DVC T &C Personal Use - Only Thread to Discuss!

I'm just glad they're saying/doing SOMETHING to acknowledge the issue for real. It's so hard to argue that anyone buying thousands of points to primarily rent out isn't commercial, even if they divide them into five contracts and use employee names, etc. It's not a huge deal for random owners to rent an occasional extra reservation but the number of hard to get ressies listed all over the internet is infuriating at times. (like the day you are trying to book one :scared:)
This is where I believe there is a disconnect.

Members assign their inability to get certain rooms to commercial renting and walking instead of just supply/demand. Especially the SAP 7m crowd.
 
And before anyone else jumps in…I see no scenario where DVC is going to go after someone whose profit is the cost of dues.

They want the big time players who own for the sole purpose of renting and they pretty much said that.
Frequent and regular rentals. Not “only” rentals.
I think the change that I am concerned about is that it seems they intend to actually enforce it now and from my phone call it seems that I have to use a majority of my past and present reservations and should be renting only to family and friends.

I know Sandi is of the opinion they won't come after people like me, but I also dont want to chance it neither.
If you plan on renting for next 4-5 years, you are most certainly in the cross hairs
 

It hasn't with any of the others farther along this route. At least, not yet. Travel & Leisure is now the ticker under which the various arms of Wyndham operate. Wyndham has gone the farthest, and they are doing just fine--both in terms of sales and in terms of makret position.


What, exactly, has been devalued? The resale value? That does not matter. Wyndham's resale value is approximately 1/10th, if that; they are selling just fine, and sold more in dollar value in 2024 than 2023. If instead you think the usage is devalued, there might be an argument there, but again--Wyndham has more restrictive guest policies, and it doesn't seem to matter.


This is a problem, and has IMO been one of Marriott's challenges. But even here, I don't think it is unfavorable. The 2024 MFs on a 2BR at Grande Vista (also in Orlando) were just shy of $1,900/week. That was a huge increase (17%), but the increase was due partly to new Florida requirements to fully fund structural reserves. Even so, that's not horrible. SSR's "maximum reallocation" figure for a 2BR is 41 points/night---this is the point value that results from every single night in the Base Year being the same cost. That puts a week in an SSR 2BR at 41 * 7 * $8.14, or $2,336.


I bet you would be surprised to know what DVDs marketing costs come to. True, they do not give (much) in the way of tour incentives. But, those free Membership Magic evenings in fully-operating theme parks are very much not free. You can't swing a dead cat around WDW without hitting a DVC kiosk, and those are all staffed with one or more people who need paid.

I am not familiar with Wyndham so i can't comment on that. But I'm familiar with Marriott well.

When I look at the chart below (Marriott Vacations over the past 5 years compared to the aggregate US market), I don't think pad policy that destroys resale value doesn't matter. It's probably not just one thing, but the culmination of many things over the years that led to this.


1748963775514.png


We do not really know DVDs marketing costs but when I look at MVCs sales and marketing costs as a fraction of timeshare sales, I see the former going up and the latter going down. While "cost of vacation products" (via ROFR) is going down, it also seems to be taking more marketing cost and effort to sell less. Bad policy may not affect sales and the stock price immediately, but it does catch up.


1748964697720.png

At some point you run out of totally uninformed buyers who walk into the sales offices. People learn about the resale option either before or after their first purchase and asking those people to buy (or buy again) becomes very hard when they know the value of what they buy is 90% less the following week.
 
And before anyone else jumps in…I see no scenario where DVC is going to go after someone whose profit is the cost of dues.

They want the big time players who own for the sole purpose of renting and they pretty much said that.
I wouldn't fully ignore those who have two buckets of points: those they use exclusively for their own reservations, and those that they use to rent out. Just because you have 1,000 points that you use yourself, year in and year out, doesn't mean that the other 1,000 points you rent out year after year don't represent a pattern of commercial renting. There were several members on this forum, found at or near the top of the 1,000-point club who stated publicly that they were purchasing points on a one-to-one basis (one point to rent for every point purchased for their own use). For a couple of those folks, that rental point pool was well over 1,000 and possibly reaching 2,000.
 
I am not a lawyer. Given no clear definition of commercial and personal use for DVC points, I can see a lawsuit coming even from the bad apple DVC owners renting out their points like a business. I do not like the rental DVC companies or walking of reservations. That said, I actually hope Disney would lose such lawsuit. I think there can be other policies at play to regulate rental DVC owners from abusing the system.

See I don’t think anyone is winning since all the POS documents gives DVC the right to decide when an owner has crossed over

PreRIV resorts documents state that decision needs to be reasonable. RIV and VDH do not. And CFW, being a RTU vs leasehold is a whole different ball game.

We know what DVC is thinking…they have said two things that are definitely match the personal use clause.

The also said frequent and regular does not but DVC is the only one who gets to decide what that looks like to makes that membership or memberships evidence it’s for commercial purposes.
 
I am not a fan of the changes. I agree that walking and commercial renting by LLC's has gotten way out of hand but this is a ridiculous overreach filled with ambiguity. Disney has given themselves the ability, with no recourse, to call whatever they want and whenever they want commercial renting. I called DVC today and essentially they told me as long as we're renting to family and friends and using the majority of our points each year then we would be ok. This is infuriating to me because this particular year we have rented all our points and likely will have to do so for the next 3 years. Regardless of your political leanings, we're Canadian and our government has advised us to exercise caution travelling to the USA. Many other countries have done the same.

Our family and friends are majority Canadian as well and dont want to travel either. So of course I am going to put my points up for rent via an intermediary and rent to some unknown family or individual.
I don't really want to start anything, but "caution" with respect to what? What are you supposed to be afraid might happen at disney world?
 
Though the extra checkbox is an encouraging sign, I'm eager to hear enforcement stories. And if some commercial renters get impacted and decide to sell their contracts, there might be some good deals on resale DVC contracts soon.

I'm not sure what to expect of booking availability if there really is a crackdown. Overall, there will still be the same number of points and the same number of rooms; it will just be different people booking reservations. Perhaps the commercial renters were more likely to use bots to make & modify reservations, and humans might get better odds against other humans?
 
As an example, there are posts on the dis from “experienced renters” with thousands of points available. Is there anyone who realistically thinks those owners aren’t part of the dragnet this is aimed at?

I think most think, and DVC indicated that large points owners, those with thousands of points renting are in the cross hairs.

But your small point owner who is using at least 50% for themselves m? Nope, I don’t think they are going to bother them.
 
@CanadianDVC2024On a different note, can anyone let me know if my assumption is correct regarding resale companies? I'm of the assumption that when the resale company offers to buy the contract themselves, they strip the contracts and rent out the points and then resell the stripped contract. To me that is the very definition of commercial renting. Am I correct that they are doing that?
Which is why I believe they added this specific language to the POS:
5.7 Except for Ownership Interests owned by DVD, rentals of Vacation Homes to the general public by any of The TWDC
Companies including DVD and BVTC, reservation or use of Vacation Homes and facilities of a DVC Resort is limited solely to the
personal use of Club Members, their guests, invitees, exchangers, and lessees and for recreational use by corporations or other similar
business entities owning Ownership Interests while staying as a registered guest at the DVC Resort. Except for any of The TWDC
Companies, purchase of an Ownership Interest and reservation or use of Vacation Homes and facilities of a DVC Resort for
commercial purposes or for any purpose other than personal use is expressly prohibited. BVTC shall be the sole determiner, in its
discretion, of any use or activity that does not constitute personal use or constitutes commercial use under this Agreement. Such
commercial purpose could include a pattern of rental activity of reserved Vacation Homes or frequent occupancy by others of reserved
Vacation Homes other than a Club Member or the Club Member's family; use of regular rental or resale advertising; creating,
maintaining, or frequent use of a rental or resale website; repeated or frequent purchase and resale of Ownership Interests whether in
the name of a Club Member or those related to such Club Member or through the use of entities, partnerships, or trusts; or the
acquisition of a number of Ownership Interests in excess of the amount of the maximum permitted ownership whether in the name of a
Club Member or those related to such Club Member or through the use of entities, partnerships, or trusts.
Specifically, to address those who might "buy the contract themselves, they strip the contracts and rent out the points and then resell the stripped contract".
 
Frequent and regular rentals. Not “only” rentals.

If you plan on renting for next 4-5 years, you are most certainly in the cross hairs

Correct and DVC may simply see renting points to cover dues in a few reservations every year not frequent and regular enough to be considered commercial as it relates to what the FL timeshare statute 718 says in terms of owners right to rent

You don’t know and I don’t know where that line is.
 
My parents have a ton of points under many of many of contracts (Many different home resorts). They have never rented points out. However, we go on massive family trips were we book upwards of 8-10 rooms, the most may have been 20 rooms for one trip. Also, we have been on trips with a ton of friends (each getting their own room).

All of these rooms are booked under my parent's points as gifts, but obviously not under my parent's name. How can the Walt Disney Company tell that we are using these points for personal use instead of commercial use?
If this is how the membership has always been used and all of you always travel together then this will be an easy not commercial use scenario. The people they are after book many rooms throughout the entire year and rarely ever have the same person twice on their reservations.
 
I hope the commercial renters enjoy losing thousands of dollars through attorney fees on a frivolous lawsuit.
As I said upthread, Bloomberg Law has reported that Disney has around 300 lawyers on staff in-house, and another 1,100 on retention. Granted, those are spread out across all aspects of their businesses, but likely mostly in entertainment and business/contract law, so a contract battle with a few vocal “professional DVC renters” probably doesn’t even make for decent water cooler chat.

Disney has proven it's willing to go to the mattresses with the disabled community. Butting heads with a few disgruntled DVC owners in a dispute over dollars and contractual language, versus disabled access to theme park attractions, is just another Monday for them.
 
Last edited:
If you are renting to cover your dues and have a contract with the renter, you can easily share this with DVC to show you are not "profiting" from the transaction. Since you are supposed to have a contract with your renter.

Also, I think that Families with a large amount of points that are all shared through the extended family would be best served with calling DVC and setting up some kind of "frequent family members" who are using the points that the Parent own. I'm sure that DVC doesn't want to harm a relationship with a large family that has gone to Disney for 3 or 4 generations. Probably best just talk to your guide about this to avoid an issue.

Who else went to DVCforLess.com when this was announced........
FYI, there is already a way to add family members who frequently use one's membership. It's called "Associate." We've done this for my mother who lives in So. FL, since we frequently get a rooms when she wants to go to WDW for a day/quick weekend. From DVC FAQ:

"Associate"
An Associate is a person named by the Purchaser or Purchasers who is only authorized to make reservations using the Disney Vacation Club Member's Home Resort Vacation Points. Associates do not receive Membership Cards and are not entitled to the benefits and privileges that are available to a Disney Vacation Club Member. An Associate must be 18 years of age or older.
 
This is where I believe there is a disconnect.

Members assign their inability to get certain rooms to commercial renting and walking instead of just supply/demand. Especially the SAP 7m crowd.
I agree. As I said yesterday, the flood gates won't open with rooms available weeks out across every resort. The points are still out there, still owned by someone, and still being used to make reservations.

However, what I suspect MIGHT happen is, instead of one "member" (entity, whatever) owning, say, 10, 20 or more contracts all for commercial use, targeting the same lucrative room types (studios, for example) during high demand weeks, and making numerous reservations, you'll see a more natural distribution as now 10 or 20 discrete owners, with their own travel plans, preferred or needed room types, and travel calendars, will be using those points in a more organic fashion and not necessarily targeting peak travel periods. Sure, some folks will still use their points during peak periods, and why shouldn't they, they own the points and that is their right, but the points are at least potentially distributed across multiple members who won't all want to go on vacation all during the same travel periods.

For me, if I owned a ton of points for purposes of commercial renting, I'd be snagging as many studios between Christmas and New Years, on marathon weekends, etc. as possible (walking, using bots, whatever). As a person using my points for personal use, I'm using absolutely none of them at those times, and we prefer 2BR's, which aren't the most lucrative rooms if you're commercially renting.
 
So here’s a scenario: your friends wants to go to Disney and use your timeshare. Because you are all gainfully employed, they offer to pay you for its use. You give them a reasonable deal as those points are valuable to you, too, but it’s not free, and you may even make back a small percent on your original DVC investment.

Is this personal use?
Yes but only if you do it a few times a year. Where DVC draws the line we don’t know.
 
FYI, there is already a way to add family members who frequently use one's membership. It's called "Associate." We've done this for my mother who lives in So. FL, since we frequently get a rooms when she wants to go to WDW for a day/quick weekend. From DVC FAQ:

"Associate"
An Associate is a person named by the Purchaser or Purchasers who is only authorized to make reservations using the Disney Vacation Club Member's Home Resort Vacation Points. Associates do not receive Membership Cards and are not entitled to the benefits and privileges that are available to a Disney Vacation Club Member. An Associate must be 18 years of age or older.
I was thinking about the extended family members, that you may not want to have access to the points in your contract making reservations that you didn't authorize.
 
I feel they should be more specific - something as vague as not renting your points "regularly or frequently" could scare average members who have legitimate needs to rent points more than Disney might think.

For example, what if you have one big contract but your travel plans have changed and you now need fewer points, but don't want to sell the whole thing. If you used say 70% of the points yourself annually and rented the remaining 30% each year is that against the rules?

They should just pick a number - like no more than 2 or 3 rented reservations per year per membership. That would address the people who are clearly renting as a business but give comfort for "regular" renting for owners.

I agree they need to pick some kind of number. This is just too vague and leaves it open to them making arbitrary and inconsistent decisions.
 



















DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest

Back
Top