Lost DVC points

[Deb & Bill]

They did put themselves in a vulnerable position. When they didn’t cancel before 30 days, those points were no longer eligible for banking.

How does it matter who the rule was meant to protect? Can you explain to me how August points banked into 2020 because of the rule change are less damaging to the system than June points? I’d say the June points are less damaging because they expire sooner.

The second question is if April/June are the only ones who lose current UY points due to the closing, how will they be protected from any future impact caused by allowing other UY’s to bank? Or do you think April/June should pay twice?

The 30 days has nothing to do with banking. 30 days out with a cancellation, points go into Holding. DVC has waived holding for these cancellations. They couldn't be banked any more because they were less than four months out from the end of the UY. In the old days, banking was even harder as you moved through the UY since you could only bank a smaller percentage of your points as time went by. Then DVC changed the banking rule to allow any banking of points as long as you banked them before you were in the last four months of your UY. That is why long time members say it can be risky to book a stay in the last months of your UY. It used to be worse.

They also changed the rule about the minimum number of points you had to purchase for your first purchase direct. In the very beginning it was something like 210 points for a minimum first time purchase. When we bought in 1997, they had reduced it to 160 points (we bought 175). When you have to use banking and borrowing to get your trip, you put more points in jeopardy if you need to cancel.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

They did put themselves in a vulnerable position. When they didn’t cancel before 30 days, those points were no longer eligible for banking.

There was absolutely nothing they could have done. They didn't know the parks were all of a sudden going to close. That's a far cry from planning out your vacation at a minimum 4 months in advance knowing your travelling outside the banking window.

How does it matter who the rule was meant to protect? Can you explain to me how August points banked into 2020 because of the rule change are less damaging to the system than June points? I’d say the June points are less damaging because they expire sooner.

You are correct. All points use up the same inventory. But the difference again is that the holding account is designed to benefit Disney.

We agreed in our contracts that within 60 days of reservations, Disney can rent out open inventory to the general public for their own profit. The reason the 30 day holding account exists is to discourage members from booking up rooms that they don't intend on using within that period, so that Disney has more inventory to sell for their own benefit. Otherwise, their would be no reason for it.

Since Disney is not renting those rooms anyways to the general public, there is no reason to punish members.

While the whole circumstance is unfortunate for members who had to cancel at the end of their use year due to the closures, there is simply no other method that I personally can think of where the entire membership doesn't absorb the losses of a few.

The second question is if April/June are the only ones who lose current UY points due to the closing, how will they be protected from any future impact caused by allowing other UY’s to bank? Or do you think April/June should pay twice?

What you have to understand is that April and June use years weren't picked arbitrarily to lose their points to the benefit of the rest the membership. That's simply not what is happening.

The rule is, you are allowed to bank current use year points during the first 8 months of your use year. That is why travelling within the last 4 months of your use year is ALWAYS a risky proposition. If anything happens and you can't travel (not just Covid 19), your points will be stuck without the ability to bank. It just so happens that April and June use years were the only ones that fell within non banking window based on timing (because their are no May and July use years). People with August use years who didn't cancel and bank by last week have now fallen into that non banking window as well.

It's important to note that the rules they are following are the same rules they have always followed during periods of closures such as Hurricanes.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

That's not a rule. The two things they changed we're

2) allow owners who borrowed points to return points to their proper use year. Normally this is not allowed, but it does make sense. The inventory that those points belong to have not been lost.

All UYs points were returned without holding restrictions.

The rules have been consistently applied. April and June UY people are asking for a different rule...late banking...had they booked trip before that window closed, and this happened, they would have been eligible to bank points too

ETA. As of today, it’s now April,June and August who are beyond window. Once May hits, 4 of the 8 UYs will not be able to bank late if they wait to cancel .

I still can't figure out how you rationalize that putting borrowed points back did not hurt anything when we all know full well that there are already banked points sitting in next year that previously balanced those borrowed points. Now the borrowed points have all been put back and all those (previously) banked points are still There. That's the entire balance in the banking/borrowing concept.

That inventory most certainly has been lost. I suspect a lot of it is already booked with previously banked points, with many other banked points sitting out there ready to do the same thing at 7 month windows.

While it may suit the pitch you're selling to sell it that way, there is no way to rationalize how all those points from borrowers were singled out and let off the hook, when those of us losing our points were/are not being allowed to bank ours, albeit it at the end of our UYs.

This isn't first degree murder, but it is equal crimes. They broke the rules for one group completely while giving those of us with no choice (subject to losing our points at the end of our UYs) the full sentence, at least so far. You can argue to me that's fair until you're blue in the face, but you're not going to change the fact that one group was allowed to break the rules and the other wasn't.

 

[Deb & Bill]

Just looking a available inventory through the end of the year, there isn't much. January is always hard to book for the first half of the month. That gives these people with April UY points about two and a half months to use those points a third time. Lots of people don't want to go in Jan or Feb and then you are running into March and Spring Break again. So do they ask for yet another year to use their points?

 

[CanadaDisney05]

I still can't figure out how you rationalize that putting borrowed points back did not hurt anything when we all know full well that there are already banked points sitting in next year that previously balanced those borrowed points. Now the borrowed points have all been put back and all those (previously) banked points are still There. That's the entire balance in the banking/borrowing concept.

That inventory most certainly has been lost. I suspect a lot of it is already booked with previously banked points, with many other banked points sitting out there ready to do the same thing at 7 month windows.

While it may suit the pitch you're selling to sell it that way, there is no way to rationalize how all those points from borrowers were singled out and let off the hook, when those of us losing our points were/are not being allowed to bank ours, albeit it at the end of our UYs.

This isn't first degree murder, but it is equal crimes. They broke the rules for one group completely while giving those of us with no choice (subject to losing our points at the end of our UYs) the full sentence, at least so far. You can argue to me that's fair until you're blue in the face, but you're not going to change the fact that one group was allowed to break the rules and the other wasn't.

Your not wrong about allowing those with borrowed points to return to the original Use Year being just as detrimental to the system. Those who borrowed points were taking the same risk as those travelling in the final 4 months of their Use Year, and those travelling on banked points.

I guess it's just my own personal perspective on the difference between the scenarios.

1) banked points should not be allowed to be banked a second time. The inventory associated with those points has expired.

2) current year points used for travel in the last 4 months of the use year I have less of a problem with being allowed to bank. The inventory associated with those points was taken away from the membership at nobody,'s fault. However, members were taking a risk by travelling in the last 4 months of their use year so I am also okay with them not allowing these to be banked too.

3) borrowed points I have an even less of a problem with them allowing them to be returned to original use year. The inventory associated with these points hasn't happened yet. However the members who did borrow did take the risk by borrowing them knowing that they couldn't be re banked if the trip had to be cancelled. I guess I'm indifferent on this scenario.

4) current use year points that are still in the banking window. In order to protect next year's inventory, they could suspend banking, however I think that is opening Pandora's box, and I'd only like to see them do that if this turns into an extreme scenario. I don't think this is off the table though.

 

[Dole_whip_doll]

I understand the frustration. I've also had a month to accept that we are vulnerable to losses right now and we cannot all shift the burden outward. We'll all need to absorb some of it unfortunately.

I've had a school trip for DS17 to UK/Scotland for 4 years now and invested $5k. Week by week this month I've had to swallow the reality we may not only be out the trip, we may be out the money. It stinks. 4 months ago I would've been outraged at the thought. Now I'm accepting that everybody is taking a hit and we're no different. Sometimes life squeezes lemons in your eye. Day by day, year by year it stings less.

Was your trip through a student tour group? We were actually ON a student tour group trip when all this broke out. Our school admin MADE us come home early, missed our last park day and both admin and travel company said sorry no refunds. Travel company also said they had a school tour group scheduled to arrive the day we were leaving and that group had cancelled and wouldn’t be getting a refund.

Not sure how all that works. I’m personally miffed that someone should be refunding me $100-ish for that park ticket. If it was a $20 six flags, i probably wouldn’t be but $100 is a good chunk of money, even more so now. I can’t even imagine what a “Karen” I would become over my $1500 trip not being refunded.

 

[10CJ]

They did put themselves in a vulnerable position. When they didn’t cancel before 30 days, those points were no longer eligible for banking.

Do you realize how much is changing over 30 days right now? That is an eternity in the current climate.

 

[Sandisw]

They did put themselves in a vulnerable position. When they didn’t cancel before 30 days, those points were no longer eligible for banking.

How does it matter who the rule was meant to protect? Can you explain to me how August points banked into 2020 because of the rule change are less damaging to the system than June points? I’d say the June points are less damaging because they expire sooner.

The second question is if April/June are the only ones who lose current UY points due to the closing, how will they be protected from any future impact caused by allowing other UY’s to bank? Or do you think April/June should pay twice?

The point is that no one canceled the reservation, the resort closed so they decided that everyone would get their points back into the account without holding. They had the ability to make the decision and they did.


Once points were back, they made the decision to put borrowed points back. Why? We don’t really know but given they are attached to future inventory and not past, it would appear it helps to spread points out. Could it do further damage? Sure. Could they have decided that borrowed points were only there because ld that specific reservation? Maybe, We don’t know, but it’s their job to decide how to minimize this...and they decided this step was necessary,

Sorry, but April UY owners who decide or use their points within weeks of their expiration put those points at high risk of loss. of course, this isn't their fault, but when you decide to use something knowing they are only good for 2 more weeks, you are choosing that risk, June UY isn’t quite as risky, because there was still 2 months left to use if something happened, but still, anyone who travels outside banking window should know it’s risky.

Think of it this way,,,you and I both have a gift card. Your card expired (past banking window) and mine did not, Store closes. I get reimbursed because mine was still good when they closed,..you did not because your card was expired, even though both of us had not used it. Same effect...can’t use...different response because different starting point.

So, we are left with a decision that banking rules are being kept in place. Remember, like it or not, they have decided that, right now, those specific rules needs to stay in place for long term impact,

Could it change? Maybe. Do I think it will? No. Do I think that more restrictions could happen? Sure,

What you are stuck on is owners, and not points. Points are dealt with first and second is to impact as few owners as possible.

 

[Lewisc]

This isn't first degree murder, but it is equal crimes. They broke the rules for one group completely while giving those of us with no choice (subject to losing our points at the end of our UYs) the full sentence, at least so far. You can argue to me that's fair until you're blue in the face, but you're not going to change the fact that one group was allowed to break the rules and the other wasn't.

Equal to first degree murder. Sorry I don't agree.
DVC is basically voiding the reservation. Since the reservation was voided borrowed points were returned as if they were never borrowed. Voiding the rental didn't change the expiration date, or banking deadline, of your UY points.

 

[Sandisw]

I still can't figure out how you rationalize that putting borrowed points back did not hurt anything when we all know full well that there are already banked points sitting in next year that previously balanced those borrowed points. Now the borrowed points have all been put back and all those (previously) banked points are still There. That's the entire balance in the banking/borrowing concept.

That inventory most certainly has been lost. I suspect a lot of it is already booked with previously banked points, with many other banked points sitting out there ready to do the same thing at 7 month windows.

While it may suit the pitch you're selling to sell it that way, there is no way to rationalize how all those points from borrowers were singled out and let off the hook, when those of us losing our points were/are not being allowed to bank ours, albeit it at the end of our UYs.

This isn't first degree murder, but it is equal crimes. They broke the rules for one group completely while giving those of us with no choice (subject to losing our points at the end of our UYs) the full sentence, at least so far. You can argue to me that's fair until you're blue in the face, but you're not going to change the fact that one group was allowed to break the rules and the other wasn't.

And the point you are missing is that losing 10 weeks of inventory is going to cause a ripple effect no matter what is done.

You are trying to use normal banking and balancing patterns to all,y and it just doesn’t. I agree that changing NO rules would make those Who are beyond banking window feel it would have been fairer to those with borrowed points would feel the pain Too.

But, anyone who traveled outside their banking window started out at a disadvantage for your situation,

Yes, they could have changed nothing. And what would that have done. Simply kept all those points clustered in a shorter period time. Tell me now that would have helped this situation vs what they did?

The difference that some are missing is borrowing can only happen when you choose very specific dates and they may have felt that those points would not have been there had that specific trip not occurred. Your points would have been unbankable for a 4 month period already.

Again, we don’t have to like the decision or agree with it, but they had to try to take more points and move them to free up more short term inventory. They chose the borrowed points.

Once it is done, they may have realized it was too many and guess what, they will adjust again. One choice, though, does absolutely nothing to change that points beyond banking window are a different type of point and they Decided not to treat them the same way.

Some of us never travel at the end of our UY for this exact reason

Those of us who may rationalize are not saying that this move couldn’t have an impact. We are just saying we can see why DVCM choose the borrowed point rule to suspend vs, the late banking one. .

DVCM could have done nothing that might help. They chose, at least, to try, which is their responsibility.

 

[dsnymnkyuncle]

I really like and respect your post. If the years of DVC have proven anything to me it is that Disney/DVC do 'bend' rules and act to fix issues that come up whether it is 'required' or not. In fact I would say they go more than 50% of the way. That said they are a business. And while I totally agree with you it is helpful to remember that when an issue that effects so many people and so much money comes up the threat of a class action comes up. And more than the actual issue being litigated is the discovery and the internal information that could come to light. I have asked but never received information on how resorts bill the bus service between cash and members. I wonder how food profits are divided? Do they track actual guest spending by cash/member? Or do they estimate? The same for operating costs. Does the fact last minutes guests spend more for a room with additional profit for Disney get tied to the fact that disney has created an easy access to room that are never really vacant because there is the underlying points left to take if the room is not cashed out? Of if they cash out and double dip by getting points off the inventory? It is entirely possible the association had no say in closing but it was required by Disney. Would that impact the issues being reported by members with timeshare companies?

Really great explanation!!

 

[Grumpy by Birth]

Since the reservation was voided borrowed points were returned as if they were never borrowed. Voiding the rental didn't change the expiration date, or banking deadline, of your UY points.

I think this is an important point. Since you can only borrow points to make a reservation, you would never have borrowed those points to make a reservation if the resort was closed.

Currently, you can't borrow points to make a reservation for May 1st. The resort isn't open, so you can't make a reservation, so you can't borrow points to make that reservation.

DVC has decided to put borrowed points back because they wouldn't have been borrowed in the first place except to make the reservation that they had to cancel on you (and the arguments about future vs. past inventory likely play a key role in that decision as well).

 

[CanadaDisney05]

I think this is an important point. Since you can only borrow points to make a reservation, you would never have borrowed those points to make a reservation if the resort was closed.

Currently, you can't borrow points to make a reservation for May 1st. The resort isn't open, so you can't make a reservation, so you can't borrow points to make that reservation.

DVC has decided to put borrowed points back because they wouldn't have been borrowed in the first place except to make the reservation that they had to cancel on you (and the arguments about future vs. past inventory likely play a key role in that decision as well).

This is a really good point that I hadn't considered.

If the resorts closure would have been announced ahead of time, it would technically be impossible for those points to have been borrowed.

Had the resort been closed ahead of time, you can argue that people would have banked their points earlier, but that is a major assumption.

 

[Grumpy by Birth]

Had the resort been closed ahead of time, you can argue that people would have banked their points earlier, but that is a major assumption.

Perhaps. And maybe in the end, they will allow those who missed their banking deadline because they had a reservation and that was "the only reason they didn't bank." However, since that reservation was for a date AFTER their banking deadline, the counter-argument DVC is likely to make would be that traveling after your banking deadline always assume risk of losing your points.

For some, this means they could still use those points for a re-scheduled trip before they expire. Now, if Disney remains closed and those points CAN'T be used, perhaps they will revisit that decision.

For those who were traveling on points that were about to expire (i.e., not just past their banking deadline, but literally about to expire and, thus, expired before the resorts could possibly open up), I'm afraid that DVC is not likely to make concessions for this circumstance. They are more likely to cite that traveling on points past banking deadline/points about to expire assumes risk.


ETA: I just thought of one possible alternative (may not be feasible... I admittedly have not tried to do any analysis of the numbers to determine that):

What if they allowed those who lost points during the closure because of missing their banking deadline to have those points banked to their next UY.... BUT they go into holding status. This would mean they can only be used for reservations that are still available at 60 days from check-in.

Perhaps that could offset the availability/inventory concern? If a reservation is still available that late, then others have had ample opportunity to book those nights. If they didn't, that could be considered "on them." So, allowing those who lost points during the shutdown to book those nights could be considered an acceptable option.

Granted, those who lost points because of missing banking deadlines might not consider this much of a compensation if there's no availability and they still lose their points at the end of the next UY. But at least there was a CHANCE they could get some relief from the situation "subject to availability." And it seems to me, that would be better than nothing.

 

[Sandisw]

This is a really good point that I hadn't considered.

If the resorts closure would have been announced ahead of time, it would technically be impossible for those points to have been borrowed.

Had the resort been closed ahead of time, you can argue that people would have banked their points earlier, but that is a major assumption.

It may be an assumption, but you are right, if they had said, all resorts are closed in March, an owner would not have borrowed points in their account.

If an owners with April and June UYs had been told of a March closing, they still could have booked points in February, and be in the same position.

So, really, a March closing and beyond didn’t have any effect on the ability to bank or not bank those points. The owner made the choice to give up banking rights when they booked during a time they KNEW those points couldn’t be banked.

 

[Sandisw]

Perhaps. And maybe in the end, they will allow those who missed their banking deadline because they had a reservation and that was "the only reason they didn't bank." However, since that reservation was for a date AFTER their banking deadline, the counter-argument DVC is likely to make would be that traveling after your banking deadline always assume risk of losing your points.

For some, this means they could still use those points for a re-scheduled trip before they expire. Now, if Disney remains closed and those points CAN'T be used, perhaps they will revisit that decision.

For those who were traveling on points that were about to expire (i.e., not just past their banking deadline, but literally about to expire and, thus, expired before the resorts could possibly open up), I'm afraid that DVC is not likely to make concessions for this circumstance. They are more likely to cite that traveling on points past banking deadline/points about to expire assumes risk.


ETA: I just thought of one possible alternative (may not be feasible... I admittedly have not tried to do any analysis of the numbers to determine that):

What if they allowed those who lost points during the closure because of missing their banking deadline to have those points banked to their next UY.... BUT they go into holding status. This would mean they can only be used for reservations that are still available at 60 days from check-in.

Perhaps that could offset the availability/inventory concern? If a reservation is still available that late, then others have had ample opportunity to book those nights. If they didn't, that could be considered "on them." So, allowing those who lost points during the shutdown to book those nights could be considered an acceptable option.

Granted, those who lost points because of missing banking deadlines might not consider this much of a compensation if there's no availability and they still lose their points at the end of the next UY. But at least there was a CHANCE they could get some relief from the situation "subject to availability." And it seems to me, that would be better than nothing.

Another option...not sure if they can...could be to decide for all members to receive the number of days that they lost use to apply from opening date,

So, April UY lost about 15 days of use. June UY lost about 10 weeks worth of us,,,assume June 1st opening.

That would mean April UY can book trips from June 1st to June 15th...and June UY from June 1st to about mid August,

Or, in order to give at least some time from decision, they are given a start date...ie: July 1st to get back the use,

If there is no availability, or it’s not a good travel time, that would be unfortunate, but all other owners using up points, would be in the same boat.

 

[10CJ]

So, really, a March closing and beyond didn’t have any effect on the ability to bank or not bank those points. The owner made the choice to give up banking rights when they booked during a time they KNEW those points couldn’t be banked.

I feel like this is oversimplifying it. We travelled for a Thanksgiving last year. This is after our banking deadline. We knew it was a risk. However there were several potential solutions if we were unable to attend. We could have attempted to keep the reservation and rent it out to someone else. This is obviously not an option for anyone right now.

We are now looking at booking for Nov this year since our April trip was cancelled. If they are not open by then or have to close again, then what?

 

[nagshead]

I feel like this is oversimplifying it. We travelled for a Thanksgiving last year. This is after our banking deadline. We knew it was a risk. However there were several potential solutions if we were unable to attend. We could have attempted to keep the reservation and rent it out to someone else. This is obviously not an option for anyone right now.

We are now looking at booking for Nov this year since our April trip was cancelled. If they are not open by then or have to close again, then what?

this is a great point!

 

[CanadaDisney05]

I feel like this is oversimplifying it. We travelled for a Thanksgiving last year. This is after our banking deadline. We knew it was a risk. However there were several potential solutions if we were unable to attend. We could have attempted to keep the reservation and rent it out to someone else. This is obviously not an option for anyone right now.

We are now looking at booking for Nov this year since our April trip was cancelled. If they are not open by then or have to close again, then what?

But what is the solution that isn't simply, "Hey Disney, give me free stuff!"?

Remember, as DVC owners, we own the property, not Disney. The resorts being closed is not Disney's fault or responsibility. It's not their resort to choose what do do with it. It's ours. The resort closed because the government told us that we have to close it

 

[Sandisw]

I feel like this is oversimplifying it. We travelled for a Thanksgiving last year. This is after our banking deadline. We knew it was a risk. However there were several potential solutions if we were unable to attend. We could have attempted to keep the reservation and rent it out to someone else. This is obviously not an option for anyone right now.

We are now looking at booking for Nov this year since our April trip was cancelled. If they are not open by then or have to close again, then what?

It is a frustrating situation for sure, but, booking after a banking window, especially now, is even more risky than before.

As you say, there may not be the solutions in the past. What does that mean?

If I was in your position, I wouldn’t book a trip for November and risk points being lost, when we know that banking rules are not being changed.

I think that what this situation has brought to light is that when deciding when to use points, one needs to plan for forces out of ones control that could cause a cancellation and what the options would be if that happened,

It could mean more owners will be forced to travel early in the UY to ensure they have protected the points as best they can,