Multiple time renter now concerned?

[GrnMtnMan]

No, because DVC is cancelling those reservations. As an owner you would be in breach of contract for failing to keep the reservation active.

I see your point. It would be interesting to see how something like this got litigated: a nonrefundable contract versus a force majure closure and a good faith effort by the member to offer substitute accommodations. I agree that members wold probably be forced to refund, but you never know...definitely best to have this situation in the agreement in advance.

 

[CmdrThor]

How about an addition to the contract stating in the event the resort is closed, the space rented is not available and the points used will expire before the reservation can be rescheduled, the owner of the points and the renter of the points shall share the amount paid by the renter. The owner will keep an amount that would be equal to the cost of the dues for those points (include that cost in the contract) and the renter will be entitled to the remaining funds. Then include information noting when the points expire so the renter can decide if they want to continue with the reservation.

Whatever the Owner and Renter agree to works, it is just important to have it spelled out explicitly in the contract. As an Owner I would write up the contract as an exchange of money for DVC Vacation Points with the expiration dates made clear. Then if there was a resort closure the contract would state the owner would use those points for the benefit of the renter for any available reservation within the expiration. I don't typically rent out distressed points though so I feel like the renter would feel like they have adequate time to reschedule if there is an issue.

 

[Sandisw]

How about an addition to the contract stating in the event the resort is closed, the space rented is not available and the points used will expire before the reservation can be rescheduled, the owner of the points and the renter of the points shall share the amount paid by the renter. The owner will keep an amount that would be equal to the cost of the dues for those points (include that cost in the contract) and the renter will be entitled to the remaining funds. Then include information noting when the points expire so the renter can decide if they want to continue with the reservation.

i think you will see more of this in contracts. And, it will then be uo to a renter to decide if they want to accept,

I do believe that any owner who doesn’t offer some split of costs with a renter due to a resort closure, may have a harder time.

 

[Matty B13]

How about an addition to the contract stating in the event the resort is closed, the space rented is not available and the points used will expire before the reservation can be rescheduled, the owner of the points and the renter of the points shall share the amount paid by the renter. The owner will keep an amount that would be equal to the cost of the dues for those points (include that cost in the contract) and the renter will be entitled to the remaining funds. Then include information noting when the points expire so the renter can decide if they want to continue with the reservation.

I would at least think some amount of money for all the time the owner spent dealing with the situation would also be fair, not just the cost of dues. I know I've spent a lot of time taking care of the renters that needed changes, and it amounts to hours of my own time.

 

[Fangorn]

I think that going forward, not only will the specific language and terms and conditions of rental contracts change, but we'll also see a significant reduction in the rental market (at least in the next 2-3 years) overall and probably a complete revamp of business models for brokers - those that survive and the new ones that step in to replace those that don't.

One of the interesting things we might get out of all this chaos, is a chance to see (as has been argued among members for the past several years) just how much the rental market is or is not contributing to room unavailability. But then again, under the current situation, rentals won't be the only thing in flux, so changes to availability may not be solely attributable to changes in rentals. (Note to self: lay in a new supply of popcorn! )

Steve

 

[_auroraborealis_]

A lot of points in trouble right now were not distressed to start with. They were 11 month bookings. They might have been end of UY or banked points, but an 11 month booking has never been considered distressed.

 

[Brian Noble]

But then again, under the current situation, rentals won't be the only thing in flux, so changes to availability may not be solely attributable to changes in rentals.

Exactly. Lots of timeshare systems have seen a noticeable decrease in availability over the last several years, including those without the name brand and relatively liquid rental market surrounding DVC. My conclusion from watching lots of discussions at TUG across many systems is that travel demand is simply higher, fewer owned weeks/points are going to breakage in all of these systems, and that explains at least some of the availability issues.

There are certainly some aspects of DVC that exacerbate the problem: the under-pointing of studios and over-pointing of 1BRs, resorts with highly imbalanced point structures (Poly, CCV), some curious point structures between resorts, etc. But I suspect the lion's share has been simple: everyone has wanted to travel.