Lawsuit

[Dean]

So just to understand, in the POS it doesn't state that DVC members have access to other resorts around the world that could be used for points ?

There are 2 POS, one for the home resort which is contractual and one for the club called the Multi Site POS. DVD/DVC can pretty much change anything they want going from one resort to another. There are limitations on what they can do for a club resort (other DVC resorts) but it's possible for a given resort to cease to be a club resort. There are NO contractual listings for anything else and a lot of disclaimers that suggest anything else available can be taken away without notice.

 

[EWL]

OK, as someone currently awaiting ROFR to become an AKV owner, I am wondering what "POS" stands for (because I KNOW that it's not what first comes to mind!! ) and when I will get to review it-- at/before closing?

And I am puzzled by this comment:

...but I trusted the Disney name, only to find I was ripped off anyway!

Ripped off how? Have you not been able to use your points for DVC reservations?

 

[DVCconvert]

I am wondering what "POS" stands for (because I KNOW that it's not what first comes to mind!! )

Public Offering Statement.
These are available for viewing at the relevant land records offices on line.

 

[drusba]

Original purchasers from Disney get a contract and two thick volumes called "Public Offering Statements" (POS) which govern the resorts and spell out rights, obligations of both parties and what Disney has the discretion to do. Things like the Disney Collection are not even mentioned in those documents because they are essentially percs that Disney can give and take away at will and what you do get at time of purchase are written statements that tell you just that about percs.

 

[chainkid]

I don't see a legal ground for a suit but it doesn't surprise me that another fool is parted from his money to retain a lawyer who probably knows this will be futile. Don't feel sorry for the fool though because ignorance of his contract is not grounds for a suit and if he needs to lose good money to learn to read a contract than it is money well spent for an education

 

[doconeill]

Remember, there is a difference between contractual rights and perks. Perks can be changed at any time.

I've learned to think of it this way.

I own at one particular resort. I only have rights to that resort.

Currently, my resort is a member of the Disney Vacation Club. Like any other "trading" system like RCI or II, I can trade my points for the equivalent at another DVC resort. They just make it easier by using the same valued point system. They can stop it if they want.

My resort, through DVC, can also trade out into other Disney properties. But the value of that changes yearly as the agreements get renegotiated. They can eventually go away as well. For resales going forward, they already have.

My resort, through DVC, can also trade out into RCI. That can change and it has, as it was previously II, and before that it was RCI...and they could opt to not allow trade-ins or -outs.

 

[Anewman]

The way he sees it is that this is in breach of a contract if the value of the points go down because the value of the points should not change no matter who owns the points.

You sure he is a lawyer?

I cant find where the contract states that value will not change, or that all perks will exist forever and transfer to subsequent owners?

 

[yitbos96bb]

I really doubt anyone will be filing a lawsuit over the recent changes. IMO, it would just be a waste of money and thus virtually impossible to find a competent attorney to take the case.

The perks that were removed were never guaranteed by contract. Neither were there any contractual representations regarding resale value.

There hasn't been any breach of contract. I fear your friend either did not carefully read the POS and the other purchase documents, or did not completely understand them.

Nor understands depreciation or what constitutes breech of contract.

 

[JimMIA]

The way he sees it is that this is in breach of a contract if the value of the points go down because the value of the points should not change no matter who owns the points.

That's naive to the point of being delusional. He should never have bought a timeshare...or probably a car, a house, stocks and bonds...anything.

Your friend lives in a dream world.

 

[ewebet]

I am not a lawyer but have learned that winning the lawsuit is not always the goal. If a lawyer or law firm found a court to hear the case, it's possible to keep Disney tied up in litigation for years costing tons of time, money and bad publicity. If it lasted long enough Disney would be forced to settle.

What would that do for us DVC owners? Nothing the already overpriced gifts, food, and admissions would surely go up even more.

I don't believe lawsuit is the answer. However going public with DVC owner dissatisfaction would surely get Disney's attention. I have never bought into a time share before. I believe they are all rip-offs, but I trusted the Disney name, only to find I was ripped off anyway!

I have referred 3 friends into buying into DVC and now greatly regret it. I will now unfortunately advise people against the purchase.

How were you ripped off? I feel really bad about that! We just made it through ROFR and are waiting to sign the closing documents.

 

[JimMIA]

How were you ripped off? I feel really bad about that! We just made it through ROFR and are waiting to sign the closing documents.

Don't pay any attention to blanket statements like that. Most "I was ripped-off" situations are self-inflicted - either by the buyer not understanding what they were buying or having unrealistic expectations.

DVC is a great timeshare for vacations at DVC resorts. It will deliver what it promises to deliver, and if your expectations are rational, you will not be disappointed.

 

[TisBit]

You sure he is a lawyer?

I cant find where the contract states that value will not change, or that all perks will exist forever and transfer to subsequent owners?

Actually, with his comprehension of the contract I can bet he IS a lawyer.

 

[jarestel]

Every time any change is made to existing DVC procedures, you can count on some disappointed member(s) to bring up the topic of lawsuits. For all of the changes, I don't recall any actual lawsuits though.

Talk is cheap, and it's what we do here. Given that, I'd not assign much weight or credence to the lawsuit chatter. But it does liven up the the threads once in a while!

 

[DeeCee735]

Can the home resort be booked? If the answer is yes, your friend got exactly what he paid for. Resistance is futile Time to think about getting over it.

 

[sean-1966]

Life is too short. I can go to WDW, I can go to Vero Beach, I can go to Hilton Head. That's pretty much all I care about at this point. Not even that interested in HH, never been there. I'm happy with that.

 

[floatinourboat]

Maybe I am just being naive, but we have never regretted our purchase in DVC. We have use our points in a manner that had we not bought into the DVC we would have spent nearly twice what we spent on the points even with the association fees. We have traded through interval a couple times for weekend trips to the windy city. Again, I would have had to pay cash for those accommodations but the DVC provided us with real value.

 

[bakenatj]

I am not a lawyer but have learned that winning the lawsuit is not always the goal. If a lawyer or law firm found a court to hear the case, it's possible to keep Disney tied up in litigation for years costing tons of time, money and bad publicity. If it lasted long enough Disney would be forced to settle.

What would that do for us DVC owners? Nothing the already overpriced gifts, food, and admissions would surely go up even more.

I don't believe lawsuit is the answer. However going public with DVC owner dissatisfaction would surely get Disney's attention. I have never bought into a time share before. I believe they are all rip-offs, but I trusted the Disney name, only to find I was ripped off anyway!

I have referred 3 friends into buying into DVC and now greatly regret it. I will now unfortunately advise people against the purchase.

Exactly how were you "ripped off"? If you purchased thinking this was an monetary investment your thinking was way off. What you purchased was a guarantee to stay at your home resort till when ever your contract expires. It doesn't take Warren Buffet to figure out that Timeshares as a whole aren't good investments, they are horrible investments. You purchase because you want to vacation someplace for the long haul. That's pretty much what you are investing in is a long term, cheaper rate to stay at a place you picked. Don't see how Disney is ripping you off.

 

[Greysword]

I am kind of curious what the actual issues are for Tdisney, the friend, and especially bmtta2003. Please list them, so we can understand and maybe help shed some light on the issues.

As for Tdisney's friend, I think the product purchased is exactly the same (and even better, if he/she bought way back in the day). I also think Disney tries to help with the depreciating market, but they can only buy so many contracts and stay solvent. I would guess the number of foreclosures over the past 2-3 years hit them hard and created an excess of points, which likely hampered the number they could buy using ROFR.

On a side note, these sorts of statements make me sad that we have definitely devolved into a entitlement society. If someone feels personally wronged, they immediately go for the litigation button, even before getting the whole story. Who cares if such an act would cause everyone else to be injured (potential devaluation of DVC from bad press, DVC legal fees paid from our dues, and other unforeseen costs) .

If you have a legitimate grievance, then the community is likely to back you up. If it is frivolous (such as a member who is perfectly happy with their membership and even wants to own at a different resort, but immediately threatens to sue and attempts to tarnish the club's reputation when they discover their points may sell for less than they initially paid decades ago), then it is likely to only hurt the community as a whole.

 

[brack]

Talk is cheap, and it's what we do here. Given that, I'd not assign much weight or credence to the lawsuit chatter. But it does liven up the the threads once in a while!

 

[bmtta2003]

I am kind of curious what the actual issues are for Tdisney, the friend, and especially bmtta2003. Please list them, so we can understand and maybe help shed some light on the issues.

As for Tdisney's friend, I think the product purchased is exactly the same (and even better, if he/she bought way back in the day). I also think Disney tries to help with the depreciating market, but they can only buy so many contracts and stay solvent. I would guess the number of foreclosures over the past 2-3 years hit them hard and created an excess of points, which likely hampered the number they could buy using ROFR.

On a side note, these sorts of statements make me sad that we have definitely devolved into a entitlement society. If someone feels personally wronged, they immediately go for the litigation button, even before getting the whole story. Who cares if such an act would cause everyone else to be injured (potential devaluation of DVC from bad press, DVC legal fees paid from our dues, and other unforeseen costs) .

If you have a legitimate grievance, then the community is likely to back you up. If it is frivolous (such as a member who is perfectly happy with their membership and even wants to own at a different resort, but immediately threatens to sue and attempts to tarnish the club's reputation when they discover their points may sell for less than they initially paid decades ago), then it is likely to only hurt the community as a whole.

I do not understand what you do not understand. I am not asking Disney to ensure my real estate membership never loses value. As the contract matures it will naturally depreciate. If Disney wants to change the perks of membership that is also within their rights. What I don't like is their two tiered sytem. If they took perks away from all memberships that is fair and equitable, we all ,including Disney lose the same perks. By only removing perks from the re-sale market they have made an un-fair market, that has de-valued every member that wishes to sell. You either now have to take what Disney gives you or take a greatly reduced price on the secondary market.

Why greatly reduced? Because it no longer has all the benefits of a direct purchase. If you were a new buyer would you buy a membership with more perks or less.

Maybe members who have never thought about selling don't understand all this, or maybe just don't care. It only affects you if you decide to sell. I hope I have explained my position and represented my position well. Now I have to go apologize for one of my previous posts.