Was closing DVC Resorts Legal?

[Grumpy by Birth]

Because they waived putting points into holding, many people (I'm one of them), were still within their banking window and went ahead and banked points into UY20. Granted, we could have banked those points anyway. On top of that, they allowed a lot of points to be "un-borrowed." That's still more points in UY20 that otherwise would not have been floating around. I'm not advocating for this, but I could see them suspending borrowing into UY20 to level things out. That way, they would have a much clearer picture of precisely how many points are eligible for bookings.

One caveat: I realize that UY20 has already begun for some owners, and everyone's points expire in different months throughout the year. I didn't take time to consider all of those variables yet, but I still think limiting more points by suspending borrowing is a possible action that DVC will take to mitigate all of these excess points. Then again, maybe it's not as many as we think, and they already have enough of a "slush fund" of inventory to ride this out.

 

[TisBit]

Going to the banking and borrowing debate, I think DVC would be better to extend banking points. In the sense that if they need to spread these points losses out over the membership. They could theoretically expand to allow banking of points for 3 years for any owners affected by this, for the points that were impacted. This would allow more time for the points be spread out over several years and alleviate the "strain" on the system. Every year, owners allow points to expire to some degree, so they could try to recoup the closure points through that.....but, again this is uncharted, as it shouldn't ever happen.

 

[Miffy]

I know what you are saying. But how is it different than a hotel that is not closed. Or another timeshare resort. I have not heard any other resorts closing. And while your apartment doesn’t have those things, there are a lot of apartments and condos that do. And Disney hasevery right to close the restaurant and pool and concierge. That is part of the contracts.

The question I started was is It legal. I know why they did it, but let’s say next year there is something else happening. Can Disney legally lock deeded owners from the property at their own discretion and prohibit them from using points?

Look, I have no idea about the legality of this. But an apartment building and a hotel or timeshare are totally different. Please read @CarolMN's post as well as mine.

 

[Sandisw]

Going to the banking and borrowing debate, I think DVC would be better to extend banking points. In the sense that if they need to spread these points losses out over the membership. They could theoretically expand to allow banking of points for 3 years for any owners affected by this, for the points that were impacted. This would allow more time for the points be spread out over several years and alleviate the "strain" on the system. Every year, owners allow points to expire to some degree, so they could try to recoup the closure points through that.....but, again this is uncharted, as it shouldn't ever happen.

They have been pretty consistent on keeping banking rules in tact. Personally, I only think they should be waiving holding and nothing more.

But, whatever they decide to do, the membership as a whole will suffer the consequences because in this type of situation, there is going to be no one solution that will fix it for everyone.. There will continue to be winners and losers.

Again, much like the debate going on about renters not having insurance and being stuck holding the bag, traveling late in a UY can have devastating consequences in unforeseen emergencies.

 

[TisBit]

They have been pretty consistent on keeping banking rules in tact. Personally, I only think they should be waiving holding and nothing more.

But, whatever they decide to do, the membership as a whole will suffer the consequences because in this type of situation, there is going to be no one solution that will fix it for everyone.. There will continue to be winners and losers.

Again, much like the debate going on about renters not having insurance and being stuck holding the bag, traveling late in a UY can have devastating consequences in unforeseen emergencies.

They have been very consistent on banking, but also in having resorts available for booking. I think if they try to push this impact onto members by further restricting points usage, you will see this going on for a long time and likely end up in a legal review.

Yep, I agree, this will be a complete mess later on. I am not sure what the impact will have. Luckily, right now I am not impacted, but likely will be with an mid April reservation. But, I think they have to address this, if the resorts stayed open, there would not be an issue. If the membership chooses not to book during a period of time, then can't use their points when they want to, is a different scenario than points being taken out of a "balanced" system.

 

[TisBit]

Look, I have no idea about the legality of this. But an apartment building and a hotel or timeshare are totally different. Please read @CarolMN's post as well as mine.

I still disagree, yes a hotel is completely different and people staying in a hotel have not rights to staying in that hotel past the time the hotel wants them to leave.

But a time share has OWNERS, not renters. While they may be temporary, they do have deeds and own a portion of that resort. Depriving someone of use of something they own is a big deal. Again, every other time share in the state is open and available for their owners if they want to use it. If the Governor ordered the closure, that would definitely be a different story, as they would have been ordered closed as part of the state of emergency and then their liability would be removed, but resolution of the impact on the owners would still have to be worked out.

 

[Sandisw]

They have been very consistent on banking, but also in having resorts available for booking. I think if they try to push this impact onto members by further restricting points usage, you will see this going on for a long time and likely end up in a legal review.

Yep, I agree, this will be a complete mess later on. I am not sure what the impact will have, right now I am not impacted, but. likely will be with an mid April reservation. But, I think they have to address this, if the resorts stayed open, there would not be an issue. If the membership chooses not to book during a period of time, then can't use their points when they want to, is a different scenario than points being taken out of a "balanced" system.

I meant consistent on not allowing banked points to be banked again during the closure.

If the POS says it’s legal to suspend banking and borrowing, then there is nothing we can do, it is there for times when the system would be overloaded and this emergency is the exact type of situation that may warrant it,

You seem to think that rules are being broken. They are not, based on the language of the POS I can find. If you disagree with that language, I’d love for you to find me other parts..I am still reading...that you feel what they are doing isn’t within their power,

People will lose points. Its the nature of owning. if a resort had a fire and the rooms were taken out of service, something would have to be done. Again, we don’t know yet, and it’s too early in this situation to know, what is going to happen regards to that,

So, we are left with at least 2 weeks, most likely more with the resorts closed, an imbalance in points, and a DVC system that will need to be designed in the future to accommodate for all those points.

Step 1 will most likely be the suspension of banking and or borrowing as that is allowed under POS. What else they chose to do, if any, will not be known until this is over and we know how many point usage days were lost.

 

[Sandisw]

I still disagree, yes a hotel is completely different and people staying in a hotel have not rights to staying in that hotel past the time the hotel wants them to leave.

But a time share has OWNERS, not renters. While they may be temporary, they do have deeds and own a portion of that resort. Depriving someone of use of something they own is a big deal. Again, every other time share in the state is open and available for their owners if they want to use it. If the Governor ordered the closure, that would definitely be a different story, as they would have been ordered closed as part of the state of emergency and then their liability would be removed, but resolution of the impact on the owners would still have to be worked out.

Lets be honest. You have made up your mind thst what they did is illegal when it’s clear from the POS..what you agreed to when you bought...to allow DVCM be in charge of resort operations.

Just because other timeshare resorts didn’t close shop, doesn’t impact the decision of DVC to do so, Marriott just laid off tons of workers and you will begin to see those resorts shut down too.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Multiple hotels and timeshares have closed. That you've not heard about it doesn't mean it failed to happen.

Ex: https://www.chicagobusiness.com/com...icago-peninsula-hotels-close-amid-covid-fears

http://www.chaffeecountytimes.com/f...cle_3926197a-696c-11ea-a71a-7b082188a465.html
"Chaffee County has ordered all lodging businesses including hotels, motels, timeshares and short-term rentals to be closed effective immediately."

And TUG is full of closures of properties across the country.

Forced closures of businesses in many states are also depriving owners of their right to use their properties, and even to earn a living. And it's absolutely legal.

 

[TisBit]

Multiple hotels and timeshares have closed. That you've not heard about it doesn't mean it failed to happen.

Ex: https://www.chicagobusiness.com/com...icago-peninsula-hotels-close-amid-covid-fears

http://www.chaffeecountytimes.com/f...cle_3926197a-696c-11ea-a71a-7b082188a465.html
"Chaffee County has ordered all lodging businesses including hotels, motels, timeshares and short-term rentals to be closed effective immediately."

And TUG is full of closures of properties across the country.

Forced closures of businesses in many states are also depriving owners of their right to use their properties, and even to earn a living. And it's absolutely legal.

And I have addressed when they are ordered closed, not voluntarily closed. That falls into things like mandatory evacuations and the Government has ordered something. Maybe there are others that have done this, which is why I am asking. If this legal, there are a lot of people that know timeshares inside and out and own all over. They should have some type of knowledge of this happening and the responsibilities.

 

[TisBit]

I meant consistent on not allowing banked points to be banked again during the closure.

If the POS says it’s legal to suspend banking and borrowing, then there is nothing we can do, it is there for times when the system would be overloaded and this emergency is the exact type of situation that may warrant it,

You seem to think that rules are being broken. They are not, based on the language of the POS I can find. If you disagree with that language, I’d love for you to find me other parts..I am still reading...that you feel what they are doing isn’t within their power,

People will lose points. Its the nature of owning. if a resort had a fire and the rooms were taken out of service, something would have to be done. Again, we don’t know yet, and it’s too early in this situation to know, what is going to happen regards to that,

So, we are left with at least 2 weeks, most likely more with the resorts closed, an imbalance in points, and a DVC system that will need to be designed in the future to accommodate for all those points.

Step 1 will most likely be the suspension of banking and or borrowing as that is allowed under POS. What else they chose to do, if any, will not be known until this is over and we know how many point usage days were lost.

Lets be honest. You have made up your mind thst what they did is illegal when it’s clear from the POS..what you agreed to when you bought...to allow DVCM be in charge of resort operations.

Just because other timeshare resorts didn’t close shop, doesn’t impact the decision of DVC to do so, Marriott just laid off tons of workers and you will begin to see those resorts shut down too.

Actually, I haven't completely. I don't see a logical sense of this being legal, knowing the amount of law that I do know and understand. I am not a lawyer, especially specializing in timeshares or similar industry. But, the POS generally addresses any irregularities like you cite and address how those will be handled, such as banking and borrowing, redistribution of points, member benefits, etc. It even specifically calls out that we were buy ownership of the resort and the parks and other ancillary things like pools, restaurants do not affect that. Which is why, I think they would be on firm legal ground for shutting down everything and telling members too bad, you booked your stay, here are the rules. But they obviously were trying to be nice, but may be in a bind now.

I don't see anything in the POS discussing closures and that should be spelled out on how a closure would impact the ownership community. Trying to fit it into the POS through another avenue, lends me to believe that this is very unprecedented and likely should not legally have occurred. Saying that operations covers them closing the resorts at any time at their discretion just does not make any sense whatsoever and I don't think that any state would allow that type of power. They could literally lock all owners out and still require them to pay maintenance fees forever.

I do wonder and even thought about what has happened at other resorts if they suffered a total catastrophic loss. A fire could do it at smaller timeshares or a resort completely destroyed by a hurricane. Although, even those scenarios are outside of a decision by the management company's decision. Would love to hear any examples of something similar.

I suspect that they came out and announced this closure and did not think through it. I would think that their lawyers are potentially smacking their heads on a table, because this was not thought through very well. And, maybe I am totally wrong or unaware of some type of legal way they can do this without a specific order from the Government demanding they close.

 

[TisBit]

I did some research and it appears for an emergency like fires and hurricanes it is pretty common for the resort to close and no compensation and everyone continued to have to pay MF's. Most other scenarios seem to be that a structural repair forcing a resort to close temporarily were also acceptable and usually voted on by a board (DVC) and such.

But I cannot find another resort during this crisis that has closed voluntarily and not a result of government requirements forcing them to close. Maybe the Reedy Improvement District did release something closing the resorts (if they are allowed to) and that is the out for DVC?

 

[Sandisw]

Actually, I haven't completely. I don't see a logical sense of this being legal, knowing the amount of law that I do know and understand. I am not a lawyer, especially specializing in timeshares or similar industry. But, the POS generally addresses any irregularities like you cite and address how those will be handled, such as banking and borrowing, redistribution of points, member benefits, etc. It even specifically calls out that we were buy ownership of the resort and the parks and other ancillary things like pools, restaurants do not affect that. Which is why, I think they would be on firm legal ground for shutting down everything and telling members too bad, you booked your stay, here are the rules. But they obviously were trying to be nice, but may be in a bind now.

I don't see anything in the POS discussing closures and that should be spelled out on how a closure would impact the ownership community. Trying to fit it into the POS through another avenue, lends me to believe that this is very unprecedented and likely should not legally have occurred. Saying that operations covers them closing the resorts at any time at their discretion just does not make any sense whatsoever and I don't think that any state would allow that type of power. They could literally lock all owners out and still require them to pay maintenance fees forever.

I do wonder and even thought about what has happened at other resorts if they suffered a total catastrophic loss. A fire could do it at smaller timeshares or a resort completely destroyed by a hurricane. Although, even those scenarios are outside of a decision by the management company's decision. Would love to hear any examples of something similar.

I suspect that they came out and announced this closure and did not think through it. I would think that their lawyers are potentially smacking their heads on a table, because this was not thought through very well. And, maybe I am totally wrong or unaware of some type of legal way they can do this without a specific order from the Government demanding they close.

I don’t think I said they could close at their discretion. I said they are in charge of operations and thus, if they have a valid reason to close the resorts, and the guidelines from the CDC that came out on Sunday would support resort shut downs, it is in their power to do so on our behalf as owners, We don’t have a say in that decision. Remember, we were also under a state of national emergency when this decision was made, I’d say that alone provides support from the government to warrant a closure,

 

[BillPA]

to the OP, are you even a DVC owner? Or just someone that likes to stir the pot.

 

[Sandisw]

I did some research and it appears for an emergency like fires and hurricanes it is pretty common for the resort to close and no compensation and everyone continued to have to pay MF's. Most other scenarios seem to be that a structural repair forcing a resort to close temporarily were also acceptable and usually voted on by a board (DVC) and such.

But I cannot find another resort during this crisis that has closed voluntarily and not a result of government requirements forcing them to close. Maybe the Reedy Improvement District did release something closing the resorts (if they are allowed to) and that is the out for DVC?

Your example reminds me of what has happened here in NY. Last week, the governor recommended to businesses to cut their workforces down to have them work from home. Many didn’t and I get that for some it was a hardship.

But, yesterday, he came out and said that since it didn’t happen, he was now mandating thst they cut to 50% work at home and today, because cases spiked, he ordered it to 75%.

Point is, when it was a suggestion, many didn’t listen. Maybe I’d they had, the mandate would not have happened and businesses might have some more flexibility.

The fact that DVC did not wait to be ordered to close vs, close when a national emergency was declared is what you seem to be deeming irresponsible on the part of Disney Simply because you can’t find another resort who chose the same option.

IMO, it was not only legal, but the correct and responsible call and the impact on the system is the cost of owning a timeshare, Id venture to guess that if a vote took place, more owners than not would have voted yes,

ETA: Remember, Disney owns at least one weeks worth of points at every resort...IIRC...which means their share alone will absorb one week of closing. We also know that we max out with breakage every year so there must be rooms going unbooked there.

I believe the system already has the ability to absorb some of this if it’s short term.

 

[Sandisw]

https://www.wdwinfo.com/news-storie...-studios-orlando-guest-dies-from-coronavirus/

This is why you make the decision sooner rather than later

 

[TisBit]

IMO, it was not only legal, but the correct and responsible call and the impact on the system is the cost of owning a timeshare, Id venture to guess that if a vote took place, more owners than not would have voted yes,

I think you are also stuck in your opinion on the subject and that is fine. Time will tell, cause once everything settles down every actions and in action will be evaluated. But for the record, legal and responsible are two different things. And showing you were trying to be responsible, doesn't dissolve you of the legality of your decisions.

The New York example is where I actually say, yes, the Government should be clear and not make "suggestions".

 

[sethschroeder]

Lets be honest. You have made up your mind thst what they did is illegal when it’s clear from the POS..what you agreed to when you bought...to allow DVCM be in charge of resort operations.

Just because other timeshare resorts didn’t close shop, doesn’t impact the decision of DVC to do so, Marriott just laid off tons of workers and you will begin to see those resorts shut down too.

If we are being honest way to many people on here fall back to "Disney can do anything because you said you didn't have voting rights".

Do I think they should have closed? Yes

Do I think they should allowed any exceptions to banking and borrowing? No

Should Disney do something for those affected? Yes but they are not required to, something like a GC for points that expire that had a booked room which Disney cancelled I think is a good gesture.

If anything I think Disney needs to remember there are many many members and you can't throw out the rule book because of a terrible but recent event. Those member could have travel insurance but I can't by travel insurance for points in the future that are not even booked yet that could be impacted in ability to book rooms.

 

[TisBit]

to the OP, are you even a DVC owner? Or just someone that likes to stir the pot.

Why am I not being a fanboy enough for you to think I actually own DVC? For the amount of questioning on these boards for every decision DVC has ever made, I'm more surprised people aren't wondering how this occurred.

 

[TisBit]

And Disney being able to decide what is "responsible" independently of the Government directives, means they can decide independently not to reopen the resorts until it is beneficial for their business and bottom line. So, that really means they may lock owners out, long after states of emergencies are lifted and they start seeing enough bookings to decide it is worthwhile.

I really don't think they will do that, I think they desperately want to open as soon as possible. But, as a timeshare owner and being booked for the Star Wars Half Marathon, why cannot I decide to still use my timeshare that weekend, regardless if the parks are open or not? If the Federal Government has not restricted travel and the State of Florida has not restricted timeshares or hotel use at that time (and maybe they have started to roll back restrictions on other things), why can DVC legally stay closed.

I get it, we all support them being closed. I think it is a great idea, move people out as much as possible, protect employees, all of that is great. But, they do have a responsibility to be above board and protect the investments of all the owners. This can adversely affect the ownership interest of everyone involved and what those ripple effects will be we don't know.