But renting FOR PROFIT - any profit - even covering in excess of the dues on those points to pay for extra points is prohibited by the contract. To the best of my knowledge, Florida law does not guarantee you can rent for profit, only that you can rent to cover your costs. U.S. Code defines commercial primarily through the use of the word "profit" - and while we argue what profit is here, it certainly kicks in if you are covering more than the cost of dues and the amortized cost of the points you use for that reservation only. In other words, to the best of my knowledge, there is no guarantee you can rent points to cover the cost of the points you use.
That doesn't mean Disney will change their "20 rentals a year" - but that rule is very old and its based on an old system - when that was put in place I don't think there was internet booking and Disney's ability to pull data from their systems to analyze was still in its infancy as far as DVC is concerned. Subsequent system modernization and tools make a different approach (such as proportion of points you travel on where you are the lead guest or the lead guest on a concurrent reservation over several years) much more possible than it was twenty years ago. Automation makes sending out warning letters much easier as well. And we haven't heard (as far as I know) of them enforcing even the 20 rentals rule in the past few years.
That doesn't mean they will do it. It is fairly likely that this was simply a CM overstepping - although overstepping in this manner means someone has a least heard about the commercial clause and its being talked about by CMs, you don't make that up out of whole cloth. And, as was pointed out, the OP was asking MS to do something MS DOESN'T do - talk to a non-member (and shouldn't do, MS is understaffed and busy enough with members). But I think that legally they can - as long as they permit renting to cover the cost of dues and amortized points. Moreover, I think if they did do it, they would go after the people who are really running rental businesses - those people who have maximum points (or even more than maximum points but spread over several owners) and those people who are buying, stripping, and selling. Not your average user who travels on their own points regularly and rents (or gives) their points out a few times a year. And I doubt they'd go hard or consistent - they'd target a few high profile rental businesses, audit the memberships, cancel the reservations, and cool the rental market, repeating that as often as they determine they should to keep the rental market where Disney wants it (and who knows where that is). That's functionally what they did last time with the 20 rentals rule - they put a few people out of business, cooled the market, made the membership that was complaining about rentals happy, and then nothing more that was visible.
Someone upthread pointed out that we all got the notice on 20 rentals a year when it was announced. I don't think I ever got anything other than what I heard on the board. With 150 points, it really doesn't apply to me, so its possible I wasn't paying any attention, but I'm fairly certain I never was informed with anything as formal as a letter. Maybe there was a notice on
DVCmember.com, but since I go there twice a year at most, I wouldn't have seen it.
I don't think that is accurate. Any rental will give you a profit in the technical terms there is no way to allow a rental and then say it can't be above dues. Where in the contract does it say you can't make a "profit" when it defines our rights to use our membership for rentals? I can't seem to find that...but please share if I have missed it.
The contract does not say you can't make a profit. It says that one can't rent for "commercial purposes"...meaning, that you can't rent so much that you have turned it into a business...and that is what is prohibited.
Even the post with the confirmed reservations may or may not be a violation if all of those are being offered by different owners, on different memberships and just seeing that doesn't tell us that. Just because we have not heard about owners being notified of being in violation, doesn't mean it is not happening, does it?
Again,
@drusba really laid out all the specifics which people need to go back and read because it explains the words that matter. I know
@CarolMN linked it earlier but I will link it again..
https://www.disboards.com/threads/a...-email-response-from-ms.3919744/post-64837406
Now, I do agree that the 20 reservations limit that is currently in place to trigger a membership may be outdated and with the ease of securing rentals via the internet...whether it be brokers, FB, or the disboards...or any other sites out there...DVC may need to look into updating the terms if they believe that there are many memberships out there getting close to or violating the rules...and no one has yet to confirm that DVC is not doing that.
In terms of notice...it was included in an updated POS (IIRC)...the multi-site one? And then that change was noticed and shared via websites.
Playing devil's advocate.... I could very easily be the owner of 4 of those 6 resort studio rentals posted above since I have three memberships...two which have VGF points...for the record, they are not mine, but if they were, and DVC checked my account, I would not be even close to meeting the renting for "commercial purposes" rule, if all I had was four reservations on my account in a 12 month period that I said I would be renting.
Again, I am not saying that the rental market hasn't exploded and that in the past year or two we are seeing more spec rentals happen, but DVC can not step in and stop those.
Now they do have this ability:
32. Special Season Preference List shall mean any reservation list established by Member Services from time to time for high demand Use Days at a given DVC Resort created for the purpose of allowing Club Members to have an opportunity to reserve these Use Days
But, that just means all owners have access and if someone who wants to rent it gets chosen, then those spec rentals will still be there.
It's been mentioned several times...as long as an owner's name is on a reservation...no matter how many trips are on a membership...it can't be considered anything but an owner using it for their own purpose.
I get that people are frustrated with not being able to get a room and then to see it listed for rent. And, maybe what we will see DVC do, if they do anything, is start requiring members to let MS know it is a rental, by adding that to the booking option. I know it does say "guest is not a DVC owner", but maybe they will add "guest is a renter".