DVC Commercial Use Policy added to POS

[JimMIA]

I saw it and acknowledged same on page 17 as well as stating that makes me a commercial renter under that definition even though I own mainly to use and rent out roughly about 2 to 3 times a year currently.

Well then...I guess we've conclusively established who's not keeping up -- ME!

Have a great weekend!

 

[rinkwide]

...that makes me a commercial renter...

Actually, it designates you as "commercially active", whatever the hell that means -- and that's assuming anything printed in a "vacation planner" has some kind of substantive value in the first place.

 

[Off-The-Deep-End]

They are covered in the guidelines that you probably agreed to when you signed up for the DIS:
http://www.wdwinfo.com/guidelines.htm

Touchee!

robin, thanks for comming back to the keyboard to point this out!

You rock!

 

[Off-The-Deep-End]

No one here is attacking anyone we are having a health debate .

The rules are there for all of our benifits and to keep DVC a worthwhile investment.

What would happen if everymember rented points the market would take a hit and dvc would lose it worth.

As it is now you see posting here "Why buy when I can rent cheaper"

But like anything else these are all opinions and conjecture.

Actually you have attacked, besmerched and demeaned many. Also, not one health topic except school drug abuse/testing has been brought up, so I also don't see a health debate, just a rental rant, IMHO, YMWCV!

 

[sjdisneywedding]

Their actions make perfect sense.

The purpose of anti-renting language in timeshare contracts - as Brian indicated - is to protect buyers from unscrupulous sellers who often make outrageous promises about the income potential of their products. Unfortunately for Disney, these clauses really can't be used in reverse - i.e., to protect a developer's competitive rental advantage over that of the owner's by prohibiting renting. As a result, DVD can't legally do anything to stop commercial renting. The sad part is that they can bully, badger and burden the membership until all renting becomes too much of a hassle.

I've come to the conclusion that Disney really isn't cut out for the large-scale timeshare business. Their property is simply too valuable, even for a right-to-use.

unfortunately you are probably correct on that

 

[DBorges]

I've read it and have a couple of thoughts about it. First, assuming we're talking the same section, it is just a shorthand version of what is being discussed earlier. Second, according to DVC's legal dept, the product understanding checklist is not a binding article, only a representation. My previous interpretation stands.

That was really my point. They own the points and if they elect to rent them out, so be it. And that's true if they get every single unit for the week I want to go and I'm left out. While I don't have the reference anymore, I have seen information of case law in FL where a condo developer was renting units by the week and instituted a law that owners could only rent for a month or longer. The courts held that the rules had to apply to all evenly regardless of the rules put in place by the developer.

Are you a lawer??

Do you understand closing Doc??

And sorry yes that makes you a Comm rent LOL JK

 

[InstImpres]

IJust to add, my participation may be spotty the next couple of weeks. We leave early AM to HI for 2 weeks on II exchanges. I'll be back but as you say, if the thread keeps on this pace I may miss a few things.

Dean..I don't think you address the most important question...which points did you use for the exchange?

Have a great time!

 

[CarolMN]

From the '08-'09 Vacation Planner:

Renting Vacation Points Restriction
Use of Vacation Homes and recreational facilities for commercial purposes or any purpose other than described in the Declaration is expressly prohibited. Commercial purpose includes a pattern of rental activity or other occupancy by an Owner that the Board (of the Condominium Association), in it's reasonable discretion, could conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or practice.

Example: A Member who maintains a web site offering rental of points is clearly renting for commercial purposes; a Member who makes 20 reservations per Use Year in the name of other persons is most likely renting for commercial purposes. These members are considered to be "commercially active." A person who makes one or two reservations within a Use Year in the name of other persons most likely is not renting for commercial purpose.​

....(snip).....
That was really my point. They own the points and if they elect to rent them out, so be it. And that's true if they get every single unit for the week I want to go and I'm left out. While I don't have the reference anymore, I have seen information of case law in FL where a condo developer was renting units by the week and instituted a law that owners could only rent for a month or longer. The courts held that the rules had to apply to all evenly regardless of the rules put in place by the developer.

I agree with Dean. (I am not a lawyer and AFAIK, neither is Dean).

Don't believe Disney can legally stop an owner from doing what Disney itself does. They can print anything they like in the planner - it doesn't necessarily make what they print "legal" or binding.

That said, it would cost quite a bit to go to court over this. In the current environment, I certainly wouldn't buy now to rent on a regular basis. (For the record, we have never rented our points, but have gifted reservations to our daughter and our nephew and niece).

I don't particularly like speculative or commercial renting, but can think of no way to stop it that doesn't have a fairly significant negative impact on other DVC owners. Any proposed solution I've seen seems to be a "throw out the baby with the bathwater" deal, IMHO.

Since I have always gotten the reservations that I want, even though they are arguably among the most difficult to get, I can only conclude that most who object to others who rent do so either because

1) they cannot or choose not to effectively use the 11 month window, or
2) they do not want to stay at their home resort and must use the 7 month window.

DVC is a first come, first served system. The reservation rules apply equally to all.

 

[DVC Mike]

Don't believe Disney can legally stop an owner from doing what Disney itself does. They can print anything they like in the planner - it doesn't necessarily make what they print "legal" or binding.

On that point, the 12/31/2007 modification to the POS also updated the "Personal Use" section (updates in italics):

Personal Use. Except for Units or Ownership Interests owned by DVD, which may be utilized as provided in the Declaration of Condominium, each of the Vacation Homes shall be occupied only as vacation accomodations. Except for Units or Ownership Interests owned by DVD, rentals of Vacation Homes to the general public by DVD or the Management Company and use of Vacation Points in connection with the DVC Reservation Component or external exchange programs, use of the accomodations, commonly used facilities, and recreational facilities of the Condominium is limited solely to the personal use of the Owners...

 

[TisBit]

Don't believe Disney can legally stop an owner from doing what Disney itself does. They can print anything they like in the planner - it doesn't necessarily make what they print "legal" or binding.

That said, it would cost quite a bit to go to court over this.

Actually, that isn't necessarily true. Just because Disney sells tickets, doesn't mean that you can start a resale market, etc. If you are given tickets, you legally aren't supposed to transfer them, but as you stated, Court is an expensive way to go.

I don't particularly like speculative or commercial renting, but can think of no way to stop it that doesn't have a fairly significant negative impact on other DVC owners. Any proposed solution I've seen seems to be a "throw out the baby with the bathwater" deal, IMHO.


DVC is a first come, first served system. The reservation rules apply equally to all.

I agree, I think it can be a nuisance and create even more demand during peak times (DVC members plus people wanting to pick up those ressies via renting) it doesn't really create an unbalance for DVC as a whole. The whole point is that you have to manage the system with minimum inconvenience to the normal owner (I have mentioned this many times).

Most of the complaints blamed on "renters" is about availability, but that simply isn't the case, it is just about demand and the fact that there are more and more people going to WDW (partly due to the lack of other choices). People used to book at the Poly on points or at another resort without an extra fee, now they are booking DVC because they don't want to pay $95. As Disney continues to move towards "in-house" trades, you will see availability and prime weeks become more difficult.

I woudln't be surprised if the point schedules change somewhat, this would help offset the demand during peak times and move more people to non-peak DVC times. Look at the first two weeks of December, no one ever went to Disney, but it is one of the hottest times for DVC because of point values.

 

[rinkwide]

On that point, the 12/31/2007 modification to the POS also updated the "Personal Use" section...:

Personal Use. Except for Units or Ownership Interests owned by DVD, which may be utilized as provided in the Declaration of Condominium, each of the Vacation Homes shall be occupied only as vacation accomodations. Except for Units or Ownership Interests owned by DVD, rentals of Vacation Homes to the general public by DVD or the Management Company and use of Vacation Points in connection with the DVC Reservation Component or external exchange programs, use of the accomodations, commonly used facilities, and recreational facilities of the Condominium is limited solely to the personal use of the Owners...

The exceptions above are questionable because, as Dean mentioned earlier, DVD is thought to be allowed no different an interest under the law than that of any other owner. Looks like they're pressing their managerial advantage to the point of almost begging for a legal challenge. The gamble is that renting just isn't profitable enough to make a lawsuit worth the effort and they might be right (but I hope they're not).

For a developer, selling timeshares has both positive and negative consequences. Obviously the upfront cash windfall is nice but the loss of total control as to how the property gets used is the price that must be paid. Now it seems, Disney Vacation Development is set on bending Florida timeshare law to avoid the unfortunate side effects that come with selling off ownership interests in their very valuable property.

By the way, some here have insinuated that those of us who argue against renting restrictions must be the ones who are renting commercially and causing all the trouble. The reality is that many of us are opposed to any restrictions placed on the membership that aren't absolutely necessary because it degrades our control over what we purchased.

The changes, to this point, have been mostly an annoyance to members but it's a slippery slope. It seems that DVD is now emboldened to the point where they're making unilateral revisions to the program and the possibilities are kind of scary. For example, lately some CMs at Member Services have been hinting at a new policy soon to be implemented that will forbid owners from changing any names on a reservation without forfeiting the reservation to the waitlist. That could be a lot of fun.

You know, up until now DVC Guides have been in the habit of asking existing members to tell prospective members how much they like the program, in turn hoping to seal the deal. With all the recent changes and restrictions to the program I bet some Guides are going to be getting answers they're not expecting and might soon be looking for new closing techniques.

 

[disney54us]

The exceptions above are questionable because, as Dean mentioned earlier, DVD is thought to be allowed no different an interest under the law than that of any other owner. Looks like they're pressing their managerial advantage to the point of almost begging for a legal challenge. The gamble is that renting just isn't profitable enough to make a lawsuit worth the effort and they might be right (but I hope they're not).

For a developer, selling timeshares has both positive and negative consequences. Obviously the upfront cash windfall is nice but the loss of total control as to how the property gets used is the price that must be paid. Now it seems, Disney Vacation Development is set on bending Florida timeshare law to avoid the unfortunate side effects that come with selling off ownership interests in their very valuable property.

By the way, some here have insinuated that those of us who argue against renting restrictions must be the ones who are renting commercially and causing all the trouble. The reality is that many of us are opposed to any restrictions placed on the membership that aren't absolutely necessary because it degrades our control over what we purchased.

The changes, to this point, have been mostly an annoyance to members but it's a slippery slope. It seems that DVD is now emboldened to the point where they're making unilateral revisions to the program and the possibilities are kind of scary. For example, lately some CMs at Member Services have been hinting at a new policy soon to be implemented that will forbid owners from changing any names on a reservation without forfeiting the reservation to the waitlist. That could be a lot of fun.

You know, up until now DVC Guides have been in the habit of asking existing members to tell prospective members how much they like the program, in turn hoping to seal the deal. With all the recent changes and restrictions to the program I bet some Guides are going to be getting answers they're not expecting and might soon be looking for new closing techniques.

You have made some very good points. At the same time, though I and I'm sure many do not care for some of the decisions being made in the past few years. We have to judge this decision base on its own value. Those who resent any interference and think they can go on there merry way, will be unhappy just b/c they are being told what they can or can't do (even though they don't do it). No solutions to that, if people are still holding on to there teenage rebellion , nothing anyone or DVC can do. I think it come down to this, 'commercial renting' has become a problem and DVC is addressing it. Like it or not, DVC has every right to sell membership base on the assumption that you will follow the rules and they tell you upfront, it is to be used as recreational not for profit. I remember that, and that was 10yrs. ago. For those who have had guides that have told them different, I can't argue with that. We all no that what is said in that case is not binding in a court of law. I can say, of all the many things I was told I could do with my DVC membership, at no time was it suggested to me that I could rent my points.

Final point, how many days people? arguing over something that's not going to change?? It is, what it is. Like it or not, we have been warned. For those of us not in the "commercial renting" business, it will not make a difference!! Stop with the what if's. If and when it happens then complain. For those who want to give new meaning to beating a dead horse just b/c you can or know how. The CB boards have every debate type forum you could need. For those who want to argue the legality of what DVC is doing. Let's wake up and realize, this is Disney. I am sure legal has been lookng at this for some time. Remember with Disney you get the best, that includes the lawyers. Isn't that why we all spent the money on DVC? (except those who did it to turn a profit), sorry couldn't resist.

 

[Brian Noble]

Now it seems, Disney Vacation Development is set on bending Florida timeshare law to avoid the unfortunate side effects that come with selling off ownership interests in their very valuable property.

You forget: this is the same company that talked Florida into giving them their very own governmental entity so that they could exercise near-total control within their property boundaries. What's more, there's a reason DVC is RTU rather than deeded property, and there's a reason that the property in the NE corner that's going to have deeded vacation homes and fractional-ownership units is being deannexed from RCID.

 

[disney54us]

You forget: this is the same company that talked Florida into giving them their very own governmental entity so that they could exercise near-total control within their property boundaries. What's more, there's a reason DVC is RTU rather than deeded property, and there's a reason that the property in the NE corner that's going to have deeded vacation homes and fractional-ownership units is being deannexed from RCID.

It's Disney! They have the power and from a business standpoint a amazing operation. As long as they use it to keep things up to par, IMHO, then they will remain the great Corporate machine, which provide me and many others with vacations, I am willing to spend $$ on. If there are those who have a problem with the powers of Disney, which I know there are many. I do question, why they would invest in anything Disney owned. To me it would be like voting for someone who believes in everything you don't. This is not to say, I agree w/every DVC decision that has been made (especially the past few years). It just seems that some of these arguments, really have nothing to do with the actual original thread. It is big corporate Disney bashing, like those who like to bash the government no matter what they do. I have the same thought for both. If you think that Disney is that bad and the big mean Corporate machine, don't go, if you own sell and don't support what you don't believe in. Same thought if you hate everything no matter what that the government does, please feel free to leave at any time, go and find the better land.

 

[WebmasterDoc]

{quote=DVC Mike]On that point, the 12/31/2007 modification to the POS also updated the "Personal Use" section...:
Quote:
Personal Use. Except for Units or Ownership Interests owned by DVD, which may be utilized as provided in the Declaration of Condominium, each of the Vacation Homes shall be occupied only as vacation accomodations. Except for Units or Ownership Interests owned by DVD, rentals of Vacation Homes to the general public by DVD or the Management Company and use of Vacation Points in connection with the DVC Reservation Component or external exchange programs, use of the accomodations, commonly used facilities, and recreational facilities of the Condominium is limited solely to the personal use of the Owners... [/quote]



While I have not seen a copy of the most recent incarnation of the POS, I have read a number of earlier copies and all of those included a definition of "Personal Use" which included something like "DVC members, guests and lessees". I do not have access to those documents tonite, as we are still in Orlando, but I will check when we return home.

If that portion of the definition has been modified, perhaps someone can post the exact language of any new definition for "Personal use".

 

[DVC92]

there's a reason DVC is RTU rather than deeded property

DVC is actually a hybrid of a RTU and a deeded property. It is a deeded property with a termination date. Therefore, we (DVC members) are required to pay the property taxes rather than the developer, DVD.

 

[sjdisneywedding]

Final point, how many days people? arguing over something that's not going to change?? It is, what it is. Like it or not, we have been warned. For those of us not in the "commercial renting" business, it will not make a difference!! Stop with the what if's. If and when it happens then complain. For those who want to give new meaning to beating a dead horse just b/c you can or know how. The CB boards have every debate type forum you could need. For those who want to argue the legality of what DVC is doing. Let's wake up and realize, this is Disney. I am sure legal has been lookng at this for some time. Remember with Disney you get the best, that includes the lawyers. Isn't that why we all spent the money on DVC? (except those who did it to turn a profit), sorry couldn't resist.

I dont view it as arguing I view it as discussing and in discussion everyone learns.

we better understand the rule, better understand the system, sometimes see a point of view we may have missed, and sometimes obtain information on how to help change a rule or system that may not be quite right.

yes I know that might be a drastic thought, Disney/DVC has actually modified, added, or removed rules and restrictions in the past. crazy concept for a company as powerful as Disney--you would think once they put a rule or restriction in place there would never be a need to alter it

 

[DVC Mike]

On that point, the 12/31/2007 modification to the POS also updated the "Personal Use" section...:

Personal Use. Except for Units or Ownership Interests owned by DVD, which may be utilized as provided in the Declaration of Condominium, each of the Vacation Homes shall be occupied only as vacation accomodations. Except for Units or Ownership Interests owned by DVD, rentals of Vacation Homes to the general public by DVD or the Management Company and use of Vacation Points in connection with the DVC Reservation Component or external exchange programs, use of the accomodations, commonly used facilities, and recreational facilities of the Condominium is limited solely to the personal use of the Owners...

While I have not seen a copy of the most recent incarnation of the POS, I have read a number of earlier copies and all of those included a definition of "Personal Use" which included something like "DVC members, guests and lessees". I do not have access to those documents tonite, as we are still in Orlando, but I will check when we return home.

If that portion of the definition has been modified, perhaps someone can post the exact language of any new definition for "Personal use".

Doc, you are thinking of the text from the Multi-Site POS. DVC has amended all of the Component Site POS with the new text. In my quote above, the text continues as before after the "..." at the end of my quote. I didn't type in the entire text, as it remains the same. I just wanted to show the modified section.

Here is the full quote from the Component Site POS:

Personal Use. Except for Units or Ownership Interests owned by DVD, which may be utilized as provided in the Declaration of Condominium, each of the Vacation Homes shall be occupied only as vacation accomodations. Except for Units or Ownership Interests owned by DVD, rentals of Vacation Homes to the general public by DVD or the Management Company and use of Vacation Points in connection with the DVC Reservation Component or external exchange programs, use of the accomodations, commonly used facilities, and recreational facilities of the Condominium is limited solely to the personal use of the Owners or Cotenents, their lessees, guests, exchangers and invitees and for recreational uses by corporations and other entities owning Ownership Interests in a Unit. No Owner may occupy a Unit or Vacation Home or use any recreational facilities or Common Elements at any time other than during the time that a Vacation Home is properly reserved in accordance with the Condominium Documents. Except as set forth above, use of Vacation Homes, recreational facilities and Common Elements, other than Commercial Units and Commercial Unit LCEs, for commercial purposes or any purposes other than the personal use described herein is expressly prohibited. "Commercial purpose" shall include a pattern of rental activity by a Cotenant that the Association, in its reasoable discretion, could conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or practice.

 

[Dean]

Are you a lawer??

Do you understand closing Doc??

And sorry yes that makes you a Comm rent LOL JK

Not a Lawyer, LOL. But I do have a lot of experience working with timeshare legal documents as well as having spent 3 years on one of the Boards for the state of FL where we actually wrote the original rules for a newly regulated profession. As far as lawyers go, the only ones that are are going to be helpful in this situation are the ones that actually practice and deal with timeshares/condo's, a good timeshare person will know more than the rest. Where FL law and the the POS differ, FL law will prevail. IMO, the section quoted by DVCMike fits into that category. The other point I'll make is that renting is basic to each individual resort's POS while the changes quoted here from what I can tell, come from the Multi site POS which is not really a legal document. IF they differ, the individual resorts POS would be the final word.

Dean..I don't think you address the most important question...which points did you use for the exchange?

Have a great time!

LOL, not DVC for sure. I used II for Maui and RCI for Oahu, both with bluegreen points deposits. Thanks.

 

[WebmasterDoc]

Thanks, Mike. That was the section I was thinking of.
It's interesting to see that they are still including "lessees" in the definition for "Personal Use" in light of the other recent changes - both written and rumored.
This will be more interesting in the coming months.