You wish you could report people renting rooms 10 months out?

[DonMacGregor]

For me, I don't see an issue with the general idea of renting points, heck I've done it. Where things get a little sticky, at least from a common decency perspective, is when an owner secures a reservation during the holidays that they never intend to use, but do so for the sole purpose of maximizing profit on the rental. There is absolutely zero chance that the owner is unaware that the reservation going to a non-member means that a fellow member has been skunked on getting a reservation that they DO intend to use. Sort of a "there but for the grace" and "Golden Rule" sorta thing.

No it's not "illegal", and it doesn't violate any rules, but it just strikes me at time as particularly s%#@@y, and something akin to buying 4 times as many supplies as you could ever use before a storm, knowing full well that your neighbor will arrive at the store to find the shelves bare. But "hey, they should have got up earlier". I'm a firm believer in karma, and to be honest, am something of a karma gloater when it comes back to bite someone (we all have our demons).

 

[Robbie Cottam]

For me, I don't see an issue with the general idea of renting points, heck I've done it. Where things get a little sticky, at least from a common decency perspective, is when an owner secures a reservation during the holidays that they never intend to use, but do so for the sole purpose of maximizing profit on the rental. There is absolutely zero chance that the owner is unaware that the reservation going to a non-member means that a fellow member has been skunked on getting a reservation that they DO intend to use. Sort of a "there but for the grace" and "Golden Rule" sorta thing.

No it's not "illegal", and it doesn't violate any rules, but it just strikes me at time as particularly s%#@@y, and something akin to buying 4 times as many supplies as you could ever use before a storm, knowing full well that your neighbor will arrive at the store to find the shelves bare. But "hey, they should have got up earlier". I'm a firm believer in karma, and to be honest, am something of a karma gloater when it comes back to bite someone (we all have our demons).

it may seem poopy, but we all purchased knowing it is a first come first serve deal.

If I want to use or rent my points as I see fit I should be able to do that.

Do I rent points, yea.

Do I make spec reservations, no

But should I be able to if I want to take that risk, yes….

It’s no different than walking a reservation
Or booking 4 ADRs a night….. both things I dislike btw, There are no rules against it there for it is fair game.

 

[drusba]

Why would they grumble? They know what they bought, or they should. Every resale site I've seen makes it clear on RIV purchases that they're restricted.

Site sponsor for example, on each listing page: "Points purchase via resale at the Riviera Resort can only be used for stays at the Riviera Resort or within the World Collection (Interval International exchanges)" Beyond that it's caveat emptor IMO.

It would be like me being mad I can't use my AKV resale points at RIV. Bummer, but I knew what I was buying.

Riviera may have a resale issue that could lead to lawsuits although not necessarily against Disney.

Riviera is very expensive and has high point nightly requirements. Buying new requires buying 175 points, buying, an add-on 50. Likely there have already been been lot of new purchases near the 175 point minimum and 50 to 75 point point add-ons. As time time passes there will likely be a lot of 175-point and 50 and 75 point resales. There will be resale purchasers, even if they review all the materials, thinking they can use those 50 and 75 point contracts for Tower Studios, and likely many buying those 175 point contracts think they can use them for the standard studios for almost anytime of year.

Those purchasers could read, understand, and absorb every word, sentence, and paragraph in the documents provided to them for the sale, and even the entire POS. Nevertheless, there is the potential of later lawsuits, particularly considering that the resale points cannot be used anywhere else. Here is why:

In the law relating to real estate contracts, there is the concept that the seller is required to reveal to the buyer any material facts the seller knows of which could impact on the purchaser's decision to buy, and which the purchaser cannot determine from the written documents provided. The purchaser can later sue for rescission of the contract and return of his sale price if the seller does not tell the buyer of such a material fact.

The written materials a seller gets lets him know of the warning that a delay in attempting to get a reservation after the reservation window opens could lead to not being able to get the reservation. That representation implies that if the buyer does attempt to reserve very early during the 11-month window he will get his reservation. However, there may still be a material fact being withheld. Riviera for the standard view studios and Tower studios has developed an 11-month issue, in that there are now times of the year when the member cannot get a reservation even if he obeys that early reservation warning and attempts to reserve a standard view or Tower studio at exactly 8 a.m. at 11-months

In essence, unless the seller is telling the buyer of the existence of the 11-month issue, there may be grounds for a rescssion lawsuit. I am not saying the lawsuit would be a certain winner but the risk exists for any resale seller. Moreover, that risk actually exists now for DVD if it is concealing that fact from new purchasers. Also, it could even become a major issue for other resorts, e.g., how many resales and DVD sales have occurred for BWV withIn the last four years with no one telling the purchasers that it may be impossible to get standard view studios or 2BRs even at 11-months out most of the year; same for AKV for value studios. Same for BLT standard studios which disappear right at 11-months out for a significant part of the year. (I mentioned the last four years because that is the statute of limitations for pursuing a rescission claim in Florida.)

 

[Lumpy1106]

That gets a no from me for two reasons;

1. Some day I might have an issue that would leave me needing to rent my points or lose them. It may seem desirable to restrict renting so that members will have a better shot at heavily in demand dates, but be careful what you wish for. Also, renters are not getting those reservations - it's owners. If they weren't renting out the points they'd be using them.
2. I do not understand what some seem to think is the God-given right to book certain rooms at certain times, even if you own there. If it's not available why can't you make other plans? You have 11 MONTHS to do so! It's not like you are being left holding the bag.

That said I do think that walking reservations is not cool. If you really want to give everyone a more fair shot at getting the most in demand reservations, maybe you should start there.

 

[sndral]

Riviera may have a resale issue that could lead to lawsuits although not necessarily against Disney.

Riviera is very expensive and has high point nightly requirements. Buying new requires buying 175 points, buying, an add-on 50. Likely there have already been been lot of new purchases near the 175 point minimum and 50 to 75 point point add-ons. As time time passes there will likely be a lot of 175-point and 50 and 75 point resales. There will be resale purchasers, even if they review all the materials, thinking they can use those 50 and 75 point contracts for Tower Studios, and likely many buying those 175 point contracts think they can use them for the standard studios for almost anytime of year.
…

I thought the minimum buy for new members was currently 150?

 

[drusba]

I thought the minimum buy for new members was currently 150?

That is the general number for new buyers to get member benefits and may not necessarily be the actual number a new member must ourchase at any particular resort just to become a member. Riviera was 175 when it went on sale in 2019, and I have not checked the minimum since then and it may now be 150. It is possible all resorts became 150 when that new number for member benefits was created, I just do not know off-hand.

 

[Sandisw]

That is the general number for new buyers to get member benefits and may not necessarily be the actual number a new member must ourchase at any particular resort just to become a member. Riviera was 175 when it went on sale in 2019, and I have not checked the minimum since then and it may now be 150. It is possible all resorts became 150 when that new number for member benefits was created, I just do not know off-hand.

The minimum has been 150 for all resorts since 2021.

I do not remember it being 175 when RIV went on sale though. I believe it was 125 but could be wrong.

 

[sndral]

The minimum has been 150 for all resorts since 2021.

I do not remember it being 175 when RIV went on sale though. I believe it was 125 but could be wrong.

According to this thread Riviera was 100 minimum when it opened https://www.disboards.com/threads/so-youve-decided-to-buy-dvc.3567366/#post-56896794.
When I was first looking at buying DVC over a decade ago I kept seeing AKV resale listings w/ 160 points & just assumed that must have been the minimum for new members when AKV opened, apparently not - maybe there were just great incentives at that number?
Irrespective of the minimums, the fact that it takes a lot more points to stay in the newer resorts v. the no. needed for the legacy resorts & that because the buy in cost is so high new members are buying fewer points certainly exacerbates the increasing competition for studios IMO.

 

[SL6827]

When did the "confirmed" reservations thing really start to tahe off with renting DVC?

Are these reservations generally during the Christmas timeframe and how much more do they cost per point vs. the standard $20-$21?

 

[BamaGuy44]

Riviera may have a resale issue that could lead to lawsuits although not necessarily against Disney.

Riviera is very expensive and has high point nightly requirements. Buying new requires buying 175 points, buying, an add-on 50. Likely there have already been been lot of new purchases near the 175 point minimum and 50 to 75 point point add-ons. As time time passes there will likely be a lot of 175-point and 50 and 75 point resales. There will be resale purchasers, even if they review all the materials, thinking they can use those 50 and 75 point contracts for Tower Studios, and likely many buying those 175 point contracts think they can use them for the standard studios for almost anytime of year.

Those purchasers could read, understand, and absorb every word, sentence, and paragraph in the documents provided to them for the sale, and even the entire POS. Nevertheless, there is the potential of later lawsuits, particularly considering that the resale points cannot be used anywhere else. Here is why:

In the law relating to real estate contracts, there is the concept that the seller is required to reveal to the buyer any material facts the seller knows of which could impact on the purchaser's decision to buy, and which the purchaser cannot determine from the written documents provided. The purchaser can later sue for rescission of the contract and return of his sale price if the seller does not tell the buyer of such a material fact.

The written materials a seller gets lets him know of the warning that a delay in attempting to get a reservation after the reservation window opens could lead to not being able to get the reservation. That representation implies that if the buyer does attempt to reserve very early during the 11-month window he will get his reservation. However, there may still be a material fact being withheld. Riviera for the standard view studios and Tower studios has developed an 11-month issue, in that there are now times of the year when the member cannot get a reservation even if he obeys that early reservation warning and attempts to reserve a standard view or Tower studio at exactly 8 a.m. at 11-months

In essence, unless the seller is telling the buyer of the existence of the 11-month issue, there may be grounds for a rescssion lawsuit. I am not saying the lawsuit would be a certain winner but the risk exists for any resale seller. Moreover, that risk actually exists now for DVD if it is concealing that fact from new purchasers. Also, it could even become a major issue for other resorts, e.g., how many resales and DVD sales have occurred for BWV withIn the last four years with no one telling the purchasers that it may be impossible to get standard view studios or 2BRs even at 11-months out most of the year; same for AKV for value studios. Same for BLT standard studios which disappear right at 11-months out for a significant part of the year. (I mentioned the last four years because that is the statute of limitations for pursuing a rescission claim in Florida.)

This is America, anyone can sue anyone for anything, sure. I’m not a lawyer but I can’t imagine what a buyer could claim they weren’t told about. I haven’t read my contract in a while but there’s some kind of language in there that essentially says owning points doesn’t guarantee availability.

Won’t surprise me is someone rolls the dice on saying they were deceived and thought they could get any room any time they want, not something I’d give much thought to if I were buying or selling though.

 

[SL6827]

This is America, anyone can sue anyone for anything, sure. I’m not a lawyer but I can’t imagine what a buyer could claim they weren’t told about. I haven’t read my contract in a while but there’s some kind of language in there that essentially says owning points doesn’t guarantee availability.

Won’t surprise me is someone rolls the dice on saying they were deceived and thought they could get any room any time they want, not something I’d give much thought to if I were buying or selling though.

Right. I am waiting for someone to sue me for having red hair!

 

[Sandisw]

When did the "confirmed" reservations thing really start to tahe off with renting DVC?

Are these reservations generally during the Christmas timeframe and how much more do they cost per point vs. the standard $20-$21?

It seems to be more of a thing lately. There are a lot of different offerings but yes, some out there are popular times or room views.

In the end though, we were never guaranteed the right to every room size on every date.

And, I have tracked things for the popular times..fall to winter..and there has never been a time where someone was shut out of using points at their home resort at 11 months. Might not get the less point cost rooms and views but definitely can book something.

 

[SL6827]

Wonder if someone ever bought a fixed week to just rent it out?

 

[drusba]

According to this thread Riviera was 100 minimum when it opened https://www.disboards.com/threads/so-youve-decided-to-buy-dvc.3567366/#post-56896794.
When I was first looking at buying DVC over a decade ago I kept seeing AKV resale listings w/ 160 points & just assumed that must have been the minimum for new members when AKV opened, apparently not - maybe there were just great incentives at that number?
Irrespective of the minimums, the fact that it takes a lot more points to stay in the newer resorts v. the no. needed for the legacy resorts & that because the buy in cost is so high new members are buying fewer points certainly exacerbates the increasing competition for studios IMO.

When AKV first went on sale in 2007, the minimum was 160 points. That minimum applied to all resorts and had been the minimum for many years. Then the 2008-09 Great Recession happened, near the end of which, DVD changed the new buyer minimums to 50 at OKW, 75 at AKV, SSR, VB and HH, and 100 at others. By 2013, all DVC resorts had become 100, but that was a flexible minimum, in that following the recession, DVD began selling as low as 75 and sometimes 50 points to new purchasers if that was needed to do a sale. That practice of selling low points is likely still going on today (I have seen such sales reported as late as 2020). I now see that Riviera did begin its minimum at 100. Today, DVC actually no longer provides specific minimum purchase numbers. The number it provides, now 150 for every resort, is stated to be only the minimum purchase required for new buyers to get the membership card that shows they are entitled to member benefits.

 

[Chuck S]

They could clarify their definition of commercial use. I‘d be fine if they decided on something like at least 33% of the points every 3 years needs to be used by the owner (they need to be lead on a reservation). If not, then what are they doing with their contract? Highly doubt they’d do anything like this though since it would impact resale value and could make direct harder to sell.

But what about another scenario where many original OKW owners are aging, and may be unablle to use their points, but use them for friends and family? The owner would not be the lead name on those reservation, as they would not be going on the trip. So that really wouldn;t work, either. Plus I've had group trips using three separate concurrent rooms (16 people) so that also would not bode well to require the DVC owner as lead name.

Here on the DIS Rent/Transfer Board, we do discourage 11 month pre-existing reservatons by not allow existing reservations to be offered more than 30 days prior to check-in unless a $124.95 or $249.95 Rent/Transfer Board plan is purchased, and even so, the less expensive plan limits the owner to ONE such reservation, and the more expensive to 3 of them. There is always the scenario of just renting the points and making a reservation for the trenter, if possible, and that includes reservations at 11 months out (of course, the renter most probably needs to have contacted the owner earlier to get the 11 month window). As renting IS allowed under our contracts, there is really no practical way to prevent it, except the "commercial use" phrasing, which DVC can define any way they wish, but it still has to remain practical. They current look at DVC accounts with 20 or more reservations per year to see how they are being used...what they would do if someone is found to be in violation of the spirit of the policy is unknown.

Making DVC reservations more restrictive is not, IMO, a good answer, as it could have a very negative impact on owners (like not allowing changes or cancellations) as Disney really takes long term planning with tickets, flights, park reservations, dining reservations and so forth. Lat minute hop on a ploane trips are really not a practical thing anymore.

 

[Chuck S]

Wonder if someone ever bought a fixed week to just rent it out?

I'm sure that is likely, however, we do not allow full weeek reservatons startingon Friday, Saturday or Sunday on our Rental board...but plent of other places do.

 

[Chuck S]

To me, it really boils down to I'm not a Gladys Kravitz. As long as other members follow the rules, I don't care how they use their points. If I can't book the room I want at my home resort....then I should have booked earlier or maybe even tried to walk the reservaton.

In practice, I've only walked reservatons once, for a group trip of 11 people, when we needed a HA Grand Villa and regular two bedroom for Thanksgiving Week, because there are only 3 HA Grand Villas at OKW.

 

[CarolMN]

It seems that many who want to stop renting and walking assume that they would be able to get the reservation they want if those practices were not allowed. But the bottom line is that availability is limited - not everyone who wants a premium or 'bargain' villa in a popular time will be able to get it. Even if no one rented or walked, there still would be many who could not get what they want when they want it. There just aren't enough of those rooms at those times to satisfy everyone who wants one. Some will ALWAYS be disappointed. It's the nature of the 'first come, first served' system we purchased.

The booking rules are objective and the same for everyone.

 

[Robbie Cottam]

I find it interesting the 91 percent of those who took the polled don’t seem to have an issue with this.

That poll seems to end the discuss.

 

[808blessing]

It is not a black and white issue. With limits, less than 20 is better imho. How many fewer? That might be the next poll.