If resorts closed, will DVC rental companies and Hotwire refund your money?

[Thumper99]

Some owners blame other owners renting out their points (so by extension the renters) for the lack of (or part of the lack of) availability, particularly studios. I don't know that it's the whole story but it makes sense that it plays a part in availability issues.

I agree with you though, the transactions are mutually beneficial. There's a weird vibe from some that owners are doing renters a favour. The rental market wouldn't exist if we didn't all get something out o

Disney define this as 20 or more reservations in 12 months by a single owner, in other people's names.

FWIW, agencies are NOT commercial renting. Agencies are like matchmakers: They are intermediary between an owner and a renter, but not making the booking or owning the points.

but making a profit as a business doing that matchmaking right? It feels like a business. But I will agree they can’t do their thing without the owners wanting to rent.

 

[Lewisc]

A poster in another thread posted an email from David's

 

[Lewisc]

A poster in another thread shared an email from David's

We are an all sales final policy and due to this unprecedented situation where there was no reservation for them to access, the agreement is no longer valid

 

[_auroraborealis_]

but making a profit as a business doing that matchmaking right? It feels like a business. But I will agree they can’t do their thing without the owners wanting to rent.

But it is not commercial renting as far as Disney policy is concerned because Disney has no contractual relationship with the agency.

 

[AllSam]

Owners are the one with the long term financial obligation. They shouldn't be the one that has to take the financial hit. When you are renting from an owner, you are getting a reduced rate at the expense of losing flexibility. Being able to cancel/modify your accommodations clearly has its own worth, which is why renting from Disney is substantially more expensive. When you chose to rent from an owner instead, you are paying a lower rate at the expense of losing flexibility. I'm personally going to be out $2,400 dollars if I can't rent out my two Bonnet Creek weeks this year from this pandemic.

I have one that sold already and I will allow the renter to change their dates, but there's no way I will give them a refund because I am a person with my own financial crisis from this pandemic, not a company. My family is going to have to live off my teacher's salary this year, which is only $1,000 above poverty line. That means my daughter and my husband wont have any health insurance this year because that's how crappy teacher benefits are and I make $1000 too much this year to qualify for Medicaid for them. Also, I will owe more than $1,000 in tax penalties for not having insurance for them, making it even worse off than if I just made $1,000 less a year.

Penalties for not having insurance were set to $0 in the 2017 Tax Act so unless your state imposes penalties there is no tax hit for not having insurance.

 

[lbus42]

Just my two cents here...
Back in January, I rented my points out through a private transaction to a person who owns a restaurant. The reservation is for right after Thanksgiving. She paid $500 down and the balance is due at the six month booking window date of April 28. Because of corona virus, her restaurant business is tanking and she wants to cancel her reservation.

I want to do the fair and right thing, however, I have been unsuccessful so far at cancelling the trip either on the DVC web site or reaching anyone at DVC. I have no desire to try to go to WDW during the dates she had requested. If this was my trip, I would have booked at my home resort last October, for a trip in September. I’m pretty certain that BWV is already booked up for September.

I am sorry that the virus taking a toll on her business. I am fine with not charging her the balance, but I feel that I do not owe a refund of the deposit. She says that she cannot take the trip because she can no longer afford it. I know that if there wasn’t a virus pandemic and if a person booked a trip, paid a deposit, then later decided that they could not afford it and cancelled, I would not refund the deposit.

 

[Thumper99]

Just my two cents here...
Back in January, I rented my points out through a private transaction to a person who owns a restaurant. The reservation is for right after Thanksgiving. She paid $500 down and the balance is due at the six month booking window date of April 28. Because of corona virus, her restaurant business is tanking and she wants to cancel her reservation.

I want to do the fair and right thing, however, I have been unsuccessful so far at cancelling the trip either on the DVC web site or reaching anyone at DVC. I have no desire to try to go to WDW during the dates she had requested. If this was my trip, I would have booked at my home resort last October, for a trip in September. I’m pretty certain that BWV is already booked up for September.

I am sorry that the virus taking a toll on her business. I am fine with not charging her the balance, but I feel that I do not owe a refund of the deposit. She says that she cannot take the trip because she can no longer afford it. I know that if there wasn’t a virus pandemic and if a person booked a trip, paid a deposit, then later decided that they could not afford it and cancelled, I would not refund the deposit.

I don't understand why it is hard for you to cancel her trip. Your 7 months away? You should be able to cancel online with no issue. Will you lose points? Can you bank those points? Have you checked for the dates you wanted personally? Lots of availability popping up and down as people are reconsidering travel.

Just me. I would refund her minimum $250 (but probably all) if you have it to refund. Everyone has been Hit hard by this. I don’t know that you have to give her the money back but if my points weren’t altered in any way , I would.

Did you have a contract?

Lol curious why would you choose September over a late November stay?? Unless you have school and/or work obligations. You might want to check that time out!! We love that time of year!! The resorts are beautiful with Christmas decorations. It’s a very coveted time of year for DVC!

good luck. This is hard on everyone.

 

[Sandisw]

Just my two cents here...
Back in January, I rented my points out through a private transaction to a person who owns a restaurant. The reservation is for right after Thanksgiving. She paid $500 down and the balance is due at the six month booking window date of April 28. Because of corona virus, her restaurant business is tanking and she wants to cancel her reservation.

I want to do the fair and right thing, however, I have been unsuccessful so far at cancelling the trip either on the DVC web site or reaching anyone at DVC. I have no desire to try to go to WDW during the dates she had requested. If this was my trip, I would have booked at my home resort last October, for a trip in September. I’m pretty certain that BWV is already booked up for September.

I am sorry that the virus taking a toll on her business. I am fine with not charging her the balance, but I feel that I do not owe a refund of the deposit. She says that she cannot take the trip because she can no longer afford it. I know that if there wasn’t a virus pandemic and if a person booked a trip, paid a deposit, then later decided that they could not afford it and cancelled, I would not refund the deposit.

I see this case as different, as much as an hardship is for the renter. As long as the resort is open, and the reservation can be delivered to the renter, then the owner has done what they promised, and it, for me, falls in to the non refundable aspect.

Where I think it muddys the water is when the resort closed, and the owner can’t deliver it. Granted, it wasnt the owner who canceled, but none the less, they can’t,

So, giving the renter a chance to drop and lose what is paid is completely fair, IMO, because at this point, there is no reason to assume the resorts will be shut down

 

[Tess]

I see this case as different, as much as an hardship is for the renter. As long as the resort is open, and the reservation can be delivered to the renter, then the owner has done what they promised, and it, for me, falls in to the non refundable aspect.

Where I think it muddys the water is when the resort closed, and the owner can’t deliver it. Granted, it wasnt the owner who canceled, but none the less, they can’t,

So, giving the renter a chance to drop and lose what is paid is completely fair, IMO, because at this point, there is no reason to assume the resorts will be shut down

I totally agree with you, but is it the right thing to do? This poor soul is losing a business. . .compassion needs to play a part here especially when the owner is not in jeopardy of losing anything. Tough times.

 

[Sandisw]

I totally agree with you, but is it the right thing to do? This poor soul is losing a business. . .compassion needs to play a part here especially when the owner is not in jeopardy of losing anything. Tough times.

What about in ordinary times, and the same thing happens? There are always times when crisis can happen to a renter, and while it may not be as large scale as this, it doesn’t make it any less of a hardship for the renter wno has last their job and stuck.

Renting has risks and this Is one of them. The bigger issue now, though, is that we have never before had a situation where the resort was closed,

An owner willing to adjust at all, if they can, is certainly a nice thing to do, and if the owner can help out, great. But, I don’t believe it’s a right or wrong situation. In this case, the owner is willing to let the renter out of the contract. They don’t even have to do that, they are.

 

[Tess]

What about in ordinary times, and the same thing happens? There are always times when crisis can happen to a renter, and while it may not be as large scale as this, it doesn’t make it any less of a hardship for the renter wno has last their job and stuck.

Renting has risks and this Is one of them. The bigger issue now, though, is that we have never before had a situation where the resort was closed,

An owner willing to adjust at all, if they can, is certainly a nice thing to do, and if the owner can help out, great. But, I don’t believe it’s a right or wrong situation. In this case, the owner is willing to let the renter out of the contract. They don’t even have to do that, they are.

I completely agree with everything you have said. In normal circumstances this individual would have made the trip. There are no winners. My thought is that if the owner is able to cancel the reservation and use or re-rent the points, then the renter should be reimbursed--it is simply the right thing to do.

Now a resort closing and the renter has no option. . .another story.

 

[Lewisc]

I want to do the fair and right thing, however, I have been unsuccessful so far at cancelling the trip either on the DVC web site or reaching anyone at DVC. I have no desire to try to go to WDW during the dates she had requested. If this was my trip, I would have booked at my home resort last October, for a trip in September. I’m pretty certain that BWV is already booked up for September.

I am sorry that the virus taking a toll on her business. I am fine with not charging her the balance, but I feel that I do not owe a refund of the deposit. She says that she cannot take the trip because she can no longer afford it. I know that if there wasn’t a virus pandemic and if a person booked a trip, paid a deposit, then later decided that they could not afford it and cancelled, I would not refund the deposit.

That's "nice" of you. I'm sure you're entitled to keep her deposit, but all you're doing is following the contract. I'd be shocked if the contract allowed you to require specific performance. You're not doing anything for her.

Do you know the restaurant owner? Are you a customer? Will you lose anything if you just go online and cancel the reservation? Can you bank the points? Use them before your UY ends? Rent them to someone else? If you're not suffering a loss the fair and right thing would be to refund at least some of her deposit. Not required.

If I rented through a broker my answer might be different.

I don't understand why it is hard for you to cancel her trip. Your 7 months away? You should be able to cancel online with no issue. Will you lose points? Can you bank those points? Have you checked for the dates you wanted personally? Lots of availability popping up and down as people are reconsidering travel.

Just me. I would refund her minimum $250 (but probably all) if you have it to refund. Everyone has been Hit hard by this. I don’t know that you have to give her the money back but if my points weren’t altered in any way , I would.

Did you have a contract?

Lol curious why would you choose September over a late November stay?? Unless you have school and/or work obligations. You might want to check that time out!! We love that time of year!! The resorts are beautiful with Christmas decorations. It’s a very coveted time of year for DVC!

good luck. This is hard on everyone.

+1

I see this case as different, as much as an hardship is for the renter. As long as the resort is open, and the reservation can be delivered to the renter, then the owner has done what they promised, and it, for me, falls in to the non refundable aspect.

Where I think it muddys the water is when the resort closed, and the owner can’t deliver it. Granted, it wasnt the owner who canceled, but none the less, they can’t,

So, giving the renter a chance to drop and lose what is paid is completely fair, IMO, because at this point, there is no reason to assume the resorts will be shut down

Of course it falls under the no-refund provision. There isn't any obligation to refund. I object to the implication the poster is doing anything extra in allowing the renter to default.

The question isn't what's contractually permitted. The question is what's fair and right. Assuming the only "cost" is the electricity and time it takes to go online and cancel the fair and compassionate thing would be to refund at least half. or Just say I'm legally entitled to the money and I'm going to keep it. I'd respect that more then pretending you're doing the right thing when you're not doing anything more then what is contractually required.

 

[Sandisw]

That's "nice" of you. I'm sure you're entitled to keep her deposit, but all you're doing is following the contract. I'd be shocked if the contract allowed you to require specific performance. You're not doing anything for her.

Do you know the restaurant owner? Are you a customer? Will you lose anything if you just go online and cancel the reservation? Can you bank the points? Use them before your UY ends? Rent them to someone else? If you're not suffering a loss the fair and right thing would be to refund at least some of her deposit. Not required.

If I rented through a broker my answer might be different.


+1


Of course it falls under the no-refund provision. There isn't any obligation to refund. I object to the implication the poster is doing anything extra in allowing the renter to default.

The question isn't what's contractually permitted. The question is what's fair and right. Assuming the only "cost" is the electricity and time it takes to go online and cancel the fair and compassionate thing would be to refund at least half. or Just say I'm legally entitled to the money and I'm going to keep it. I'd respect that more then pretending you're doing the right thing when you're not doing anything more then what is contractually required.

The owner has a contract that can be enforced and the owner does not have to allow the renter to void it. When the renter entered into it, they knew what the rules were and agreed. It’s risky business booking something non refundable. Why? Because you never know what will happen.

I get this is for unforeseen. But, IMO, it doesn’t change the situation and that if an owner has decided they want to enforce the contract, I do not believe they should be faulted for thst,

So, yes, the owner letting the person out of a non refundable/non changeable contract with the loss of only the deposit IS going above and beyond for this renter. It is taking it off that persons plate as an obligation. Why is it fair for the renter to expect the owner to now have to try and struggle? If the owner no longer has the rest of the rental money, they are suffering a loss as well, The terms fair and right go both ways.

Owners rent out points for a reason,..and it’s usually a financial one, Personally, it’s unfair to criticize an owner for trying to do something that they don’t have to do at all,

I have renters schedule through the brokers for August. If the resort is open, I plan to enforce the contract, even if the renters decide they can’t Go. I’d be willing to reschedule, but I won’t refund, unless I decide to try my hand at another rental...which..given everything thst has happened, I doubt.

Like I said, if the resort is closed, then I think that is an entirely different sort and non refundable or not, the renter should be entitled to most, if not all, of their money back

 

[lovethesun12]

I am sorry that the virus taking a toll on her business. I am fine with not charging her the balance, but I feel that I do not owe a refund of the deposit. She says that she cannot take the trip because she can no longer afford it. I know that if there wasn’t a virus pandemic and if a person booked a trip, paid a deposit, then later decided that they could not afford it and cancelled, I would not refund the deposit.

I've heard a lot of people here discuss the idea that the non-refundable contract is iron clad. From my experience (What I've been told about contracts I've had to have people sign) is that a contract is only as good as the paper it's written on. It does show the renter was aware of the risks. But If a deposit is not refunded and the points are either used/rented, well that's against the law in most places (double dipping) and would the contract trump that? I'm not a judge so I'm not sure but there's probably something there.

For cases where the resorts are closed, if the member has options and refuses a refund without looking at possibilities presented by Disney but doesn't who is at fault? It looks a lot better for the member if they explore options that have minimal cost and looks way worse for the member if they re-rent the points or use them without issuing a refund.

 

[Sandisw]

I've heard a lot of people here discuss the idea that the non-refundable contract is iron clad. From my experience (What I've been told about contracts I've had to have people sign) is that a contract is only as good as the paper it's written on. It does show the renter was aware of the risks. But If a deposit is not refunded and the points are either used/rented, well that's against the law in most places (double dipping) and would the contract trump that? I'm not a judge so I'm not sure but there's probably something there.

For cases where the resorts are closed, if the member has options and refuses a refund without looking at possibilities presented by Disney but doesn't who is at fault? It looks a lot better for the member if they explore options that have minimal cost and looks way worse for the member if they re-rent the points or use them without issuing a refund.

In this case though, the reservation is most likely for a time when the resort is open. So, it is the renter asking the owner to let them out of the contract in which they agreed to it being non refundable, The owner has agreed to void the contract in lieu of forfeiting the deposit,

Once that is offered, it then becomes the renters choice to accept that as a settlement, or not, and keep the reservation and pay for it later.

The thing is that the owner is not obligated if this reservation gets canceled to try and rent out those points again. So, in essence, there would be no double dipping.

 

[lovethesun12]

In this case though, the reservation is most likely for a time when the resort is open. So, it is the renter asking the owner to let them out of the contract in which they agreed to it being non refundable, The owner has agreed to void the contract in lieu of forfeiting the deposit,

Once that is offered, it then becomes the renters choice to accept that as a settlement, or not, and keep the reservation and pay for it later.

The thing is that the owner is not obligated if this reservation gets canceled to try and rent out those points again. So, in essence, there would be no double dipping.

I agree. I guess this is where it gets risky on both ends though. How detailed is the contract? And when is the final payment due date? These things all make a difference. If someone says they would like to cancel and receive a refund they are giving an option for the owner to far in advance rent the points (or attempt to rent) or use the points for themselves. Remember a deposit is a partial payment for a room. If the room is not rebooked and the owner is unable (or does not want) to secure a new reservation then I would imagine the owner would 100% get to keep the payment since they are out the funds they could have had.

But if they re-rent they then receive two room payments on the exact same room. Isn't that the definition of double dipping?

Again I am not a lawyer or a judge, just playing devil's advocate really. It might not be as easy as washing your hands clean and keeping the deposit if you plan to use/rent the points

 

[Thecouch]

I managed to cancel my priceline express booking at dolphin for mid April. I had been checking my booking from my phone and it hadn't changed. I selected to open in desktop instead of mobile on my phone and spotted it had a cancel for refund due coronavirus button. Clicked on and got email straight away explaining I would get a full refund only due to coronavirus as this type of booking would not normally get a refund. So pretty happy with priceline and dolphin resort

 

[nkereina]

I see this case as different, as much as an hardship is for the renter. As long as the resort is open, and the reservation can be delivered to the renter, then the owner has done what they promised, and it, for me, falls in to the non refundable aspect.

Where I think it muddys the water is when the resort closed, and the owner can’t deliver it. Granted, it wasnt the owner who canceled, but none the less, they can’t,

So, giving the renter a chance to drop and lose what is paid is completely fair, IMO, because at this point, there is no reason to assume the resorts will be shut down

This. Point rentals are in contemplation of a resort reservation. If the resort reservation cannot be fulfilled through no fault of the renter (i.e. resort closure), I presume it would make the rental contract voidable (I presume because I haven't read the actual verbiage). There would no longer be exchange of value in the contract, which makes it invalid. It's certainly a drag for owners who have points expiring, but it can be chalked up to a risk of renting. Similar to the risks renters take if something comes up personally that causes them to not be able to go. The whole transaction has risks on both sides.

In the case of someone wanting to cancel months from now due to the economic hardship this has caused, I would agree the owner has no obligation to refund money at this point. If the owner is unable to re-rent the points, one could argue the renter would still be on the hook for the balance due as well.

I totally agree with you, but is it the right thing to do? This poor soul is losing a business. . .compassion needs to play a part here especially when the owner is not in jeopardy of losing anything. Tough times.

Respectfully, its a business transaction. Emotion should be taken out of it. The right thing to do, from a business perspective, is follow the language in the contract. This is why contracts exist. Its a very unfortunate situation for the renter, but again, this is another risk of renting points. A renter is exchanging the risk of losing money for cheaper lodging on a vacation. A renter should consider that life can throw curveballs, and assess whether this is a risk they want to take before entering the contract.

 

[Tess]

Respectfully, its a business transaction. Emotion should be taken out of it. The right thing to do, from a business perspective, is follow the language in the contract. This is why contracts exist. Its a very unfortunate situation for the renter, but again, this is another risk of renting points. A renter is exchanging the risk of losing money for cheaper lodging on a vacation. A renter should consider that life can throw curveballs, and assess whether this is a risk they want to take before entering the contract.

I cannot nor do I disagree with anything you have said. Personally, if I was in the owner's situation, the money would be refunded even though I would have no obligation to do so. That's just me.

 

[nkereina]

I cannot nor do I disagree with anything you have said. Personally, if I was in the owner's situation, the money would be refunded even though I would have no obligation to do so. That's just me.

Right, that would be the owner's choice to make. I would probably do the same. My only point is that the owner is under no obligation to do so, even given the current horrible circumstances.