What's up w/MS?

[Beca]

Deb and Bill,

I agree. You need to read my post closer. What they are not allowing is two reservations FOR THE SAME PARTY at two different resorts for the same night. That does NOT mean that a member can't make two reservations for the same night that do not involve the same parties on the reservation (remember that all parties on a reservation are now listed at the time of booking).

When I booked a ressie for friends in December, I booked rooms on the same nights we are going to be there. I was not sure who was going to be in our friends' room, so I asked MS to just put both ressies under my name until I knew for sure...then, I called back about a week later (after vacations had been secured), and changed the ressie to their name. The CM had no problems with this whatsoever. Now, it is a little different as she knew we would be keeping both ressies. However, our name was still on both ressies with no problem.

But, when I read posts like this, it makes me think that it IS going to be more difficult to get ressies outside your home resort in the future. I am very glad I own where I want to stay. I'm not sure if DVC can actually change any rules, but I have read a few instances lately where they seem to be trying to "bully" owners into NOT calling and listing day-by-day. And, seriously....if it were not for the knowledge of the people on these boards, the bullying might work. I KNOW it would work for my mom...she would be too upset, thinking that she was "bothering" someone, or possibly breaking the rules. I think we may start seeing MS "discouraging" some practices that are often espoused on these boards. I'm not saying it's right (I don't agree with it), but I think as the "fights" become harder to try to get into the smaller resorts at 7 months, MS is going to try to "put the reigns on" some practices.



Beca

 

[riopooh]

It is so weird to read this as I had a similiar discussion with MS today. I rec'd a transfer of pts from another memeber for the exact # of pts I need to secure 3 nights next Feb at the Beach Club (my home resort is WL). I plan on calling daily as a) it is a busy time b) my family and extended family are counting on this and c) I really really want to try the BC. The MS person I spoke to today told me that because they are transferred pts, it is a manual transaction and it will take alot of time and I should probably wait until the window opens for the entire trip. I replied that is a busy time - what if there is no availability. Her response was "well, it is alot of work." I said - well, I can be patience. I think she was just hoping that she doesn't get me!!

I don't know about everyone else, but sometimes I have to do things I don't want to at my job. I wish I had a job where it wasn't "alot of work!"

 

[Doctor P]

I think you all need to keep in mind that this is NOT a typical situation and it is NOT a case of someone being bullied about making a RESERVATION day by day. This is a case where for the entire stay there is currently no availability and an existing waiting list for each night. This is NOT a case of someone being asked to not make a RESERVATION night-by-night. Subtle, but important, difference, IMHO.

 

[Dean]

The question is really what is the rules. The rules allow you to book day by day, wait list either day by day or all at once and to hold 10 reservations for the same time at different resorts if you want and have the points. What they CM likes or wants is really irrelevant in the situation. IF the OP plans to wait list day by day, and accept the days as the come through one at at time; that is what she should do. ASAMOF, if she waits, she's going to be behind a lot of other people. What she can't do is wait list day by day then change it to all at once and keep the earlier priority. She could certainly change it but would fall in line at the points she made the change and lose her place in line otherwise.

I really don't think there's been any change with MS other than one or two rogue CM who are aggravated with following the rules in place. I'll be the first to say, and I have previously, that some of the rules are cumbersome and add a lot of work to MS which DOES cost us all money. Likely a fair chunk of our dues. And they could make changes that would reduce the work. What they could do would be to institute a minimum stay, which they can up to 5 days, and to allow one to book stays for a period of time one one call. To do so up to the minimum stay would be easy for them to manage and a likely more fair to the members overall than the current system, with some ups and downs of course.

 

[keishashadow]

IMO I was asked NOT to make a res. day-by-day????

I am making the 2nd res. day-by-day, beginning with the 1st night I WL'd for yesterday.
Today, I will try & add on the 2nd night & so forth. Sure hope some of the nights will be available & I don't have to WL for every night.

As for transferring points into your account, MS advises that it can take up to 3 business days for the manual transfer to reflect on the books, then the points do take on the characteristics of your account. However, I specifically looked for my UY when I needed extra points via a transfer to avoid this snafu.

Additionally, if you've transferred in points w/the intent of using their 11 month window, beware. CMs cautioned me that it can take up to a couple days for them to verify that also (via a manual pool) if they are busy/it's a holiday booking period.

Hope I get a happy CM today...TGIF.

BTW, multiple ADR's will automatically cancel each other out in the system. Last time I looked WDW didn't care if you had 2 resort res. as long as you paid the deposit. I'm not going to keep my 1st res. after I secure my 2nd choice & probably wouldn't go thru the hassle of calling day-by-day for it, except it is a minor holiday period (Columbus Day).

I think you all need to keep in mind that this is NOT a typical situation and it is NOT a case of someone being bullied about making a RESERVATION day by day. This is a case where for the entire stay there is currently no availability and an existing waiting list for each night. This is NOT a case of someone being asked to not make a RESERVATION night-by-night. Subtle, but important, difference, IMHO.

 

[Doctor P]

Last time I looked WDW didn't care if you had 2 resort res. as long as you paid the deposit. I'm not going to keep my 1st res. after I secure my 2nd choice & probably wouldn't go thru the hassle of calling day-by-day for it, except it is a minor holiday period (Columbus Day).

There has been a lot of discussion on the boards about this. Now that MS (and Disney in general) is asking for names to fill each space on the reservation, they are really starting to crack down on holding more than one room reservation for the same party and there are numerous instances where this has not been allowed, and it has nothing to do with multiple deposits (that has been made clear in several threads). You were the only one on the boards who was party to the conversation that you had with MS. The way that I interpreted what you said the CM said was this: there is no availability for any night that you are seeking so you are going to need to wait list every night. Furthermore, because you want to not cancel your reservation until you have every night, you will need to do your wait list for the full time period rather than night by night because you cannot hold more than one reservation for your party for the same night. I think what Disney is finding is that they are losing business by people holding multiple reservations (people are told there is no room at the Inn and make alternative plans and the room ends up empty or some portion of them remain empty). I am not really criticizing what you are trying to do, but I also, contrary to Dean, do not believe that we are, by right, entitled to more than one reservation for the same night for the same people. Multiple reservations, of course. Multiple reservations for the same party, no. I don't think you will find anything in the POS that you can assert that Disney can't prohibit more than one reservation for a given night for the same party.

 

[keishashadow]

My confidence in MS is restored! Spoke to a professional & courteous CM this morning.

He indicated that DVC is happy to process my res. request exactly as I am doing and that it is not an uncommon nor an unreasonable request.

Did get the 2nd night of res. request and am hoping that I'll be able to add the next few days plus link my 1st night WL when it becomes avail.

Guess I'm doomed to be lumped in w/the speculators who reserve holiday weeks & rent them out for profit - whoa is me!

BTW, I recently changed a res. from AKL to the Cont. When I made the change the CM inquired if I wanted to keep the AKL room as a "back-up" (since I was only able to secure the Cont. @ rack rate) - I did decline.

 

[Doctor P]

Glad it worked out for you.

 

[keishashadow]

Thanx!

Glad it worked out for you.

 

[Dean]

There has been a lot of discussion on the boards about this. Now that MS (and Disney in general) is asking for names to fill each space on the reservation, they are really starting to crack down on holding more than one room reservation for the same party and there are numerous instances where this has not been allowed, and it has nothing to do with multiple deposits (that has been made clear in several threads). You were the only one on the boards who was party to the conversation that you had with MS. The way that I interpreted what you said the CM said was this: there is no availability for any night that you are seeking so you are going to need to wait list every night. Furthermore, because you want to not cancel your reservation until you have every night, you will need to do your wait list for the full time period rather than night by night because you cannot hold more than one reservation for your party for the same night. I think what Disney is finding is that they are losing business by people holding multiple reservations (people are told there is no room at the Inn and make alternative plans and the room ends up empty or some portion of them remain empty). I am not really criticizing what you are trying to do, but I also, contrary to Dean, do not believe that we are, by right, entitled to more than one reservation for the same night for the same people. Multiple reservations, of course. Multiple reservations for the same party, no. I don't think you will find anything in the POS that you can assert that Disney can't prohibit more than one reservation for a given night for the same party.

DVC does not care, nor should they, if you have multiple points reservations. I currently have 7 reservations in my name for Dec at 2 different resorts. There would be no basis for DVC to stand on to prevent multiple reservations in one name. Many times one doesn't know who will be in the room or what unit you will end up with. No way DVC could prevent one having multiple reservations or for that matter, being on multiple reservations on check in.

 

[Doctor P]

DVC does not care, nor should they, if you have multiple points reservations. I currently have 7 reservations in my name for Dec at 2 different resorts. There would be no basis for DVC to stand on to prevent multiple reservations in one name. Many times one doesn't know who will be in the room or what unit you will end up with. No way DVC could prevent one having multiple reservations or for that matter, being on multiple reservations on check in.

I will agree about the part about having your name on different reservations, but we will have to agree to disagree about the rest. Not only do I think that they do care, I think they should care. And I will further suggest that I think the chances of being able to continue using this practice may decline in the future. And it would actually be quite easy (and legal) to prevent (though I might add it also can be not difficult to circumvent). However, I think the likeliest scenario (and I am guessing) is that they officially institute the policy in a "formal" way and then selectively enforce it to curb abuses as necessary. A little like the police chiefs who have told me that one of their major tools in fighting gangs is simply to use their discretion to enforce the existing laws more vigorously. BTW, I do the multiple reservations thing a lot with cash reservations outside of Disney, so I do understand why people do it. Furthermore, I recognize that many people do it and do not in any way really abuse the system. Unfortunately, the tactic is also used to abuse the system and that could be curbed somewhat, IMHO, with minimal effort and pain to those who are not abusing the system.

 

[jarestel]

A little like the police chiefs who have told me that one of their major tools in fighting gangs is simply to use their discretion to enforce the existing laws more vigorously.

The difference in this case is that the "existing laws" permit day by day bookings and multiple reservations. A simple call to MS or a skim through the DVC "bible" substantiates this clearly enough. Now if you are proposing new laws to do away with those things, then it's a different discussion.

 

[Doctor P]

The difference in this case is that the "existing laws" permit day by day bookings and multiple reservations. A simple call to MS or a skim through the DVC "bible" substantiates this clearly enough. Now if you are proposing new laws to do away with those things, then it's a different discussion.

There is nothing in existing declarations that explicitly allows multiple bookings for the same party for the same night. A member can make more than one reservation for the same night, but that is not the same thing. There is also nothing that explicitly allows day by day booking, but I think it is reasonably implied. One thing that has to be kept in mind is that technology and other things have changed since the POS's were written and some things are possible to track that were not feasible before.

 

[Dean]

I will agree about the part about having your name on different reservations, but we will have to agree to disagree about the rest. Not only do I think that they do care, I think they should care. And I will further suggest that I think the chances of being able to continue using this practice may decline in the future. And it would actually be quite easy (and legal) to prevent (though I might add it also can be not difficult to circumvent). However, I think the likeliest scenario (and I am guessing) is that they officially institute the policy in a "formal" way and then selectively enforce it to curb abuses as necessary. A little like the police chiefs who have told me that one of their major tools in fighting gangs is simply to use their discretion to enforce the existing laws more vigorously. BTW, I do the multiple reservations thing a lot with cash reservations outside of Disney, so I do understand why people do it. Furthermore, I recognize that many people do it and do not in any way really abuse the system. Unfortunately, the tactic is also used to abuse the system and that could be curbed somewhat, IMHO, with minimal effort and pain to those who are not abusing the system.

I guess I'm not totally sure where we're disagreeing. But having read the POS and FL statutes applicable, I can see no way that DVC would prevent duplicate reservations in ANY way. I can see why some might want to but I see no way to do so for DVC, CRO would be a different matter. All I've seen is a couple of posts about MS complaints which seem to be rogue CM imparting their on personal sense of "fairness". In on case a call to a supervisor got a apology and did not produce a "change in policy" statement. In the other that I recall, a follow up call took care of the issue.

There is nothing in existing declarations that explicitly allows multiple bookings for the same party for the same night. A member can make more than one reservation for the same night, but that is not the same thing. There is also nothing that explicitly allows day by day booking, but I think it is reasonably implied. One thing that has to be kept in mind is that technology and other things have changed since the POS's were written and some things are possible to track that were not feasible before.

The way I read it would require authority to prevent it, not permission to have the multiple reservations. IMO, DVC would have to produce proof of authority to prevent it and the member would not have to produce authority to do so other than the points available. This is what many don't seem to realize, that the points availability is the rate limiting step here. But from a realistic step, I'd say that a large portion of the reservations are made without truly knowing the party makeup.

I'm reading between the lines so you correct me if I am wrong. It seems you feel that keeping two reservations with the intent of using one or the other is wrong. If so, we certainly will have to agree to disagree. But I can tell you that DVC can and will do multiple books for the same people, same dates and even different resorts. As I noted, I have 7 different units over 2 resorts for Dec. They include a 3 BR, standard view and BW options. They are all in my name and I don't know which ones I will keep and which ones I won't or even if I will possibly rent out one or two of them if things don't work out. I'm sure most people read this and assume since there are so many totally different choices that I booked with the idea of renting, that would be far from the truth but OK it was true. Actually, my daughter is getting Married and then the entire family is going to WDW. I've also invited a select group from the groom's side but they obviously wouldn't want to stay with us. So I used the available points at my two home resorts to book the best unit options available with the idea of changing over at the 7 month window for a portion of the units.

They could essentially prevent day by day bookings by instituting a minimum stay, which they could legally do up to a length of 5 days.

 

[jarestel]

There is nothing in existing declarations that explicitly allows multiple bookings for the same party for the same night. A member can make more than one reservation for the same night, but that is not the same thing. There is also nothing that explicitly allows day by day booking, but I think it is reasonably implied. One thing that has to be kept in mind is that technology and other things have changed since the POS's were written and some things are possible to track that were not feasible before.

One thing to keep in mind is that all it takes to change a CRO policy on Monday is a memo to the appropriate people on the preceding Friday. Not so simple with DVC, since it's a timeshare and state laws come into play whenever changes to the signed contracts are proposed.

The items in existing declarations that explicitly cover when and how reservations can be made are certainly clearly spelled out. If a member has the points, current and/or borrowed, and wants to make a reservation within the applicable booking windows, the documents say all conditions for making a reservation are met.

It doesn't really matter ( contractually ) if the member wants to make 7 one-day reservations or 1 seven-day reservation. Or if the member wants to make 50 reservations all for the same time period, as long as the points are available. It's pretty simple and there's not a lot of wiggle room, legally speaking. However, I would strongly doubt anyone within DVC would seriously propose re-writing the booking policies. But it makes for an interesting exercise here on the information superhighway!

 

[Doctor P]

One thing to keep in mind is that all it takes to change a CRO policy on Monday is a memo to the appropriate people on the preceding Friday. Not so simple with DVC, since it's a timeshare and state laws come into play whenever changes to the signed contracts are proposed.

The items in existing declarations that explicitly cover when and how reservations can be made are certainly clearly spelled out. If a member has the points, current and/or borrowed, and wants to make a reservation within the applicable booking windows, the documents say all conditions for making a reservation are met.

It doesn't really matter ( contractually ) if the member wants to make 7 one-day reservations or 1 seven-day reservation. Or if the member wants to make 50 reservations all for the same time period, as long as the points are available. It's pretty simple and there's not a lot of wiggle room, legally speaking. However, I would strongly doubt anyone within DVC would seriously propose re-writing the booking policies. But it makes for an interesting exercise here on the information superhighway!

Actually, you are incorrect about this. The declarations are SILENT on this particular issue. There is nothing in the declarations that would prevent DVC from preventing the same occupying party from having more than one reservation for the same night at different resorts. The language in the declarations may protect more than one reservation made by a member, but it does not protect more than one reservation for a given occupying party.

 

[Dean]

The language in the declarations may protect more than one reservation made by a member, but it does not protect more than one reservation for a given occupying party.

While I understand the idea that one person can't be in more than one place at one time, there are other considerations. One is that it's not an uncommon practice to have the member on multiple reservations to get a key and access to each unit, esp when kids are concerned. And it's not that uncommon to get say a 2 BR or 3 BR and one or more studios and give others access to the larger unit and the kitchen and LR. Besides this wouldn't be an issue until actual checkin.

 

[Doctor P]

While I understand the idea that one person can't be in more than one place at one time, there are other considerations. One is that it's not an uncommon practice to have the member on multiple reservations to get a key and access to each unit, esp when kids are concerned. And it's not that uncommon to get say a 2 BR or 3 BR and one or more studios and give others access to the larger unit and the kitchen and LR. Besides this wouldn't be an issue until actual checkin.

I understand this, and I don't think anybody enforcing such a policy (if they were going to strictly enforce it) would even give a second thought to the "multiple" issue in these circumstances. What I am talking about, and of course honesty comes into play here (LOL), is the two reservations for persons A, B, C, and D for two studios for the same night at VWL and BCV (or something like that). Yes, this could end up in some messy situations which we need not get into with fear of giving people more ideas about gaming the system, but I think this is going to happen sooner rather than later with some disincentives for members who try to game the system. And, actually, it is becoming more and more of an issue before check in. As I understand from some people in the hotel industry, the asking for names of guests up front is also related to Homeland Security and more and more places are denying accomodations to parties not listed on the initial reservation or revoking reservations for parties that have occupants not listed on the reservations. Some will laugh and think this is just a paranoid whacko speaking, but when you think of having to surrender your passport as you check in at many hotels overseas in order for them to confirm your identity and do a background check (which we were warned about prior to our 1997 trip to Europe and it came to fruition a few times) this is actually fairly mainstream and believeable. All you have to do to see some other changes is to look on the cruise board. DCL and other cruise lines are no longer allowed to sell very last minute tickets because their manifests have to be provided to Homeland Security several days in advance. So, there are many levels to the issue here. BTW, there is a lot of innocent "double booking" that goes on, I know. In general, any such policy enforcement I don't think would be AIMED at that, but might have the result of reducing it.

 

[jarestel]

Actually, you are incorrect about this. The declarations are SILENT on this particular issue. There is nothing in the declarations that would prevent DVC from preventing the same occupying party from having more than one reservation for the same night at different resorts. The language in the declarations may protect more than one reservation made by a member, but it does not protect more than one reservation for a given occupying party.

It's not likely that a member will retain multiple reservations if he/she has no intention of using them, so it's not a "real" scenario. If they are retained, then obviously someone is going to be using them ( guests of the member or renters ) and those names can be put on the reservation at any time. So, whether or not the initial reservations were all made under the same name isn't of any real significance. And it's not likely that DVC will put themselves into the position of trying to ascertain "motive" when a member makes a reservation.

I understand your concern that making multiple "just in case" reservations can have an affect on the ability of other members to acquire accomodations, but again, most members probably don't have the points or the desire to make multiple reservations for the same time period as a backup plan. I guess I don't see the difference between a member holding 2 reservations for Easter week, or the same member holding a week in April and a week in December. Same points, same member. Same rules for making reservations.

I don't think the lack of stated exceptions to the booking rules in the contracts implies that there can be exceptions to the booking rules. Could DVC do it? Theoretically, they might be able to implement changes, but I don't see any upside for them in doing so. Aside from a few reservations CMs who don't like having to enter data, I don't see any benefit for DVC as a whole to contemplate changes. I can't imagine Jim Lewis and his staff sitting around worrying that the members are booking day by day.

 

[Dean]

I understand this, and I don't think anybody enforcing such a policy (if they were going to strictly enforce it) would even give a second thought to the "multiple" issue in these circumstances. What I am talking about, and of course honesty comes into play here (LOL), is the two reservations for persons A, B, C, and D for two studios for the same night at VWL and BCV (or something like that). Yes, this could end up in some messy situations which we need not get into with fear of giving people more ideas about gaming the system, but I think this is going to happen sooner rather than later with some disincentives for members who try to game the system. And, actually, it is becoming more and more of an issue before check in. As I understand from some people in the hotel industry, the asking for names of guests up front is also related to Homeland Security and more and more places are denying accomodations to parties not listed on the initial reservation or revoking reservations for parties that have occupants not listed on the reservations. Some will laugh and think this is just a paranoid whacko speaking, but when you think of having to surrender your passport as you check in at many hotels overseas in order for them to confirm your identity and do a background check (which we were warned about prior to our 1997 trip to Europe and it came to fruition a few times) this is actually fairly mainstream and believeable. All you have to do to see some other changes is to look on the cruise board. DCL and other cruise lines are no longer allowed to sell very last minute tickets because their manifests have to be provided to Homeland Security several days in advance. So, there are many levels to the issue here. BTW, there is a lot of innocent "double booking" that goes on, I know. In general, any such policy enforcement I don't think would be AIMED at that, but might have the result of reducing it.

I am still having a little trouble trying to figure out exactly what you think is the problem here. You are talking about gaming the system which implies that someone is doing something shady or wrong. If that is your feeling then we are on totally separate sides of the fence on this one. The way the system works you have the following options:

• Call day by day to make reservations or all at one time, your choice.
• Make reservations for multiple unit sizes.
• Make reservations for multiple resorts.
• Hold as many reservations as you can muster the points.
• Change your location at anytime you want and there is availability.

Could DVC instituted changes that would affect these issues, I'd say yes but only to a degree. The most likely one within the rules would be to institute a minimum stay. But I'd think the could also impose cancellation fees and multiple reservation fees if they really wanted though I don't see it happening. I see no procedural or legal way for them to restrict by number of reservations, location, unit size or even who is on the reservation other than the home resort priority and number of points available. I could see them insisting that each person was only listed once for actual check in.

Do realize that these options have costs in mind which we pay. Soy any reduction in options could and should give a savings of the yearly fees to the members. They could also suspend banking and borrowing which would have an effect on some of these issues. And every action of a member affects the rest of the membership to a degree, some more than others. You may not be able to get in The week of Xmas next year because of all the units I have reserved but such is life.