Third party commercial renters

[disneyjanet]

I am not a regular poster but I have been enjoying reading this thread like @DonMacGregor for entertainment purposes. I do not rent points and don’t particularly care if others do. I am one of those “problem people” with a 50 point AKL contract so I don’t ever have excessive points. I thought I’d add my take because after 24 pages I am kinda surprised I haven’t seen someone else saying something similar yet. I’m also not a lawyer but I do own a small business, a Pilates studio that trains instructors, so I do give basic info about starting businesses to my students.

My take. Disney is large business that faces a lot of scrutiny and has to operate legally. As we all know, the DVC contract prohibits using the membership as a commercial enterprise. They don’t define it and I’m not sure they need to as the USA government does this already through the irs. All DVC properties are in the USA and these rules would apply.

According to the irs at https://www.irs.gov/businesses/smal... have to file an,employment were $400 or more.
You have to file an income tax return if your net earnings from self-employment were $400 or more.

So if you net $400 or more you are a commercial enterprise according to the USA government. If that isn’t enough data to make you feel $400 is the cutoff for commercial enterprise or would apply to renting DVC points check out their gig economy info at https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/manage-taxes-for-your-gig-work

What is Gig Work?​

Gig work is certain activity you do to earn income, often through an app or website (digital platform), like:

• Drive a car for booked rides or deliveries
• Rent out property or part of it
• Run errands or complete tasks
• Sell goods online
• Rent equipment
• Provide creative or professional services
• Provide other temporary, on-demand or freelance work

Note that rent out property or part of it is specifically called out as gig work.

It is further pointed out at https://www.irs.gov/businesses/gig-economy-tax-center

Gig Economy Income is Taxable​

You must report income earned from the gig economy on a tax return, even if the income is:

• From part-time, temporary or side work
• Not reported on an information return form — like a Form 1099-K, 1099-MISC, 1099-NEC, W-2 or other income statement
• Paid in any form, including cash, property, goods, or virtual currency

Note that temporary is on the list so if I only rent points this year it is temporary income from my truly poorly designed commercial enterprise.

If that wasn’t enough for you to feel that $400 is cons business income see the definition of business income from the irs at https://apps.irs.gov/app/vita/content/globalmedia/teacher/09_businessincome_lesplan.pdf
Business Income: Business income is income received from the sale of products or services. For
example, fees received by a professional person are considered business income. Rents received by a person in the real estate business are business income. Payments received in the form of property or services must be included in income at their fair market value.

So if you have business income you have a business or commercial enterprise. Don’t believe me check out the SBA at https://www.sba.gov/business-guide/launch-your-business/choose-business-structure
A sole proprietorship is easy to form and gives you complete control of your business. You're automatically considered to be a sole proprietorship if you do business activities but don't register as any other kind of business.

My argument is that Disney doesn’t have to define and come up with official policies about all of this as it is already done by the federal government.

Now DVC has a problem they disallow commercial enterprise but must follow Florida timeshare law which allows renting. This is when I am at an advantage with my 50 point contract. Let’s say I have 40 points leftover in 2024 and I rent them to my buddy for the cost of dues which are $9.0820 at AKL for 2024 I am under $400. If that’s all that I do this year I am clearly not a commercial enterprise and I am renting. Let’s say I charge my buddy double my dues or 18.164 for each of my 40 leftover points for a grand total of $726.56. In this case I would net $363.28 after I deduct dues therefore not be using my membership for commercial purposes and still renting. But what about my buy in cost you ask? Should I not also be able to deduct some of that and then maybe I can can charge my Buddy $30 a point and still not be a commercial enterprise. This is a grey area. Those of you with more than 50 points like me who rent will probably pretty easily get past the $400 net income threshold with or without touching the grey areas. Now does Disney want to be in any way involved in this. Probably not unless it starts to impact their business. I would also imagine they don’t want to get dragged into having to report anything to irs regarding rentals. If the did the check if this is a rental box some have suggested then they might have to start reporting that knowledge. If the got into competition with the rental companies in letting us sell back points they’d have to report like a marketplace.

The way it currently is set up they assume everyone is personal use and aren’t looking too hard. It would seem to me that the previously reported 20 limit was designed so they didn’t have to look to deeply but could still say they are doing their job and monitoring things. Now if they decide it is a problem for any reason in my opinion they can clamp down if they wish. If it starts negatively effecting their business they can clamp down. If the feel pressure from the membership they can clamp down. I would guess that using a broker would be relatively easy to clamp down as the brokers pay at a rate that would be easy to exceed $400 net profit. I’m not sure what argument anyone could make for using a broker other than to profit from their points rental. It seems they exist to allow people to easily turn their membership into a commercial enterprise as defined by the irs as making $400 net profit without the hassle of finding customers directly.

Final add for @Sandisw LLC member names can be found through public records requests/searches in the state of their formation. Probably hard to do from a practical level in general but if you have a particular one or 2 and you know/guess the state of formation it could be done.

So that’s my add to the discussion. Back to lurking and enjoying the thread.

 

[Sandisw]

I am not a regular poster but I have been enjoying reading this thread like @DonMacGregor for entertainment purposes. I do not rent points and don’t particularly care if others do. I am one of those “problem people” with a 50 point AKL contract so I don’t ever have excessive points. I thought I’d add my take because after 24 pages I am kinda surprised I haven’t seen someone else saying something similar yet. I’m also not a lawyer but I do own a small business, a Pilates studio that trains instructors, so I do give basic info about starting businesses to my students.

My take. Disney is large business that faces a lot of scrutiny and has to operate legally. As we all know, the DVC contract prohibits using the membership as a commercial enterprise. They don’t define it and I’m not sure they need to as the USA government does this already through the irs. All DVC properties are in the USA and these rules would apply.

According to the irs at https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/self-employed-individuals-tax-center#:~:text=You have to file an,employment were $400 or more.
You have to file an income tax return if your net earnings from self-employment were $400 or more.

So if you net $400 or more you are a commercial enterprise according to the USA government. If that isn’t enough data to make you feel $400 is the cutoff for commercial enterprise or would apply to renting DVC points check out their gig economy info at https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/manage-taxes-for-your-gig-work

What is Gig Work?​

Gig work is certain activity you do to earn income, often through an app or website (digital platform), like:

• Drive a car for booked rides or deliveries
• Rent out property or part of it
• Run errands or complete tasks
• Sell goods online
• Rent equipment
• Provide creative or professional services
• Provide other temporary, on-demand or freelance work

Note that rent out property or part of it is specifically called out as gig work.

It is further pointed out at https://www.irs.gov/businesses/gig-economy-tax-center

Gig Economy Income is Taxable​

You must report income earned from the gig economy on a tax return, even if the income is:

• From part-time, temporary or side work
• Not reported on an information return form — like a Form 1099-K, 1099-MISC, 1099-NEC, W-2 or other income statement
• Paid in any form, including cash, property, goods, or virtual currency

Note that temporary is on the list so if I only rent points this year it is temporary income from my truly poorly designed commercial enterprise.

If that wasn’t enough for you to feel that $400 is cons business income see the definition of business income from the irs at https://apps.irs.gov/app/vita/content/globalmedia/teacher/09_businessincome_lesplan.pdf
Business Income: Business income is income received from the sale of products or services. For
example, fees received by a professional person are considered business income. Rents received by a person in the real estate business are business income. Payments received in the form of property or services must be included in income at their fair market value.

So if you have business income you have a business or commercial enterprise. Don’t believe me check out the SBA at https://www.sba.gov/business-guide/launch-your-business/choose-business-structure
A sole proprietorship is easy to form and gives you complete control of your business. You're automatically considered to be a sole proprietorship if you do business activities but don't register as any other kind of business.

My argument is that Disney doesn’t have to define and come up with official policies about all of this as it is already done by the federal government.

Now DVC has a problem they disallow commercial enterprise but must follow Florida timeshare law which allows renting. This is when I am at an advantage with my 50 point contract. Let’s say I have 40 points leftover in 2024 and I rent them to my buddy for the cost of dues which are $9.0820 at AKL for 2024 I am under $400. If that’s all that I do this year I am clearly not a commercial enterprise and I am renting. Let’s say I charge my buddy double my dues or 18.164 for each of my 40 leftover points for a grand total of $726.56. In this case I would net $363.28 after I deduct dues therefore not be using my membership for commercial purposes and still renting. But what about my buy in cost you ask? Should I not also be able to deduct some of that and then maybe I can can charge my Buddy $30 a point and still not be a commercial enterprise. This is a grey area. Those of you with more than 50 points like me who rent will probably pretty easily get past the $400 net income threshold with or without touching the grey areas. Now does Disney want to be in any way involved in this. Probably not unless it starts to impact their business. I would also imagine they don’t want to get dragged into having to report anything to irs regarding rentals. If the did the check if this is a rental box some have suggested then they might have to start reporting that knowledge. If the got into competition with the rental companies in letting us sell back points they’d have to report like a marketplace.

The way it currently is set up they assume everyone is personal use and aren’t looking too hard. It would seem to me that the previously reported 20 limit was designed so they didn’t have to look to deeply but could still say they are doing their job and monitoring things. Now if they decide it is a problem for any reason in my opinion they can clamp down if they wish. If it starts negatively effecting their business they can clamp down. If the feel pressure from the membership they can clamp down. I would guess that using a broker would be relatively easy to clamp down as the brokers pay at a rate that would be easy to exceed $400 net profit. I’m not sure what argument anyone could make for using a broker other than to profit from their points rental. It seems they exist to allow people to easily turn their membership into a commercial enterprise as defined by the irs as making $400 net profit without the hassle of finding customers directly.

Final add for @Sandisw LLC member names can be found through public records requests/searches in the state of their formation. Probably hard to do from a practical level in general but if you have a particular one or 2 and you know/guess the state of formation it could be done.

So that’s my add to the discussion. Back to lurking and enjoying the thread.

That is a lot of great information!!! Thank you for you incredible insight! Given all this, the question becomes what are the remedies, if DVC did look harder, that DVC would be legally allowed to implement if they determine a membership is a commercial enterprise.

Interesting take to think about using a broker....don't people make more money, though, renting on their own than through a broker? So, if it would apply to a broker, wouldn't it apply to all rentals, no matter how an owner reached that $400 profit?

As an owner, that should be the very least we should expect to have clear guidelines around....and when I get my follow up emails...don't expect for a bit since I asked to be contacted by legal or someone high in authority to answer my questions...and it was evident the MA CM does not appear to be that person.

 

[crvetter]

I am not a regular poster but I have been enjoying reading this thread like @DonMacGregor for entertainment purposes. I do not rent points and don’t particularly care if others do. I am one of those “problem people” with a 50 point AKL contract so I don’t ever have excessive points. I thought I’d add my take because after 24 pages I am kinda surprised I haven’t seen someone else saying something similar yet. I’m also not a lawyer but I do own a small business, a Pilates studio that trains instructors, so I do give basic info about starting businesses to my students.

My take. Disney is large business that faces a lot of scrutiny and has to operate legally. As we all know, the DVC contract prohibits using the membership as a commercial enterprise. They don’t define it and I’m not sure they need to as the USA government does this already through the irs. All DVC properties are in the USA and these rules would apply.

According to the irs at https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/self-employed-individuals-tax-center#:~:text=You have to file an,employment were $400 or more.
You have to file an income tax return if your net earnings from self-employment were $400 or more.

So if you net $400 or more you are a commercial enterprise according to the USA government. If that isn’t enough data to make you feel $400 is the cutoff for commercial enterprise or would apply to renting DVC points check out their gig economy info at https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/manage-taxes-for-your-gig-work

What is Gig Work?​

Gig work is certain activity you do to earn income, often through an app or website (digital platform), like:

• Drive a car for booked rides or deliveries
• Rent out property or part of it
• Run errands or complete tasks
• Sell goods online
• Rent equipment
• Provide creative or professional services
• Provide other temporary, on-demand or freelance work

Note that rent out property or part of it is specifically called out as gig work.

It is further pointed out at https://www.irs.gov/businesses/gig-economy-tax-center

Gig Economy Income is Taxable​

You must report income earned from the gig economy on a tax return, even if the income is:

• From part-time, temporary or side work
• Not reported on an information return form — like a Form 1099-K, 1099-MISC, 1099-NEC, W-2 or other income statement
• Paid in any form, including cash, property, goods, or virtual currency

Note that temporary is on the list so if I only rent points this year it is temporary income from my truly poorly designed commercial enterprise.

If that wasn’t enough for you to feel that $400 is cons business income see the definition of business income from the irs at https://apps.irs.gov/app/vita/content/globalmedia/teacher/09_businessincome_lesplan.pdf
Business Income: Business income is income received from the sale of products or services. For
example, fees received by a professional person are considered business income. Rents received by a person in the real estate business are business income. Payments received in the form of property or services must be included in income at their fair market value.

So if you have business income you have a business or commercial enterprise. Don’t believe me check out the SBA at https://www.sba.gov/business-guide/launch-your-business/choose-business-structure
A sole proprietorship is easy to form and gives you complete control of your business. You're automatically considered to be a sole proprietorship if you do business activities but don't register as any other kind of business.

My argument is that Disney doesn’t have to define and come up with official policies about all of this as it is already done by the federal government.

Now DVC has a problem they disallow commercial enterprise but must follow Florida timeshare law which allows renting. This is when I am at an advantage with my 50 point contract. Let’s say I have 40 points leftover in 2024 and I rent them to my buddy for the cost of dues which are $9.0820 at AKL for 2024 I am under $400. If that’s all that I do this year I am clearly not a commercial enterprise and I am renting. Let’s say I charge my buddy double my dues or 18.164 for each of my 40 leftover points for a grand total of $726.56. In this case I would net $363.28 after I deduct dues therefore not be using my membership for commercial purposes and still renting. But what about my buy in cost you ask? Should I not also be able to deduct some of that and then maybe I can can charge my Buddy $30 a point and still not be a commercial enterprise. This is a grey area. Those of you with more than 50 points like me who rent will probably pretty easily get past the $400 net income threshold with or without touching the grey areas. Now does Disney want to be in any way involved in this. Probably not unless it starts to impact their business. I would also imagine they don’t want to get dragged into having to report anything to irs regarding rentals. If the did the check if this is a rental box some have suggested then they might have to start reporting that knowledge. If the got into competition with the rental companies in letting us sell back points they’d have to report like a marketplace.

The way it currently is set up they assume everyone is personal use and aren’t looking too hard. It would seem to me that the previously reported 20 limit was designed so they didn’t have to look to deeply but could still say they are doing their job and monitoring things. Now if they decide it is a problem for any reason in my opinion they can clamp down if they wish. If it starts negatively effecting their business they can clamp down. If the feel pressure from the membership they can clamp down. I would guess that using a broker would be relatively easy to clamp down as the brokers pay at a rate that would be easy to exceed $400 net profit. I’m not sure what argument anyone could make for using a broker other than to profit from their points rental. It seems they exist to allow people to easily turn their membership into a commercial enterprise as defined by the irs as making $400 net profit without the hassle of finding customers directly.

Final add for @Sandisw LLC member names can be found through public records requests/searches in the state of their formation. Probably hard to do from a practical level in general but if you have a particular one or 2 and you know/guess the state of formation it could be done.

So that’s my add to the discussion. Back to lurking and enjoying the thread.

I don’t believe passive income from renting out property is necessarily considered self employment. It generally only falls into that realm based on some means tests of having multiple properties, employees, etc. DVC renting wouldn’t count as self employment, though the brokers give a 1099 and it counts as ordinary income (i.e. you don't have to pay self employment taxes on them).

Your first part talks about self employment the second part talks about income taxes which are different. Also I’m sure the renting would be defined as commercial just because you pay taxes on it.

Though if some brokers are truly running a business on many they would and surely do because the rental incomes would come across on their balance sheet to the business. Then anything paid to employees or owners would be subject to employment taxes.

 

[Sandisw]

Talked to someone at DVC today and they guided me to the documents of the POS, Multi site POS, and the Home Resort rules and regulations.

Any person named on the reservation that an owner makes on their membership is considered their guest…family, friend, or stranger.

DVC will only discuss with you your own membership and can not discuss other peoples membership, including what would happen in a hypothetical situation...ie: if someone else is doing X, etc. The important takeway from my conversation was:

1. The information written in the documents ARE the rules.
2. DVC, as stated in the Home Resort Rules and Reservations, under Amendements, gives full authority to DVC to change rules.
3. Any rules and regulations that would be amended would be in published documents. DVC must notify us as to the rules for using your membership.
4. The closest we have, those that own RIV, CFW, and presumbly VDH is that they may decide to use pattern of rental reservations, etc. but since its not published that they do, those are only examples of what they could choice to put in the rules.

Basically, if the current documents don't outline a specific rule, then it is not prohibited. The specific language used in the RIV POS, and beyond, that gives ideas of what DVC might do is considered "official" and an owner whom which DVC felt was in violaiton of the published rules would be contacted by DVC.

While some may say these are non-answers, here is what I am walking away with....nothing in the published documents currently prohibts the use of a broker to advertise and rent a reservation, confirmed, or with points....renters are guests of the owner.

Until something is specifically published, like happened in 2007, then the language that is there is what you use as an owner to make your decisions.

Owners can and should make decisions on that....

 

[aammtt20]

Talked to someone at DVC today and they guided me to the documents of the POS, Multi site POS, and the Home Resort rules and regulations.

Any person named on the reservation that an owner makes on their membership is considered their guest…family, friend, or stranger.

DVC will only discuss with you your own membership and can not discuss other peoples membership, including what would happen in a hypothetical situation...ie: if someone else is doing X, etc. The important takeway from my conversation was:

1. The information written in the documents ARE the rules.
2. DVC, as stated in the Home Resort Rules and Reservations, under Amendements, gives full authority to DVC to change rules.
3. Any rules and regulations that would be amended would be in published documents. DVC must notify us as to the rules for using your membership.
4. The closest we have, those that own RIV, CFW, and presumbly VDH is that they may decide to use pattern of rental reservations, etc. but since its not published that they do, those are only examples of what they could choice to put in the rules.

Basically, if the current documents don't outline a specific rule, then it is not prohibited. The specific language used in the RIV POS, and beyond, that gives ideas of what DVC might do is considered "official" and an owner whom which DVC felt was in violaiton of the published rules would be contacted by DVC.

While some may say these are non-answers, here is what I am walking away with....nothing in the published documents currently prohibts the use of a broker to advertise and rent a reservation, confirmed, or with points....renters are guests of the owner.

Until something is specifically published, like happened in 2007, then the language that is there is what you use as an owner to make your decisions.

Owners can and should make decisions on that....

Thank you for the update, Sandi! I appreciate how you are always digging in to really understand the in's and out's of our contracts and then passing along the wealth of information to the users on this board. I've learned so much about many different facets of DVC from your posts these last few months.

 

[Swaggerwagon]

Saw this on a Facebook tips page tonight. Maybe Disney is trying to stop the commercial renters? A renter has their grand villa cancelled at AKL for a week in December.

 

[CWTC]

Saw this on a Facebook tips page tonight. Maybe Disney is trying to stop the commercial renters? A renter has their grand villa cancelled at AKL for a week in December.

I of course had to go track down this post. One of the commenters said the same thing recently happened to them. It’s really too bad for the people who had rented the points and were planning on the GV.

 

[lowlight]

Saw this on a Facebook tips page tonight. Maybe Disney is trying to stop the commercial renters? A renter has their grand villa cancelled at AKL for a week in December.
View attachment 870109

That’s interesting. I know it says for compliance, but it could be a lie by the member to get out of any penalties from the broker. Maybe he didn’t pay his dues or something.

 

[aammtt20]

I of course had to go track down this post. One of the commenters said the same thing recently happened to them. It’s really too bad for the people who had rented the points and were planning on the GV.

Very interesting… I’d be curious to know if DVC is judging these violators by the 20 reservation yearly limit they have used in the past or if there is some other metric that caused them to have reservations cancelled.

 

[mistysue]

Talked to someone at DVC today and they guided me to the documents of the POS, Multi site POS, and the Home Resort rules and regulations.

Any person named on the reservation that an owner makes on their membership is considered their guest…family, friend, or stranger.

DVC will only discuss with you your own membership and can not discuss other peoples membership, including what would happen in a hypothetical situation...ie: if someone else is doing X, etc. The important takeway from my conversation was:

1. The information written in the documents ARE the rules.
2. DVC, as stated in the Home Resort Rules and Reservations, under Amendements, gives full authority to DVC to change rules.
3. Any rules and regulations that would be amended would be in published documents. DVC must notify us as to the rules for using your membership.
4. The closest we have, those that own RIV, CFW, and presumbly VDH is that they may decide to use pattern of rental reservations, etc. but since its not published that they do, those are only examples of what they could choice to put in the rules.

Basically, if the current documents don't outline a specific rule, then it is not prohibited. The specific language used in the RIV POS, and beyond, that gives ideas of what DVC might do is considered "official" and an owner whom which DVC felt was in violaiton of the published rules would be contacted by DVC.

While some may say these are non-answers, here is what I am walking away with....nothing in the published documents currently prohibts the use of a broker to advertise and rent a reservation, confirmed, or with points....renters are guests of the owner.

Until something is specifically published, like happened in 2007, then the language that is there is what you use as an owner to make your decisions.

Owners can and should make decisions on that....

But the real question is not whether anyone can use a broker to rent points (as this is so common and ignored it is obviously allowed) but how much a person can rent and it not be "commercial" in DVC's use of the term.

So at this point, basically what we have is Disney says "don't be a commercial renter" but sets itself no set rules for when they will decide someone is. The only rules are that it is their decision, we have no right to know, and that they can change their minds whenever.

 

[Genie+]

Very interesting… I’d be curious to know if DVC is judging these violators by the 20 reservation yearly limit they have used in the past or if there is some other metric that caused them to have reservations cancelled.

Yep once an owner hits 20 reservations they are obligated to prove not one is a rental if DVC asks, if they want to make reservations .

Honestly I am surprised there hasn’t been more IRS issues. Many of the people renting 1000 or 4000 points on FB, here and elsewhere use real name as username (and almost always during rental process). Like here you can see years and years history of multi 1000pt+ transactions and details, and name on DVC contracts searchable on OCC site. It’s a very public paper trail. Doesn’t IRS give out 10% rewards on fruitful reporting? Even if nobody reported, would the IRS ever look into something like that?

 

[GoingSince1990]

Honestly I am surprised there hasn’t been more IRS issues. Many of the people renting 1000 or 4000 points on FB, here and elsewhere use real name as username (and almost always during rental process). Like here you can see years and years history of multi 1000pt+ transactions and details, and name on DVC contracts searchable on OCC site. It’s a very public paper trail. Doesn’t IRS give out 10% rewards on fruitful reporting? Even if nobody reported, would the IRS ever look into something like that?

What makes you think these owners are not paying the taxes they owe? I make sure to declare any rental income on my tax return.

 

[JackosinDIS]

Saw this on a Facebook tips page tonight. Maybe Disney is trying to stop the commercial renters? A renter has their grand villa cancelled at AKL for a week in December.
View attachment 870109

Interesting. Very rare to see examples of this. While there’s no evidence of why exactly the member was subject to cancellations by Disney, the post suggests that is was due to the number of current reservations on the membership. So they are still applying some sort of rule as to the number an owner can hold, but seem reluctant to actually disclose those rules / policies to owners.

 

[BeachClub2014]

DVC will only discuss with you your own membership and can not discuss other peoples membership, including what would happen in a hypothetical situation...ie: if someone else is doing X, etc. The important takeway from my conversation was:

1. The information written in the documents ARE the rules.
2. DVC, as stated in the Home Resort Rules and Reservations, under Amendements, gives full authority to DVC to change rules.
3. Any rules and regulations that would be amended would be in published documents. DVC must notify us as to the rules for using your membership.
4. The closest we have, those that own RIV, CFW, and presumbly VDH is that they may decide to use pattern of rental reservations, etc. but since its not published that they do, those are only examples of what they could choice to put in the rules.

Interesting stuff. Thanks for following up on this topic with DVC; I appreciate you!

If I understand correctly, this means there are potentially different rules for renting points based on which resort documents you consider. DVC doesn't necessarily apply the same rules/prohibitions for renting points across the spectrum.

 

[lowlight]

Talked to someone at DVC today and they guided me to the documents of the POS, Multi site POS, and the Home Resort rules and regulations.

Any person named on the reservation that an owner makes on their membership is considered their guest…family, friend, or stranger.

DVC will only discuss with you your own membership and can not discuss other peoples membership, including what would happen in a hypothetical situation...ie: if someone else is doing X, etc. The important takeway from my conversation was:

1. The information written in the documents ARE the rules.
2. DVC, as stated in the Home Resort Rules and Reservations, under Amendements, gives full authority to DVC to change rules.
3. Any rules and regulations that would be amended would be in published documents. DVC must notify us as to the rules for using your membership.
4. The closest we have, those that own RIV, CFW, and presumbly VDH is that they may decide to use pattern of rental reservations, etc. but since its not published that they do, those are only examples of what they could choice to put in the rules.

Basically, if the current documents don't outline a specific rule, then it is not prohibited. The specific language used in the RIV POS, and beyond, that gives ideas of what DVC might do is considered "official" and an owner whom which DVC felt was in violaiton of the published rules would be contacted by DVC.

While some may say these are non-answers, here is what I am walking away with....nothing in the published documents currently prohibts the use of a broker to advertise and rent a reservation, confirmed, or with points....renters are guests of the owner.

Until something is specifically published, like happened in 2007, then the language that is there is what you use as an owner to make your decisions.

Owners can and should make decisions on that....

Was this in writing and who said it? Owners should probably only make decisions based on what DVC has officially stated (in writing) by DVC legal department. Not trying to be nitpicky, appreciate you getting the response, but want to make sure it’s not some junior level staffer saying something in a casual conversation. I’ve been told things by Amazon employees in writing and then had their level 2 customer service tell me the employee was wrong and the TOS are x y and z, and that was just returning an item, not a several dozen grand contract.

 

[Sandisw]

But the real question is not whether anyone can use a broker to rent points (as this is so common and ignored it is obviously allowed) but how much a person can rent and it not be "commercial" in DVC's use of the term.

So at this point, basically what we have is Disney says "don't be a commercial renter" but sets itself no set rules for when they will decide someone is. The only rules are that it is their decision, we have no right to know, and that they can change their minds whenever.

I asked questions in several different ways to confirm I was understanding things and based on that, it was clear that those documents I mentioned are what we, as an owner, have to understand our membership and how to use it.

What the documents do say is that DVC is for personal use and enjoyment and should not be bought as an investment. Any rules regarding who we book reservations for will be part of the documents and based on the answers I got, if I read the contract and something is not there, then I can make decisions based on that.

As I said, they will only talk to you about questions you have in relation to YOUR membership, and she continued to guide me to the documents, with the amendment that said DVC has the right to change, amend rules, but whatever changes occur, will be updated in our documents.

What the documents say is what the current rules are and if there is nothing in there to say XYZ is not okay, then as of today, it is.

As I say, when you look at the documents of RIV and beyond, they give examples of what may be used as guidance by DVC as to when a membership...and it is based on membership....is seen as being used as a commercial enterprise.

So, I take that to mean that at any time, DVC might use those and if I am a RIV owner, I need to be aware that they might put that critiera in place. What was a clear takeaway is that the wording of contracts is what matters, and as an owner, I can make decisions based on that, and that all published documents will include the information owners need to use thier contracts.

My interpretation of it all...since the contracts are meant for personal use, owners need to use that lense when deciding how to use your own membership....for me, it means that I can secure a rental anyway I want, I can rent confrimed reservations, and there is currently no set number of reservations in the names of others that will automatically violate the terms of the contract.

Now, if someone doesn't like the broadness of the current rules, they could certainly share with DVC they want stricter ones for owners to use their memberships, but what I walked away with from my conversation the documents will always be about the personal use definition and not the commercial one.

 

[Sandisw]

Was this in writing and who said it? Owners should probably only make decisions based on what DVC has officially stated (in writing) by DVC legal department. Not trying to be nitpicky, appreciate you getting the response, but want to make sure it’s not some junior level staffer saying something in a casual conversation. I’ve been told things by Amazon employees in writing and then had their level 2 customer service tell me the employee was wrong and the TOS are x y and z, and that was just returning an item, not a several dozen grand contract.

It was high enough for me to feel confident, especially with it being a taped conversation, that the notion is that any and all rules are published for owners to follow and they took me through the areas that I mentioned while on the phone and we talked through them.

Basically, if the contract doesn't say XYZ is prohibited, and DVC intends it to be, then we will be notified, in writing, that it will be via the updated documents published in our accounts, which includes all updates to the POS documents.

Like I said, even the specifics of the RIV contract put me on notice of what might be seen as a potentail rule, and because DVC gets to decide it all, and can change the rules at anytime, they are clarifying what could happen.

The way I take that is that if I rent a lot, and DVC puts in a specific limit, which would be included in the documents like it was in 2007, then I could be in trouble...but, until we have it in writing from them, I am free to use my ownership interest in line with what is there.

Put another way, rent a lot at your own risk because you never know when DVC might decide to update rules.

I confirmed several times that if I read the contract and all the documents, including the Home Resort Rules and Regulations regarding booking reservations, then I have what I need to use my membership within the guidelines and the answers were yes.

I can tell you that what they will not do is discuss anything related to what others are doing with their memberships, they will only discuss questions you have regarding your own membership and your own use....ie: they won't discuss what is happening in the rental market, etc.

For me, the answers are sufficient to address my concerns on how I can use my membership for renting reservations, and not run afoul with DVC, based on the official documents they have provided me, as an owner.

I understand its not going to be the same conclusion others might have.

 

[Sandisw]

Interesting stuff. Thanks for following up on this topic with DVC; I appreciate you!

If I understand correctly, this means there are potentially different rules for renting points based on which resort documents you consider. DVC doesn't necessarily apply the same rules/prohibitions for renting points across the spectrum.

Not necessarily, because the early POS documents...ie: my VGF document....does say that someone can contact DVC for more information.

My guess, and this is just a guess, is that the updated POS langauge for the new resorts could be pointed to. As I posted above, as a RIV owner, I use that language as a way to be put on notice that DVC could use something like pattern of rental activity as a rule to decide my membership has crossed the line, but if it is going to be A rule, then it will be shared, similar to the 2007 language in the POS that did.

She would not specifically address the 2007 language, other than when I said "If something is no longer there, then the most up to date documents is what guides the policy that I should follow?" and the answer was "That sounds like you understand it".

 

[Sandisw]

Interesting. Very rare to see examples of this. While there’s no evidence of why exactly the member was subject to cancellations by Disney, the post suggests that is was due to the number of current reservations on the membership. So they are still applying some sort of rule as to the number an owner can hold, but seem reluctant to actually disclose those rules / policies to owners.

I can't speak to that, but after what was made clear to me yesterday, if they are using something, they are required to publish it for us, and if they are canceling reservations on a membership, then there needs to be something in the documents somewhere that gives them that authority.

I do actually remember reading that not to long ago that it says that, but I have read RIV, SSR, VGF, CFW and MS POS recently and cant remember where it was....and if in all or some...so, I am going to read my contracts again in the next few days to see where it was.

 

[mistysue]

I asked questions in several different ways to confirm I was understanding things and based on that, it was clear that those documents I mentioned are what we, as an owner, have to understand our membership and how to use it.

What the documents do say is that DVC is for personal use and enjoyment and should not be bought as an investment. Any rules regarding who we book reservations for will be part of the documents and based on the answers I got, if I read the contract and something is not there, then I can make decisions based on that.

As I said, they will only talk to you about questions you have in relation to YOUR membership, and she continued to guide me to the documents, with the amendment that said DVC has the right to change, amend rules, but whatever changes occur, will be updated in our documents.

What the documents say is what the current rules are and if there is nothing in there to say XYZ is not okay, then as of today, it is.

As I say, when you look at the documents of RIV and beyond, they give examples of what may be used as guidance by DVC as to when a membership...and it is based on membership....is seen as being used as a commercial enterprise.

So, I take that to mean that at any time, DVC might use those and if I am a RIV owner, I need to be aware that they might put that critiera in place. What was a clear takeaway is that the wording of contracts is what matters, and as an owner, I can make decisions based on that, and that all published documents will include the information owners need to use thier contracts.

My interpretation of it all...since the contracts are meant for personal use, owners need to use that lense when deciding how to use your own membership....for me, it means that I can secure a rental anyway I want, I can rent confrimed reservations, and there is currently no set number of reservations in the names of others that will automatically violate the terms of the contract.

Now, if someone doesn't like the broadness of the current rules, they could certainly share with DVC they want stricter ones for owners to use their memberships, but what I walked away with from my conversation the documents will always be about the personal use definition and not the commercial one.

I believe we just said the same thing. I just said it in many fewer words.

The other takeaway that I'm getting from this, that you are not really pointing out, is that this does leave DVC wide open to allowing the "buddy" of someone in charge to be massively abusing the system and get away with it because they are not really committed to any specifics of when they have to stop any particular individual. You could have people getting in trouble for renting out 20 reservations and somebody else renting out 50 and DVC looking the other way, But the rules are written in a way as to be so vague that they are essentially meaningless for enforcement purposes, unless someone backstage decides they want them to be in any particular case.
In other words, the person who saw their reservation canceled literally could have been dealing with a situation where it was only looked into because somebody in DVC decided they wanted the room instead. I don't expect that that's what actually happened, but it's absolutely possible with how loosely these rules are written.