Wanted to share my not great experience with MS regarding renting points

[Tatebeck]

They’re the one who defined personal use to include non commercial renting

So that’s the definition that the court’s gonna use and when you check the box you just notified them.

If every single reservation has to have the check box marked, there is nothing that differentiates that the reservation is a rental, which is what is required in the rule I quoted

 

[Mouseforward]

But anything that looks like spec renting is going to raise red flags because it is the most profitable form of renting. I'm not saying that DVC should have stopped Jolynne from changing the reservation or that she was profiting from the rental, but I completely understand the cast member at Member Services reacting like they did because management has almost certainly told them to be on the lookout for rentals like this. They were just doing what management has directed them to do.

As far as we know, only one policy exists to define commercial renting. Sandy requested the policy and had it had nothing to do with spec renting. If there are additional policies and they’re not provided at the request to the members. Then they’re violating the member agreement.

 

[VGCgroupie]

So this thread is delving into everyone's interpretation of legalease which I feel can be done here https://www.disboards.com/threads/commerical-use-policy-update-new-thread.3969816/ since that is where we are supposed to talk about it and I would like this thread to remain open and not get shut down.

What this thread is about is a member being harassed for no reason.

 

[Mouseforward]

If every single reservation has to have the check box marked, there is nothing that differentiates that the reservation is a rental, which is what is required in the rule I quoted

Yes, checking the box indicated that the rental meets their definition of personal use, which includes renting.

The only thing the checkbox would exclude would be renting for commercial purposes.

Who designed the system - they did. If it’s a poor design, who’s responsible? They are.

 

[Mouseforward]

So this thread is delving into everyone's interpretation of legalease which I feel can be done here https://www.disboards.com/threads/commerical-use-policy-update-new-thread.3969816/ since that is where we are supposed to talk about it and I would like this thread to remain open and not get shut down.

What this thread is about is a member being harassed for no reason.

Agree, sorry about that OP

What galls me the most is the board is supposed to represent the members interest. And they direct the actions of member services who are employed by our dues. This is not Walt Disney World telling a prospective hotel guest the rules.

These are literally people on our payroll, being rude to us. And deliberately deceiving us in my opinion.

 

[VGCgroupie]

Agree, sorry about that OP

What galls me the most is the board is supposed to represent the members interest. And they direct the actions of member services who are employed by our dues. This is not Walt Disney World telling a prospective hotel guest the rules.

These are literally people on our payroll, being rude to us. And deliberately deceiving us in my opinion.

I agree with the point in bold. And pressuring into saying friends and family is not cool

 

[Tatebeck]

Yes, checking the box indicated that the rental meets their definition of personal use, which includes renting.

The only thing the checkbox would exclude would be renting for commercial purposes.

Who designed the system - they did. If it’s a poor design, who’s responsible? They are.

Still def not how that works, but lets drop it or keep it to the other thread if you want me to explain it to you further.

So this thread is delving into everyone's interpretation of legalease which I feel can be done here https://www.disboards.com/threads/commerical-use-policy-update-new-thread.3969816/ since that is where we are supposed to talk about it and I would like this thread to remain open and not get shut down.

What this thread is about is a member being harassed for no reason.

Agreed, We're trying to figure out what the heck MS is doing (again). Don't need it turning into "how can we try to skirt these rules too" lol

 

[Mouseforward]

I agree with the point in bold. And pressuring into saying friends and family is not cool

And doing this ( pressuring to lie ) on a recorded line, which is most likely discoverable (but I am unsure of that) it’s just profoundly stupid.

There’s just no way that would work out for them in any desirable manner. It would be humiliating for this to come up in court if DVC ever pressed this issue.

What it sounds to me, is that they were instructed mislead and intimidate us. And this employee probably just wanted to end the call and was giving OP a hint how to skirt the system.

I feel like this gives support to some of the more cynical on the other thread who felt that this intimidation is going to be the extent of the response. I feel like if the employee was taking it seriously and they were actively trying to go after commercial renters she would’ve just said OK. It’s a renter wrote it down and reported it.

 

[Tatebeck]

Just reply back in contract legalese I guess

"I agree that these reservations are for my personal use as defined in the resort Public Offering Statements"

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

But anything that looks like spec renting is going to raise red flags because it is the most profitable form of renting. I'm not saying that DVC should have stopped Jolynne from changing the reservation or that she was profiting from the rental, but I completely understand the cast member at Member Services reacting like they did because management has almost certainly told them to be on the lookout for rentals like this. They were just doing what management has directed them to do. (emphasis added)

To me, this is the $1,000,000 question-- are they doing what management directed them to do? It's exactly why reports like this are so valuable (and should not get bogged down with individual members rehashing their own interpretations of the word commercial).

So far, this reminds me of the DAS reform where people were hearing inklings from CMs (who had been trained to reject most kinds of disabilities but were not yet supposed to be going public with the new system) but the majority of longtime DAS users refused to believe that these dramatic changes were coming. I don't think they plan to ban all renting, but I don't think a number of different MS agents are all just refusing to change names unless the owner confirms it's friends and family because they enjoy tormenting and bickering with members.

Based on what we know, I don't think this specific MS CM was correct to badger Jolynne-- but if I was in that position, I would absolutely not claim a total stranger was a friend and family, I would ask to keep escalating to supervisors and quote the language @Tatebeck suggested above.

So this thread is delving into everyone's interpretation of legalease which I feel can be done here https://www.disboards.com/threads/commerical-use-policy-update-new-thread.3969816/ since that is where we are supposed to talk about it and I would like this thread to remain open and not get shut down.

What this thread is about is a member being harassed for no reason.

Have we heard any stories of someone successfully saying it's a rental and getting names changed? If this thread is dedicated to supporting Jolynne, I think it would be very helpful to start a separate thread of positive and/or negative experiences changing names on rentals-- it's all well and good to reassure each other that surely our own planned rentals fall within personal use, but it's much more valuable to see if anybody in the past six weeks has successfully told a CM "it's a rental that falls within my personal use as I'm entitled in the POS" and actually gotten a name changed. It sounds like one member was told they are allowed to rent within personal use by a supervisor, but it would be valuable to know if every single entry level MS CM shuts it down or only one or two.

 

[VGCgroupie]

Just reply back in contract legalese I guess

"I agree that these reservations are for my personal use as defined in the resort Public Offering Statements"

I think this is a great idea.

 

[RamblinWreck]

Renting for commercial purposes has never been allowed. There’s no ban on spec renting. We’re talking about two separate things.

Spec renting seems like it could be defined as for commercial purposes even if you aren't doing a ton of it.

Booking a reservation you never intended to use to make as much money as you can off of it sounds pretty "commercial" to me. These are probably the types of rentals that will invite the most scrutiny.