Third party commercial renters

[lowlight]

DVC is what it is. If it becomes too s tressful for you, then it is the time to sell or gift it to someone in your family that wants it.

If it’s easier to book your week through a third party rental website than as an owner, something is wrong. We are at that point, depending on the week and the resort you are seeking. You don’t care, you’ve said so many times in many threads. Some of us do, and want to fix it.

 

[Chuck S]

If it’s easier to book your week through a third party rental website than as an owner, something is wrong. We are at that point, depending on the week and the resort you are seeking. You don’t care, you’ve said so many times in many threads. Some of us do, and want to fix it.

And again I ask, how would you do that, legally, without negatively impacting ALL DVC owners?

 

[Chuck S]

The fact that I have never seen a post here or anywhere else where someone says “oops, I went over 20 reservations per year and got a call from Disney” makes me wonder whether they are even enforcing that restriction.

Remember, the DIS is, overall, a small portion of DVC Owners, and I would assume NONE of the people who regularly rent here, because of the restrictions and costs we have associated with offering pre-existing reservations, has actually gone over the 20 reservations per year limit.

 

[Sandisw]

The fact that I have never seen a post here or anywhere else where someone says “oops, I went over 20 reservations per year and got a call from Disney” makes me wonder whether they are even enforcing that restriction.

There was a poster who did indeed get that and shared that years ago...cant recall who. But, remember, the DIS boards are a small group of owners. So, there is a very good chance that those who rent a lot may simply not be here and won't advertise that it happened, if it did.

Plus, even when the review happens, the owner is given a chance to provide context to what is there and if they are all in the name of the owner or owners, then DVC can't simply assume they are not for personal use...though, the new language of the Resorts Use Plan for CFW does give them more authority about that.

 

[Sandisw]

If it’s easier to book your week through a third party rental website than as an owner, something is wrong. We are at that point, depending on the week and the resort you are seeking. You don’t care, you’ve said so many times in many threads. Some of us do, and want to fix it.

Its just not that simple though, is it?. Let's take AKV Value...there are 10 rooms (unless I have the wrong info)....that means ONLY 10 to 20 owners will get the room on any given night...out of how many AKV owners?

Sure, has to be frustrating if you are one who wants that room and see them for rent, but the chances of getting one are slim anyway....and not sure what system DVC can put in place to stop that when its based on a specific room or certain high demand rooms. It is the same with a BWV SV studios...only 52....with how many BWV owners who want them? Seeing those for rental is going to cause the same level of frustruation...

We also know that plenty of owners who are not renting are getting these rooms (based on posts) so not all of them go to owners who run broker businesses.

I think what has increased in the past few years is the fact that many owners, even those who are not what DVC or anyone as "commercial" are renting high demand confirmed reservations instead of offering points to make reservations.

Heck, if I decide to rent some points to pay for a different type of trip, you bet I am going to snag a few RIV and VGF SV studios in early December....why wouldn't I? They wil go fast and maybe for a bit more...and the beauty of DVC is that we can rent points if we want to.

IMO, there in lies the issue...is it commercial renting or is it the renting of hard to get rooms? Would people be as upset about it if all the brokers were renting were SSR rooms? My guess is no.

The reality is that the rental market, commerical or not, has greatly increased over the past 14 years since I became an owner, and I do believe that you have a lot more owners who rent regulary, then in the past, and that while yes, I am sure there are owners who are pushing that limit, I also believe that a lot of what is out there are simply hundreds to thousands of owners who rent without being in violation of the contract.

 

[Chuck S]

I think what has increased in the past few years is the fact that many owners, even those who are not what DVC or anyone as "commercial" are renting high demand confirmed reservations instead of offering points to make reservations.

Also add in the impact of fixed weeks for hard to get bookings, which is a fairly recent development for DVC. It started in 2010 with Aulani. So over the last 14 years, when availability started being a noticable problem for some owners, the fixed week option would also need to be factored in.

 

[crisi]

And again I ask, how would you do that, legally, without negatively impacting ALL DVC owners?

We've discussed how over and over - there are a ton of things they can do. And...some of them will negatively impact some DVC owners - none of them would negatively impact ALL DVC owners - although the rules would apply equally to ALL DVC owners. But, the current situation negatively affects many DVC owners, putting booking restrictions in around walking, bots, changing reservation names, restricting changes within 30 days of the eleven month window - and more importantly - ENFORCING the clauses already in place regarding ownership limits and commercial renting, would make it better for many. So, do we keep the status quo, which negatively impacts some people, or do we make changes which will enforce terms already in the contract, which will negatively affect some people?

Commercial renting has not yet affected me, btw. but neither would any of the restrictions proposed affect me. However, I bought for my own use and it irks me that people like me are finding it difficult to get in demand rooms because Disney is not enforcing its own contract terms, which specifically forbid commercial renting - not all renting, but the "I'm doing this specifically for profit with a pattern" sort.

 

[Chuck S]

But, how do you know that they aren't enforcing the 20 reservation per year per membership criteria that they established as a definition for commercial renting?

Lower the limit of active reservations per membership? Would it work? Maybe...but what about the members that own a LOT of points and take multiple family trips per year that require mutliple rooms per trip? Or the Mom and Pop that just want to rent points, with no pre-existing reservations? I rented out less than 100 points last year, the first time I've rented points. and those 1 to 2 night reservations (one of which was one night in a AKV value studio) plus my own existing reservations, means I had 9 reservations active in the system at one time. In fact, I was shocked the value studio was even avalaible for one night at less than 7 months out.

And don't forget, there are a LOT of things that factor into limiting availabllity, not just commercial renting, There is the ever increasing number of small contracts, meaning there are more owners trying for those hard to get (generally lower point cost) rooms, fixed week contracts (up to 35% of rooms) , taking rooms out of points reservation inventory, rooms going down for repairs and refurbishment, bad weather cancellations where people will rebook later with those points, and so forth.

Given the fixed weeks, I'm not even sure we could call commercial renting the primary cause of availability issues.

 

[Retired2018]

When the CFW first allowed booking and it was pointed out here the number of confirmed reservations were being listed for sale, we reached out to DVC and provided websites with the listings. As of their April 26 2024 response DVC indicated they view commercial as being listed over the internet. If they are doing internal reviews, it sure does not appear we are seeing any results of that. Below is a snippet of their response.

"While Members of Disney Vacation Club do have the ability to rent out Disney Vacation Club accommodations through their Membership on an occasional basis, use of Disney Vacation Club accommodations for commercial purposes is expressly prohibited. Commercial purposes include a pattern of rental activity. We view rentals of Disney Vacation Club accommodations over the Internet as a pattern of rental activity, which is prohibited under the Membership rules. Please note that we do observe the online activity and handle as necessary internally.

The feedback we receive from our Members is very important to us. As we continuously strive to improve the benefits and services we provide to our Members and enhance the overall Member experience, we are constantly evaluating our operation. You may be assured your comments have been shared with the appropriate areas of Leadership within the Disney Vacation Club community, as it is paramount to our success."

I understand that renting is allowed. However, if DVC views rentals as listed over the internet that sure would put a damper on the number of confirmed reservations if they were able and decided to enforce it. Imagine all those unhappy renters.

The renters could do cash stays through Disney and the rest of us could compete with each other for the stays that we purchased our membership for. Well, those of us that bought for personal use and not commercial purposes.

 

[muppets3d]

I have personally watched value and club studios vanish at exactly 8AM. Immediately at 8:00:00. There is no way they go away that quickly, except by bots.

DVC already logs out users automatically frequently - that probably helps curtail some bots. But why did the 2 factor login fail when they tried it a year or so ago? I don't remember. It didn't last long. You do have to 2 Factor login to get to your loans, but not the DVC site at large.

It seems that requiring a 2 Factor login to log in to your dashboard could curtail some bots.

 

[Chuck S]

I doubt simply saying "over the internet" would stand up to legal scrutiny, if challenged. I mean, I could be renting to family and friends "over the internet" as that is really how most people communicate these days. Simply renting over the internet does not establish a "pattern of rental activity" and they really can't prohibit us from using rental brokers. IMO that "pattern oif rental activity" would have to include the criteria of changing the primary on the reservation, as well as how often they do so.

 

[muppets3d]

I doubt simply saying "over the internet" would stand up to legal scrutiny, if challenged. I mean, I could be renting to family and friends "over the internet" as that is really how most people communicate these days. Simply renting over the internet does not establish a "pattern of rental activity" and they really can't prohibit us from using rental brokers. IMO that "pattern oif rental activity" would have to include the criteria of changing the primary on the reservation, as well as how often they do so.

I took it to mean the reservation advertised on the internet, such as some of the popular brokerage sites. It wouldn't be hard for DVC to look at a broker site, match up ads there with member bookings, then see which member called in to modify their booking when the broker site took the listing down.

Rentals definitely drives interest in DVC from prospective members and is a value-add for members, but there is a balancing act there.

 

[Chuck S]

It wouldn't be hard for DVC to look at a broker site, match up ads there with member bookings, then see which member called in to modify their booking when the broker site took the listing down.

True, but it would certainly take employee time from a company that is already very short handed. They are probably losing more money by not having enough staff to restart resort delivery of in-park purchases, because people don;t want to lug bags around all day.

 

[muppets3d]

True, but it would certainly take employee time from a company that is already very short handed. They are probably losing more money by not having enough staff to restart resort delivery of in-park purchases, because people don;t want to lug bags around all day.

It could be done programmatically without too much difficulty, especially since half of the data is already in their systems. And they wouldn't have to do much, they could start with focusing on the people who work for brokerages that "own" thousands of points that they rent out for the brokerage - to get around the point maximums.

 

[Chuck S]

It could be done programmatically without too much difficulty, especially since half of the data is already in their systems. And they wouldn't have to do much, they could start with focusing on the people who work for brokerages that "own" thousands of points that they rent out for the brokerage - to get around the point maximums.

Unless the actual membership of the brokerage has more actual rentals then is allowed per membership, I doubt DIS coulld do much of anything. Example: Husband owns brokerage, and has a membership, wife has a membership, corporation has a membership, husband AND wife have joint membership, husband and kids have a joint membership, and so on...just in that small example, that is 100 rentals allowed under the 20 per membership criteria. And remember the new rules, so far, only appear on the POS for the CFW.

And seeing the problems over the years when Disney IT gets involved and makes changes...I'm not sure I'd want them poking around in everyone's memberships trying to match up reservations.

 

[muppets3d]

Unless the actual membership of the brokerage has more actual rentals then is allowed per membership, I doubt DIS coulld do much of anything. Example: Husband owns brokerage, and has a membership, wife has a membership, corporation has a membership, husband AND wife have joint membership, husband and kids have a joint membership, and so on...just in that small example, that is 100 rentals allowed under the 20 per membership criteria. And remember the new rules, so far, only appear on the POS for the CFW.

And seeing the problems over the years when Disney IT gets involved and makes changes...I'm not sure I'd want them poking around in everyone's memberships trying to match up reservations.

Brokerage hires X number of people, each person buys points resale up to the maximum DVC allows, I think it's 8000 points. Of course, the brokerage actually owns all the points, pays the dues, etc - they're just in their employee's names to get around the membership maximums. This happens for sure, it's not speculation.

With as much money there is in renting DVC points (especially when you consider the brokerage can make a lot more money if they rent out points that they own vs. pay a large commission to a DVC owner), there is no doubt in my mind that they've had bots written to automate booking and walking. Heck, you could probably ask ChatGPT to write you a bot and it would get you pretty far. Although there is no proof of that except the fact that rooms like BWV studios, value studios, etc., go away immediately at 8AM every day - faster than a human can possibly react.

Disney knows it's happening, when/if they decide to do anything about it is the question.

I think requiring a captcha/2 factor login to the site before booking a reservation would curtail a lot of it at least for a while.

 

[Chuck S]

I doubt captcha would do much. The script would just pause for human input, and the staff could take turns logging in the captcha. Overall, a script would still beat a fully human attempt to book reservations, even with the pause. And remember, if a membership number has more than one contract associated with it, the script would need to pause anyway to select which contract(s) to take the points from.

Unless you think it is a good idea to have all members log out if they make a reservation, then have to log back in to make another reservation. Which would be a PITA and could lose reservations for people needing multiple rooms for a big family trip.

 

[lowlight]

When the CFW first allowed booking and it was pointed out here the number of confirmed reservations were being listed for sale, we reached out to DVC and provided websites with the listings. As of their April 26 2024 response DVC indicated they view commercial as being listed over the internet. If they are doing internal reviews, it sure does not appear we are seeing any results of that. Below is a snippet of their response.

"While Members of Disney Vacation Club do have the ability to rent out Disney Vacation Club accommodations through their Membership on an occasional basis, use of Disney Vacation Club accommodations for commercial purposes is expressly prohibited. Commercial purposes include a pattern of rental activity. We view rentals of Disney Vacation Club accommodations over the Internet as a pattern of rental activity, which is prohibited under the Membership rules. Please note that we do observe the online activity and handle as necessary internally.

The feedback we receive from our Members is very important to us. As we continuously strive to improve the benefits and services we provide to our Members and enhance the overall Member experience, we are constantly evaluating our operation. You may be assured your comments have been shared with the appropriate areas of Leadership within the Disney Vacation Club community, as it is paramount to our success."

I understand that renting is allowed. However, if DVC views rentals as listed over the internet that sure would put a damper on the number of confirmed reservations if they were able and decided to enforce it. Imagine all those unhappy renters.

The renters could do cash stays through Disney and the rest of us could compete with each other for the stays that we purchased our membership for. Well, those of us that bought for personal use and not commercial purposes.

What email did you reach out to? I think if we bombard them with emails concerning this, we may get more attention from on high- the squeaky wheel and all.

There is language in the POS that allows renting, but also clearly states that the board will determine what constitutes commercial renting and the language is broader than “20 rentals”, even if that’s what they’ve said is their current benchmark.

There is also spirit of the law vs letter of the law, and I’m not sure committing fraud by keeping 10 contracts in 10 different names for the sole purpose of circumventing a contractual limitation is a good defense, but I’m no lawyer so I’ll let the actual lawyers speak on that.

 

[Sandisw]

We've discussed how over and over - there are a ton of things they can do. And...some of them will negatively impact some DVC owners - none of them would negatively impact ALL DVC owners - although the rules would apply equally to ALL DVC owners. But, the current situation negatively affects many DVC owners, putting booking restrictions in around walking, bots, changing reservation names, restricting changes within 30 days of the eleven month window - and more importantly - ENFORCING the clauses already in place regarding ownership limits and commercial renting, would make it better for many. So, do we keep the status quo, which negatively impacts some people, or do we make changes which will enforce terms already in the contract, which will negatively affect some people?

Commercial renting has not yet affected me, btw. but neither would any of the restrictions proposed affect me. However, I bought for my own use and it irks me that people like me are finding it difficult to get in demand rooms because Disney is not enforcing its own contract terms, which specifically forbid commercial renting - not all renting, but the "I'm doing this specifically for profit with a pattern" sort.

Except any requirement that restrict an owner from making changes to a reservation with some sort of plenty…no name change, cancel and rebook, etc…has the potential to impact all owners and I, for one, don’t think that is a better system for everyone in terms of the beauty of DVC.

IMO, any change should not, in anyway, impact an owner who is not renting for commercial purposes, or isn’t renting at all.

No change is worth it if an owner loses the ability to use DVC like we can today. I would rather they keep rules as they are and make sure to enforce them in an approximate way.

However, if every broker who owns DVC is prevented from renting their own points, or points from trusts or LLCs, there is still going to be a large rental market out there, and there is still going to be a lot of rentals of hard to get rooms by your average owner.

 

[Sandisw]

When the CFW first allowed booking and it was pointed out here the number of confirmed reservations were being listed for sale, we reached out to DVC and provided websites with the listings. As of their April 26 2024 response DVC indicated they view commercial as being listed over the internet. If they are doing internal reviews, it sure does not appear we are seeing any results of that. Below is a snippet of their response.

"While Members of Disney Vacation Club do have the ability to rent out Disney Vacation Club accommodations through their Membership on an occasional basis, use of Disney Vacation Club accommodations for commercial purposes is expressly prohibited. Commercial purposes include a pattern of rental activity. We view rentals of Disney Vacation Club accommodations over the Internet as a pattern of rental activity, which is prohibited under the Membership rules. Please note that we do observe the online activity and handle as necessary internally.

The feedback we receive from our Members is very important to us. As we continuously strive to improve the benefits and services we provide to our Members and enhance the overall Member experience, we are constantly evaluating our operation. You may be assured your comments have been shared with the appropriate areas of Leadership within the Disney Vacation Club community, as it is paramount to our success."

I understand that renting is allowed. However, if DVC views rentals as listed over the internet that sure would put a damper on the number of confirmed reservations if they were able and decided to enforce it. Imagine all those unhappy renters.

The renters could do cash stays through Disney and the rest of us could compete with each other for the stays that we purchased our membership for. Well, those of us that bought for personal use and not commercial purposes.

My guess is this answer did not come from legal and just a CM who had the authority to answer in this way.

The use of the “internet” is not a term that can be enforced without them defining that and they know that, If I rent to co-worker and send the information and contract via email, I have used the internet.

And, my guess is that DVC knows, and doesn’t want to become in a situation that gets them into a legal battle, or even the appearance of one.

The contract certainly states we don’t need their approval and their efforts need to be reasonable in defining it and I can’t see them ever actually enforcing something that broad.

I have also shared my thoughts with DVC…but as an owner who does not want to see any changes that negatively impact owners who don’t rent.