to the fractional share we own....and I know that we have access to all units, but once a resort is sold out...or all the declared units are sold out, then the bulk of the units are owned by owners.

In my thinking, because of that, the trust can't open up booking to all units of the resort, or pull out specific units it chooses, and offer those as part of a trust.

I completely agree.

They can’t pull anything because there isn’t anything in part or whole that can be removed without impacting the system.

It’s very different than a deeded owner who owns a week and choosing to move that week into a different program. To me that’s a huge difference between Disney and other programs.

 

[drusba]

Adding to the above, Marriot created its trust in 2010 when it was dealing with existing timeshare resorts where the owner had set periods of use in the timeshare that would not be affected by the trust plan and thus went unchallenged on the basis of not putting entire units into the trust. Also, before 2015 the Florida statute was different. Though the definition of timeshare estate mandated the statutory trust requirements applicable to a single site timeshare had to be followed, §721.08(2)(c)4, it did not include in the definition that the trust provisions for multisite timeshares, §721.53(1)e, had to be followed, which, at the time, were not necessarily mandatory for a multisite plan to be a valid timeshare estate. That was changed in 2015 to add that the trust provisions of §721.53(1)e, contained in the multisite timeshare section, had to be met to be a "timeshare estate" in a multisite plan that uses the trust method.

Also note that, under Florida law, timeshare resorts from other states have to meet their state's laws and not Florida's when made part of multisite timeshare plan that also has Florida sites, and thus the Florida trust requirements are mandated only for the Florida parts of the multisite plan.

 

[MerlinandtheMouse]

Now that we can safely assume the trust will be going ahead sooner than later, it would be another safe assumption that the Poly Tower will be added to the trust, as well (can’t see much appeal in joining the trust if it didn’t give me access to more desirable locations/resorts), right?

Not sure anyone can shed light on this at the current time anyway, but I’m very curious how they will add the current PVB longhouses into this trust since it’s very likely the same association. I’m also curious if I were to purchase into the trust, if my deeded Poly resale points can be joined with trust points to have more points at 11mos. Or will they have to be separate bookings even if both are at 11mos?

 

[Hubalorian]

Now that we can safely assume the trust will be going ahead sooner than later, it would be another safe assumption that the Poly Tower will be added to the trust, as well (can’t see much appeal in joining the trust if it didn’t give me access to more desirable locations/resorts), right?

Not sure anyone can shed light on this at the current time anyway, but I’m very curious how they will add the current PVB longhouses into this trust since it’s very likely the same association. I’m also curious if I were to purchase into the trust, if my deeded Poly resale points can be joined with trust points to have more points at 11mos. Or will they have to be separate bookings even if both are at 11mos?

In the fort wilderness documents that were recently unearthed in another thread, they used wording to basically all, some or none of the units could be added to the trust while still maintaining the right to sell deeded ownership.

I think we will see the hybrid model going forward. Let’s speculate and say 25% of Poly2 is declared at the beginning. They could easily sale 15% in deeded interest (what we think DVC is now) while selling access to the 10% in the trust.

 

[Cfabar1]

In the fort wilderness documents that were recently unearthed in another thread, they used wording to basically all, some or none of the units could be added to the trust while still maintaining the right to sell deeded ownership.

I think we will see the hybrid model going forward. Let’s speculate and say 25% of Poly2 is declared at the beginning. They could easily sale 15% in deeded interest (what we think DVC is now) while selling access to the 10% in the trust.

I have not seen this, but this would indicate to me that Disney knows they should not try adding deeded inventory to a trust with the existing inventory.

 

[dioxide45]

In the fort wilderness documents that were recently unearthed in another thread, they used wording to basically all, some or none of the units could be added to the trust while still maintaining the right to sell deeded ownership.

Can you post a link to the other thread?

 

[JackosinDIS]

Can you post a link to the other thread?

https://www.disboards.com/threads/ft-wilderness-cabins-becoming-dvc.3916819/post-65231123

Lots of reading for you!

 

[MerlinandtheMouse]

In the fort wilderness documents that were recently unearthed in another thread, they used wording to basically all, some or none of the units could be added to the trust while still maintaining the right to sell deeded ownership.

I think we will see the hybrid model going forward. Let’s speculate and say 25% of Poly2 is declared at the beginning. They could easily sale 15% in deeded interest (what we think DVC is now) while selling access to the 10% in the trust.

Oh I have no doubt they’ll make some sort of hybrid situation like you’ve said, I’m just wondering if it will include the longhouses as they’re all currently declared. So if you purchase trust points for access to the PVB association, will one be able to book the deluxe studios/bungalows at 11mos? I know one of the concerns for existing Poly owners, myself included, is how availability to those rooms might change once we see the room layouts for the tower studios that will potentially make the current deluxe rooms more popular.

If the trust has access to those rooms at 11mos, as well, that will dramatically change the number of people who can access those rooms. Maybe that’s the ultimate tradeoff for making it the same association

 

[Cfabar1]

Oh I have no doubt they’ll make some sort of hybrid situation like you’ve said, I’m just wondering if it will include the longhouses as they’re all currently declared. So if you purchase trust points for access to the PVB association, will one be able to book the deluxe studios/bungalows at 11mos? I know one of the concerns for existing Poly owners, myself included, is how availability to those rooms might change once we see the room layouts for the tower studios that will potentially make the current deluxe rooms more popular.

If the trust has access to those rooms at 11mos, as well, that will dramatically change the number of people who can access those rooms. Maybe that’s the ultimate tradeoff for making it the same association

I still feel like the points have to either be in the trust or in the old system, which wouldn't allow the same points to be in both places simultaneously.

 

[dioxide45]

https://www.disboards.com/threads/ft-wilderness-cabins-becoming-dvc.3916819/post-65231123

Lots of reading for you!

Thanks. I read through the documentation and replied in another thread. But I think for the most part, the Palmetto Trust Association Inc documentation was simply created and filed to support the Cabins at FW. Nothing more. I no longer see any evidence of a multisite trust coming from Palmetto. I speculate that with the cabins being modular or manufactured homes, and being different than purpose built real estate, may have necessitated a different type of ownership plan to make it work.

 

[dioxide45]

In the fort wilderness documents that were recently unearthed in another thread, they used wording to basically all, some or none of the units could be added to the trust while still maintaining the right to sell deeded ownership.

I think we will see the hybrid model going forward. Let’s speculate and say 25% of Poly2 is declared at the beginning. They could easily sale 15% in deeded interest (what we think DVC is now) while selling access to the 10% in the trust.

I think this is just standard wording that DVD uses in their documents to cover all their bases. The documents even say you can't take a cyborg or avatar on to the property without permission. It seems they thought of everything.

 

[MerlinandtheMouse]

I still feel like the points have to either be in the trust or in the old system, which wouldn't allow the same points to be in both places simultaneously.

Yeah I’ve thought the same. Maybe the more logical answer that they won’t add the tower to the trust which would solve a lot of issues for them but it would make the trust even less appealing, at least for now.

 

[MerlinandtheMouse]

Thanks. I read through the documentation and replied in another thread. But I think for the most part, the Palmetto Trust Association Inc documentation was simply created and filed to support the Cabins at FW. Nothing more. I no longer see any evidence of a multisite trust coming from Palmetto. I speculate that with the cabins being modular or manufactured homes, and being different than purpose built real estate, may have necessitated a different type of ownership plan to make it work.

Hmm I wonder if it also is a way to introduce moderate resorts into DVC without changing its “deluxe” nature, so maybe going forward if they add a Coronado Springs wing of DVC or wherever, they’ll incorporate into the trust.

 

[Hubalorian]

Yeah I’ve thought the same. Maybe the more logical answer that they won’t add the tower to the trust which would solve a lot of issues for them but it would make the trust even less appealing, at least for now.

Or we misunderstood the statement. Polynesian is a resort that happens to have some DVC rooms. The quote is “as of right now, our plan is for the tower to be apart of the existing resort”. The tower can be solely in the trust and be apart of the resort. There would be no exchanging between the two at 11 months but would be at 7 months unless you bought the trust resale. The resale restrictions blocks you out of all “legacy resorts”

 

[Sandisw]

Now that we can safely assume the trust will be going ahead sooner than later, it would be another safe assumption that the Poly Tower will be added to the trust, as well (can’t see much appeal in joining the trust if it didn’t give me access to more desirable locations/resorts), right?

Not sure anyone can shed light on this at the current time anyway, but I’m very curious how they will add the current PVB longhouses into this trust since it’s very likely the same association. I’m also curious if I were to purchase into the trust, if my deeded Poly resale points can be joined with trust points to have more points at 11mos. Or will they have to be separate bookings even if both are at 11mos?

I do not think the current longhouses and bungalows would become part of the trust, because I don’t think they legally can…DVD doesn’t own any units in total.

However, because of the way these new documents are written, and the way the current POS is written about future declarations, I think they could very well declare the new tower units as part of a trust plan, while still being part of PVB….

And, when they sell the tower, sell it as a RTU ownership via the trust…or, they are going to surprise everyone and just make the tower a new resort use plan and not end up adding to PVB because things have changed…and that is the move to have a trust model and not one that sells deeded ownership interests.

 

[MerlinandtheMouse]

I do not think the current longhouses and bungalows would become part of the trust, because I don’t think they legally can…DVD doesn’t own any units in total.

However, because of the way these new documents are written, and the way the current POS is written about future declarations, I think they could very well declare the new tower units as part of a trust plan, while still being part of PVB….

And, when they sell the tower, sell it as a RTU ownership via the trust…or, they are going to surprise everyone and just make the tower a new resort use plan and not end up adding to PVB because things have changed…and that is the move to have a trust model and not one that sells deeded ownership interests.

This would really change a lot and I don’t think anyone assumed anything like for the tower. Idk feels like a really big gamble to do this now that they’ve insinuated that it would be part of the existing association and never retracted their statement. This would cause a lot of upheaval and anger I would imagine, not sure DVD wants that headache.

But if this does end up being the plan, will there be a setup with BVTC to allow 7mo open availability amongst all resorts? There’s gotta be, right? Actually what does it say about this regarding CFW?

 

[tjkraz]

Or we misunderstood the statement. Polynesian is a resort that happens to have some DVC rooms. The quote is “as of right now, our plan is for the tower to be apart of the existing resort”. The tower can be solely in the trust and be apart of the resort. There would be no exchanging between the two at 11 months but would be at 7 months unless you bought the trust resale. The resale restrictions blocks you out of all “legacy resorts”

That discussion has made the rounds multiple times. The trust certainly puts a different spin on what we have "known to be true" over the last 34 years. Nevertheless, DVC has had 4 weeks to monitor online reporting and discussions following the condo meeting, and issue a correction if they felt their plans were being misrepresented. Instead DVC guides have gone on record confirming that Poly tower will be part of the same condo association. I think the odds of it being something completely different are low.

 

[BeachClub2014]

That discussion has made the rounds multiple times. The trust certainly puts a different spin on what we have "known to be true" over the last 34 years. Nevertheless, DVC has had 4 weeks to monitor online reporting and discussions following the condo meeting, and issue a correction if they felt their plans were being misrepresented. Instead DVC guides have gone on record confirming that Poly tower will be part of the same condo association. I think the odds of it being something completely different are low.

.....and some guides have said that no decision has been made and that they had no information to share. I think it's still an open question.