It Makes Me So Mad

[Dean]

Originally posted by Desperado
....In your opinion. These are not facts and not consistent with others interpretation of the POS. We do not know that DVC would be held to the same standards. However, thank you for sharing your knowledgable opinion.

Then I'd like to see the criteria, it's certainly not in the POS.

 

[Apollo53]

I must admit I am enjoying this thread. I find it very interesting mainly because while reading the so called "layman's" opinion, I also get to hear the legal opinion from a corporate attorney, my DW. Unfortunately, for me several other members of my family are also attorneys, so I am always being told my opinion is wrong.

One individual posted the opinion of an attorney they talked to concerning the subject in this thread. The post is the closest to what I am being told thus far.

 

[Desperado]

Originally posted by ripleysmom
I don't think anyone arguing against renting points has a problem with the occasional rentals. Nor do they have a problem with the rentals where the units are reserved after a rental agreement is reached.

It is the members who use the 11 month window to scarf up prime vacation time for auction on ebay or rent on the Rent/Trade board. It is the members who analyze the return on their investment bragging that unless the realize a 10% return they don't feel as though they are making enough money. It is the members who periodically post urging collusion among DVC owners as to what rental prices should be charged.

As to whether or not it is enforceable, I definitely think that reading some of the above mentioned posts would present a strong case to DVD as to the commercial nature of the member's intentions and would, I believe, be a valid basis for booting them out of DVC. Will it happen? Probably not but it would be nice.

My own opinion is that the people who do this to other members (and to potential renters since they are in essence attempting to price fix the market) stink. Period.

I think you make a very valid point.

A graph depicting the outliers using a measurement of percentage of point rented vs personally used over a certain ownership level would probably show a few owners at one far end of the graph compared to the majority of the owners with occasional renting patterns. A series of warnings regarding their commercial use could be issued to these outlier individuals inquiring as to ther rental activities, payment, price advertising and communication activities An appropriate escalation of sanction/actions/timlines could ensue based on the direction of the Board specific to the outlier group. Legal action? Sure, both sides could pursue legal action, DVC with it's attorney's on staff, and an individual paying for attorney fees. That would certainly suck up the potential future rental profits requiring the services of an attorney. The case could take two, three years to resolve, meantime points could be frozen in escrow while the determination is made. In the end, the court agrees DVC does have the right to review the excessive rental practices (of auctioning off prime time holiday periods, and attempted price fixing) of DVC members and take appropriate action after a reasonable series of warnings, and demonstrating good faith in working with the individual to communicate and resolve the issues and directive of the Board regarding commercial use. I know, Fantasy land, it'll never happen.

 

[Apollo53]

Legal action? Sure, both sides could pursue legal action, DVC with it's attorney's on staff, and an individual paying for attorney fees. That would certainly suck up the potential future rental profits requiring the services of an attorney.

I totally agree!

 

[niks81]

 

[ripleysmom]

"Never, I think you have me confused with Nuthut. I've never said we should charge more, only what I feel it is worth to me. And I've NEVER started a thread on this subject to my knowledge. I'll accept your apology once you search the board."

I have no intention of apologizing because when I asked the question, I knew that you hadn't.

My question to you was to highlight the fact that you do NOT analyze your return on investment to the nth degree as some others on this board do. Nor do you practice collusion as some other members of this board do.

Can you honestly say that those members who do what I outlined do not have the appearance of utilizing their points as a commercial enterprise?

 

[ripleysmom]

"This is what I'm saying....you "assume" you know this. Unless you have heard from a member's mouth that they use most/all their points for renting out, its unfair to assume that and make judgements."

I am not assuming anything. The people who do this on a regular basis are pretty blatant about it.


"Don't forget the maximum points to own is 5000...how do you know that someone isn't renting 2500 and using 2500?"

Well in at least one of the cases I know how many points this owner has. I am also pretty certain that that owner rents out over half his points.


"You said earlier it was their "actions" not what they say....so you're basing your entire argument from "actions" of certain members on this board."

Yes for those members that it applies to, why wouldn't I? And it IS partly what they say....I'd say that urging people to increase the amount of rent that they charge because someone wants a greater than 10% return on their investment says a lot, don't you?


So tell me....do you call and scarf up prime weeks and auction them on ebay too?

 

[Desperado]

Originally posted by niks81

 

[Desperado]

Originally posted by Apollo53
{snip}
One individual posted the opinion of an attorney they talked to concerning the subject in this thread. The post is the closest to what I am being told thus far.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. Good luck with your family situation.

My view is that there are a few people who are far at the end of the scale from normal "under the bell curve" type rental practices. It's not hard for DVC to figure out who they are (large volumes of points, numerous rentals, public posts advocating higher rental rates) and start notifying those individuals of their concern over their "potentially" commercial use practices and begin escalation procedures (warnings, sanctions, action) to curb some of the inappropriate activities. Claiming this type or similar type of process isn't legal is an opinion, perhaps even a knowledgable opinion, but it is not a fact.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by ripleysmom
"Never, I think you have me confused with Nuthut. I've never said we should charge more, only what I feel it is worth to me. And I've NEVER started a thread on this subject to my knowledge. I'll accept your apology once you search the board."

I have no intention of apologizing because when I asked the question, I knew that you hadn't.

My question to you was to highlight the fact that you do NOT analyze your return on investment to the nth degree as some others on this board do. Nor do you practice collusion as some other members of this board do.

Can you honestly say that those members who do what I outlined do not have the appearance of utilizing their points as a commercial enterprise?

So you posted a thread to make me look bad for something I did not do when you knew I had not done as you posted. Smooth move.

As to the commercial activity, appearance isn't the issue. The first question is what is commercial activity, I suspect my definition is far different that yours but they would both be opinions. In my definition one couldn't get there with 5000 ponts unless they opened a true business with signs, stationary and the like. Personally, I'd draw a distinction even between a sideline business and coommercial activity but that's me, I doubt most on this thread would agree.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by Desperado
Claiming this type or similar type of process isn't legal is an opinion, perhaps even a knowledgable opinion, but it is not a fact.

I stand by my opinon an it has always been my opinion. I am still waiting for the definition of "commercial activity" as it is written in the POS. As is the reverse. I think some are under the mistaken idea that DVC even cares, regardless of the rest of this.

 

[ripleysmom]

"So you posted a thread to make me look bad for something I did not do when you knew I had not done as you posted. Smooth move."

Um no....I asked you a question to which I knew the answer would be zero to highlight the fact that you do not engage in the questionable practices that others engage in on this board. How is that making you looking bad?

I do have a question now though, if you are hellbent on defending the practices that I have listed (as you seem to be) then why would you consider it to be making you look bad?


As for sideline business versus "commercial activity", it's still a business and thus a commercial activity.

You're right about commerical activity in the POS, there is no definition of commericial activity. That, however, could work either for or against someone.

Sadly, I also agree that DVD doesn't really care about any of this.


Ultimately my biggest objection to people who rent out their points is the ones who scarf up prime weeks to auction off or rent out leaving others who were trying to get through high and dry. Especially for newer members who do not have the experience to know that there are other DVC members out there who are abusing the system for their own personal gain.

I also object to the price fixing posts that are made by some of the members who rent out their points and wish that the DIS would delete them when they are made. To me they violate DIS guidelines since they are being used somewhat to promote the business of those who use their points to make money but that is my own personal opinion and those posts are unlikely to stop.

 

[RobDoc]

This has deterioated into a series of personal messages. Please feel free to continue those by email or PM, but they are not appropriate for the public forum.

Thanks!

 

[Desperado]

Originally posted by ripleysmom
{snip}
As for sideline business versus "commercial activity", it's still a business and thus a commercial activity.

You're right about commerical activity in the POS, there is no definition of commericial activity. That, however, could work either for or against someone.

Sadly, I also agree that DVD doesn't really care about any of this.

ripleysmom, you raise a couple of good points. I don't think there is a distinction between it being a main income source versus a sideline business in order to determine it a commercial activity. I think there are some outlier activities that can be tracked and determined to fall under commercial activity, even though it is not specified in the POS. The Board can make those determinations specific to commercial use based on data and analysis it is given by DVC management. A progressive measured response could be applied to notify and encourage change, if DVC saw it as enough of an issue to proceed. I don't believe there was an internet e-bay style and internet posting boards that could be used for price fixing attempts available when the original POS document was drawn for OKW, if it was, it was certainly in it's infancy. I think you hit that point with the concept that because it is not spelled out, it could work both ways. I think your right, it could easily be made more difinitive if DVC determined a need.

Given that we are not aware of any communication to high volume prime week renters, may not mean it's not occurring, just that we have not had any news of it occuring. The only way we would know is if someone recieveing such a communication were to come forth and tell us, which is unlikely. It very well may not be big enough an issue for DVC to address at this point. But that would seem to fall more under the area of enforcement, instead of to they have the ability to more tightly control and address some of the fringe rental practices if they chose, through the board's endorcement to do so. I don't think any of this qualifies as a legal guarantee that the the types of rental practices and price hiking approaches described are untouchable and fully allowed. I should clarify, that is just my opinion, and is not related to the earlier discussion I had with a lawyer regarding this issue.