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

[Brianstl]

That would mean that if you own 160 points at BWV, 300 at VGF, 500 at SSR and so on they would need to have an internal definition of how many points you can rent at each resort.

It sounds like it would make things much more complicated than it had to be.

It would be much easier just to grab each owners total dues and divide it with whatever cost per point they are using.

Every resort has a “commercial purposes” clause in their condominium association description documents. There really is no work on Disney’s part to track what is being used where.

 

[mkatsy]

I see. A timeshare in foreclosure is treated like any other real estate in foreclosure. I didn't know, it wasn't on my radar.
Unlike a house in foreclosure, at least the defunct owner can't strip the copper and cabinets.

I'd buy a foreclosed contract. I don't see a downside to it.



I've no interest in The Polynesian but I would like to add either Riviera or Grand Floridian points. Maybe even Boardwalk or Old Key West if the price was right.


That seems ---odd. If I was looking at a stripped or loaded contract vs one that is neither, it would matter to me and that translates to dollars. I suppose of my agent advised me to not assign a value to a loaded contract in my offer, I'd take their advise against my own inner thinking.

Yes, I was thinking if one could transfer the points out and build them up in an account they will keep, then yes but I was also thinking the subject contract would lose value due to being stripped of usable points making it a wash but as has been pointed out, buyers don't devalue stripped contracts. Also moot since DVC nipped that transfer option in the keister.



Also----what is Dibb??

Animal kingdom is $65 a point at the courthouse. I was under the mistaken impression that Disney would out bid you, obviously that is not the case. There are multiple LLC gobbling up contracts over there. The date &time of the sales are public record, they’re just during the day in downtown Orlando, not super convenient if you work. Maybe I’ll head over to one and see if anyone can buy these, or just the”special” people.

 

[Genie+]

Also----what is Dibb??

theDIBB​

Disney, Florida & UK Holiday Planning​

It’s a UK-centric Forum and site.

Back in the FP+ days they had the best availability tracking tool. That’s how/why I first became familiar with it.

 

[kilik64]

Animal kingdom is $65 a point at the courthouse. I was under the mistaken impression that Disney would out bid you, obviously that is not the case. There are multiple LLC gobbling up contracts over there. The date &time of the sales are public record, they’re just during the day in downtown Orlando, not super convenient if you work. Maybe I’ll head over to one and see if anyone can buy these, or just the”special” people.

You can bid online through the occ site too for some of them. They have a calendar where you can see when they are coming up.

 

[Sandisw]

I am starting to think you won’t be able to pool contracts at multiple resorts to get your dues dollar total, but you will have a dues dollar total for the total contracts you own at each individual resort. I really don’t think you will be able to use your GF dues to increase what you are able to rent at BW for example. I say this because the rental policy is a condominium association policy for each resort. The associations can’t make or enforce policies for an association they aren’t. I don’t think they will be able to cross streams legally.

I asked this specifically as I own three resorts and the answer is yes, it’s about your total dues as an owner and how much rental income.

I own 900 points at 3 resorts and my total dues are around $7k. I can rent any combination of points as long as my rental income does not exceed my dues.

Where I own is irrelevant because this is about whether I, as an owner is renting at a level that DVC sees as commercial.

It is the board of each condo association who adopts the policy and then they give DVCMC the right to enforce.

The board members are the same for every resort so they simply adopt the same policy for all resorts.

They have always had the same metric for owners at each.

The contracts state that owners can have no more than 4000 at one resort but 8000 across all so the contracts already allow for DVC to look at what an owner has in total.

I’m not sure why DVC woild complicate this when using totals gets them what they want….stopping owners from renting a lot of points to make money.

Matter of fact, comparing this to the 2008 policy, it actually makes a lot more sense to me in terms of being able to prevent those from renting to the degree it’s commercial.

That one was tied to reservations on a membership which is how people got around it.

Now, it’s about you, as an owner, and what you do with with all your ownership interests.

And, it equalizes things across resorts in a way that doesn’t treat certain resort owners differently based on how popular their resort might be.

Obviously, we now wait to hear about enforcement but IMO, the board landed on a policy that protects our rights to rent but allows for easier enforcement against those who bought DVC for the sole purpose to make money off rentals.

That reason is now gone.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

There's no way the value of dues alone holds up. Money has a time value as does the cost of the points over time. Nice scare tactic. But I don't believe the sieve would hold water.

Do they hold themselves to the same standards for the points they own (not traded points)?

 

[Sandisw]

Yeah I get that, it’s just a stretch to see it as DVC management training CMs to deliberately mislead people as a matter of intended procedure. That CM needs better training. I can’t imagine management directing them to leave sentences out when reading back T&C. I can see something like management’s plan being to encourage members to revisit what personal use means, because enhanced enforcement will be changing the status quo as far as rentals are concerned.

Google searches are going to start including more clarification around rentals needing to be within personal use, and what goes beyond personal use. Something that was never consistent which now there is actually something to be consistent about.

Well, too many reports from owners who have found that the CMs are being either misleading or not giving full answers.

Owners who are not in the know are being lead to believe that you can rent only ti family and friends.

As I said, that is what was implied to me until I questioned him.

It appears to me that the policy is more answer as general as you can and let the owner draw conclusions.

But, as you said, the more people who call to get clarification and escalate to supervisors, the more accurate it wlll be.

 

[Sandisw]

There's no way the value of dues alone holds up. Money has a time value as does the cost of the points over time. Nice scare tactic. But I don't believe the sieve would hold water.

Do they hold themselves to the same standards for the points they own (not traded points)?

They don’t have to follow the same rules as us as they are not bound to commercial standards as they are a commercial enterprise already.

And, this is not about the value or your ownership. It is only about whether the level of renting one is doiing is defined by DVC to be commercial

They have always had the right to define that. You can still rent as much as you want but rental income can’t exceed dues.

If you do, then you are at risk of DVzc finding you in violation of the commercial purposes clause.

IMO, it would be a pretty difficult legal battle for owners to win, if they do decide to try.

My guess is that many owners willl view this a reasonable approach to balancing owners rights and stopping commercial renters.

 

[Jperiod]

I haven't followed all 170 pages, just checking in periodically. What's this about rental income can't exceed annual dues? I checked the first few posts and couldn't find the verbiage or if there was a recent update somewhere? How would disney even know this? Yikes, I def rent for much more when I do. Otherwise, I don't see how it falls under commercial renting if one only breaks even?

 

[Mouseforward]

Do they hold themselves to the same standards for the points they own (not traded points)?

I see your point ,

I would answer this by saying can we take a 2042 OKW resale and snap our fingers and turn it into a 2057 direct contract?

No point in pretending that we are on a level playing field with Disney or DVC. Hence all of the contract warnings about how we should remember we would be competing with DVC / Disney if we rent or resell and should not purchase expecting a profit.

 

[JackosinDIS]

Also----what is Dibb?

It’s the cool kids version of Disboards

Well, too many reports from owners who have found that the CMs are being either misleading or not giving full answers.

Owners who are not in the know are being lead to believe that you can rent only ti family and friends.

Quoting from the report I mentioned, just so everyone can make their own judgement on how it is being approached by MS:

“I just called MS to amend the booking and was asked to confirm it was for personal use - which I can’t because it isn’t.

I wasn’t aware of the rule change they informed me about (I’ve had no email or other communication) and the update to the reservation was refused.”

Apparently the CM was ‘adamant’ that one cannot rent reservations.

While those who view renting as a negative may be pleased that DVC is preventing lead guest changes in this manner, my own view is that is is entirely inappropriate, and DVC have a responsibility to provide the full and correct information to CMs and also ensure it is passed on to owners - not deliberately mislead.

What they are doing here is lying by omission.

 

[VGCgroupie]

It’s the cool kids version of Disboards

Thanks. I was about to google to see what I was missing

Quoting from the report I mentioned, just so everyone can make their own judgement on how it is being approached by MS:

“I just called MS to amend the booking and was asked to confirm it was for personal use - which I can’t because it isn’t.

I wasn’t aware of the rule change they informed me about (I’ve had no email or other communication) and the update to the reservation was refused.”

Apparently the CM was ‘adamant’ that one cannot rent reservations.

While those who view renting as a negative may be pleased that DVC is preventing lead guest changes in this manner, my own view is that is is entirely inappropriate, and DVC have a responsibility to provide the full and correct information to CMs and also ensure it is passed on to owners - not deliberately mislead.

What they are doing here is lying by omission.

I am 100% for stopping commercial renting. I even am okay with DVC being vague in its definition of commercial. I am not okay with them not giving a clear message across all channels. Regardless of the new check box we all know renting is allowed to some degree per the pos. So we know that these CMs are wrong and DVC has a responsibility to properly train their people to not give out false information like this. You shouldn’t have to escalate to a super to get accurate info.

 

[VGCgroupie]

I had to change the lead guest today for a reservation I am renting (previous renter cancelled) The CM said this via chat.

“Prior to modifying this reservation, please note, by confirming this reservation, you are agreeing to the Disney Vacation Club's Terms and Conditions. Do you confirm that this reservation is for your personal use only”?

I said yes, I’m sure the CM expected me to start questioning them and was relieved when I didn’t.

I did not like the use of the word your in front of personal use, but that’s just my feeling on it not that it means anything.