DVC plans to target commercial renters

[xdan0920]

In the meantime, will be going next week!

Covered by rentals I’m sure

 

[Brian Noble]

I've said this before, but: I think a lot of people are over-estimating the degree to which any potential changes will be viewed as onerous by the rank-and-file owners.

I currently own what I would describe as a medium-to-large pile of Wyndham points. Wyndham has what is probably the most restrictive booking model meant to curb rental use. And it has exactly zero impact on my booking patterns, vacation habits, etc. Judging from The Discourse on TUG (an Extremely Online group of owners who are almost as quick to take offense as DISers) that's true for most of the other owners as well.

Some random owner at the hot tub doesn't even know those curbs exist, because they just take vacations and don't really pay attention to the minutiae. At most, they've heard the words "Owner Priority" and think "Gosh, that sounds great to me, seeing as how I'm an owner."

And, for the record, I don't think DVC changes the booking model much at all. I think the most likely path is to identify the egregious players, and cut them off, using only the language currently in place in the public offering statements. I don't even think they will need to rely on the early-2008 changes to that language, let alone the more recent additions, because the POS has always (a) limited use to personal enjoyment and (b) given DVCMC the power to define what lies outside that boundary. Indeed, I think the most recent changes to the language was meant as a shot across the bow more than anything.

 

[nalababybear]

Covered by rentals I’m sure

Money is fungible

 

[nalababybear]

I've said this before, but: I think a lot of people are over-estimating the degree to which any potential changes will be viewed as onerous by the rank-and-file owners.

I currently own what I would describe as a medium-to-large pile of Wyndham points. Wyndham has what is probably the most restrictive booking model meant to curb rental use. And it has exactly zero impact on my booking patterns, vacation habits, etc. Judging from The Discourse on TUG (an Extremely Online group of owners who are almost as quick to take offense as DISers) that's true for most of the other owners as well.

Some random owner at the hot tub doesn't even know those curbs exist, because they just take vacations and don't really pay attention to the minutiae. At most, they've heard the words "Owner Priority" and think "Gosh, that sounds great to me, seeing as how I'm an owner."

And, for the record, I don't think DVC changes the booking model much at all. I think the most likely path is to identify the egregious players, and cut them off, using only the language currently in place in the public offering statements. I don't even think they will need to rely on the early-2008 changes to that language, let alone the more recent additions, because the POS has always (a) limited use to personal enjoyment and (b) given DVCMC the power to define what lies outside that boundary. Indeed, I think the most recent changes to the language was meant as a shot across the bow more than anything.

Agreed. The discussion at hand largely revolves around how Disney will define and enforce current regs.

Disney has a very large playing field to do this already, including a warning letter and canceling reservations after said notice.

That's targeted and whatever Disney decides to target....that's their decision and fully within bounds. Their playground. Their rules.

Disney does want us to play on it too. They have clearly mentioned in bad PR slips that they track per visitor spend. I have no doubt that they have this granular data down to include DVC members stays and even rentals as all this is cross linked on MDE and easily minable.

Disney does Disney. Not Wyndham. Not Marriott. DVC is directly linked to its parks ecosystem. Decisions aren't so simple upstairs.

 

[Cyberc1978]

We have discussed rentals, meaning reservations owners made online.

What about II DVC exchanges they are being rented quite a lot just as RCI reservations were. Perhaps not the same big problem as regular reservations but still a problem.

Is it DVC duty to strike down on those or is it LL?

 

[Brian Noble]

Technically, I think that is Interval's responsibility. DVC can help by identifying them though. Interval has in the past sent warning letters and locked accounts, but it's been a while since I heard of that happening.

The good news is that the Interval stuff is strictly leftovers---among the least desirable bookings for DVC Membrers. You might see a BWV 1BR every once in a blue moon, and BRV/AKV a little more often, but mostly it is a sea of OKW and SSR.

 

[Nabas]

And, for the record, I don't think DVC changes the booking model much at all. I think the most likely path is to identify the egregious players, and cut them off, using only the language currently in place in the public offering statements. I don't even think they will need to rely on the early-2008 changes to that language, let alone the more recent additions, because the POS has always (a) limited use to personal enjoyment and (b) given DVCMC the power to define what lies outside that boundary. Indeed, I think the most recent changes to the language was meant as a shot across the bow more than anything.

I believe the original POS included language along the lines of:

From time to time, to the extent that the Board determines that use is occurring that is for a commercial purpose, the Board may in its sole and absolute discretion, adopt and amend policies to provide what constitutes a commercial enterprise, practice or purpose.​

I believe from the beginning, Disney reserved the right to define commercial renting.

IMO, the 2012 change muddied the waters and should never have been added:

​

DVC Members may make as many reservations as they desire. However, if, in any 12-month period, a DVC Member desires to make more than 20 reservations, the DVC Member shall be required to establish, to the satisfaction of the Board, that all of the reservations made by the DVC Member in such 12-month period are for the use of accommodations by the DVC Member, the DVC Member’s family and/or the DVC Member’s friends (collectively, “Personal Use”), and not for commercial purposes. If, in any 12-month period in which a DVC Member attempts to make more than 20 reservations but is unable to establish, to the satisfaction of the Board, that all such reservations are for Personal Use and not for commercial purposes, all reservations in excess of the first 20 reservations shall be presumed to be the use of Vacation Accommodations for commercial purposes in violation of the Declaration and the Membership Agreement (the “Multiple Reservation Rule”).​

Some have interpreted this statement as meaning it's OK to have up to 20 reservations for commercial use.

However, the paragraph clearly states that "all" reservations should be for personal use. Instead, the 20 limit applies to the assumption that all reservations above 20 are assumed to be for commercial use unless all of the first 20 are not.

I counted. I have 13 reservations for 2025. Most are for me, with some for my adult children and one for my sister. I can imagine how easy it is for someone with more than 1000 points to have more than 20 reservations for personal use. So the "20 limit" was arbitrary and just a pain to manage.

At the timeshare meeting, Disney acknowledged that occasional renting is acceptable. However, anyone who does more than occasional renting is at risk.

 

[Brian Noble]

mostly it is a sea of OKW and SSR.

I will add that I happen to like these two, so this works out just great for me. I've got a 1BR at OKW for early March.

The good news is that the Interval stuff is strictly leftovers

I should add that the deposits to Interval don't even show up until about 5 months prior to check in, so Members have ample opportunity to book what they want first. The most recent mini-bulk included the last two weeks of May, and showed up in mid-to-late December if memory serves.

 

[Chuck S]

Technically, I think that is Interval's responsibility. DVC can help by identifying them though. Interval has in the past sent warning letters and locked accounts, but it's been a while since I heard of that happening.

The good news is that the Interval stuff is strictly leftovers---among the least desirable bookings for DVC Membrers. You might see a BWV 1BR every once in a blue moon, and BRV/AKV a little more often, but mostly it is a sea of OKW and SSR.

I take offense at you calling OKW "least desirable!" LOL

 

[Sandisw]

I believe the original POS included language along the lines of:

From time to time, to the extent that the Board determines that use is occurring that is for a commercial purpose, the Board may in its sole and absolute discretion, adopt and amend policies to provide what constitutes a commercial enterprise, practice or purpose.​

I believe from the beginning, Disney reserved the right to define commercial renting.

IMO, the 2012 change muddled the waters and should never have been added:

​

DVC Members may make as many reservations as they desire. However, if, in any 12-month period, a DVC Member desires to make more than 20 reservations, the DVC Member shall be required to establish, to the satisfaction of the Board, that all of the reservations made by the DVC Member in such 12-month period are for the use of accommodations by the DVC Member, the DVC Member’s family and/or the DVC Member’s friends (collectively, “Personal Use”), and not for commercial purposes. If, in any 12-month period in which a DVC Member attempts to make more than 20 reservations but is unable to establish, to the satisfaction of the Board, that all such reservations are for Personal Use and not for commercial purposes, all reservations in excess of the first 20 reservations shall be presumed to be the use of Vacation Accommodations for commercial purposes in violation of the Declaration and the Membership Agreement (the “Multiple Reservation Rule”).​

Some have interpreted this statement as meaning it's OK to have up to 20 reservations for commercial use.

However, the paragraph clearly states that "all" of first 20 should be for personal use. Instead, the 20 limit applies to the assumption that all reservations above 20 are assumed to be for commercial use unless all of the first 20 are not.

I counted. I have 13 reservations for 2025. Most are for me, with some for my adult children and one for my sister. I can imagine how easy it is for someone with more than 1000 points to have more than 20 reservations for personal use. So the "20 limit" was arbitrary and just a pain to manage.

I think everyone agrees that DVC gets to make the decision on what changes an owner’s actions in reference to renting from okay and not okay.

But the pre RIV contracts include the word “reasonable” which means owners of those resorts at least expect the rules to fit the word reasonable.

Obviously, what I or you or anyone thinks is reasonable may not match what the board decides is, but I do believe that the board will create rules that many members will see in that light.

I think the 20 reservations and canceling only reservations above that was a way for DVC at the time to address questions and to give some parameters.

That is not to say that they can’t amend now…they can…but since they have language in the contract already that is easy to implement and enforced there is no need to even define it further.

I posted earlier…enforce the LLC clause…have owners submit rental agreements and have guests sign at check in if it’s not there.

Allow owners to issue guest certificates for family and friends who travel at times the owner is not..no limit but one in which the owner and guest confirm it’s not a rental.

Enforce the no transferring for money rule by having owners verify on the phone or in writing no money is changing hands.

For the other aspects that aren’t related to just renting, add the special seasons list for hard to get rooms.

Change the booking back to check out day and not check in.


All that can be done within the current t terms is the contract, and for the most part, don’t negatively impact too many owners…

This allows those running a business using LLC to be stopped and would put it on owners to decide how much is too much when they have to submit agreements. This might cause that medium size owner who rents in what some think is the grey area to think twice.

It then leaves it in the hands of DVC to monitor accounts that might be at issue.

 

[Genie+]

My understanding was that the board said something like "Hopefully we won't have this discussion next year"

If my understanding is correct then DVC needs to come out with some sort of statement or whatever, otherwise they will have the same discussion next year. If people hear nothing they will start to ask.

They did state that so you know what? You are right, maybe they will update information to members! Good catch!!!

No they did not state that.

They said hopefully we will see improvement….

https://dvcnews.com/dvc-program-men...mmercial-renting-walking-during-condo-meeting

According to Yvonne Chang, Executive Director, Business Operations "[w]e’ve got a whole team of folks focused on this. Hopefully by next year when we have this conversation, we will see some improvement.”

 

[Genie+]

The current contracts have a decent amount for DVC to work with already.

Pattern of use. Owners cannot rent bank or borrowed points. LLCs cannot rent.

Where the contracts mention owners renting, it does not say: Renting is allowed.

There’s a bunch of other words in that sentence and section, not just “Renting is allowed (period)”

 

[Chuck S]

Pattern of use. Owners cannot rent bank or borrowed points. LLCs cannot rent.

I don't think I ever saw that banked/borrowed points could not be rented. I know that they can not be transferred to another member's account.

 

[Brian Noble]

I take offense at you calling OKW "least desirable!" LOL

Oh, I'm with you. It is among my favorites! I just love how it whispers "island time" around every corner. I haven't been here in almost a decade, and am looking forward to this trip!

 

[zavandor]

I highly recommend everyone write to Shannon Sakaske at shannon.sakaske@disney.com to let him know your feelings on walking and renting. You could also snail mail him or Stephanie Young at:
1851 Community Drive
Lake Buena Vista, FL 32830




There are a limited number of DVC reservations, ADR’s, LL’s etc to go around. Things are ok when people share, and things are even ok when just a few people hoard. Things go bad when everyone grabs everything they can get their hands on. That’s where we are headed and why those who have been hoarding are upset having gone unnoticed for so long. I can, by the rules, make 5 ADRs a day and cancel them 2 hours before dining. People do that every day. If everyone does it, it ruins Disney World. You don’t agree that something can be in the rules and yet bad for everyone at the same time?

Thank you for the addresses.
I will write to tell them that I am very worried that to curb walking they might end up removing the flexibility I love in the booking process. And also that I support enforcing the rule that businesses shouldn't use DVC points to rent, but I want kept unaltered the rights of owners to rent.
I invite others to write as well if they feel the same.

 

[kboo]

Still on page 12 and probably all this is mooted but I am procrastinating...

However I think the comments about making sure owners aren’t negatively impacted or that it doesn’t cause owners ability to book go back to having to go in more often remains a priority for them in any potential change they could make.

I have not been an owner for as long as @Chuck S but even in the 8-ish years we have been owners - we've already experienced every instance of "life happens" (which we didn't think would happen until much farther in the future) where I've been thankful for the flexibility in modifying, extending, renting, etc. So I'm nervous about the baby vs the bathwater. That said, since I rented for a few years before buying in, I've seen the change in the apparently commercial renting.

Except they have to allow for people to extend beyond 7 days as some people do take longer trips.

That means some large point owners might end up with an advantage here and could still tie up a room for a few weeks by extending and then dropping initial days when they pass whatever window is there to modify.

That is why having different rules for different situations makes this not as easy as it seems because DVC needs to take all that into consideration when deciding the rules.

Agree with this! Many of these situations affect smaller point holders who are trying to book studios/being frugal with their points. If one had more points, it wouldn't be so imperative to book a studio/standard view/low season. Or people using 2+ years of points to make that hard-to-get reservation. Large point owners will always have an advantage just because we/they have more of a cushion and thus more flexibility.

Just because a reservation is not in the owners name does not necessarily mean it has been rented. Most of my points end up in the names of family and friends. I am going to have a serious problem if I have spent this much money over the years to help out family and friends with trips. Our plan is to spend a significant portion of the winter at Disney in the future and we have been acquiring points with this plan. However, with time constraints of jobs, sports and school we simply do not have the time to travel there as much now.

When I am making reservations, especially at 11mo at 8a, I grab what i can in my name only, and then modify at my leisure. When I am making reservations for family and friends, I usually keep my name as lead until the last minute in case they have to cancel or other issues arise, it is much easier to manage the reservation.

My partial retirement plan is the same -the next 4-10 years we are probably stuck with school holiday breaks and larger units, and sharing extra points when we can, before retirement kicks in.

A very good explanation of why DVC Members should be careful what they wish for. No system will be perfect and fulfill the needs of every member, and there are many that could be far worse than what we have now.

I am cautious as well - in the time since we bought DVC, my kids have lost 3 out of 4 grandparents. We've had to cancel on very short notice for memorial services, cut trips short because of illness, modified/canceled/and/or rented because of COVID, added family members (after their spouse died) ... it's been quite an experience having to pivot with trips in a short time frame.

Can they bring back the the room lottery, but only apply it to certain resorts and room types? Let's say you want a Value Studio for Christmas Week. You'd register and be entered into a lottery with every other DVC Owner that wants thoat room for those days, regardless of home resort*, for that room and week. Would that be fair? It would solve the problem of commercial renters taking the most "desirable" rooms, even if they use a bot. But of course, your odds of actually getting hte room aren't really any better. B ut it would be fair, wouldn't it?

*Home resort priority was suspended for the lottery. And yes, it was a real thing for two or three years.

That sounds like a nightmare! And maybe workable to suspend home resort priority when the only DVC was OKW, but we bought most of our points at VGF for the specific purpose of being there and having priority over winter breaks. (Riviera to a lesser extent for New Year's) I am sure I'm not the only one who would be apoplectic at a lottery for holiday weeks, especially one that suspended home resort priority.

I dunno… if I ever saw some true reasons to ‘be careful what I wish for’ because DVC had a track record of such… I would have never bought DVC in the first place.

I think in 8 years, I've experienced every instance where the proposed changes/restrictions here would have seriously affected how I use my membership for my own trips (other than the 20+ rentals a year) that I am more cautious about changes that have unintended consequences for DVC owners who are just doing their thing with their DVC.... Sorry if that makes me sound like Grandpa Simpson complaining about change. (And yes, I wouldn't mind paper FPs coming back but I've finally dropped that...)

As a bwv owner I would be upset if they changed the distribution of points between standard and p/g. A lot of the value of owning at bwv is the standard view point chart even knowing the rooms are competitive to book and I won’t always get it.

Same with Riviera. Secret's out about the fireworks views. (Again - why Riviera is terrific for NYE if you're not out at midnight).

Sure they can. When I rented points, I got the info from the renters first, and then made the reservation in their names from the start, there was no need to call member services and change names on the reservation.

That's not how everyone does it. I've had to cancel holiday plans that I made 11 mo in advance (see above, dying grandparents) and those points would have expired or gone into holding. Those were rented as last minute "spec rentals" and at relatively low prices because I didn't want to lose the points entirely, and my grief could help spread some joy.

But I agree that August, especially the last two weeks, should be lowered.

That's one of our preferred weeks to go, so I'd be in favor of that! LOL.

 

[lowlight]

Thank you for the addresses.
I will write to tell them that I am very worried that to curb walking they might end up removing the flexibility I love in the booking process. And also that I support enforcing the rule that businesses shouldn't use DVC points to rent, but I want kept unaltered the rights of owners to rent.
I invite others to write as well if they feel the same.

Yes ma’am, you should write how you feel- that’s how adults communicate. For those that understand walking and commercial renting are wrong, make sure you mention their legal duty to uphold the contract “for the good of the membership as a whole”.

 

[Sandisw]

No they did not state that.

They said hopefully we will see improvement….

https://dvcnews.com/dvc-program-men...mmercial-renting-walking-during-condo-meeting

According to Yvonne Chang, Executive Director, Business Operations "[w]e’ve got a whole team of folks focused on this. Hopefully by next year when we have this conversation, we will see some improvement.”

Actually, that was said at the end of one of the meetings. I was at two of them.

While that article captured highlights of the VGF meeting, it did not include everything that was said.

So, they definitely also stated that they Hope by by next year we won’t be having the same conversation.

 

[Sandisw]

Yes ma’am, you should write how you feel- that’s how adults communicate. For those that understand walking and commercial renting are wrong, make sure you mention their legal duty to uphold the contract “for the good of the membership as a whole”.

Have definitely done that and the key is that the contract is filled with you can rent but not use DVC as a commercial enterprise when renting.

And while you can keep using the word commercial renting for all renting, that is not the way the contract is written. It differentiates beteeen the two..it just leaves the authority of what makes them different to DVC.

They simply do not have the authority to stop all renting by simply saying “it’s all commercial”.

 

[xdan0920]

Thank you for the addresses.
I will write to tell them that I am very worried that to curb walking they might end up removing the flexibility I love in the booking process. And also that I support enforcing the rule that businesses shouldn't use DVC points to rent, but I want kept unaltered the rights of owners to rent.
I invite others to write as well if they feel the same.

Careful, might wind up on a renter to watch list.