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

[mkatsy]

Adding to responses already made: the City of Orlando ordinance also does not apply simply because Disney World is not in the City of Orlando and subject to its ordinances. It is in Orlando County but not the city

the state applies the same standard in 509.013 transient public lodging. Three rentals (less than 30 days duration) in a calendar year and you owe transient tax to the county and city (of course, only if you are within the boundaries).

 

[Cyberc1978]

Disney could use a base of what they charge for OTUP.

Just for my understanding do you mean they if an owner have ie 10 reservations in others name they would multiply the total points used with the cost of the OTUP. If that number exceeds your total annual dues for all points then they would consider you a commercial renter?

 

[Anthony1971]

If ones net profit is $10k, after dues, every year, then that is income and is high enough IMO to shift your purpose for owning.

I am specifically talking about an owner, who, may rent half their points to cover the yearly dues.

They have a net profit of close to $0…to me, that is not someone in it for a commercial purpose. It’s just to offset the cost of ownership…maybe a better way to phrase it.

The standard that DVC is supposed to apply is that the owner is reasonably in it for something thst looks like a business.

The standard is not supposed to be anything that one could term a commercial act in the most technical of terms.

Sorry to pick this one post.

One of the first economic terms learned in a 101 or 102 class is there is no such thing as free. Someone is paying.
Commercial has no specific definition other than engaged in commerce.
Renting to cover ones dues is just not a good point to justify non commercial as it can easily be proven it is.

"Personal use may include enjoying the benefits of a DVC Membership with family or allowing use of any reserved Vacation Home to friends and family on occasion. Additionally, personal use means that the member does not regularly or frequently rent/sell reservations booked using their membership."

This is very intentional wording covering that was a reservation for my friend or 99th cousin will not work. Renting to cover dues is 100% regular renting. Then adds Frequent... Frequency is simply a pattern like I use all my points one year the next I rent all my points. Any renting over any period that occurs more than once......
If you rented once in 3 years then 7 years later then 2 years after that this is not frequent. In the same if you make reservations for family or friends for the exact same time you are there or your child, brother, sister etc.....

While I would love to say X should be allowed it is very apparent DVC intends to and likely will make examples of ? Before you say X should be ok.... I would seriously consider how one can defend the broad yet some specific working and this is done with the reason of we can defend canceling very easily.... Now up to the owner to prove otherwise with 99% in a court room with $$$$$$ Lawyers (and I do mean you better shell out for the best).

 

[tx911]

It's easy to get into the weeds with this and start trying to split hairs with what is commercial and what is allowed. My own personal feeling is that renting out half your points every year to cover dues crosses the line, but I know many would disagree.

Better to avoid the controversy and shut down the huge renters who are basically never using points for personal reasons. This is an area where we can virtually all agree. It would be relatively easy to collapse demand for rentals by starting to cancel the obvious ones.

Meanwhile, we wait.

 

[mkatsy]

Just for my understanding do you mean they if an owner have ie 10 reservations in others name they would multiply the total points used with the cost of the OTUP. If that number exceeds your total annual dues for all points then they would consider you a commercial renter?

If you look at your receipt from Disney for your OTU points they are something like $17 each plus the tax that Disney collects and submits

 

[JOLT]

Just for my understanding do you mean they if an owner have ie 10 reservations in others name they would multiply the total points used with the cost of the OTUP. If that number exceeds your total annual dues for all points then they would consider you a commercial renter?

They could use that metric. I dont think they would go off just 1 years snap shot but at least 3 years of usages. if you are constantly renting with excess profit they could think that you are no longer using your contract for personal use. My whole theory is based off "personal use".

I bought all my points with the rationality that I would rent to cover dues. I ran into the problem of not having extra points to rent to cover dues.

 

[DisneynBison]

If you look at your receipt from Disney for your OTU points they are something like $17 each plus the tax that Disney collects and submits

Just did it

17.77 for the point
1.16 sales tax
1.07 accomodation tax

$20 total

 

[Massachusetts]

Interestingly www.dvcresalemarket.com has posted an unusually high number of stripped contracts in the past 2 days. 21 out of 32 (65%) new listings are stripped or nearly stripped. The ratio of labeled stripped to current total listings is 78/477 (16%) as per www.dvcforless.com.

For comparisons sake www.fidelityrealestate.com has 5 stripped contracts out of 28 (18%) listed in the past 2 days. Currently fidelity has 80 contracts labeled stripped out of 260 total listings (30%).

Caveat: Label usages like "stripped" can vary even within brokerages.

76 new listings for www.dvcresalemarket.com since Friday. 42 of which are stripped or nearly stripped (55%). Total active listings per www.dvcforless.com up 8.9% since Personal Use announcement, BWV and AKV leading the charge in WDW at up 18.3% and 16.5% respectively. AUL is the overall leader at up 54%.

 

[Cyberc1978]

76 new listings for www.dvcresalemarket.com since Friday. 42 of which are stripped or nearly stripped (55%). Total active listings per www.dvcforless.com up 8.9% since Personal Use announcement, BWV and AKV leading the charge in WDW at up 18.3% and 16.5% respectively. AUL is the overall leader at up 54%.

Yeah I got a few emails from dvcforless with listings for my UY for AKV. Some of the were as “low” as $89 but they were completely stripped. The $89 is btw not low enough when it’s stripped.

 

[Sandisw]

Sorry to pick this one post.

One of the first economic terms learned in a 101 or 102 class is there is no such thing as free. Someone is paying.
Commercial has no specific definition other than engaged in commerce.
Renting to cover ones dues is just not a good point to justify non commercial as it can easily be proven it is.

"Personal use may include enjoying the benefits of a DVC Membership with family or allowing use of any reserved Vacation Home to friends and family on occasion. Additionally, personal use means that the member does not regularly or frequently rent/sell reservations booked using their membership."

This is very intentional wording covering that was a reservation for my friend or 99th cousin will not work. Renting to cover dues is 100% regular renting. Then adds Frequent... Frequency is simply a pattern like I use all my points one year the next I rent all my points. Any renting over any period that occurs more than once......
If you rented once in 3 years then 7 years later then 2 years after that this is not frequent. In the same if you make reservations for family or friends for the exact same time you are there or your child, brother, sister etc.....

While I would love to say X should be allowed it is very apparent DVC intends to and likely will make examples of ? Before you say X should be ok.... I would seriously consider how one can defend the broad yet some specific working and this is done with the reason of we can defend canceling very easily.... Now up to the owner to prove otherwise with 99% in a court room with $$$$$$ Lawyers (and I do mean you better shell out for the best).

Renting half your points could be considered regular by DVC. But that is an interpretation of that word.

DVC could decide just as easily that renting your points in that manner does not meet their threshold of regular.

As I said, if I tell someone I go to the dentist regularly, and also tell you I go to the gym regularly, the context changes the meaning.

Regular could also be defined as monthly…and until DVC gives us clarity, there is no “this counts and this does not”.

They are all examples of potential situations that DVC will have to consider when deciding.

I think the only situation we all agree on is that someone renting thousands and thousand of points every year would be renting regularly and frequently at a high level, and making a high level of income that it is obvious it’s a commercial membership.

Beyond that, it’s each owner’s personal interpretation of it.

 

[mkatsy]

Just did it

17.77 for the point
1.16 sales tax
1.07 accomodation tax

$20 total

If members are renting points and not submitting taxes maybe that button is just Disney distancing themselves from exposure to members actions

 

[Sandisw]

You guys keep speaking of 'profit margin' as a metric for determination. Just exactly how is anyone privy to said profit margin on any rental?

They wouldn’t be, and the contract says the terms of rentals are between owner and renter.

But, it’s pretty hard to argue that someone renting 8000 points a year isn’t going to have a profit that most would say would be large enough to be an example of what the contract was meant to prevent.

It’s the lower levels that we have wide difference of opinions.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

There's no clause that says you can only rent a reservation for no more than the cost of dues. I can charge the equivalent of $100/point if I can get somebody to pay it. I can also charge $5/point if I want to. We're getting way off into the weeds with you guys saying Disney can speculate what a renter is charging. The fees being charged by a renter is confidential between the renter and the rentee. There is no universe that exists where Disney nor anybody else should be privy to that sort of information, commercial or private. I'll stand on my head defending that regardless of who is renting the points.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

They wouldn’t be, and the contract says the terms of rentals are between owner and renter.

But, it’s pretty hard to argue that someone renting 8000 points a year isn’t going to have a profit that most would say would be large enough to be an example of what the contract was meant to prevent.

It’s the lower levels that we have wide difference of opinions.

Arguing it and proving it are two totally different things. The only thing that matters is what you can prove.

I'm visualizing this entire problem based soley on volume and not based on some sort of imaginary profit margin of which nobody here or at Disney is privy to.

 

[mkatsy]

There's no clause that says you can only rent a reservation for no more than the cost of dues. I can charge the equivalent of $100/point if I can get somebody to pay it. I can also charge $5/point if I want to. We're getting way off into the weeds with you guys saying Disney can speculate what a renter is charging. The fees being charged by a renter is confidential between the renter and the rentee. There is no universe that exists where Disney nor anybody else should be privy to that sort of information, commercial or private. I'll stand on my head defending that regardless of who is renting the points.

I think the tax man might have a different opinion on just how private your transactions are

 

[Sandisw]

There's no clause that says you can only rent a reservation for no more than the cost of dues. I can charge the equivalent of $100/point if I can get somebody to pay it. I can also charge $5/point if I want to. We're getting way off into the weeds with you guys saying Disney can speculate what a renter is charging. The fees being charged by a renter is confidential between the renter and the rentee. There is no universe that exists where Disney nor anybody else should be privy to that sort of information, commercial or private. I'll stand on my head defending that regardless of who is renting the points.

Let me clarify…I do not think DVC would ever use that as an enforcement metric.

But do I think it could be a internal parameter they use to help them define when a membership is crossing the line? Sure

It is just hard not to admit these large point owners renting thousands and thousands of points every year are making a substantial profit or they wouldn’t be doing it.

I completely see this as a volume thing and expect DVC to continue to use that like they have since 2008.

It’s the same thing with why I would be surprised to see them prohibit spec renting if it isn’t also accompanied by frequent and regular renting.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

I think the tax man might have a different opinion on just how private your transactions are

That should be obvious. That YOU and YOUR taxes. Tax people don't have to speculate it. You are required by law to report it to them.

 

[GoingSince1990]

You guys keep speaking of 'profit margin' as a metric for determination. Just exactly how is anyone privy to said profit margin on any rental?

When a spec reservation is advertised for sale, DVC knows exactly what profit margin the member is shooting for. They can also identify the member by cross-referencing the reservation in their database and monitoring it to check when the member changes the lead guest when the reservation is sold. This is why I suspect the main target will be the low-hanging fruit of spec reservations being advertised openly, which happily also appear to be the types of rentals that people get most irate about, based on this and other threads I have seen. By contrast, for reservations where all DVC knows is that the lead guest is different from the member, they have no way of knowing whether or not it is even a rental, let alone what the profit margin might be if it was. As I mentioned earlier, I recently gifted a reservation to my son's future mother-in-law and some of her friends, for her first ever WDW trip. All people with completely different names, from a different state, who I have never traveled with before, and yet it is not a rental, and I have no idea how I would go about proving this if challenged by DVC, or what kind of proof they might demand.

 

[Mouseforward]

As I said, if I tell someone I go to the dentist regularly, and also tell you I go to the gym regularly, the context changes the meaning.

I now need to go tell that priest that I am a regular at church I show up on Easter. I mean it’s once a year.

 

[AstroBlasters]

76 new listings for www.dvcresalemarket.com since Friday. 42 of which are stripped or nearly stripped (55%). Total active listings per www.dvcforless.com up 8.9% since Personal Use announcement, BWV and AKV leading the charge in WDW at up 18.3% and 16.5% respectively. AUL is the overall leader at up 54%.

There are a lot of “double listings” going on.