Hi all, I spoke with member services about the 2022
point chart and on topics beyond the scope of this thread (Resale restrictions/ Legacy 14/ DVC 2.0/ fascinating discussion on Direct owners vs Resale owners).
With respect to this thread, I want to share that member services was extremely polite and did a great job of listening to my concerns. It wasn't a scheduled call, so I didn't have all the math metrics in front of me, but I think I was able to convey the most salient concerns around the fiduciary stewardship and POS interpretation that exceeds what is allowable in the document. The call was recorded, and the associate mentioned that what I spoke on would be raised up. I also mentioned that I would be sharing the conversation at a high level. (Since the boards are monitored, I welcome DVC to reach out to me again if it would be helpful to clarify aspects that have been raised here or during the call.)
Here's some take-aways for future calls:
- There is no official correspondence on the adjustment to the 2022
point charts. Any conversation around chart adjustment is speculative. I left the call without
any indication an adjustment was going to occur.
- The person that I spoke with was not aware of the initial concerns I raised, and I wasn't going to challenge that statement. (nothing to gain there but defensiveness) There was a particular amount of time devoted to understanding how I learned about the possible point chart adjustment and other concerns. I mentioned that the point inflation, non-neutral chart for 2022 can be calculated by any single owner- these concerns do not require an online community to discover or define them.
- I believe I made myself clear that base year and point chart exceeds what is allowable in the Public Offering Statement. (POS) I also mentioned that any chart adjustment, should it occur, would demonstrate that DVC management is willing to examine their broad interpretation. Without that, I believe DVC interpretation needs to have a third party arbiter examine whether there has been over-reach in their execution.
- I do believe these concerns were heard with respect, and I don't know whether my input will have any impact. But, I also think the person I was speaking with wasn't the person to have the "tough talk" about proper stewardship. That's ultimately for a regulatory body to do. I did thank DVC for the point extensions during the pandemic; it's important to be balanced and celebrate what is going well.
- Moving forward, members are requested to call member services to express concerns. Especially for folks like me that may want to be better prepared with math/figures on hand. I asked whether the hold times are back to normal. (I had emailed, because I didn't want to take time away from other owners that had urgent matters who needed the few staff that were available.) It sounds like there's more availability for service by phone.
Please don't take this report as an excuse to bash DVC, the inflammatory rhetoric is unhelpful. We can express our disappointment, concern and even outrage in a way that raises awareness and/or brings solutions, rather than just ranting for the sake of getting an adrenaline high.
If you really feel that strongly that business is being conducted in a way contrary to the contracts, then 1) bring it up with DVC, give them a chance to learn and correct/adjust course. Maybe we do this as a community, as a business, as individuals. If not resolved, then 2) bring it to a Florida regulator or arbiter.
Suggestion: If you really need to use an exclamation point in your language or rhetoric, use that energy in a way that will actively bring resolution to your concern.
I have no reason to doubt posters here, so my assumption is yes. But until it actually happens, seems like there's always some risk of being derailed by corporate red tape.
