IMO, this may be more about having an owner acknowledge things so if that owner is one who is doing a lot, or whatever DVc decides has shifted to commercial purpose membership, they have something to back it up.
Personally, I would not have no problem in saying yes.
Since the word leaseee is included in the POS under personal use, then I am being truthful.
The other part is that the online booking language and the reported phone or chat language is different.
Maybe just a tactic to out someone on the spot and they are hoping some owners think twice?
Agree. There appear to be two possibilities here:
A.
DVD (DVC) Has Misread the Original Personal Injury Rules
The DVD personnel or lawyers who created and issued the June 2025 rules, and adopted the policy to require that a member making a reservation confirm that it is or is not solely for "personal use," failed to read or understand the definition of personal use in §12 of the Declarations, at least for all those resorts created before Riviera. That definition defines "personal use" as the use of a room as a vacation accommodation and expressly provides that a member's making such reservations for "lessees" is an allowed "personal use." Thus, a member's renting rooms to anyone for use as a vacation accommodation is, in fact, an allowed "personal use." It becomes an improper "commercial purpose" only if: (a) the rental is for actually using the room for a business purpose (something that can only be done in designated "Commercial Units"); or (b) the member has engaged in a pattern of rental activity that the association can reasonably conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or practice (a commercial enterprise is a legal term meaning that one is actually regularly engaging in the business for doing something for profit). As a result, most members who do rentals can honestly answer "yes" to the question whether a reservation is solely for personal use even if the particular reservation is a rental.
B.
DVD Is Intentionally Being Disingenuous
I doubt the responsible DVD personnel are as uninformed as stated above. As DVD is undoubtedly aware, DVD is allowed to unilaterally make changes to things in the declarations after a resort begins to be sold but, absent a vote of the members, is prohibited from doing so if the change could "prejudice or impair to any material extent the rights of any Owner." E.g., BWV Declarations §16.2. Courts consider the right to rent residential-type property such as timeshares to be a fundamental right of the owners. Thus, DVC Resorts’ declarations do not allow DVD to further restrict the member's ability to rent absent an actual vote of the members. Even then, for condominiums, there is also the statute that prohibits creating further restrictions that could reduce the number of rentals an owner can make absent a member vote, and the members that vote against the change are not required to follow it. §718.110(13).
The new rules are written to appear to be saying renting is something only rarely done or allowed and the term personal use refers only to a member's use of the room or a member's allowing family or friends to use the rooms. But if you read the new rules several times, you may conclude something different: DVC is not really creating new rules. It has just rewritten the existing rules with a much more harsh tone, and likely: (a) its position if challenged will actually be that the new rules can be construed to be the same as the old rules; (b) it will principally pursue the professional renters if they do not cease their activities because they are violating the old rules and have no real defense; and (c) the new rules may themselves cause many members doing some fairly frequent rentals, who perceive that the term personal use does not include rentals, will actually stop renting, or at least decrease their amount of renting, under the belief that new rules require that.
The applicable June 2025 rental rules are, per sentence:
1. "You agree that any reservations made under your membership are solely for personal use and not for commercial purposes, as required by governing documents for each DVC Resort,
including but not limited to the Declaration of Condominium and Membership Agreement."
That sentence actually says nothing more than the actual rule in the declarations. The sentence does not declare personal use excludes rentals or that commercial purposes include anything more than what is actually provided in the declarations.
2. "DVCM reserves the right to interpret personal use and determine if reservations are booked for personal or commercial purposes in its sole discretion."
That is a big "so what" sentence. DVCM has the power to finally determine the issue of personal use and commercial purposes for the Riviera and after resorts, but the sentence does not say it actually has that power for all pre-Riviera resorts. Nothing disallows DVCM from weighing in on the issue as to those resorts but, under those POS’s, only the association can finally determine the issue and the association must apply a reasonableness standard. That rule is not really changed because the sentence does not say DVCM is the entity that finally determines the issue.
C. "Personal use may include enjoying the benefits of a DVC Membership with family or friends or allowing use of any reserved Vacation Home to friends and family on occasion."
That sentence is literally true as to what personal use "may include," but the sentence does not actually exclude rentals or anything else not stated in the sentence that could be personal use.
D. "Additionally, personal use means that the member does not regularly or frequently rent/sell reservations booked using their membership."
Noteworthy is that the sentence appears to be conceding that the term "personal use" expressly includes a member's ability to rent. ”Regularly” or “frequently” are vague terms that could require, as the rules in the declarations of most DVC Resorts, a large number of rentals before a violation of what is stated in the sentence.
If any real legal dispute arises, my sense is DVD/DVC will not take the position that its new rules are more restrictive than those stated in the declarations of the DVC Resorts. To do so would raise the issue that such new rules cannot apply because they were never voted on by the members, and that is an issue DVD/DVC would likely lose in a lawsuit. Its position will instead be that its June 2025 Rules really do not conflict with the DVC Resorts' declarations’ definitions of personal use and commercial purpose. Moreover, it will likely focus on the professional-type renters who are doing a lot of rentals because those can be shown to be acting improperly under the original personal use and commercial purpose definitions.
Respecting the rule not to share images here, but it is happening (which is insane and risky for both renter or and guest).
