DVC Occupancy Thread Part 2

[DebbieB]

Exactly. So why make different rules for members and non- members. The members don't have a bed for their fifth occupant.

What I'm trying to say is that since I already know for a fact that these rooms can sleep 5 through member services then why don't they let others do the same.

I think it should be one set of rules straight across the board.

I'm more annoyed knowing that 5 "members" can have a 1 bdrm. but 5 "non-members" can not. And most people don't even realize that. But I do and it's not the way things should be run.

Because DVC guides have used the line "you can have 5 in your 1 bedroom" to sell DVC for years. Otherwise, telling a family of 5 that they have to get a 2 bedroom would be too many points to afford for many.

I'll just say one more thing. You and I know that it is kind of a "super-secret policy" when you allow more guests in a room that shouldn't be there only because they are members.

There are fire code laws after all.I guess.

They would not go against fire code for anybody, that would be a huge legal risk. Disney occupancy rules and fire code are 2 different things.

 

[Dean]

That really doesn't make sense though. If they will let a family who are members do it then what's the difference if a non-member family wants to do the same especially since I know this from experience being in the dvc at one time.

Will they be replacing the chairs in the one bedrooms with a sleeper chair? This would make sense.

The fact is that the CRO interpretation is more in line with the legal interpretation.

Disney's sandbox...Disney's rules.

Yes and no. practically that's accurate to a degree, however, this really is more of a legal and rule issue. It is my opinion that one could legally require DVC to enforce the rules if one wanted to go to such lengths. IF the 2 sets of rules ever merge, expect the CRO rules to be the one going forward.

Because DVC guides have used the line "you can have 5 in your 1 bedroom" to sell DVC for years. Otherwise, telling a family of 5 that they have to get a 2 bedroom would be too many points to afford for many.

There would be no legal or technical issue with enforcing the rules as stated. Oral representations are not enforceable in timeshares sales, esp if they conflict with the written documentation as they would in this situation. Of course each resort would be considered independently and only the owners at that given resort would have any potential argument. The truth is that for non home resorts, they could reduce the occupancy if they wanted to say 2 for a studio for example.

 

[DVCtinkerbell]

The good thing about Disney is that there will be beds for everyone in your party. I have made reservations at other hotel and then once we get in the room there were accommodations for only 2 out of the 4 of us. No rolling beds, nothing. The management could care less. At Disney I never have to worry about whether or not there are beds for my whole family.

 

[Deb & Bill]

I'll just say one more thing. You and I know that it is kind of a "super-secret policy" when you allow more guests in a room that shouldn't be there only because they are members.

There are fire code laws after all.I guess.

Fire codes don't really care how many people are in the room. They just care how many people will be in the corridor and stairwell evacuating the building. Most hotels solve the calculation by limiting the number of guests in a room. It's not the size of the room, it's the size of the corridor and number of stair exits.

 

[abk96]

Fire codes don't really care how many people are in the room. They just care how many people will be in the corridor and stairwell evacuating the building. Most hotels solve the calculation by limiting the number of guests in a room. It's not the size of the room, it's the size of the corridor and number of stair exits.

Well won't those people from the room be in the corridor if there is ever an emergency?

And again, I'm saying that DVC member services is allowing more people in a 1 bdrm than CRO would just because you are a member. Doesn't make sense now does it.

There should be one set of rules for both parts of Disney. Whether it's MS or CRO.

 

[Chuck S]

There should be one set of rules for both parts of Disney. Whether it's MS or CRO.

Why? I mean, the rules vary for almost all other parts of the program between cash and points. Limited housekeeping for point stays, booking categories, booking seasons, booking windows, availability...so why shouldn't occupancy also be different. Legally, DVC and Disney are separate entities, and their interests are not always mutually inclusive.

In this case, the interest of Disney making more $ by renting a 2 bdrm vs. a 1 bdrm, and the interest of DVC by being able to sell a family of 5 DVC in a 1 brdm that would not buy into a 2 brdm.

 

[tjkraz]

There should be one set of rules for both parts of Disney. Whether it's MS or CRO.

IMO, my 10 year old should only have to pay $12 for the paltry servings of chicken nuggets & pizza he will eat at a Disney character buffet. But Disney is still gonna charge me the $30 "adult" rate.

This is not much different than Disney granting ticket discounts to FL residents or meal discounts to Annual Passholders. In this case DVC members get an extra body in the rooms. There really isn't any moral high ground.

Perhaps Dean is correct and it would not survive a legal challenge. But who is going to mount such a challenge?

As long as Disney isn't discriminating on the basis of race, gender or creed, they can (and do) set different policies for different groups.

 

[DebbieB]

There would be no legal or technical issue with enforcing the rules as stated. Oral representations are not enforceable in timeshares sales, esp if they conflict with the written documentation as they would in this situation. Of course each resort would be considered independently and only the owners at that given resort would have any potential argument. The truth is that for non home resorts, they could reduce the occupancy if they wanted to say 2 for a studio for example.

I was responding to the question on why DVC has different rules for members vs CRO. They are choosing not to enforce the rules for members I believe because of past (and probably current) statements to buyers. Yes, they could legally choose to start enforcing it but I don't think they want to open up that can of worms at least not while they are still building properties. But it doesn't mean they should have to extend those exceptions to CRO reservations.

 

[Dean]

I was responding to the question on why DVC has different rules for members vs CRO. They are choosing not to enforce the rules for members I believe because of past (and probably current) statements to buyers. Yes, they could legally choose to start enforcing it but I don't think they want to open up that can of worms at least not while they are still building properties. But it doesn't mean they should have to extend those exceptions to CRO reservations.

Thanks Debbie.

 

[abk96]

IMO, my 10 year old should only have to pay $12 for the paltry servings of chicken nuggets & pizza he will eat at a Disney character buffet. But Disney is still gonna charge me the $30 "adult" rate.

This is not much different than Disney granting ticket discounts to FL residents or meal discounts to Annual Passholders. In this case DVC members get an extra body in the rooms. There really isn't any moral high ground.

Perhaps Dean is correct and it would not survive a legal challenge. But who is going to mount such a challenge?

As long as Disney isn't discriminating on the basis of race, gender or creed, they can (and do) set different policies for different groups.

Now you're being silly.

And occupancy in a room is totally different than chicken nuggets. Come on now.

I didn't think any of you would agree with me because you all are members. But I know a lot of people who aren't members and when I tell them about this they are confused. And it is confusing and well quite frankly "wrong".

 

[Chuck S]

Now you're being silly.

And occupancy in a room is totally different than chicken nuggets. Come on now.

I didn't think any of you would agree with me because you all are members. But I know a lot of people who aren't members and when I tell them about this they are confused. And it is confusing and well quite frankly "wrong".

Why are they confused? It's pretty simple, really. Occupancy is set by whoever controls the room, as long as it doesn't violate any fire codes. Disney could even say cash 1 bedrooms have a maximum occupancy of two, if they wanted to do so. Since non-Member can not directly book DVC controlled room, it is really a non-issue for them and irrelevent. Much like Disney giving special tickets to Florida residents. It has no impact on me, I am not a Florida resident, so if I buy a MYW ticket, I pay full price. If Disney grants discounts to organized groups and local residents, how does that affect me? It doesn't, just like DVC Occupancy does not impact non-Members booking cash. And the occupancy is no more confusing or wrong than those resident or group discounts.

 

[tjkraz]

Now you're being silly.

And occupancy in a room is totally different than chicken nuggets. Come on now.

I didn't think any of you would agree with me because you all are members. But I know a lot of people who aren't members and when I tell them about this they are confused. And it is confusing and well quite frankly "wrong".

"Right" and "wrong" are in the eye of the beholder. To you it's "wrong" that they have different occupancy policies for DVC vs. non-DVC. To me it's "wrong" that I have to pay $30 for a buffet when my son eats about $3 worth of food.

To others, $95 park tickets are "wrong"...$500 per night hotel rates are "wrong"...$3.00 for a bottle of soda is "wrong"...cheaper annual pass prices for FL residents are "wrong."

I think the only difference between us is that you wish Disney's policy were different in this one case while I realize they make the rules and will do whatever the flip they want to do.

 

[Judique]

Now you're being silly.

And occupancy in a room is totally different than chicken nuggets. Come on now.

I didn't think any of you would agree with me because you all are members. But I know a lot of people who aren't members and when I tell them about this they are confused. And it is confusing and well quite frankly "wrong".

They may be 'confused' at your reaction to the rule.

I don't think it is wrong. I've only had 5 in a one bedroom once in 13 years of membership, and only for a couple of nights during our stay. Usually we are only 2 or 3.

You, a non member, could consider that it is a current perk of membership.

 

[abk96]

This just makes me laugh thinking back many years right after we bought into the DVC and I asked on here if it was ok to put 5 in a one bedroom and everyone jumped all over me saying that their are fire codes and rules to occupancy.

I guess you all can't make up your mind.

 

[Dean]

Why are they confused? It's pretty simple, really. Occupancy is set by whoever controls the room, as long as it doesn't violate any fire codes. Disney could even say cash 1 bedrooms have a maximum occupancy of two, if they wanted to do so. Since non-Member can not directly book DVC controlled room, it is really a non-issue for them and irrelevent. Much like Disney giving special tickets to Florida residents. It has no impact on me, I am not a Florida resident, so if I buy a MYW ticket, I pay full price. If Disney grants discounts to organized groups and local residents, how does that affect me? It doesn't, just like DVC Occupancy does not impact non-Members booking cash. And the occupancy is no more confusing or wrong than those resident or group discounts.

Chuck, in my opinion the occupancy is set by the legal documents first and foremost. It's the enforcement that we rely on DVC for and IMO, they do a poor job in that area.

 

[Chuck S]

Chuck, in my opinion the occupancy is set by the legal documents first and foremost. It's the enforcement that we rely on DVC for and IMO, they do a poor job in that area.

Perhaps, but remember that with few exceptions, almost all parts of our POS can be changed at the whim of Disney.

 

[Dean]

Perhaps, but remember that with few exceptions, almost all parts of our POS can be changed at the whim of Disney.

It's not quite that easy and for items that are not in the best interest of the membership (at that resort) as a whole, it takes a vote of the members themselves. My opinion is that this is not in the best interest of the membership as a whole plus I doubt DVC would change the occupancy upwards of any resort without the additional bath, even if they could.

 

[Chuck S]

It's not quite that easy and for items that are not in the best interest of the membership (at that resort) as a whole, it takes a vote of the members themselves. My opinion is that this is not in the best interest of the membership as a whole plus I doubt DVC would change the occupancy upwards of any resort without the additional bath, even if they could.

OKW has only one actual bathroom in a one bedroom, and they allow 5 with the sleeper chair.

 

[staceymay00]

Wow. That's crazy.

My family just spent a week at the Beach Club on the club level and I know that these rooms have enough beds to sleep 5 but they don't really have the space for 5. The one bedrooms that I've been in over the years have way more space.

I guess I'm just thinking the way a normal person would. Disney being the non normal person of course.

More space fits more people.

The difference is that BC has sleeping space for five people even if the square footage is not all that comfortable for five. Most hotels and resorts don't allow you to book more people in a room than there are spaces to sleep. We (family of five) run into this all the time with other chains. There are certain hotels we know to look for because they have sleeping space for five.

Disney did not build suites and villas to accomodate extra guests sleeping on the floor. They have suites and villas to provide a more comfortable stay, a home away from home atmophere, and it makes perfect sense that the number of guests is limited to the number of sleeping spaces. DVC members being allowed to book five in a villa that sleeps four is a perk... an unofficial perk, I guess, but not really different from other perks that DVC members and other groups get. Not all DVC members agree with the "perk" of five in a villa that sleeps four, and not all members take advantage of it. We've always booked a 2BR for the five of us, and a lot of couples book a 1BR villa for two people, or a 2BR for four people.

 

[Dean]

OKW has only one actual bathroom in a one bedroom, and they allow 5 with the sleeper chair.

But that's part of the issue, legally they shouldn't.