Is Riviera part of Disney Vacation Club?

zavandor

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jul 22, 2011
First and foremost: I am not a lawyer, so what follows are just impressions I got reading the Florida statutes. I'm looking forward other people feedback, especially someone with some experience in Florida timeshare laws.

The Florida statutes define a "Vacation Club" this way:

(8) “Vacation club” means a multisite timeshare plan. However, notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the use of the term “vacation club” by a person or entity as part of a company, brand, or product name shall not, in and of itself, subject the person, entity, or product being offered to the provisions of this part unless the product offered otherwise meets the definition of a “multisite timeshare plan” as defined in subsection (4).

[...]

4)“Multisite timeshare plan” means any method, arrangement, or procedure with respect to which a purchaser obtains, by any means, a recurring right to use and occupy accommodations or facilities of more than one component site, only through use of a reservation system, whether or not the purchaser is able to elect to cease participating in the plan. However, the term “multisite timeshare plan” shall not include any method, arrangement, or procedure wherein:
(a) The contractually specified maximum total financial obligation on the purchaser’s part is $3,000 or less, during the entire term of the plan; or
(b) The term is for a period of 3 years or less, regardless of the purchaser’s contractually specified maximum total financial obligation, if any. For purposes of determining the term of such use and occupancy rights, the period of any optional renewals which a purchaser, in his or her sole discretion, may elect to exercise, whether or not for additional consideration, shall not be included. For purposes of determining the term of such use and occupancy rights, the period of any automatic renewals shall be included unless a purchaser has the right to terminate the membership at any time and receive a pro rata refund or the purchaser receives a notice no less than 30 days and no more than 60 days prior to the date of renewal informing the purchaser of the right to terminate at any time prior to the date of automatic renewal.
Multisite timeshare plan does not mean an exchange program as defined in s. 721.05. Timeshare estates may only be offered in a multisite timeshare plan pursuant to s. 721.57.


[...]

721.57 Offering of timeshare estates in specific multisite timeshare plans; required provisions in the timeshare instrument.—
(1) In addition to meeting all the requirements of part I, timeshare estates offered in a specific multisite timeshare plan must meet the requirements of subsection (2). Any offering of timeshare estates in a specific multisite timeshare plan that does not comply with these requirements shall be deemed to be an offering of a timeshare license.
(2) The timeshare instrument of a specific multisite timeshare plan in which timeshare estates are offered must contain or provide for all of the following matters:
(a) The purchaser will receive a timeshare estate as defined in s. 721.05 in one of the component sites of the specific multisite timeshare plan. The use rights in the other component sites of the multisite timeshare plan shall be made available to the purchaser through the reservation system pursuant to the timeshare instrument.
(b) In the event that the reservation system is terminated or otherwise becomes unavailable for any reason prior to the expiration of the term of the specific multisite timeshare plan:
1. The purchaser will be able to continue to use the accommodations and facilities of the component site in which she or he has been conveyed a timeshare estate in the manner described in the timeshare instrument for that component site for the remaining term of the timeshare estate; and
2. Any use rights in that component site which had previously been made available through the reservation system to purchasers of the specific multisite timeshare plan who were not offered a timeshare estate at that component site will terminate when the reservation system is terminated or otherwise becomes unavailable for any reason.

(my emphasys)

The Florida law defines what is a Vacation Club and states that the term Vacation Club can be used only if certain requirements are met.
The major requirement is that a recurring right to use and occupy accommodations or facilities of more than one component site is offered. Also The use rights in the other component sites of the multisite timeshare plan shall be made available to the purchaser through the reservation system.

A possible interpretation is that the reservation system is not an addendum to the Vacation Club like an RCI exchange system, it is an integral part of belonging to a Vacation Club. And as such it cannot be taken away from resale purchasers.
The way the Riviera POS has been written, the reservation component is defined more like an exchange programm where DVD can decide in its own terms who can access and who cannot (liek RCI, Consierge collection, Disney collection...).

I'm not saying that Disney cannot sell Riviera this way. They can. But they cannot call it a Vacation Club, not according to the definition of the Florida law. Doing so is misleading for the potential purchasers. They get interested in a Vacation Club, go to the sale pitch and they're explained they're not buying a Vacation Club, they're buying a resort labelled as belonging to a Disney Vacation Club that allow them to exchange their points with the 14 original resorts that belong to a Vacation Club similarly called Disney Vacation Club.
Confusing? It is.

According to this interpretation, Disney couldn't sell Riviera as part of Disney Vacation Club. They can call it Disney Magic Vacations, Disney Pixy Dust Club or however they want, but not Vacation Club, because a Vacation club is something else.
What do you think, is this interpretation reasonable? Looking forward your objections.



Link to the Florida Statutes: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0721/0721.html
 
When you buy direct, all those things are true. I do not see anything in there that says the rules have to carry over to the next owner.

I have not found anything yet that says restrctions can’t be in play when sold. Did you see anything like that?
 
If the ability to trade to other resorts in the same Vacation Club is part of the definition of what a VC is, how can it be restricted?
 
If the ability to trade to other resorts in the same Vacation Club is part of the definition of what a VC is, how can it be restricted?

It enters under the rules of the BVTC...and someone has said that guides it.

The language regarding resale restriction was approved by the FL timeshare board...I do know that as my paperwork says it.

So, it must have met legal standard according to them. But I see what you are saying is that it should be called something else?
 


How does one interpret this? It seems to say that multisite does not mean an exchange program...so I’m not sure that being part of the multisite timeshare, which is what a vacation club is equates to exchanges having to be the same...that is how I read this...thoughts?

503942
 
How does one interpret this? It seems to say that multisite does not mean an exchange program...so I’m not sure that being part of the multisite timeshare, which is what a vacation club is equates to exchanges having to be the same...that is how I read this...thoughts?

View attachment 503942

Yes, that's what my doubts are about. A Vacation Club needs to have a reservation component. If a timeshare doesn't have a reservation component that allows to book other resorts belonging to the same club, it's not a Vacation Club. There is no mention in the law if the reservation component can be restricted only to some purchasers, especially depending on how you have acquired it. Does it mean that everyone should be able to access it? I think so, but maybe the developer can instead decide to restrict it, non sure.
If my interpretation is correct, then DVD should be forced to decide between dropping the resale restrictions or drop the name Disney Vacation Club for Riviera and future resorts. It's a brand that took 30 years to establish, I think they'd prefer to drop the resale restrictions.
 
Zavandor may be on to something.

DVC is, by definition under the statutes, a multisite timeshare plan because owners of one DVC Resort have rights to reserve other DVC Resorts in the system, and such reservations are done via a centralized reservation system, the Disney Reservation Component, that can be used by members to make reservations only at DVC Resorts. It is not an “exchange program,” broadly defined as any program under which owners of one timeshare can exchange occupancy with owners of another timeshare, Fl Stats 721.05(16), because that definition specifically excludes any program that falls within the definition of a multisite timeshare plan under the statutes, i.e., the applicable statutes cited by Zavandor are designed to deal with exchange programs that meet the definition of a multisite timeshare plan and not any other exchange programs.

Also, that the Riviera restrictions were approved by the Florida timeshare entity – the Division of Florida Condominiums, Timeshares, and Mobile Homes -- means little. The usual process of “approval” is more of one of not expressing disapproval unless there is a major challenge raised while the applicable documents are being filed and full investigation as to whether the challenges are valid. That Division’s approval of Riviera POS documents is not determinative of any real issues in a subsequent lawsuit challenging whether the resale restrictions are valid under the statutes.

It also appears that DVC meets the definition of a “specific” multisite timeshare plan, Fl. Stats. 752.52(7), required for section 721.57(2) to apply, which provides that the purchasers shall be provided use rights to the sites in the system they do not own via use of the reservation system.

Thus, it appears one can assert that 721.57(2) has been violated by the addition of Riviera to the DVC system which precludes resale purchasers of other sites in the system from using the DVC Reservation Component to reserve Riviera.

I am aware of no case law in Florida that deals with any issue of resale purchasers having or not having the right to reserve resorts within the multisite reservation system under section 721.57(2), which means there is nothing out there to preclude one from raising the issue. One wonders why this issue has not been raised before since other timeshare companies adopted, long before Riviera, programs precluding resale purchasers from having access to the multisite resorts. However, that may be because those other timeshare companies did it differently, e.g., ones I am aware created vacation clubs and reservation systems that specifically exclude resale purchasers from becoming members of the applicable club at all and cannot use the applicable reservation system at all. DVC specifically added Riviera to the existing DVC system and DVC Reservation Component while still allowing all prior resale purchasers access to Riveria.

In any event, this adds a possible additional argument that Disney could not legally add Riviera to the DVC Reservation Component to those arguments already mentioned before, e.g., the POS documents and DVC Resort Agreements of the pre-Riviera Resorts appear to clearly preclude Riviera from being part of the DVC Reservation Component because those documents provided that “DVC Members” included all resale purchasers, all such DVC Members have the right of access to the DVC Reservation Component to reserve any DVC Resorts, including any future resorts added to the DVC Reservation Component, and that BVTC could not add a new resort as a DVC Resort to the DVC Reservation Component unless the material terms of DVC Resort Agreement for the new resort were the same as the prior DVC Resort Agreements. In adding Rivera to the DVC Reservation Component, DVD and BVTC (a fiduciary to the members) just ignored all those provisions in the prior POS’s and DVC Resort Agreements that prohibited what they did.

As I have noted before, DVD cleverly took away the incentive to sue from all DVC members that existed in mid-Jan 2019 by making the Riviera restrictions applicable only to future resale purchasers. However, as time passes, there will be more and more DVC resale purchasers subject to the restrictions, who may mount a claim.
 
Last edited:


So, then, assuming it wasn’t supposed to be allowed, could they simply rebrand it as DVC 2...and give it rights into BVTC, in some sort of different way?

Similar to the Disney collection? Or no, because then it is ot really multisite anymore?

When OKW was it, it was called Disney Vacation Club...and only one resort....so would not have been multisite then..

Could it be simply it’s name?
 
So, then, assuming it wasn’t supposed to be allowed, could they simply rebrand it as DVC 2...and give it rights into BVTC, in some sort of different way?

Similar to the Disney collection? Or no, because then it is ot really multisite anymore?

When OKW was it, it was called Disney Vacation Club...and only one resort....so would not have been multisite then..

Could it be simply it’s name?

Name is far from being enough. DVD could have set up Riviera as a separate resort with its own separate DVC 2 program which would have excluded it from the existing DVC program and excluded it from the using the DVC Reservation Component. The key is that its could not, with Riviera's resale exclusions, designate Riviera as a DVC Resort that could use the DVC Reservation Component and thus use the 7-month window for Riviera members to be able to reserve the other resorts. The other resort POS's actually provide for the possibility of DVD building a timeshare at Disney that does not become part of DVC 1.

But DVD obviously did not want to do a new DVC 2. The two programs would be treated entirely separate. It could set up an exchange program between Riviera and the original resorts similar to the RCI exchange program, but it could not give the Riviera owners access to other DVC Resorts on the same favorable 7-month reservation window as the owners of the prior resorts. Moreover, that new DVC would have needed its own seaprate reservation system, And having a separate DVC would have emphasized the problem of resale restrictions for Riviera when it was being sold.

Also, OKW, when it opened, actually was a designated multisite timeshare plan. The POS's and other documents, including a DVC Resort Agreement, set out the terms relating to the club, the DVC Reservation Component, and the terms applicable tor reserving any other DVC Resorts (such as those added in the future to the program), so legally it was part of a multisite timeshare plan; it just did not yet have another resort for specific use of that plan. The only major difference between the original OKW multisite timeshare plan and those set out for the the future resorts is that the 7-month reservation window for other DVC Resorts was actually designated as a 10-month reservation window in the original OKW documents; that was changed to seven months before another resort was added.
 
Last edited:
Name is far from being enough. DVD could have set up Riviera as a separate resort with its own separate DVC 2 program which would have excluded it from the existing DVC program and excluded it from the using the DVC Reservation Component. The key is that its could not, under any circumstances with Riviera's resale exclusions, designate Riviera as a DVC Resort that could use the DVC Reservation Component and thus use the 7-month window for Riviera members to be able to reserve the other resorts. The other resort POS's actually provide for the possibility of DVD building a timeshare at Disney that does not become part of DVC 1.

But DVD obviously did not want to do a new DVC 2. The two programs would be treated entirely separate. It could set up an exchange program between Riviera and the original resorts similar to the RCI exchange program, but it could not give the Riviera owners access to other DVC Resorts on the same favorable 7-month reservation window as the owners of the prior resorts. Moreover, that new DVC would have needed its own seaprate reservation system, And having a separate DVC would have emphasized the problem of resale restrictions for Riviera when it was being sold.

Also, OKW when it opened, actually was a designated multisite timeshare plan. The POS's and other documents, including a DVC Resort Agreement, set out the terms rating to the club, the DVC Reservation Componen, and the terms applicable tor reserving any DVC Resorts added (in the future) to the program, so legally it was part of a multisite timeshare plan; it just did not yet have another resort for specific use of that plan.

That makes sense!
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!









Top