If this is indeed accurate, perhaps standardizing with the time share industry may be the reason these guidelines were listed in our documents, all the while DVC guides and MS knowing that 5 in a one bedroom was just fine with them. For example, there are clauses in the Vero documents that talk about selling the Vero resort. Just because it's written in the documentation that way doesn't mean that Vero will definitely be sold. While its a possibility, it is not a steadfast fact that it will absolutely be sold. There are several "last resort", "lets make sure we are covered just in case" type clauses in the documents. I don't think DVC ever had any intention to strickly adhearing and restricting members to 4 in a one bedroom, and guides have always been aware of the leeway, and willing to communicate to their clients about it. We see the same type of leeway given to commercial use with for-profit rental practices. Whether I agree or not with the level of enforcement of these practices, DVC gives those members with high volume rentals leeway, (although language surrounding this is much fuzzier). A service excellence approach provides for a degree of leeway, not strict adherance to steadfast conservative CYB policies. Strict adherance to steadfast conservative CYB policies in todays service economy is a recipe for failure.
I'd agree there are just in case scenarios but I can't see the occupancy issue as one. It's written into the contract AND into the product understanding checklist. While DVC has thus far chosen to bend a little, if it's abuse, this will change. So ultimately, this will be on the members in all likely hood.
Well, we dissagree on this. And, we are reading where new MS unofficial guidelines are being stated about 5 being OK in a one bedroom. Seems very reasonable to me.
There is no evidence of this to date. Abuse of any of the aspects could result in change, not just occupancy issues including for profit rental practices or other abuses. It doesn't seem like a few families with 3 children will really cause that much problem.
Obviously, DVC doesn't ask us to sign such a checkin contract. Just because others are extremely rigid doesn' mean DVC ever intended to be extremely rigid about this, expecially given the numerous statements we have learned about from Guides, especially a guide with the expertise and competency of Judy Kaufman.
In case others have missed Brent's earlier post in this thread, he has confirmed the "five adult rule".
Does it matter? I think most DVC members still don't understand that what a timeshare sales person says doesn't mean a hill of beans. If it's not written, it's not enforceable. I'd assume they didn't. I'd love for each and every member of this board to go to at least one HIGH pressure timeshare sales pitch then find out the real rules and issues, it would give them a whole new perspective on this topic.
Of course it varies with the timeshare company and the salesman and the answers are all over the place. It suffices to say that a certain percentages FLAT OUT LIE TO YOU intentionally. I've seen it myself on a number of occasions. While DVC guides usually try to be accurate, they are not always. Sometimes it's an honest misunderstanding but occasionally one is OVERZEALOUS so to speak. Actually to change it would require a vote of the membership as this is one of those issues that could materially affect the members.
Actually the rules are quite specific and there is no rule that says a child under 3.
Actually to change it would require a vote of the membership as this is one of those issues that could materially affect the members. But DVC members should know that just because some one answered an email or a timeshare sales person said something, does not make it accurate or "legal". I'll believe it's a new rule when I see it in writing on the website, VM or other official paperwork. Until then it's simply just another case of Disney inconsistency.
I'd have to agree with you. Some staunch supporters of strict contract interpretation do so because it has no impact on thier family or size of unit. We have 3 small boys, and a one bedroom suits us just fine. If we did get a second bedroom, we wouln't use it, we'd have to close it off unused.
Naaahhh........ we agreed to have the DVC management company and Board govern those decisions as a part of the documents we signed. People can get excessively demanding about many things and behaviors they wish others to display, that doesn't make them right, or mean that the Board has to direct the DVC management to enforce them. As I said previously, there are many, many cover your behind clauses in the contract. Certainly DVC never had any intention of exercising every one of them. It is really not reasonble to make that assumption. MS decides as we pay them to do.
