New $500 Resale DVC Transfer Fee

[Sandisw]

So due to ROFR there is no real way to avoid this with a new resale contract at this point.

Initially I didn't think much of it, but now I'm upset. This is a ridiculous and bogus punitive fee. Also, the amount. They went from $0-$500. That is substantial for something that should already be covered on the back end by dues through member services. Will this new revenue be used to better fund member services or maybe reduce dues? ... I already know the answer to these questions but I'm just venting.

I can definitely understand the frustration but dues cover the operating costs for the program.

DVCM does get a set fee to manage the program but while MA is under the umbrella, the task of transferring the deeds it different.

At one point, years ago, DVD didn’t even charge closing costs to buy direct…and now they do when selling contracts.

With resale, the title company gets the money via closing costs to handle it…so I can see why they decided to charge given the volume of resales they handle.

It’s definitely going to change the math.

 

[airjay75]

I’m just wondering how this is worked into the contract. Mine is in the ROFR process now. Doubt it’s going to close by then, so are we gonna have to adjust the contract? An addendum?

This could get a little tricky. I don't think resale purchase contracts address surprise fees imposed by Disney to transfer the contract. If you're already in ROFR, you'll presumably pass ROFR before 1/1/2026, so just depends on whether you can get it closed before 1/1/2026. Might be worth a call to the broker and title company sooner rather than later. If you pass ROFR well before 1/1/2026, I'd probably take the position that if the seller can't get their docs back in time to close, they're paying the $500. If ROFR doesn't come back with enough time, maybe you agree to split it 50/50 with the seller.

 

[Sandisw]

This could get a little tricky. I don't think resale purchase contracts address surprise fees imposed by Disney to transfer the contract. If you're already in ROFR, you'll presumably pass ROFR before 1/1/2026, so just depends on whether you can get it closed before 1/1/2026. Might be worth a call to the broker and title company sooner rather than later. If you pass ROFR well before 1/1/2026, I'd probably take the position that if the seller can't get their docs back in time to close, they're paying the $500. If ROFR doesn't come back with enough time, maybe you agree to split it 50/50 with the seller.

Legally, a seller has until closing to get them back. You can’t force a fee on them for something they have a legal right to.

It is possible that DVD will clarify and have this apply only to contracts dates 1/1/2026 and later.

IIRC. When they changed the resale restrictions, contracts that were already submitted to ROFR, even if not closed, were exempt.

Maybe @pkrieger2287 has insight?

 

[airjay75]

It’s definitely going to change the math.

Yeah. My mind immediately went to the following:

50-pt contract: $500/50=$10.00/point
100-pt contract: $500/100=$5.00/point
150-pt contract: $500/150=$3.33/point
200-pt contract: $500/200=$2.50/point

I think one could argue that correlates roughly to the premium small point contracts currently get over larger point contracts. Will be interesting to see if this has an effect on the higher price smaller point contracts tend to fetch on the resale market.

 

[pkrieger2287]

Legally, a seller has until closing to get them back. You can’t force a fee on them for something they have a legal right to.

It is possible that DVD will clarify and have this apply only to contracts dates 1/1/2026 and later.

IIRC. When they changed the resale restrictions, contracts that were already submitted to ROFR, even if not closed, were exempt.

Maybe @pkrieger2287 has insight?

Absorbing a lot of this in real time, but my understanding is that no notices have been provided on this to resale or title companies. Unfortunately at the moment there are just lots of questions and few answers... but this is very common in the timeshare industry. As others have stated, we're just going to have to wait and see the overall affect it has on value.

 

[pkrieger2287]

I just checked and no changes to the HRR document.

But, I can’t seem to find under the FAQ anything about rentals any longer.

Maybe I’m missing it? Or not looking in the correct place.

Link seems active still: https://disneyvacationclub.disney.go.com/faq/points/renting

 

[airjay75]

Another question. Is this $500 a change to the current $150 estoppel fee or an addition to that fee? I don't think I've ever heard about the $150 estoppel fee being negotiated in a resale purchase contract (although I'm sure it could be). If just an increase to the current $150 fee, not quite as bad of a hit to would be for resale buyers/sellers if it is an addition to the $150 estoppel fee.

 

[Sandisw]

Link seems active still: https://disneyvacationclub.disney.go.com/faq/points/renting

Thanks! And I was able to find it and where it was!

Yup, just me missing it!!! Lol

 

[Sandisw]

Another question. Is this $500 a change to the current $150 estoppel fee or an addition to that fee? I don't think I've ever heard about the $150 estoppel fee being negotiated in a resale purchase contract (although I'm sure it could be). If just an increase to the current $150 fee, not quite as bad of a hit to would be for resale buyers/sellers if it is an addition to the $150 estoppel fee.

The estoppel fee is charged to the seller. My guess is this is an additional charge

 

[Add-On-Itis]

Yeah. My mind immediately went to the following:

50-pt contract: $500/50=$10.00/point
100-pt contract: $500/100=$5.00/point
150-pt contract: $500/150=$3.33/point
200-pt contract: $500/200=$2.50/point

I think one could argue that correlates roughly to the premium small point contracts currently get over larger point contracts. Will be interesting to see if this has an effect on the higher price smaller point contracts tend to fetch on the resale market.

This is going to hurt the resale market, especially the smaller or lower-cost contracts!

 

[airjay75]

The estoppel fee is charged to the seller. My guess is this is an additional charge

That's what I was initially thinking, but I can't seem to find any reference to the estoppel fee on the DVC website. Another prominent broker, on their FB page, has said the estoppel/transfer fee used to be higher (I think they said $400?). So, maybe there is the potential this is replacing the $150 estoppel fee? I guess we will find out in the coming days.

 

[Girlstar30]

A lose for us all. Whether we buy or sell, no one is going to want to pay that. Glad im done buying resale. Won't stop people from buying or selling resale though, $500 is still better than an extra 10 grand.

Wonder what other creative way they'll come up with to devalue resale next. More money in their pockets, but a lot of resale people cannot just buy a bunch of direct because the gap is going to keep narrowing.

If all my resales were 30k plus I wouldnt be having all these and buying direct instead anyways. Pretty soon the amount of points to stay in anything other than a studio is going to be for ballers only

 

[atthebeachclub]

I prefer smaller contracts. This is off putting considering my direct purchase of three small contracts just closed this week. I still like them better as they give better flexibility, but this will definitely remove most of the premium (and you already pay a premium to buy small contracts).

 

[airjay75]

I prefer smaller contracts. This is off putting considering my direct purchase of three small contracts just closed this week. I still like them better as they give better flexibility, but this will definitely remove most of the premium (and you already pay a premium to buy small contracts).

Yeah, I’m not sure I’d have paid the $250/contract to break my direct points up as much as I did had I known about this fee, especially if it ends up being a seller imposed fee. I suppose smaller contracts will still be easier to sell simply because they are smaller and cost less, buy this seems like it will change the premium they currently fetch.

 

[PolyRob]

I suppose smaller contracts will still be easier to sell simply because they are smaller and cost less, buy this seems like it will change the premium they currently fetch.

That's my thought as well. It stinks, but smaller contracts are still cheaper for buyers.

 

[VGCgroupie]

Was just coming here to post this. This is not welcome news for buyers or sellers.

 

[Sandisw]

That's what I was initially thinking, but I can't seem to find any reference to the estoppel fee on the DVC website. Another prominent broker, on their FB page, has said the estoppel/transfer fee used to be higher (I think they said $400?). So, maybe there is the potential this is replacing the $150 estoppel fee? I guess we will find out in the coming days.

I remember when it was $75 and then went to $150.

I have never paid more than that as a seller. And I sold my first contract in 2010…and several other years along the way.

And, the cost is charged to the seller so it wouldn’t be in any documents for buyers, except maybe in the settlement of charges in the final closing documents.

When DVDs takes a contract back via ROFR, the seller doesn’t have to pay it.

So, IMO, this is a different fee because estoppel is the document sent to the title company verifying the financial aspect…dues and loan information.

This says it’s a fee to handle the transfer. I agree though we will find out more soon

 

[AstroBlasters]

Just wait until they have a closing lighting lane option for another $250

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

In the end, it doesn’t really matter if it defaults to buyers or sellers, small contracts are going to be about $5-20/pt less valuable than they were this year and larger contracts will be $1-5/pt less valuable (though that 1000 pt aulani contract only got devalued by $0.50/pt, lol!)— the current sales price reflects the total amount buyers are willing to pay for resale points and they aren’t going to magically start finding them $500 more valuable, especially on contracts less than 100 points.

Perhaps the market can absorb a couple dollars per point in hidden fees with less sophisticated buyers not accounting for it—but I am skeptical, especially in a market that wasn’t so strong lately to begin with.

Definitely kicking myself for not listing my VGF contract last month!

 

[mkatsy]

Whelp … there it is! The reason they cancelled the membership meeting. Can’t stomach the pitch fork and torches crowd … we all knew something unpleasant was coming.