Priority Booking - Owners vs Rented Points

[CarolynFH]

Article for this?

What if I booked 5 rooms for all of my family? Something has to be more to this story than a couple bookings from someone.

And I would think having the opportunity to rent points to others would be somewhat of a "selling point" (maybe not the exact words I'm looking for) for owners. Knowing you can rent your points if for some reason you can't use them, is a benefit, IMHO. I would hesitate to buy any timeshare, points or otherwise, if I were not able to rent them out - not necessarily for profit, but to at least break even.

Here is one of the threads on TUG that addresses the issue: https://tugbbs.com/forums/threads/moved-wyndham-commercial-letter.345749/. One of the frequent complaints is that the option to rent when not able to use it themselves was a selling point often stated by the Wyndham sales personnel. BTW Wyndham has never even vaguely defined “commercial use” - at least DVC issued that letter years ago that states 20+ guest reservations will trigger an investigation - and some Wyndham owners have reported on TUG that they’ve received letters or even had reservations cancelled after 1 or 2 guest certificates were used.

 

[drusba]

The 20 reservation rule is not In the POS documents. The rule is the one stated in the link provided above by @sndral. It was adopted by DVC in December 2007 and issued to members at the tmei as its interpretation of the stated POS rule prohibiting members from engaging in rental activity for "commercial purposes." "Commercial purposes" is a phrase that implies that one be in the business of doing something. The POS expressly provides that members' "personal use" of membership includes the right to rent, and thus doing rentals cannot, in and of itself, be deemed to be for a "commercial purpose." The interpretative rule DVC provided at the time was about as far as it could go in limiting rental activity without potentially facing a lawsuit that could wipe out its interpretation.

Reservations made by members are all subject to the first come first served rule stated in the POS,with the only distinction allowed being the difference between home resort and non-home resort reservations. DVC cannot legally create a rule that says members reserving for themselves shall take priority over members reservations for others, such as relatives or persons to whom the member has rented, without first amending the existing POS documents, and since the right to rent and the first come, first served rules are material terms, such a change to the POS would require an actual vote of the members.

 

[sndral]

Wyndham cracking down on owners renting their points is interesting to me. They, like DVC, forbid ‘commercial’ use. If I understand what’s happened (I don’t own Wyndham) they’ve apparently recently defined what commercial use is more strictly & have become more aggressive in enforcing that limitation.
Meanwhile DVC can sit back & watch, see if Wyndham is sued & if so, what the result of that suit is. Then, if they chose to, DVC can decide whether to more strictly define & enforce the prohibition against commercial use.
I believe that most people who rent DVC points do so because it’s much cheaper than paying even a discounted cash rate to Disney. If Disney decides that the booming DVC rental market is eroding their hotel business profit I can see them becoming more aggressive in shutting it down, especially if Wyndham isn’t sued, or is but wins*.
The thread about WBC cancelations linked above also mentions that they are stricter about modifications, thus limiting walking.

*Edited to add link to case where Wyndham granted summary judgement in part, defines commercial use as ‘for profit’ : https://ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2019-02300-185-6-cv

 

[ehh]

I really don't think I would mind if spec rentals got a lot stricter.

Just from this site's sponsor, there's 582 'confirmed reservations' available for rent: https://dvcrentalstore.com/guests/reservations/

And from a competitor, there's 1750 available 'confirmed reservations' available for rent: https://rentals.*******.com/confirmed-reservations/

Both are bad for vacationing owners, IMO, but the 2nd is egregious. All but 4 of the 1750 are for studios and if you count all the nights and assume a typical resort and date distribution, roughly 0.8% of all studio inventory in the next 11 months is available on this page.

I'm going to speculate a bit and say these are rarely 'something suddenly came up' situations. And I'd be surprised there are a proportionate number of individuals participating vs. something more systematic/commercial.

 

[wishicouldgomoreofte]

Wyndham cracking down on owners renting their points is interesting to me. They, like DVC, forbid ‘commercial’ use. If I understand what’s happened (I don’t own Wyndham) they’ve apparently recently defined what commercial use is more strictly & have become more aggressive in enforcing that limitation.
Meanwhile DVC can sit back & watch, see if Wyndham is sued & if so, what the result of that suit is. Then, if they chose to, DVC can decide whether to more strictly define & enforce the prohibition against commercial use.
I believe that most people who rent DVC points do so because it’s much cheaper than paying even a discounted cash rate to Disney. If Disney decides that the booming DVC rental market is eroding their hotel business profit I can see them becoming more aggressive in shutting it down, especially if Wyndham isn’t sued, or is but wins*.
The thread about WBC cancelations linked above also mentions that they are stricter about modifications, thus limiting walking.

*Edited to add link to case where Wyndham granted summary judgement in part, defines commercial use as ‘for profit’ : https://ecf.flmd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2019-02300-185-6-cv

WOW!! That man was really gaming the system. Millions of points for rental!!
We still don't know the outcome. I hope he lost!

 

[wishicouldgomoreofte]

I really don't think I would mind if spec rentals got a lot stricter.

Just from this site's sponsor, there's 582 'confirmed reservations' available for rent: https://dvcrentalstore.com/guests/reservations/

And from a competitor, there's 1750 available 'confirmed reservations' available for rent: https://rentals.*******.com/confirmed-reservations/

Both are bad for vacationing owners, IMO, but the 2nd is egregious. All but 4 of the 1750 are for studios and if you count all the nights and assume a typical resort and date distribution, roughly 0.8% of all studio inventory in the next 11 months is available on this page.

I'm going to speculate a bit and say these are rarely 'something suddenly came up' situations. And I'd be surprised there are a proportionate number of individuals participating vs. something more systematic/commercial.

Someone reported on here they had some points left over they wanted to rent to recoup dues cost, and contacted dvcrental store. They were told to make a reservation and offer it as a confirmed reservation, instead of just points for rent. dvcrental charges more to the people renting for a confirmed reservation. It would be $16 or $18 paid to the owner for the point rental. But a confirmed reservation goes for $25-$30 or more per point to the person renting a confirmed reservation, while still just $16 or $18 to the owner. So dvcrental makes a lot more money on the confirmed reservations.

 

[TinkAgainU]

It would be $16 or $18 paid to the owner for the point rental. But a confirmed reservation goes for $25-$30 or more per point to the person renting a confirmed reservation, while still just $16 or $18 to the owner. So dvcrental makes a lot more money on the confirmed reservations.

That sounds pretty "commercial use" to me. But I'm not Disney's attorney. Oh wait, they have Lots of those...

 

[Sandisw]

That sounds pretty "commercial use" to me. But I'm not Disney's attorney. Oh wait, they have Lots of those...

The brokers are not renting only points owned by their owners. They are a middle man putting owners and renters together. So it does not violate any part of the POS.

Each owner has its own contract and it’s the owner as an individual who is subject to the terms of the POS, and the renting for commercial purposes, There is not anything in the contract that prevents an owner from using an agent to help them rent their own points, which they have a legal right to do.

As long as a membership has reservations in the names of others under whatever limit has been decided there is no issue.

Personally, I don’t have any issue with owners booking and renting out reservations because they paid for their points like I have and who they choose to let sleep in their booked rooms doesn’t bother me.

I get people don’t like it, but it is a big plus of the program that would require owners to vote to change it and I doubt you’d get enough owners who would want that change to happen.

 

[Anthony Vito]

I really don't think I would mind if spec rentals got a lot stricter.

Just from this site's sponsor, there's 582 'confirmed reservations' available for rent: https://dvcrentalstore.com/guests/reservations/

And from a competitor, there's 1750 available 'confirmed reservations' available for rent: https://rentals.*******.com/confirmed-reservations/

Both are bad for vacationing owners, IMO, but the 2nd is egregious. All but 4 of the 1750 are for studios and if you count all the nights and assume a typical resort and date distribution, roughly 0.8% of all studio inventory in the next 11 months is available on this page.

I'm going to speculate a bit and say these are rarely 'something suddenly came up' situations. And I'd be surprised there are a proportionate number of individuals participating vs. something more systematic/commercial.

The hope is the bubble bursts on this (and the rental market in general) at some point. I think this is a big part of limited availability - more points are being used because people are more savvy to avoid losing points or trade points into other programs (cruise, etc.). Points aren't going to "waste," so to speak.

As for the bubble, in looking at some of these reservations, they're not too bad, but overall, I don't think it's the big savings that it once was. At one time, when first looking at renting points 4-5 years ago, it was a significant savings. However, in the last couple years, it seems the prices are sometimes not significantly better than a similar (or sometimes identical) room direct through WDW. I think it was last year, I saw a few times where the same or similar room was available directly through WDW's website for less than renting the points (I remember a confirmed reservation at Bay Lake, I think it was, that was about $200+ more per night to rent the points then to just rent from WDW with a 25% off deal).

In my opinion, the only benefit of renting points is the significant savings. Getting a hotel room through WDW is much simpler, easier to manage, you have control over everything, and there's much greater protection (cancel for full refund up to 3 days before arriving).

Renting DVC was the "savvy" thing to do for a while to save money. While it seems a bit better now, it's certainly not as big a savings as it once was, and if the trend continues towards everything tied up in confirmed reservations (with added premiums at times), at some point, the "savvy" travelers may go back in the opposite direction and go back to direct WDW reservations.

 

[Dizzydizney]

I started noticing damage and extreme wear and tear in probably 2005…kind of coincided with the advent of renting out your points. pride in ownership. Not saying it’s the majority. And I’m sure nobody is fined When pillows, irons, fiestaware dishes disappear.
it’s also annoying when people make room requests thru that outside company and seem to get the room they want, while others who request thru MS weeks ahead of time, don’t. Now that owners rent out their points for current use years, fewer are banking their points. I’m not a math expert, but more people banking would mean more availability for current use year. But I guess it’s here to stay. Wish DVC would have a way to really inspect rooms before and after each guest, having them sign something regarding the room beforehand. But that will never happen so all owners have to absorb the cost.

 

[TinkAgainU]

The contracts do say point owners are liable for any guest damages - but whether Disney enforces that is a whole different issue.

 

[Sandisw]

The contracts do say point owners are liable for any guest damages - but whether Disney enforces that is a whole different issue.

At one time, many years ago, there were reports of owners accounts being frozen until they got their guests to settle bills or pay damages.

Not sure how often that happens in reality though now

 

[AZMermaid]

I’ve seen on social media people renting out over a dozen different weekends, some weekends two different rooms, at VGC. It doesn’t bother me at all when people rent out their extra points. I’ve done it myself. But that feels a little much. But I guess on the flip side…. If they have hundreds of points to rent, maybe it’s the same thing. Not sure the answer! I think VGC stings harder since it’s so small!

 

[Robbie Cottam]

At one time, many years ago, there were reports of owners accounts being frozen until they got their guests to settle bills or pay damages.

Not sure how often that happens in reality though now

one would think the credit card at check in would help with that.

 

[Robbie Cottam]

Has anyone actually been turned away with a confirmed DVC reservation?
I have been offer accommodations at a different resort and or room type / view, always an upgrade….

Has anyone actually been told “sorry no room at the inn” with a confirmed res?

 

[Sandisw]

one would think the credit card at check in would help with that.

The issues were that the charges to the card bounced back Now that Disney does the hold thing I think the situation won’t happen like it did years ago.

And, they didn’t require an owner to pay it, but rather locked the account until the owner reached out to their guests to settle the bill. As I said, this was years ago so I doubt it happens much if at all now.

 

[Sandisw]

Has anyone actually been turned away with a confirmed DVC reservation?
I have been offer accommodations at a different resort and or room type / view, always an upgrade….

Has anyone actually been told “sorry no room at the inn” with a confirmed res?

None have been reported here.

 

[crisi]

I started noticing damage and extreme wear and tear in probably 2005…kind of coincided with the advent of renting out your points. pride in ownership. Not saying it’s the majority. And I’m sure nobody is fined When pillows, irons, fiestaware dishes disappear.
it’s also annoying when people make room requests thru that outside company and seem to get the room they want, while others who request thru MS weeks ahead of time, don’t. Now that owners rent out their points for current use years, fewer are banking their points. I’m not a math expert, but more people banking would mean more availability for current use year. But I guess it’s here to stay. Wish DVC would have a way to really inspect rooms before and after each guest, having them sign something regarding the room beforehand. But that will never happen so all owners have to absorb the cost.

I' bought my contract in 2001 - people were renting out points way back then - and honestly, I've though the conditions of the rooms have improved since the early days of my contract. And way back in 2001 people on this board were making the same complaints about renters - wear and tear, using up rooms that could be available to members.

Brokers have made the renting process more accessible...but then there are a lot more rooms and owners than there were back in 2001.

 

[808blessing]

I am very curious in a poll seeing what owners prefer the limit is on rentals (especially not on Disboards). I think most owners want it limited to increase their availability (more not renting out) if there were an actual vote.

Also if there was a rule, it would probably just open up availability mode at SAP resorts since more owners are using their premium resorts points themselves.

 

[kristenrice]

I doubt most owners would actually want to limit rentals if they really thought about the true limitations. You would be limiting your travel to those listed on your deed for the life of your contract. How would you book a room for a friend? If Disney prohibited rentals, but allowed you to book rooms for your "friends", then there is a giant loophole and the ban would be useless. I often travel with my married sister (different last name) and my best friend so if I book rooms for them, how would Disney know if they are my friends, relatives or just frequent customers? I hate the spec rentals as much as anyone, but a ban or limit on rentals would cause me more harm than the spec renting does so I will simply hate it and deal with it.