Resale restrictions and deed transfer to family

[jekjones1558]

Just wondering...
Our points were all acquired either direct or before the restrictions (on how resale points can be used) on resales were initiated. If we give any of our contracts to family members and the ROFR process is thereby skirted, will the resale restrictions apply to those contracts?

 

[dmunsil]

If we give any of our contracts to family members and the ROFR process is thereby skirted, will the resale restrictions apply to those contracts?

I just got the straight dope on this from a member administration CM. Gratuitous transfers are not considered resales, so the restrictions would not apply and those points would continue to be allowed to used the extra exchange privileges.

 

[jekjones1558]

Wow. That was quick! Thanks so much!

 

[wdrl]

Just wondering...
Our points were all acquired either direct or before the restrictions (on how resale points can be used) on resales were initiated. If we give any of our contracts to family members and the ROFR process is thereby skirted, will the resale restrictions apply to those contracts?

The resale restrictions will not apply to your deeds if you make gratuitous transfers to your family members.

Technically, you are still subject to the ROFR process when you transfer your deeds. DVD will issue a Notice of Waiver of Right of First Refusal for each deed showing that you are making a gratuitous transfer.

When a member sells a deed to a third party, the Notice of Waiver indicates that the member is selling the deed and includes a paragraph stating the points cannot be used for certain exchanges. Gratuitous transfers do not include that restricting paragraph.

 

[Dean]

I just got the straight dope on this from a member administration CM. Gratuitous transfers are not considered resales, so the restrictions would not apply and those points would continue to be allowed to used the extra exchange privileges.

That has been the case but there is no requirement for it to be so. While I doubt it will change, they could if they wanted and thus change this answer because it is not contractual.

 

[dmunsil]

That has been the case but there is no requirement for it to be so. While I doubt it will change, they could if they wanted and thus change this answer because it is not contractual.

Absolutely. But this is what they're doing now. You can see it if you look up the waivers on the OCC web site. For sales the waiver includes (in large type) a big warning about not being able to use incidental benefits (and naming specifically the various collections that are reserved for people who buy direct). For gratuitous transfers that verbiage isn't there.

If the policy changes, you'll know when the waiver comes back because it will have that warning on it.

 

[Dean]

Absolutely. But this is what they're doing now. You can see it if you look up the waivers on the OCC web site. For sales the waiver includes (in large type) a big warning about not being able to use incidental benefits (and naming specifically the various collections that are reserved for people who buy direct). For gratuitous transfers that verbiage isn't there.

If the policy changes, you'll know when the waiver comes back because it will have that warning on it.

While that may be the case currently, I would not think that the presence or absence of the disclaimer would affect the enforceability either way.