Would you join a lawsuit against DVC to stop/revert the 2020 reallocation?

[KAT4DISNEY]

DVC is now stuck in a limbo. They've already made changes at many resorts moving points across units. SSR is the resort with the gratest changes (THV, new preferred and standard views), but I can remember also BLT and AKV reclassifications. I would say those changes were in the interest of the members, but if they rolled back the 2020 reallocation because moving points across units is not possible (there might be another reason) then they're in trouble because some changes have been in place for years. Are they just going to just ignore the fact and hope no one sues? Or are they going to roll back the changes next year?

Another consideration. Let's say instead DVC can legally move points across units and increase the cost of studios while decreasing the cost of other units. Don't you think this should be clearly spelled out in the POS and the accompanying documents? I know that a buyer should carefully read the POS before signing, but we're talking something that has been debated for months here, with reasonable people having conflicting views and DVC itself clearly specifying something different in the past. Someone buying points for a specific unit size might find himself in 5 years with the cost for its unit doubled. it's not something that can be buried in a 120 page documents, it must be clearly spelled out. If they can really do this, then they're using shady sales practices, bordering a scam. If they continue to argue it's in their right, then we should go to the regulators and ask that the sale process to be rectified. In the signed contract DVC should add a note saying:

"We are in our right to reallocate points as we see fit and increase the cost of a specific unit type over time without any limit. The points you're purchasing might not be able to let you book your vacation at any time of the year".

I'm not 100% positive but for BLT I believe the shift may have stayed working the vacation home types and just moved between views. I also did not analyze SSR for this same thing but did they move the points between vacation homes or just take the pool and create views? It still wouldn't be based on seasons for either but might not violate both that and shifting across vacation homes. THV of course did. AKV I think may also have stayed within the home type?

 

[ThinkBelieveDream&Dare]

DVC is now stuck in a limbo. They've already made changes at many resorts moving points across units. SSR is the resort with the gratest changes (THV, new preferred and standard views), but I can remember also BLT and AKV reclassifications. I would say those changes were in the interest of the members, but if they rolled back the 2020 reallocation because moving points across units is not possible (there might be another reason) then they're in trouble because some changes have been in place for years. Are they just going to just ignore the fact and hope no one sues? Or are they going to roll back the changes next year?

Another consideration. Let's say instead DVC can legally move points across units and increase the cost of studios while decreasing the cost of other units. Don't you think this should be clearly spelled out in the POS and the accompanying documents? I know that a buyer should carefully read the POS before signing, but we're talking something that has been debated for months here, with reasonable people having conflicting views and DVC itself clearly specifying something different in the past. Someone buying points for a specific unit size might find himself in 5 years with the cost for its unit doubled. it's not something that can be buried in a 120 page documents, it must be clearly spelled out. If they can really do this, then they're using shady sales practices, bordering a scam. If they continue to argue it's in their right, then we should go to the regulators and ask that the sale process to be rectified. In the signed contract DVC should add a note saying:

"We are in our right to reallocate points as we see fit and increase the cost of a specific unit type over time without any limit. The points you're purchasing might not be able to let you book your vacation at any time of the year".

@zavandor Disney leads prospective purchasers to believe that:
A specific number of home resort points guarantees the same vacation choice for the length of their contract; and that they can use their points to reserve a vacation at many other resorts.
It's unfortunate for anyone who doesn't realise that the Disney machine is not always what it seems to be.
Thank goodness for the information shared on this site.
This screenshot is taken directly from https://disneyvacationclub.disney.go.com/explore-membership/
(* comment was found at the very bottom of the site page)

 

[OUjenny21]

I just received all my Riviera contract paperwork but I haven't signed yet. I was planning to buy Riviera but reading this multi-site POS and the Riviera POS makes me nervous about it. There seems to be a lot of questionable language in this. I have been catching up and sifting through all of these posts and comments and I'm looking for some insight (which I know is just guess work). Questions below.

1. Paperwork specifically says that vacation points may not be rented unless you have first made a reservation with those points in the owner's name and that "...any sums due to the Association as assessments must be deducted from the gross rentals and paid directly to the Association." Does that language exist in contracts pre 1/19/19? Not that I plan to rent my points, but it's nice to have that option and this makes it sound like they are about to lay down new restrictions regarding renting points? How would they deduct rental income as annual assessments unless they were planning to make drastic changes here? Am I missing something?

2. Paperwork says it has the right to delete a DVC Resort including, Riviera Resort, in which case the owners at the remaining DVC Resorts will not be able to reserve Riviera AND the Riviera owners will not be able to book at the remaining DVC Resorts. I figured it would say other owners couldn't book at Riviera, but this means I could buy Riviera and they could decide to still delete it and I'd lose access to all the original 14 resorts? Was this in the language for other contracts before 1-19-19? My concern is that older contract deeds say owners can use their vacation points at any of the DVC resorts within the Club. So since Riviera is in the Club, I'm not sure if it would legally stand to restrict resale owners from booking at Riviera. If it is legally determined that buying into the Club entitles ALL owners (even resale owners) access to any of the resorts within the club, what happens then? The resale members for all the original 14 resorts would then be allowed to book at Riviera but if I sell my Riviera contract, I'm still bound by the agreement I bought into that says resale at Riviera DOES in fact take away booking at any other resort. Does this concern make sense? I'm afraid that if DVD takes back the resale restrictions on the O14 regarding Riviera, it won't matter or help me as a direct Riviera buyer because I, in fact, HAVE to sign that my resale contract doesn't get to book anywhere else. The people buying direct Riviera seem to be the only ones without legal argument of any kind. The only other thing I can think of that would prevent O14 resale owners from booking Riviera would be to remove it entirely from the Club. Would they even do that? Because it might help them to prevent O14 resale owners from booking Riviera but they surely would have a much harder time selling Riviera if direct purchasers couldn't even access the original 14 resorts?

 

[skier_pete]

I just received all my Riviera contract paperwork but I haven't signed yet. I was planning to buy Riviera but reading this multi-site POS and the Riviera POS makes me nervous about it. There seems to be a lot of questionable language in this. I have been catching up and sifting through all of these posts and comments and I'm looking for some insight (which I know is just guess work). Questions below.

1. Paperwork specifically says that vacation points may not be rented unless you have first made a reservation with those points in the owner's name and that "...any sums due to the Association as assessments must be deducted from the gross rentals and paid directly to the Association." Does that language exist in contracts pre 1/19/19? Not that I plan to rent my points, but it's nice to have that option and this makes it sound like they are about to lay down new restrictions regarding renting points? How would they deduct rental income as annual assessments unless they were planning to make drastic changes here? Am I missing something?

2. Paperwork says it has the right to delete a DVC Resort including, Riviera Resort, in which case the owners at the remaining DVC Resorts will not be able to reserve Riviera AND the Riviera owners will not be able to book at the remaining DVC Resorts. I figured it would say other owners couldn't book at Riviera, but this means I could buy Riviera and they could decide to still delete it and I'd lose access to all the original 14 resorts? Was this in the language for other contracts before 1-19-19? My concern is that older contract deeds say owners can use their vacation points at any of the DVC resorts within the Club. So since Riviera is in the Club, I'm not sure if it would legally stand to restrict resale owners from booking at Riviera. If it is legally determined that buying into the Club entitles ALL owners (even resale owners) access to any of the resorts within the club, what happens then? The resale members for all the original 14 resorts would then be allowed to book at Riviera but if I sell my Riviera contract, I'm still bound by the agreement I bought into that says resale at Riviera DOES in fact take away booking at any other resort. Does this concern make sense? I'm afraid that if DVD takes back the resale restrictions on the O14 regarding Riviera, it won't matter or help me as a direct Riviera buyer because I, in fact, HAVE to sign that my resale contract doesn't get to book anywhere else. The people buying direct Riviera seem to be the only ones without legal argument of any kind. The only other thing I can think of that would prevent O14 resale owners from booking Riviera would be to remove it entirely from the Club. Would they even do that? Because it might help them to prevent O14 resale owners from booking Riviera but they surely would have a much harder time selling Riviera if direct purchasers couldn't even access the original 14 resorts?

OK - I'm not an expert - but I believe #1 has been there all along. Basically it says you are not renting your points, you are renting the reservation booked on the points. This has more or less always been the case when renting. It also says you have to pay your maintenance fees yourself, that you can not farm out your maintenance fees in the rental, and that is also the case.

#2 - I cannot really answer this question - certainly not from a legal standpoint. I will say that for all the things they've done to dissuade the resale market, they have never taken away something from an existing owner. I seriously doubt that they are ever going to pull Riviera from the club, or try and pull previous resale owners from being able to book at Riviera.

Something you need to really understand whether under the influence of the Pixie dust or not. Disney doesn't give a damn about you or your contract once you've bought. However, they DO give a damn about selling future contracts, so they are generally unlikely to make changes that would hurt future sales. Pulling Riviera (or a future resort) from the club is generally not going to be good for the brand. I seriously doubt it ever happens.

 

[crvetter]

I just received all my Riviera contract paperwork but I haven't signed yet. I was planning to buy Riviera but reading this multi-site POS and the Riviera POS makes me nervous about it. There seems to be a lot of questionable language in this. I have been catching up and sifting through all of these posts and comments and I'm looking for some insight (which I know is just guess work). Questions below.

1. Paperwork specifically says that vacation points may not be rented unless you have first made a reservation with those points in the owner's name and that "...any sums due to the Association as assessments must be deducted from the gross rentals and paid directly to the Association." Does that language exist in contracts pre 1/19/19? Not that I plan to rent my points, but it's nice to have that option and this makes it sound like they are about to lay down new restrictions regarding renting points? How would they deduct rental income as annual assessments unless they were planning to make drastic changes here? Am I missing something?

2. Paperwork says it has the right to delete a DVC Resort including, Riviera Resort, in which case the owners at the remaining DVC Resorts will not be able to reserve Riviera AND the Riviera owners will not be able to book at the remaining DVC Resorts. I figured it would say other owners couldn't book at Riviera, but this means I could buy Riviera and they could decide to still delete it and I'd lose access to all the original 14 resorts? Was this in the language for other contracts before 1-19-19? My concern is that older contract deeds say owners can use their vacation points at any of the DVC resorts within the Club. So since Riviera is in the Club, I'm not sure if it would legally stand to restrict resale owners from booking at Riviera. If it is legally determined that buying into the Club entitles ALL owners (even resale owners) access to any of the resorts within the club, what happens then? The resale members for all the original 14 resorts would then be allowed to book at Riviera but if I sell my Riviera contract, I'm still bound by the agreement I bought into that says resale at Riviera DOES in fact take away booking at any other resort. Does this concern make sense? I'm afraid that if DVD takes back the resale restrictions on the O14 regarding Riviera, it won't matter or help me as a direct Riviera buyer because I, in fact, HAVE to sign that my resale contract doesn't get to book anywhere else. The people buying direct Riviera seem to be the only ones without legal argument of any kind. The only other thing I can think of that would prevent O14 resale owners from booking Riviera would be to remove it entirely from the Club. Would they even do that? Because it might help them to prevent O14 resale owners from booking Riviera but they surely would have a much harder time selling Riviera if direct purchasers couldn't even access the original 14 resorts?

Both of these sections existed in old contracts going back to Boardwalk, I believe, (but definitely been in there for a while) when the Club was officially created with a second resort. #2 is basically to say that if Riviera is no longer in the club it can't access other resorts in the club. There are provisions for what deletion and how it can occur, some big ones are total loss of the property in a casualty event and if DVCMC is fired by the association BVTC reserves the right to delete the resort. Around the section you found this sentence I believe it lays out in detail when and how the resort could be deleted.

Neither of these sections has little to do with the resale restrictions as they existed in prior resorts contract language.

 

[zavandor]

Something you need to really understand whether under the influence of the Pixie dust or not. Disney doesn't give a damn about you or your contract once you've bought. However, they DO give a damn about selling future contracts, so they are generally unlikely to make changes that would hurt future sales. Pulling Riviera (or a future resort) from the club is generally not going to be good for the brand. I seriously doubt it ever happens.

For example, DVC will never restrict resale to booking othe resorts, it would devalue the contracts making direct less appealing and cause a lot of bad publicity onthe Internet that could hurt sales.... oh wait.

 

[Dean]

For example, DVC will never restrict resale to booking othe resorts, it would devalue the contracts making direct less appealing and cause a lot of bad publicity onthe Internet that could hurt sales.... oh wait.

As I've said before, DVC doesn't care about resale values per se, what they care about is retail sales. I think those owning and looking at DVC has proven they're sheep led to slaughter. Sure some will say they won't buy or will sell in a given situation but most that say so will end up not following through. The perfect scenario is the perception of resale value but the reality that it's not feasible. Timeshares worth pennies immediately after the sale still are able to sell so DVC will continue to do OK. They may have to make changes and they may have to get more aggressive on the sales side to do so, we'll see. DVC has ALWAYS been just a decent timeshare, albeit one where the core is at WDW.

 

[Bing Showei]

Disney doesn't give a damn about you or your contract once you've bought.

Amen. I love how there are some direct owners celebrating that Disney is "finally doing something" about the difficulty with booking studios at BCV in October 3 months out. Take that, resale losers.

Changes are made to sell contracts, not to help the membership with booking. If Disney cared about the latter, they would stop the practice of selling small contracts against larger units, they'd raise the minimum buy in, and they'd adjust points seasonally within a unit to even out demand. None of that will happen because none of it helps with direct sales.

 

[OUjenny21]

I get that Disney doesn't care after you've bought. But as a first time direct buyer, I am a target audience and I have major reservations on the contract they just sent me which is going to negatively impact their bottom line. I know they can delete a DVC Resort for fire, etc, but doesn't this seem more than that? I might be paranoid but it seems like there may be some larger plan here regarding Riviera and separation of any new resorts. I don't want to get into the middle of that as a buyer if I am going to get bad news in 6 months on what my new contract means.

I don't know what older contracts looked like but didn't they expressly state that owners could use points at any of the DVC Resorts within the Club? Or was it always in there that new DVC Resorts may enter the Club and that you could possibly never have access to them?

 

[Bing Showei]

I think those owning and looking at DVC has proven they're sheep led to slaughter. Sure some will say they won't buy or will sell in a given situation but most that say so will end up not following through.

Yup. Guilty as charged.

Let me ask you though, Dean. Say my family enjoys going to WDW and we've gone 6 times over the last 4 years. We don't want to pay cash rates for 1BRs at the Four Seasons [or insert any nice resort with 1/2BR options and FP benefits here] every time we visit. My son is young and still enjoys being at the parks and we're excited to see all the new rides coming to the park over the next several years. What is a sensible way for us to do Disney financially if not by way of the Disney timeshare?

I'm not dismissing what you're saying, but I'm honestly asking because I've heard you say it before. Disney has a monopoly on the parks and if you're a family that avoids hotel rooms and enjoy staying in suites when you travel, what option at WDW do you have? The FP bookings are a big deal because it really improves the quality of the time you spend in the parks, allows you to hit the rides you want, affords you a chance to tour the parks efficiently so you can enjoy the pool most times of the year. I'd be open to viable solution if you have one. I don't see one that is as "economical" (no, the irony is not lost on me) as the timeshare route.

 

[crvetter]

I get that Disney doesn't care after you've bought. But as a first time direct buyer, I am a target audience and I have major reservations on the contract they just sent me which is going to negatively impact their bottom line. I know they can delete a DVC Resort for fire, etc, but doesn't this seem more than that? I might be paranoid but it seems like there may be some larger plan here regarding Riviera and separation of any new resorts. I don't want to get into the middle of that as a buyer if I am going to get bad news in 6 months on what my new contract means.

I don't know what older contracts looked like but didn't they expressly state that owners could use points at any of the DVC Resorts within the Club? Or was it always in there that new DVC Resorts may enter the Club and that you could possibly never have access to them?

The language on deleting the resorts from the club has always existed in the contracts. Personally I don't see them deleting a resort unless there is an extenuating circumstance but legally they need to have language that allows them to do so. The terms of which a resort could be deleted are clearly spelled out in the section you've found that sentence. The comments in this thread were more related to the original 2020 point reallocation and the resale restrictions on Riviera, which are clearly in a separate section of the POS. This is mostly the only parts of the POS which are are significantly different than the other resorts' POS.

 

[Dean]

I get that Disney doesn't care after you've bought. But as a first time direct buyer, I am a target audience and I have major reservations on the contract they just sent me which is going to negatively impact their bottom line. I know they can delete a DVC Resort for fire, etc, but doesn't this seem more than that? I might be paranoid but it seems like there may be some larger plan here regarding Riviera and separation of any new resorts. I don't want to get into the middle of that as a buyer if I am going to get bad news in 6 months on what my new contract means.

I don't know what older contracts looked like but didn't they expressly state that owners could use points at any of the DVC Resorts within the Club? Or was it always in there that new DVC Resorts may enter the Club and that you could possibly never have access to them?

On average most don't know and even if they do, they don't care enough for it to affect their decisions. And if one ends up not buying, someone else will. Not everyone that looks or tours will buy. Until/unless DVC feels such issues are hurting them more than helping them, we'll continue to see movement in this direction. Given that this is the way timeshares have moved over the years, basically all of them to one degree or another, it must be working to add to the bottom line. Here's a related example. Timeshares rarely give you an upgrade and this is purposeful. They don't want you thinking you'll pay for a studio and get a 1 BR or pay for standard view and get preferred. It sometimes happens but if it were routine people would be less points and/or something cheaper. Remember there are a LOT of things DVCMC can do to increase sales they have not yet done. And frankly, a lot of things they could and likely should do that would not detract from professionalism.

Yup. Guilty as charged.

Let me ask you though, Dean. Say my family enjoys going to WDW and we've gone 6 times over the last 4 years. We don't want to pay cash rates for 1BRs at the Four Seasons [or insert any nice resort with 1/2BR options and FP benefits here] every time we visit. My son is young and still enjoys being at the parks and we're excited to see all the new rides coming to the park over the next several years. What is a sensible way for us to do Disney financially if not by way of the Disney timeshare?

I'm not dismissing what you're saying, but I'm honestly asking because I've heard you say it before. Disney has a monopoly on the parks and if you're a family that avoids hotel rooms and enjoy staying in suites when you travel, what option at WDW do you have? The FP bookings are a big deal because it really improves the quality of the time you spend in the parks, allows you to hit the rides you want, affords you a chance to tour the parks efficiently so you can enjoy the pool most times of the year. I'd be open to viable solution if you have one. I don't see one that is as "economical" (no, the irony is not lost on me) as the timeshare route.

Everything has a cost/compromise. Disney is an amazing organization and they have a vacuum cleaner to separate a subset of the population from their money and make us happy they did so. And that's true even if you stay with a friend for free and that friend works for Disney and gets you into the park for free. Costs include travel, housing, food, tickets and other. The reality is that the savings on housing using DVC is modest if you assume that's the only variable but in reality on average DVC members almost certainly go more than they would if they didn't own DVC. Personally I prefer to stay on site but I'm very comfortable staying off site as well. That's really easy for us as we drive to the parks even when staying on property unless it's MK or we're going from points A to B to C as part of the day. So you can rent a house, timeshare or condo or stay in a hotel with suites in the area. You can use other timeshares as an ownership and some are as close as the DVC resorts esp places like Silver Lakes and Wyndham Bonnet Creek. And in reality some of the off property resorts are nicer than DVC resorts side by side. I've seen people say they didn't care if DVC saved them money, they just wanted to be a member of the club which I have trouble getting my head around. There are too many risks and compromises to join just to join. But unless the Disney masses change their overall mentality and/or DVC prices themselves out of the market compared to retail prices, I doubt anything will change. But as you elude to if you want to stay on property it's a DVC villa or a resort suite and no matter how you cut it, it's an arm and a leg. You just have to decide. But DVCMC is going to maximize their profits at our expense and past sales are not going to be part of their consideration, only current and future sales/profits. That's not to say it's wrong and it may or may not be short sighted, from a profit standpoint their choices are likely the best direction. It really doesn't matter if the changes cause you or I not to buy more points, it's the overall average they're going to look at.

 

[skier_pete]

For example, DVC will never restrict resale to booking othe resorts, it would devalue the contracts making direct less appealing and cause a lot of bad publicity onthe Internet that could hurt sales.... oh wait.

Disney has basically decided that they feel that the resale pricing is not a driver for direct purchases, so driving down the value of resale is not so bad. They can also control resale at Riviera to a degree using ROFR. They can just decide "if the price drops below $120 we buy it back." Disney wants (A) resale differentiation and (B) resale prices moderately high. Most direct sale buyers are not going to care - as evidence even buy people on this board that have already bought at Riviera. Easy enough to rationalize "Well, I'm not planning on selling it so why should I care what the price is going to go to."

If people worried about the future value of something they were going to buy, no one on earth would ever buy a new boat. In the end we all throw up our hands and say "I can't believe that anyone would buy this now!" but to most buyers it's no difference. The change (resale can only stay at Riviera) does not affect the Direct buyer one bit UNTIL THEY DECIDE TO SELL - and since almost no one goes into the process saying "Oh, I'm going to sell this in 5 years" why would they care? @OUjenny21 is devoting a LOT more thought than the average buyer is to doing this.

 

[Dean]

Disney has basically decided that they feel that the resale pricing is not a driver for direct purchases, so driving down the value of resale is not so bad. They can also control resale at Riviera to a degree using ROFR. They can just decide "if the price drops below $120 we buy it back." Disney wants (A) resale differentiation and (B) resale prices moderately high. Most direct sale buyers are not going to care - as evidence even buy people on this board that have already bought at Riviera. Easy enough to rationalize "Well, I'm not planning on selling it so why should I care what the price is going to go to."

If people worried about the future value of something they were going to buy, no one on earth would ever buy a new boat. In the end we all throw up our hands and say "I can't believe that anyone would buy this now!" but to most buyers it's no difference. The change (resale can only stay at Riviera) does not affect the Direct buyer one bit UNTIL THEY DECIDE TO SELL - and since almost no one goes into the process saying "Oh, I'm going to sell this in 5 years" why would they care? @OUjenny21 is devoting a LOT more thought than the average buyer is to doing this.

It's never really been possible to drive retail purchase by keeping resale prices high. It's like trying to out earn one's stupidity.

 

[DougEMG]

OK - I'm not an expert - but I believe #1 has been there all along. Basically it says you are not renting your points, you are renting the reservation booked on the points. This has more or less always been the case when renting. It also says you have to pay your maintenance fees yourself, that you can not farm out your maintenance fees in the rental, and that is also the case.

#2 - I cannot really answer this question - certainly not from a legal standpoint. I will say that for all the things they've done to dissuade the resale market, they have never taken away something from an existing owner. I seriously doubt that they are ever going to pull Riviera from the club, or try and pull previous resale owners from being able to book at Riviera.

Something you need to really understand whether under the influence of the Pixie dust or not. Disney doesn't give a damn about you or your contract once you've bought. However, they DO give a damn about selling future contracts, so they are generally unlikely to make changes that would hurt future sales. Pulling Riviera (or a future resort) from the club is generally not going to be good for the brand. I seriously doubt it ever happens.

I suspect that "not hurting their brand" is why DVC went with the route of keeping Riviera in DVC (but with a similar agreement .. hahahah) rather than starting a new DVC2 as most people expect they would do.

 

[drusba]

I just received all my Riviera contract paperwork but I haven't signed yet. I was planning to buy Riviera but reading this multi-site POS and the Riviera POS makes me nervous about it. There seems to be a lot of questionable language in this. I have been catching up and sifting through all of these posts and comments and I'm looking for some insight (which I know is just guess work). Questions below.

1. Paperwork specifically says that vacation points may not be rented unless you have first made a reservation with those points in the owner's name and that "...any sums due to the Association as assessments must be deducted from the gross rentals and paid directly to the Association." Does that language exist in contracts pre 1/19/19? Not that I plan to rent my points, but it's nice to have that option and this makes it sound like they are about to lay down new restrictions regarding renting points? How would they deduct rental income as annual assessments unless they were planning to make drastic changes here? Am I missing something?

2. Paperwork says it has the right to delete a DVC Resort including, Riviera Resort, in which case the owners at the remaining DVC Resorts will not be able to reserve Riviera AND the Riviera owners will not be able to book at the remaining DVC Resorts. I figured it would say other owners couldn't book at Riviera, but this means I could buy Riviera and they could decide to still delete it and I'd lose access to all the original 14 resorts? Was this in the language for other contracts before 1-19-19? My concern is that older contract deeds say owners can use their vacation points at any of the DVC resorts within the Club. So since Riviera is in the Club, I'm not sure if it would legally stand to restrict resale owners from booking at Riviera. If it is legally determined that buying into the Club entitles ALL owners (even resale owners) access to any of the resorts within the club, what happens then? The resale members for all the original 14 resorts would then be allowed to book at Riviera but if I sell my Riviera contract, I'm still bound by the agreement I bought into that says resale at Riviera DOES in fact take away booking at any other resort. Does this concern make sense? I'm afraid that if DVD takes back the resale restrictions on the O14 regarding Riviera, it won't matter or help me as a direct Riviera buyer because I, in fact, HAVE to sign that my resale contract doesn't get to book anywhere else. The people buying direct Riviera seem to be the only ones without legal argument of any kind. The only other thing I can think of that would prevent O14 resale owners from booking Riviera would be to remove it entirely from the Club. Would they even do that? Because it might help them to prevent O14 resale owners from booking Riviera but they surely would have a much harder time selling Riviera if direct purchasers couldn't even access the original 14 resorts?

The first exists in prior POS's. Basically, what it says is that renting requires you to make a reservation before completing the rental, which all are likely to do when they rent. The assessments language essentially means you cannot really rent unless dues payments are up to date. There have actually been previously reported events where someone who rented from a member was prohibited from getting a room because the member was in arrears in paying dues.

The second one is also in prior POS's and those specifically layout the reasons that a resort can be removed as a DVC Resort, which include such things as the resort being destroyed and unrepairable, the members kicking out the Disney management company, all the applicable DVC companies going bankrupt, or the property being condemned. The stated events are unlikely to occur although there is always some possibility. Riviera, unfortunately, has an additional risk that the prior resorts do not have. If, as is possible, a court ever holds that Riviera was improperly made a DVC Resort, the remedy ordered could be that Riviera be removed as a DVC Resort, with the result that none of the owners of the prior resorts could reserve it while none of its owners could reserve the prior 14 resorts.

 

[TexasChick123]

The first exists in prior POS's. Basically, what it says is that renting requires you to make a reservation before completing the rental, which all are likely to do when they rent. The assessments language essentially means you cannot really rent unless dues payments are up to date. There have actually been previously reported events where someone who rented from a member was prohibited from getting a room because the member was in arrears in paying dues.

The second one is also in prior POS's and those specifically layout the reasons that a resort can be removed as a DVC Resort, which include such things as the resort being destroyed and unrepairable, the members kicking out the Disney management company, all the applicable DVC companies going bankrupt, or the property being condemned. The stated events are unlikely to occur although there is always some possibility. Riviera, unfortunately, has an additional risk that the prior resorts do not have. If, as is possible, a court ever holds that Riviera was improperly made a DVC Resort, the remedy ordered could be that Riviera be removed as a DVC Resort, with the result that none of the owners of the prior resorts could reserve it while none of its owners could reserve the prior 14 resorts.

If this were to happen where they had to kick Riviera out of the Club because it entered under substantially different terms, wouldn’t they need to form a new Club or remove the restriction to get around this if they didn’t want it to be a standalone resort outside of DVC? It’s the only two solutions I can see. This will keep being an issue the more properties they add with these restrictions. Thoughts?

 

[ljmiii]

If this were to happen where they had to kick Riviera out of the Club because it entered under substantially different terms, wouldn’t they need to form a new Club or remove the restriction to get around this if they didn’t want it to be a standalone resort outside of DVC? It’s the only two solutions I can see. This will keep being an issue the more properties they add with these restrictions. Thoughts?

If BVTC is forced to remove Riviera then I see DVD/DVCMC's choices to be more along the lines of removing the restrictions or forming a new trading company - the DVC2 that many thought was coming.

I assume Reflections and all subsequent resorts would have substantially similar terms to Riviera. But then again if they start a new trading company they could allow in resorts with whatever rules they chose.

 

[TexasChick123]

If BVTC is forced to remove Riviera then I see DVD/DVCMC's choices to be more along the lines of removing the restrictions or forming a new trading company - the DVC2 that many thought was coming.

I assume Reflections and all subsequent resorts would have substantially similar terms to Riviera. But then again if they start a new trading company they could allow in resorts with whatever rules they chose.

Guides have already been telling everyone who has asked that these new resale restrictions will exist for every property going forward including Reflections. My guide is particularly tight-lipped about saying anything like this, and she said this will be the rule for all properties going forward.

 

[skier_pete]

Guides have already been telling everyone who has asked that these new resale restrictions will exist for every property going forward including Reflections. My guide is particularly tight-lipped about saying anything like this, and she said this will be the rule for all properties going forward.

Oh, unless there's a direct sales backlash, I agree this is the way they all will be going forward. Eventually as the older L14 resorts drop out and get renewed, there won't be any trading resorts. That will of course take nearly 50 years.