No... it's a contractual rule. As an attorney, I pored over the contract, and then pored over it again with an attorney who specializes in timeshare law.
You've played this "I'm an attorney" card several times now and I don't know what sort of law you practice; you may be an amazeballs lawyer in your field; but you seem to struggle at reading/take gross liberties at interpreting the POS and the terms we agreed to when we bought in. From suggesting Disney can add points to a
point chart to account for refurbishment purposes (
https://www.disboards.com/threads/dvc-point-balancing-2022-vs-2021.3820183/post-62559598), to suggesting adding a pool is grounds to increase point costs (
https://www.disboards.com/threads/dvc-point-balancing-2022-vs-2021.3820183/post-62561661), you repeatedly miss the mark on understanding the timeshare you bought, or the terms under which you bought it.
At one point, you compared the devaluation of ownership people were upset about (via the new shifting Easter 7-season point chart) to the loss of ownership percentage due to the lock-off premium in defense of Disney's changes that violated the POS.
Well, I am a lawyer... but not a real estate lawyer.
But no... the lock-off premium has the exact same effect that you are railing against. Most of the resorts utilize 2BR lockoffs, and they can use that to increase the points. But even if they don't increase the points FURTHER, the lock-off premium is already diluting your ownership -- They know that most of the lockoffs are not booked as 2 bedrooms. Thus, while you may own 00.002% of a 2-bedroom unit.... when the lock-offs get broken up, you actually only the equivalent of 00.0018% of a studio and 00.0016% of a 1 bedroom. It's the exact dilution that you're claiming they can't do -- and they are already doing it.
While both do devalue the ownership percentage, the part you seem to be willfully ignoring is that with the latter, we agreed to the lock-off premium when we bought into the system. In the VGF POS, Exhibit G is explicit about how Lock-off Premiums are handled and we all acknowledged the additional costs when we bought in. Any issue raised with this lock-off premium historically has been around the fiduciary duties of the DVCMC in increasing that premium without justifiable cause.
As to the former, artificially creating additional points to book a resort (by way of shifting different weeks into different seasons depending on a shifting holiday) without offset, is not. Is this case, Disney is redefining what "holiday" meant when they originally drafted the POS.
As it pertains to the what Disney can and can't do, you seem to give little credence in the explicit terms of the Agreement we all signed when we bought in; in this instance, dismissing terms in the POS that clearly outline the duties of the Association when representing the owners and entering into the exchange, somehow concluding that is permitted because “new contracts” are drafted.
I hired a Florida-based attorney who specializes in Florida timeshare law to go over the exact terms of the POS with me prior to my conversations with DVCMC around a tax issues and again around the 2022 point chart. Those extensive, POS-specific conversations informed the points I presented to Disney. After Disney took time to "look into" it, in both cases they found cause to change course. Per the
point charts, like in 2019, Disney Legal conceded nothing, but like in 2019 Disney's plan is to correct for the additional points created by the new seasons.
I'm not sure how many times Disney needs to back pedal on policy before you start to read the POS the way other members do. But as much as you, and the guy who charged me to do it, would like us to believe, reading and understanding the terms in the POS is not something lawyers have a monopoly on.