Does DVC have a problem with renting points?

[Dean]

If Disney cared, they couldn't eliminate renting, but they could make it far less attractive. For instance, renters do not get access to meal plans or magical express. Members get priority check in - if you are not staying in your own room on your own points - or traveling WITH a member staying with their points - you will get what is left. Over time Disney could figure out which rooms get the most complaints on them (they might have that data now) - bad views, too far down the hall, too noisy - and hand those out last - to those waiting renters. Disney offers perks to anyone staying on property, but those perks do not need to be extended to renters (or frankly DVC at all), so they could (and given coding of magic bands for perks - it wouldn't be too difficult) limit early entry for instance for non members staying on points not traveling with a member.

This would mean that when you gift your points to your adult children, they wouldn't be traveling with you and would lose some of the perks, but Disney COULD do this if it were important enough to limit renting. While some members would find that problematic, I suspect as many or more would be thrilled by priority room allocation for members - knowing that if someone isn't getting into their room until 7pm to discover its the room over the luggage loading area for Magical Express or the HA room they don't need or the weird room with no balcony - it probably isn't going to be them. And I don't think it would make sales less attractive, since renters would know that with membership comes advantages in check in.

That they never have done any of this makes me believe that they would rather have occupied rooms than discourage renting.

More likely the fact it's contractually allowed means they really can't address it successfully without being at risk legally and/or causing other issues that would affect a large % of members negatively who are not renting or only very rarely. I'm certain it's not that butts in the seats means more for them, it actually is likely less. If members didn't rent, most of those that are renting would go with other options and thus it'd mean more people per day on average.

 

[kboo]

I don't think DVC has a problem with it. Renters are potential new members.

Similarly - I booked a cash studio at BWV a few years ago, and they pixie dusted us up to a 1br P/G. I'm sure they saw how often we come.

(In fact, I know they have all that info at their fingertips - we had a CM assist us with some FPs in a park on our April trip and when they scanned my band, all our past and upcoming trips showed up. DH was standing right there and I am hoping he didn't see our June anniversary trip come up!!)

 

[Madame]

This would mean that when you gift your points to your adult children, they wouldn't be traveling with you and would lose some of the perks, but Disney COULD do this if it were important enough to limit renting. While some members would find that problematic, I suspect as many or more would be thrilled by priority room allocation for members - knowing that if someone isn't getting into their room until 7pm to discover its the room over the luggage loading area for Magical Express or the HA room they don't need or the weird room with no balcony - it probably isn't going to be them. And I don't think it would make sales less attractive, since renters would know that with membership comes advantages in check in.

They might want to do this, but logistically it would never filter down to CMs. There's enough difficulty getting CMs to consistently enforce basic rules at resorts. Could you imagine trying to get them to specifically target renters? Too much effort.

 

[crisi]

They might want to do this, but logistically it would never filter down to CMs. There's enough difficulty getting CMs to consistently enforce basic rules at resorts. Could you imagine trying to get them to specifically target renters? Too much effort.

Easy when the systems are doing the work, which the systems now do a lot of the work. "Error: Members awaiting room assignment. Assign room to members before assigning to non-members."

And really, just saying that they will do it would be enough to discourage renters. Even if they never followed through - it would reduce the number of renters at play.

 

[drusba]

Mentioned above is the 20 reservation rule. That was issued in early 2008. At the time there were serious rental problems in that professional renters had control of large numbers of points and were making large numbers of reservations at 11 months out for highly desirable rooms at highly desirable times (such as Christmas) and then renting those reservations via advertisements online. They could make large numbers of reservations via a combination of owning points, having points transferred to them (there was no limit to number of transfers the professional renters could take into their accounts at the time), and they could be added to any number of member's accounts as associate members and make reservations.

DVC took three steps to limit the power of professional renters. It limited transfer to one per use year, limited to four the number of accounts on which anyone could be an associate member, and adopted the 20 reservation rule as Disney's interpretation of the rule in the POS's that says you cannot engage in in renting for "commercial purposes." That 20 reservation rule issued at the time, which you cannot find on the DVC site anymore, reads as follows:

"Commercial Use Policy. The Disney Vacation Club (DVC) Public Offering Statement makes it clear that DVC memberships are intended for personal vacation use. The Declaration of Condominium and the Membership Agreement for the Resort expressly limits the use of Ownership Interests to personal use and prohibits use for “"commercial purposes," -” –a pattern of rental activity or other occupancy by an Owner that the Board of the Association, in its reasonable discretion, could conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or activity.

"DVC Members may make as many reservations as they desire. However, if, in any 12-month period, a DVC Member desires to make more than 20 reservations, the DVC Member shall be required to establish, to the satisfaction of the Board, that all of the reservations made by the DVC Member in such 12-month period are for the use of accommodations by the DVC Member, the DVC Member’s family and/or the DVC Member’s friends (collectively, “Personal Use”), and not for commercial purposes. If, in any 12-month period in which a DVC Member attempts to make more than 20 reservations but is unable to establish, to the satisfaction of the Board, that all such reservations are for Personal Use and not for commercial purposes, all reservations in excess of the first 20 reservations shall be presumed to be the use of Vacation Accommodations for commercial purposes in violation of the Declaration and the Membership Agreement (the “Multiple Reservation Rule”).

"Enforcement of this policy will be the responsibility of DVC Member Services as follows. For each reservation made by a DVC Member, Member Services shall determine, before confirming the reservation, the number of reservations made by such DVC Member which are occurring or have occurred in any rolling twelve-month period in which the reservation then being made will occur. If, as a result of Member Services’ review of the DVC Member’s reservation history, the reservation the DVC Member is then attempting to make violates the Multiple Reservation Rule and the DVC Member has not established, or cannot then establish that all of the DVC Member’s reservations, including the reservation then being made by the DVC Member, are for Personal Use, DVC Member Services will not honor or confirm the reservation and the DVC Member shall be advised that the reservation violates the Multiple Reservation Rule and the prohibition on use of Vacation Homes for commercial purposes. For reservations canceled for violating this policy, the cancellation shall be deemed to be a cancellation by the DVC Member and the provisions of the Home Resort Rules and Regulations relating to cancellations (including, without limitation, Sections 5(d), 13 and 14) shall apply."

Though the combination of new rues did not entirely eliminate professional renters; it greatly reduced the problems that existed.

 

[freediverdude]

And be careful what you wish for, because DVC could also do some of those things to resale owners as well, like having priority check in for direct owners, guaranteeing direct owners preference in what room within a vacation home type that they get, etc.

 

[Cyberc1978]

The link below is about the discussion about the current rental rules once they got rolled out back in the day.

https://www.disboards.com/threads/dvc-commercial-use-policy-added-to-pos.1687889/

 

[bwang123]

Our contract specifically mentioned the 20 booking rule above.

 

[CarolynFH]

If Disney cared, they couldn't eliminate renting, but they could make it far less attractive. For instance, renters do not get access to meal plans or magical express. Members get priority check in - if you are not staying in your own room on your own points - or traveling WITH a member staying with their points - you will get what is left. Over time Disney could figure out which rooms get the most complaints on them (they might have that data now) - bad views, too far down the hall, too noisy - and hand those out last - to those waiting renters. Disney offers perks to anyone staying on property, but those perks do not need to be extended to renters (or frankly DVC at all), so they could (and given coding of magic bands for perks - it wouldn't be too difficult) limit early entry for instance for non members staying on points not traveling with a member.

This would mean that when you gift your points to your adult children, they wouldn't be traveling with you and would lose some of the perks, but Disney COULD do this if it were important enough to limit renting. While some members would find that problematic, I suspect as many or more would be thrilled by priority room allocation for members - knowing that if someone isn't getting into their room until 7pm to discover its the room over the luggage loading area for Magical Express or the HA room they don't need or the weird room with no balcony - it probably isn't going to be them. And I don't think it would make sales less attractive, since renters would know that with membership comes advantages in check in.

That they never have done any of this makes me believe that they would rather have occupied rooms than discourage renting.

I just want to say that it could be very difficult for Disney to determine who's a renter and who's a guest of the owner - and I would have been pretty upset if my daughter and new son-in-law had received an undesirable room assignment, etc. when we gifted them a week for their honeymoon, just because they weren't traveling with us and were presumed to be renters.

 

[Dean]

I just want to say that it could be very difficult for Disney to determine who's a renter and who's a guest of the owner - and I would have been pretty upset if my daughter and new son-in-law had received an undesirable room assignment, etc. when we gifted them a week for their honeymoon, just because they weren't traveling with us and were presumed to be renters.

It's really impossible. They'll never try to do so other than if they single out a given individual their looking at specifically. Plus technically even anyone paying you a small fee, like family, would be a renter. They've had the requirement for years to notify them but most don't and if they approached it this way even less would let them know.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I just want to say that it could be very difficult for Disney to determine who's a renter and who's a guest of the owner - and I would have been pretty upset if my daughter and new son-in-law had received an undesirable room assignment, etc. when we gifted them a week for their honeymoon, just because they weren't traveling with us and were presumed to be renters.

They have asked DVC members to self report if the person is a renter in the booking process. They do have the wording to be a member although the POS actually does indicate that family members who are not DVC members might be eligible for some perks which are completely unspecified.

 

[DebbieB]

They have asked DVC members to self report if the person is a renter in the booking process. They do have the wording to be a member although the POS actually does indicate that family members who are not DVC members might be eligible for some perks which are completely unspecified.

The reservation form says “This guest is not a Disney Vacation Club Member”. It doesn’t say renter. So the daughter on her honeymoon would not be a member and should be checked.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

The reservation form says “This guest is not a Disney Vacation Club Member”. It doesn’t say renter. So the daughter on her honeymoon would not be a member and should be checked.

Yes, I know. POS distinguishes that you let them know they are renters, and family may be given some privileges. I've always felt that was worded incorrectly when they needed it for online booking. I have not noticed that the POS states you need to let them know you have family using a room.

 

[crisi]

I just want to say that it could be very difficult for Disney to determine who's a renter and who's a guest of the owner - and I would have been pretty upset if my daughter and new son-in-law had received an undesirable room assignment, etc. when we gifted them a week for their honeymoon, just because they weren't traveling with us and were presumed to be renters.

Yep - I mentioned that. But they could and it would discourage renters..... And they really haven't ever been that interested in making sure current members are all happy with each and every policy decision. (I'm not saying they should, I'm saying they could, if it mattered that much to them).

 

[bumbershoot]

I just want to say that it could be very difficult for Disney to determine who's a renter and who's a guest of the owner - and I would have been pretty upset if my daughter and new son-in-law had received an undesirable room assignment, etc. when we gifted them a week for their honeymoon, just because they weren't traveling with us and were presumed to be renters.

Exactly.

Or an Associate traveling without the full member, like I was for some years. No I was not a member. But I was also very much NOT a renter.

The reservation form says “This guest is not a Disney Vacation Club Member”. It doesn’t say renter. So the daughter on her honeymoon would not be a member and should be checked.

I find it intriguing to think that anyone actually checks that box. I never do, and no one in my traveling party has ever gotten ANY perk that the member-only could get. FWIW.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Exactly.

Or an Associate traveling without the full member, like I was for some years. No I was not a member. But I was also very much NOT a renter.



I find it intriguing to think that anyone actually checks that box. I never do, and no one in my traveling party has ever gotten ANY perk that the member-only could get. FWIW.

My nephew has. But I think that's just him and his luck.

 

[DebbieB]

I just want to say that it could be very difficult for Disney to determine who's a renter and who's a guest of the owner - and I would have been pretty upset if my daughter and new son-in-law had received an undesirable room assignment, etc. when we gifted them a week for their honeymoon, just because they weren't traveling with us and were presumed to be renters.

I doubt they will go to that length, it's difficult enough piecing together room assignments. That would open up a whole can of worms, if a member got a bad room assignment, raising a fuss that they are not a renter. If anything, they treat cash guests better, they are upgraded more often than members. As I mentioned before, renters are potential new members.

 

[crisi]

I doubt they will go to that length, it's difficult enough piecing together room assignments. That would open up a whole can of worms, if a member got a bad room assignment, raising a fuss that they are not a renter. If anything, they treat cash guests better, they are upgraded more often than members. As I mentioned before, renters are potential new members.

And they could say "one way to get renters to move to be members is to get them to say 'this is great, but if we owned, we'd get priority room assignments." As I said, I don't think they would, because I think to Disney the more important thing is rooms filled with guests who spend in the parks - its better for them if we pay all the operating costs of their hotels. It doesn't make that much difference to them if a guest is staying DVC or CRO - most of their profit is in the parks. The people who are "hurt" by renters isn't Disney - its owners who want to stay somewhere else at seven months to discover that owners have booked every room at their desired resort....