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

[zavandor]

From the SSR Master Declaration, Exhibit G, 1.18: "Two-Bedroom Vacation Home shall mean a Vacation Home containing two (2) bedrooms, two (2) bathrooms and a Full Kitchen. Certain of the Two-Bedroom Vacation Homes may be locked-off into One-Bedroom and Studio Vacation Homes as a use convenience only"

Emphasis added.

 

[Disneyepcot]

I kind of think we're barking up the wrong tree anyway. I believe the solution is not a lawsuit it is very public member outrage and media attention.

I just had 2 friends buy this week. I told them to ask about the points charged per night and how they could change in the future and they were given the same response that most of us understood and believed to be true.

It's not right.

I will arrive to Disney World Monday. I plan on stopping at most of the DVC stands to ask some questions and notify any potential buyers to ask about reallocations, lock off premiums and future resales.

 

[wdrl]

Emphasis added.

But what do you think "use convenience only" means?

 

[wdrl]

I will arrive to Disney World Monday. I plan on stopping at most of the DVC stands to ask some questions and notify any potential buyers to ask about reallocations, lock off premiums and future resales.

Rather than going to the effort to visit DVC kiosks at ask questions to sales associates, I suggest you make an appointment to talk to a DVCMC representative while you are at WDW.

 

[zavandor]

But what do you think "use convenience only" means?

To be honest that sentence make mw think a while. However if the aim was saying that studios and 1BR are not vacation homes, calling them vacation homes would be a very basic mistake, wouldn't it?
It might mean that if you book a lockoff 2BR you can lock it for your convenience, but not sublet it. There is some language about subletting part of a VH later in the doc.

 

[wdrl]

To be honest that sentence make mw think a while. However if the aim was saying that studios and 1BR are not vacation homes, calling them vacation homes would be a very basic mistake, wouldn't it?
It might mean that if you book a lockoff 2BR you can lock it for your convenience, but not sublet it. There is some language about subletting part of a VH later in the doc.

Or it could mean that for the purposes of the declaration and for timeshare licensing lock offs "shall be" considered two bedroom vacation homes. Or that it is only for the convenience of the Club Members that Club Members are permitted to book the studio portion or one-bedroom portion of a two-bedroom.

Words are sticky things.

 

[miTnosnhoJ]

I kind of think we're barking up the wrong tree anyway. I believe the solution is not a lawsuit it is very public member outrage and media attention.

I just had 2 friends buy this week. I told them to ask about the points charged per night and how they could change in the future and they were given the same response that most of us understood and believed to be true.

It's not right.

And if every google search for DVC brought up the scam.

 

[zavandor]

Or it could mean that for the purposes of the declaration and for timeshare licensing lock offs "shall be" considered two bedroom vacation homes. Or that it is only for the convenience of the Club Members that Club Members are permitted to book the studio portion or one-bedroom portion of a two-bedroom.

Words are sticky things.

Your interpretation is in contraddiction with the sentence itself and with the rest of the document. It wouldn't explain why in a resort where there are no studios and 1br vacation home those are defined in the document. Why they are sold with fixed weeks. Why they are nominated in the maximum reallocation paragraph. Why they are nominated in minimum night point guarantee.
I'm sorry, but to treat studios and 1BR as a booking facilitation only, you have to ignore half the document.
I have yet to see evidence that the sentence stating that for reallocation purposes only 2BR count even exists.

 

[4luv2cdisney]

I was trying to overcome my current DIS obsession and get some housework done. Guess not.

I was cleaning out a closet and ran across a pile of paperwork in a box..... it was stuff from an old wdw trip. Started flipping through it and there was all my info from a DVC tour of Ssr.

The explanation in the sales material is very clear... If they increase points one place, they have to decrease somewhere else to offset and the number of points to use all vacation homes in a calendar year can never increase . It mentions "normal variations which occur in a calendar from year to year" and I specifically remember them saying " leap year " which is logical.

I really just don't even want to hear about "what constitutes a vacation home" etc and even if you tell me that I signed something saying they could do this THAT IS NOT THE WAY THEY REPRESENTED IT! There
are consumer protection laws for a reason. This is from their "Product Understanding checklist". They should not be going out of their way to describe how the points charts CAN'T change it they indeed CAN change.

I get more angry about this every day.

 

[wdrl]

Your interpretation is in contraddiction with the sentence itself and with the rest of the document. It wouldn't explain why in a resort where there are no studios and 1br vacation home those are defined in the document. Why they are sold with fixed weeks. Why they are nominated in the maximum reallocation paragraph. Why they are nominated in minimum night point guarantee.
I'm sorry, but to treat studios and 1BR as a booking facilitation only, you have to ignore half the document.
I have yet to see evidence that the sentence stating that for reallocation purposes only 2BR count even exists.

We have to agree to disagree on this and several other items. At this point, if you want an explanation of what DVCMC can or cannot do, you need to arrange a meeting with a DVCMC representative and have a discussion regarding the issues you have raised.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I was just glancing thru the Multi site POS for something and ran across this which made me consider back to what exactly your ownership is tied to. Going back to a new builds, even if you have purchased the percentage ownership, if that unit is not completed you are not able to book anything. We actually had that with Kidani - owned it, not completed, part of all of AKV, obviously declared so it could be sold - and couldn't use our representative points until Kidani itself opened. It seems then that for certain things your points are tied to the Units themselves. Then how can it deemed to not be in other circumstances such as reallocations?

 

[Dean]

@zavandor posted: "It appears very clear to me that studios and 1BR lockoff are clearly defined as Vacation homes in the POS, exactly as 2BR (emphasis added). There is no special status given to 2BR lockoff. Studios and 1BR have points charts, can be booked separately, they are identified by a number."

From the SSR Master Declaration, Exhibit G, 1.18: "Two-Bedroom Vacation Home shall mean a Vacation Home containing two (2) bedrooms, two (2) bathrooms and a Full Kitchen. Certain of the Two-Bedroom Vacation Homes may be locked-off into One-Bedroom and Studio Vacation Homes as a use convenience only" (emphasis added).

What is clear to one person may not be all that clear to another person.

Exactly, under FL law (721) it'd have to specifically spell it out for lockout's to be counted as separate. One cannot back into that issue by inference of various wordings.

We have to agree to disagree on this and several other items. At this point, if you want an explanation of what DVCMC can or cannot do, you need to arrange a meeting with a DVCMC representative and have a discussion regarding the issues you have raised.

Exactly, talking to middle management is worthless at this point. One might also be able to get someone higher up on the phone. One could also write a paper letter to the CEO or voting rep.

I was just glancing thru the Multi site POS for something and ran across this which made me consider back to what exactly your ownership is tied to. Going back to a new builds, even if you have purchased the percentage ownership, if that unit is not completed you are not able to book anything. We actually had that with Kidani - owned it, not completed, part of all of AKV, obviously declared so it could be sold - and couldn't use our representative points until Kidani itself opened. It seems then that for certain things your points are tied to the Units themselves. Then how can it deemed to not be in other circumstances such as reallocations?

The POS clearly states they are different in various ways, from what I've seen it's very clear the points for ownership are different than reservations and reallocations.

 

[mustinjourney]

Doing some research via phone, so I can’t go too in depth, but the Florida statutes appear to require DVD to only reallocate based on demand.

“The rules and regulations shall also provide for periodic adjustment or amendment of the reservation system by the managing entity from time to time in order to respond to actual purchaser use patterns and changes in purchaser use demand for the accommodations and facilities existing at that time within the plan.”

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...ing=&URL=0700-0799/0721/Sections/0721.56.html

 

[mustinjourney]

I will arrive to Disney World Monday. I plan on stopping at most of the DVC stands to ask some questions and notify any potential buyers to ask about reallocations, lock off premiums and future resales.

I’m tempted to fly out for a day to do a Dvc tour just to see how they respond to various questions.

 

[IrishEye]

I tried to read as much of the thread as possible but don't seem to find the breakdown of "total" points. Has anyone created a chart showing current number of night within each of the use seasons per room category and multiplied that against the number of points per night to get the yearly total ? In previous re-allocations they also moved nights into and out of seasons while adding weekend points in a single particular season to balance the total. Would love to see the math in order to understand whether there is a serious problem.

 

[mustinjourney]

I will arrive to Disney World Monday. I plan on stopping at most of the DVC stands to ask some questions and notify any potential buyers to ask about reallocations, lock off premiums and future resales.

The kiosk people won’t answer specific questions. You’ll need to do a tour.

 

[mustinjourney]

I tried to read as much of the thread as possible but don't seem to find the breakdown of "total" points. Has anyone created a chart showing current number of night within each of the use seasons per room category and multiplied that against the number of points per night to get the yearly total ? In previous re-allocations they also moved nights into and out of seasons while adding weekend points in a single particular season to balance the total. Would love to see the math in order to understand whether there is a serious problem.

I did it for VGF. If you assume studios and 1BRs are NEVER booked (so that VGF only has 2Br and GVs), the points match up.

If you assume that no 2BR lock offs are booked, then The points are about 200,000 over what was sold. 2.5 million declared vs 2.7 million needed to book as studios/1BRs.

https://www.disboards.com/threads/2020-point-charts.3725229/page-27#post-60125313

 

[zavandor]

Question: if it is true that it is enough that the total points sold must match only one of the possible ways to book the resort, could DVC do this:
- introduce the option for weekly bookings, fixed from Saturday to Saturday. One week costs the same amount it costs now
- double the cost per one night every night
- keep January 31st cost the same as now

If all rooms are booked as weeks the total amount of points would not change. Image how much more breakage income they would get. And they could sell it saying it's by popular demand:
- it would be easier to find availability for longer stays
- less housekeeping costs
- less front desk costs
If what counts is only one possible way to book the resort, why not?

 

[mustinjourney]

Question: if it is true that it is enough that the total points sold must match only one of the possible ways to book the resort, could DVC do this:
- introduce the option for weekly bookings, fixed from Saturday to Saturday. One week costs the same amount it costs now
- double the cost per one night every night

If all rooms are booked as weeks the total amount of points would not change. Image how much more breakage income they would get. And they could sell it saying it's by popular demand:
- it would be easier to find availability for longer stays
- less housekeeping costs
- less front desk costs
If what counts is only one possible way to book the resort, why not?

I’d have to read the filings, but my understanding is that everything is defined as a use day.

 

[RobDoc]

I think the author is @tjkraz here on the forum.

I do not believe in the maximum reallocation limit. I think it's just an example, not a binding rule. The only rule that matters in that respect is the one stating that at least one night must be bookable for xx points.
The maximum reallocation rule is interesting in the way that it shows the intention of the original writers of the POS was the reallocation to be allowed only within the same Vacation Home, not across different room types. It shows to potential owners the most extreme reallocation Disney could do, one where there is no difference between seasons and week days. It doesn't show a reallocation equalizing all room types and all seasons.

Maximum Reallocation "represents the amount that it would cost to spend a single night in the indicated resort and room size if the points were equal for every night of the year. " (Quoted from the linked article to which you refer.) This has also been published in this thread from the May, 1993 POS at the Disney Vacation Club Resort (now OKW) and for other resorts since.

Maximum Reallocation removes all 'seasons' and has no distinction regarding weekdays or weekends, as every day through the entire year has the same point requirement to make a reservation. At OKW, a Studio during Christmas week would be 15 points per night which would also be the same for the last week in September.

You may not believe it, but that is how DVC was set up from the very first POS and point chart. Maximum Reallocation would cause the Resort to be in balance for all villa types and all seasons. It is a binding rule and NOT an example. It is very doubtful (IMO) that it would ever be used, but it does exist as binding and not an example.

There are many provisions in the early POS which have been changed (Banking deadline changes, lottery for Holiday reservations, changes in BVTC fees, etc.) but the Maximum Reallocation has remained constant since it DOES show the point cost without any seasons or daily distinction which cannot be changed since the number of points sold as any resort cannot be modified except for adding additional accommodations (please note: I did not use the word "Unit").