Homework Assignment: Contrast using DVC common facilities with "pool hopping".

[Geyser Gazer]

From what I am able to glean from my pile of paperwork DCV members and guests staying on points have the right to use "common (dvc) facilities" including associated theme pools. I would argue that this right is distinct from the less well defined "pool hopping" perk currently allowed even at non dvc wdw resorts. If this is true I think I would have a problem with being asked to leave Luna, Silver Springs, or OKW pools as long as I was staying dvc on points. On the other hand, I would happily volunteer to leave any non dvc resort pool anywhere near capacity. This thinking does have implications for SAB when BCV is complete.
Discuss.

 

[Chuck S]

Well, I don't know if SAB, even with BCVs, would be considered a DVC common facility. It is a pre-existing structure and part of the BC Resort. While it's use may be granted to BCV, it may be done as a courtesy by BC Resort. I'd bet BC Resort will retain 'legal ownership' of SAB.

 

[Geyser Gazer]

Hi Chuck S.

Are you saying that even BCV owners might not have SAB privileges?

 

[Chuck S]

It depends on the public offering statements...SAB and contractual workings. SAB is currently owned by Disney World as part of the Y/BC resort. I don't see how it could legally be considered part of the DVC timeshare for 'common facilities' unless it is OWNED by Disney Vacation Development/DVC and becomes part of the ground lease of DVC. You see, at OKW, the pools are part of that ground lease...but SAB is currently part of a Disney resort, not DVC property.

I'm NOT saying access WON'T be granted to BCV guests, but I doubt it will be part of the timeshare, and MAY continue to be considered 'pool hopping'. I'm thinking that BCV guests would probably be given access like any other Y/BC paying guests, as a courtesy, given the proximity of the buildings. Otherwise, upkeep and maintenance for SAB would have to be included in BCVs dues. WLV owners, how are the shared facilities handled there? I own at OKW, and it is a freestanding DVC facility with all pools part of the DVC ground lease that expires in 2042.

 

[RobDoc]

The POS for BCV will likely state something to the effect that all BC facilities are available to BCV cash guests and DVC members staying at that resort on points.

This would effectively include all BCV guests and possibly exclude other guests (including BCV owners- not staying at the resort).

Someone recently posted similar language from their Jan 2001 POS from their VWL purchase.

Perhaps one of our legal professionals can offer comment.

 

[Doctor P]

I've been thinking about the following issue for a while, and this seems to be an appropriate place to fan the flames a little bit If I understand correctly, the Luna Park Pool is a common element of BWV and is DVC "property". That raises two questions: (1) does BWV get payments from outside of DVD to help maintain and run that pool and keep it open to BWI guests? and (2) could BWI guests be denied access to Luna Park during peak seasons since it is a DVC and not and WDW resort facility? These are really just curiousity questions that happened to come to mind. I have no strong feeling on the subject but was somewhat curious about the answer (I also don't recall how that resort was built--simultaneously, BWI first, BWV first??)

 

[Geyser Gazer]

Doc,

VWL POS states that for DVC members as well as WLV owners these common recreational facilities are available per the "common facilities agreement". I have not been able to find the text of the "common facilities agreement" within the VWL POS but it sounds like it should apply to all dvc resorts.

 

[LIDisneyFan]

The statement in the POS is under section 12 (Use Restrictions), and refers (I don't remember the exact words) like "the common facililites can only be used by guests who have properly reserved vacation homes". I think the issue that's somewhat cloudy (but I have decided not to pursue) is "Does that mean ANY home reserved as part of DVC, or the one where the facility is located".

Also, since this wording was in an April 2000 addendum, I would think that POS's before this date do NOT contain this wording, which further raises the question.

Just some thought to fuel some fire.

 

[Dean]

The little wording in the POS that seems like it could apply to this area is sufficiently vague as to allow DVC to do what ever it wants to in this area. Regardless of mine or anyone's interpretation of specific items, you can bank on certain issues.

1. Pool hopping will refer to the use of ANY pool at any resort that one is not staying at.
2. It will never be construed as a legal right within the DVC documentation.
3. It will be under the control and even whims of DVC and there's not much if anything we can do about it.
4. We will continue to discuss and argue the issue for some time regardless of what happens.
   [/list=1]
   Not an absolute but I feel as the BCV nears completion and with the overall total number of members now elligible for pool hopping at any one time, we will soon (with a year or so) witness a further reduction of this option. I hope it continues for at least 11 more months so I can win a dinner for 2 from Dan. LOL.

 

[Bennet]

We will continue to discuss and argue the issue for some time regardless of what happens.

LOL - no bet here - your are right on this point Dean. I think you got 1 to 3 too but 4 I am sure you got.

 

[Geyser Gazer]

Dean,

I was comforted to find in writing that VWL owners have access to the WL theme pool regardless of the future of pool hopping. The reason I started this thread was the coincident implication that all dvc members may have similar rights at all dvc resorts via the "common facilities agreement". I think this a separate issue that may be even more important to dvc members than the pool hopping perk.