Occupancy Thread

[Dean]

Originally posted by camlace
My goodness...if I knew people were going to get so worked up over a simple question I never would have asked. Sorry if it had been asked/answered before, but I did do a search and couldn't find an answer.

Thanks for all of the helpful responses...but I guess from now on I'll just refer to Member Services since obviously people here get frustrated answering a simple question from someone new to the DVC.

So until I'm a "veteran-DVCer" and I am welcome on the DVC board without insighting sarcasm and flame-throwing....
Have a wonderful day,
camlace

PS My sister was an invited guest on my vacation, so there is no need to throw flames at her either. Thank you!

Actually this was a pretty tame go round for this subject. But you did ask the question. I'm curious as to inviting someone on your trip you didn't know if you had a place for them to sleep. Were you thinking everyone would say it's OK to exceed the occupancy limits which are posted in your legal paperwork and you signed in your contract?

 

[chainkid]

While we don't advocate putting more than 12 adults in a grand villa, if the children are young one extra would definitely fit but you won't get an extra key. We usually bring an aero bed and put it in the laundry room at BWV . I've never had over 12 people but still use the aerobed and there is lots of room for more in the main living area. They inflate and deflate rapidly for quick out of the way storage.

 

[FLYNZ4]

Dean,

I generally agree with most of your posts... but I cannot see any reason why I should care how many people somone decides to squeeze into their unit.

I happen to like space... which is why we bought DVC in the first place. Judging others on whether someone wants to sleep on a floor (or wherever) seems petty to me.

/Jim

 

[Beca]

Originally posted by camlace
My goodness...if I knew people were going to get so worked up over a simple question I never would have asked. Sorry if it had been asked/answered before, but I did do a search and couldn't find an answer.

Thanks for all of the helpful responses...but I guess from now on I'll just refer to Member Services since obviously people here get frustrated answering a simple question from someone new to the DVC.

So until I'm a "veteran-DVCer" and I am welcome on the DVC board without insighting sarcasm and flame-throwing....
Have a wonderful day,
camlace

PS My sister was an invited guest on my vacation, so there is no need to throw flames at her either. Thank you!

Wow!! People on this board are amazingly nice and supportive, and I cannot find ONE posting that was anything other than nice and helpful. I HAVE seen people getting "flamed" on this board (rarely), and have been "flamed" myself on others...but, no one was "flaming" you on this thread. On the contrary, people have been very nice and helpful on a very touchy subject. I am sorry if you feel that some people have been less than helpful...that is one awful thing about emails...it is hard to read someone's tone. I suggest that if you feel offended by someone, that you give them the "benefit of the doubt" where their writing is concerned...IMO, all who responded to you were being kind and helpful...but, you have just "slammed" one of the nicest, and most helpful boards on the dis.



Beca

 

[ALostBoy]

sorry can't delete

 

[vernon]

Camlace, either you're increadably sensitive or you've not read the posts in the spirit in which they were intended.

If you've invited your sister then she's done nothing wrong ( although you may be better advised to think and inquire before offering invitations in future). Your comment of " Now my sister has decided to join us so we have a party of 5." led me to believe it was your sister's idea not yours or that she had perhaps changed her mind after you'd invited someone in her place. I'm sure there are many better ways for you to have phrased the comment so it would have been easier for those trying to help you to have the correct information. If you're going to be this touchy, you need to put a little more thought into how you phrase questions so you get relevent responses.

If you took my post to be an attack on her, although I can't see her being overly bothered as she'll never read it, that wasn't the intention ( particularly as she hadn't invited herself). It was a warning to you that many of the DVC owners have had similar problems in the past with relatives ignorant of what DVC involves, requires and costs. Bottom line, they often think them coming along is a zero cost to the owner ( even if the owner has to get a bigger unit) , the owner knows that is not the case but often doesn't say anything for fear of causing a scene. The situation carries on for a few years, the relative blindly believing nothing is wrong and the owners getting more and more annoyed until something gets said out of place and the whole true story comes out with both barrels. The relative feels guilty and upset that they have been accused of taking the **** and you get a massive ( and difficult to defuse) row over something that could have been sorted out with a quiet word at the beginning. It's a warning of problems others have faced in similar situations to yours. If it's not relevent then ignore it.

As previously said I don't think I or anyone else has flamed you, my own advice was an attempt to stop you from having a disaster of a vacation as I think if you go ahead you'll regret it. YOu have another 40 years + of vacations to WDW with DVC, I don't think you want to start with a trip that is packed full with potential disasters, but I have the feeling you know best, so best of luck, You'll need it.


Jim, in general I would say I tentatively agree with you. With one extra person I don't think it really makes a massive difference in the grand scheme of things as far as "wear and tear" on fixtures and fittings, extra costs on laundry (which we all have to pay) , space on busses, lack of pool space or other hotel services. But I think you are likely to agree there is a level at which if a significant number of the rooms are over occupied by 4,5 or 10 extra guests there is a time when the enjoyment of other guests (you or I) may be affected and there are financial issues alongside comfort. Disney has chosen to make the legal occupancy at those levels, IMHO with a view that there will at times be guests that exceed those guidelines. Set the limits at 4, when the resort can deal with 6 is sensible IMHO. If you set the limits at the resorts capacity (or close to it) when those limits are exceeded ( and they always will be) you are in a situation where people who have paid premium $ for a premium experience get less than they expected. That's bad for the guest, and it's bad for business.

I think you'll find that despite your initial doubts about occupancy levels ever being an issue to you, there are situations where it might be. There is a need for a line to be drawn somewhere, I'm happy that the line is at a position where minor infringements will not impinge on the experience of the members.

 

[FLYNZ4]

I can certainly envision the occasional times that I may need to exceed the occupancy limits of DVC, or any other condo that we own. I have never done that yet, and I have about 30 condo stays (mostly weekends) within the last year. However, if that becomes necessary, then I would exceed the occupancy without hesitation. I think the occupancy limits are fine as guidelines on the comfort level of a room.

I think there are probably more instances where there are fewer people in a room than instances where occupancy is exceeded. For example, my wife and are going to VWL this december and there will only be two of us in our 1BR unit. I do not expect a "wear and tear" or "transportation" credit on my bill because we are not using everything entitled to us with this reservation.

I am just somewhat amazed at the level of angst that people develop when someone asks about putting an extra person (or more) in a unit. To me... it is no different than when my kids invite a friend to sleep over at our house... and then roll a few sleeping bags on the floor. I think in the grand scheme of things... it is a VERY minor issue that people tend to blow out of proportion. At the same time... I am thankful that we are not spending our valuable vacation time packed like sardines.

/Jim

 

[vernon]

I do not expect a "wear and tear" or "transportation" credit on my bill because we are not using everything entitled to us with this reservation

Yes but Jim, Disney lay on a certain number of buses, have a certain restaurant capacity or towels round the pool because they can calculate the number of declared guests and lay on appropriate services for those guests. If you choose not to occupy your room to capacity then you are still paying your full share of the bill, but that is your choice not to fully utilise the facilities offered. Let's say for arguments sake the average occupancy is 3.3 people per 4 person accomodation. If large numbers of people start bringing extra guests so the average room occupancy goes up to 4.4 people per room your dues are going to be facing a 33% increase. I don't see why I should fund someone else's vacation when I operate within the guidelines I read, understood and legally signed to abide by ( the same as everyone should have done). Do you think there should be no limits at all on occupancy (even though for fire regs I believe there have to be) or do you just think that the line should be drawn at a different level? Personally I believe Disney wants DVC to be a "quality product" and feels that if they didn't put some sort of stipulations in the scheme it could rapidly become just a cheap and downmarket place to doss down. IMHO it's not in the members interest for that transition to take place.

Where ever you set the limits it's obvious that at times people are going to sneak in extra guests, but the resort was built for a certain capacity, it's pools were built in expectation of a certain number of guests. If too many guests exceed their guest numbers by too much then the pools would be over capacity, the buses packed and dues would be much higher.

To me... it is no different than when my kids invite a friend to sleep over at our house...

IMHO it's very different, that's your house 24/7/52 . DVC you are only owning a small part of that unit. Others share it with you and you all share in the total cost. Put it another way, how would you feel if the house next to yours was turned into a Frat house and the owners asked you and your neighbours to chip in on the bills for the taxes and utilities (and probably beer LOL). IMHO it would bring the whole concept into focus a little more sharply for you.

 

[Johnnie Fedora]

I believe the POS also makes known other resort "rules" like agreeing to shower before entering pools, etc. Most members bend the rules to some degree to suit themselves. If your family's comfort level is OK with one extra kid, I wouldn't worry about it. You can order an extra set of towels from mousekeeping for $6.

Have fun.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by FLYNZ4
Dean,

I generally agree with most of your posts... but I cannot see any reason why I should care how many people somone decides to squeeze into their unit.

I happen to like space... which is why we bought DVC in the first place. Judging others on whether someone wants to sleep on a floor (or wherever) seems petty to me.

/Jim

I think you somewhat misread the intent of my post, maybe I wasn't clear. First, I believe people should follow the rules and the rules are very clear from a legal and paperwork standpoint. And to that I DO care. But as we've discussed many times, unless DVC is willing to care and enforce the rules, that's where the problems lies and if they allow others to go over the occupancy limits, the beef would be with DVC and MS, not the member. Some would say this is a crime without a victim and that is hogwash. There are many POTENTIAL consequences to members and guests when people exceed the occupancy limits. But in part it depends on how many are over at a given time, not just a single unit. Examples would be extra people at the pool, restaurants, taking parking places; I could go on. Not to mention extra wear and tear on the units and the like. And the fact that there are other issues, like children, that also affect wear and tear, etc, means nothing to this discussion.

But my reason for posting wasn't really to tout the occupancy limits as much as the OP expectations. She apparently invited someone on a vacation there was no where for them to sleep and then is surprised when some people even question it. It's like driving 10 miles over the speed limit and then being surprised when you get a ticket.

To be clear though, I do think ALL rules should be followed, period, and it's up to DVC and MS to police them. If one doesn't follow the rules there should be consequences like being denied a room or charged a penalty. Many timeshares will kick you out in a moment if you're over the occupancy. In many cases they will not tolerate you being over the exchange occupancy even if the unit occupancy is more. For example many units exchange for 6 even though they will sleep 8 and many resorts will hold you to 6 if you exchange in and give you no latitude. One of the problems with DVC and WDW in general is that they are not consistent. I may get by with something with Disney's permission that you are prevented from doing.

 

[crisi]

Originally posted by vernon
Put it another way, how would you feel if the house next to yours was turned into a Frat house and the owners asked you and your neighbours to chip in on the bills for the taxes and utilities (and probably beer LOL). IMHO it would bring the whole concept into focus a little more sharply for you.

Vernon, do you guys have the concept of townhouses or condos with "association fees" over there? Its getting to be fairly common over here, even in single family dwellings, for a neighborhood association to be formed - it usually takes care of lawn care and other exterior maintence, taking care of a communal pool or a party room or both. You tend to be responsible for the interior care of your own unit.

Associations often encourage people to have good behavior of communal assets - often going as far as to fine people who don't. But you do have the "frat house" problem - a neighbor who takes negative care of their yard or the communal spaces, causing an increase in dues to all. And if the association wasn't set up to fine, there can be problems. The reason I ask is maybe some of us are more innured to this idea than others.

My own two cents is that DVC needs to get more diligent about charging back for anything that isn't normal "wear and tear." If you have a frat party in your room, chances are pretty good hotel security will have logged at least one report and may use that to go over the room a little closer than normal, looking for "extra" wear and tear they can apply to your membership. Same with room stuffing - it wouldn't go unnoticed by the hotel staff, and if they look a little harder after a room stuffer leaves than a retired couple without children - well, I wouldn't blame them.

To me, this would solve two of the major complaints on the board...."I don't want to pay for you smoking in my non-smoking room, having six people in your room, the additional wear and tear of whatever you do, etc." And the preceived "irresponsibility" of renters - if you might get charged for the damage renters do, professional landlords might decide it isn't worth it.

 

[TDC Nala]

If you've got 5 in a 1 BR at BCV, and the 5th person can't have a room key, wouldn't there be problems with ALL of the party accessing Stormalong Bay at the same time... not to mention the Early Entry if they happen to be checking keys.

Note this is not something I'm actually planning on doing.

 

[FLYNZ4]

I suppose that if you go to the front desk, tell them that you lost a key... they would give you a new one... I do not think getting an extra key would be the hardest thing to do if you wanted to push the system.

/Jim (who generally "under-occupies" condo reservations).

 

[crisi]

Hopefully, they'd cancel the first key, if they could figure out which one you lost. Especially with charging privledges. We lost on, and I had to bring the rest over so they could figure out which one to cancel.

But there isn't any need. They'll give you one extra key usually, no problem (the hotel I am familiar with, which was not DVC, gave two keys over the occupancy limit per room).

 

[jarestel]

Just a couple of points on the recent posts -
Using Dean's reference to getting a speeding ticket for exceeding the posted speed limit: Imagine a modern day Diogenes sallying forth in today's world armed not with a lamp, but with a radar gun. Diogenes stations himself next to the main highway in a generic "rule-follower's" home town. Question: Is Diogenes going to find anyone NOT exceeding the speed limit? I think not, most people exceed posted speed limits because it's convenient for them to do so. The point is, MOST of us pick and choose which rules we will follow and cheerfully disregard those we don't want to.

As I've said before, most of the people who admit to exceeding occupancy limits, ( and many won't admit it here for fear of being gang-flamed ), are only putting 1 extra young child in the room. We're not talking 10 spring-breakers in a studio. Most of us would have problems with this. So again, I say we should give families with young children a bit of a break in this particular situation, as Disney seems to be doing. What's the harm?

Also, regarding pool overcrowding due to the resort being over-subscribed - Even if the hotel was at recommended limits, if everyone decided to go to the pool at the same time, there would be a problem. This argument doesn't hold water, LOL!

Finally, we were at BCV a few weeks ago where we crammed ourselves and our 3 grandchildren into a 1-BR ( with the prior approval of MS ). We were issued 5 keys at the desk, no problems at all.

As with the "everyone hates studios" poll, I suspect this is an issue that a few people care passionately about, but the vast majority of members could care less if someone puts an extra kid into a studio.

Regards

 

[vernon]

Also, regarding pool overcrowding due to the resort being over-subscribed - Even if the hotel was at recommended limits, if everyone decided to go to the pool at the same time, there would be a problem. This argument doesn't hold water, LOL!

If the resort is at max capacity and the pool capacity is 30% of resort capacity it doesn't take a genius to work out that if the resort is at 140% capacity the pool capacity drops to 21% of resort capacity. In basic terms instead of the pool getting overcrowded if one guest in three decides to use it it gets overcrowded if one guest in 5 uses it. Hotels build their facilities working on percentages, if you allow the resort capacity to be exceeded, the facilities will struggle to supply the paying guests with the experience they are expecting.

Dean said

But my reason for posting wasn't really to tout the occupancy limits as much as the OP expectations. She apparently invited someone on a vacation there was no where for them to sleep and then is surprised when some people even question it.

Like Dean, my original reason for posting was more that I believed the poster of the most recent (added) thread to this discussion was running a major risk of spoiling their vacation.

As I said much earlier there is a big difference between bringing a 3rd child of a family where those children share a room to sleep and bringing a 5th adult to share with two couples.


Crisi, yes we have house associations and such here.

 

[jarestel]

Originally posted by vernon
If the resort is at max capacity and the pool capacity is 30% of resort capacity it doesn't take a genius to work out that if the resort is at 140% capacity the pool capacity drops to 21% of resort capacity.

I'm not a big numbers person, but it's highly unlikely, though I will grant you not statistically impossible, that each room would have the maximum number of occupants as well as a certain number of rooms being over-occupied. Thanks for running the numbers for that one specific scenario though.

Originally posted by vernon

Like Dean, my original reason for posting was more that I believed the poster of the most recent (added) thread to this discussion was running a major risk of spoiling their vacation.

As I said much earlier there is a big difference between bringing a 3rd child of a family where those children share a room to sleep and bringing a 5th adult to share with two couples.

We're in agreement here!

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by jarestel
Just a couple of points on the recent posts -
Using Dean's reference to getting a speeding ticket for exceeding the posted speed limit: Imagine a modern day Diogenes sallying forth in today's world armed not with a lamp, but with a radar gun. Diogenes stations himself next to the main highway in a generic "rule-follower's" home town. Question: Is Diogenes going to find anyone NOT exceeding the speed limit? I think not, most people exceed posted speed limits because it's convenient for them to do so. The point is, MOST of us pick and choose which rules we will follow and cheerfully disregard those we don't want to.

First, let me state what I've said many times, that I really don't care if someone puts an extra person in a studio o 1 BR as long as they behave themselves.

The real point was there are consequences when we disregard rules and as such, DVC should institute and enforce consequences to the rules or do away with them. Until or unless they do, they are the one we should argue with, not the member themselves when MS, DVC, the guides and the resorts themselves allow this to happen. As for the possibility of pool crowding if the resort is at capacity, that happens. The trouble with gross overstuffing the rooms is that the resort assumes a certain amount of non full rooms and a certain percentage of usage of the guests there. Even a few extra folks at the highest demand times will be a real problem whether it's the pool, parking or anything else. BTW, I don't buy any part of the argument that other "legal" things could cause the same problem as having any effect on these discussions. For example, kids in the room or smoking in a smoking optional room may increase wear and tear and therefore upkeep. It's still a "potential" problem that putting extra people in a unit increases upkeep.

 

[Zurg]

Disney Central Reservation once, years ago, put us into a studio at BWV, as cash paying guest, in excess of the occupancy limit of 4. They were well aware of how many of us there were and the ages of the kids as we were all in their system.

I guess even Mickey Mouse speeds now and then eh?

 

[Desperado]

Originally posted by FLYNZ4
Dean,

... I cannot see any reason why I should care how many people somone decides to squeeze into their unit.

I happen to like space... which is why we bought DVC in the first place. Judging others on whether someone wants to sleep on a floor (or wherever) seems petty to me.

/Jim

Families know what they need in terms of thier own accomodations and can work that out between themselves and MS.

If a considerate family of 5 stays in a non-smoking room prior to me, they won't cause me to have breathing problems and to be unable to sleep as a previous heavy smoker smoking in a non-smoking room can cause. The analogy between smoking and this posters question is like apples and poison ivy in my humble opinion.

When I was young and we vacationed, we slept in sleeping bags on the floor and loved it. Of course, I also walked and rode my bike over two miles to school, even in the snow. We didn't even have calculators to help us with math. We didn't have a microwave, we had black and white TV and I had to learn how to use a phone with a rotary dial on it.....