Poll: Your Riviera Resale price

At what price would you buy Riviera on the resale market (Be limited to staying only at Riviera)?

  • $160

    Votes: 4 1.0%
  • $150

    Votes: 14 3.6%
  • $140

    Votes: 7 1.8%
  • $130

    Votes: 10 2.5%
  • $120

    Votes: 40 10.2%
  • $110

    Votes: 28 7.1%
  • $100

    Votes: 80 20.4%
  • Under $90

    Votes: 210 53.4%

  • Total voters
    393
What social media posts are your referring to? Did the broker who flipped it actually post about it?
Yes the broker posted all over Facebook that they had the first Riviera contract for sale, which was fine. Then about a day max later they started blasting all over Facebook that the contract had an offer, which again was fine. But then they started blasting that it sold for much less than asking price, which is where my concern started—they operated against the best interest of their client by letting everyone know they accepted much less than asking, mind you the potential deal could have fallen through at this point so now everyone knew to offer only much less than asking. Then the final kicker is we all found out the owner of the resale company bought the contract and relisted it for much more than asking.
 
Yes the broker posted all over Facebook that they had the first Riviera contract for sale, which was fine. Then about a day max later they started blasting all over Facebook that the contract had an offer, which again was fine. But then they started blasting that it sold for much less than asking price, which is where my concern started—they operated against the best interest of their client by letting everyone know they accepted much less than asking, mind you the potential deal could have fallen through at this point so now everyone knew to offer only much less than asking. Then the final kicker is we all found out the owner of the resale company bought the contract and relisted it for much more than asking.

Wow! The timeshare shadiness (we don't expect to see with DVC) is in full view with this resale company. Thanks for the details.
 
Probably that's how DVC sees it. They think they can get away with it because they grandfathered everyone in.
However, as time passes, more and more people will be affected. There are already 2 contracts sold on the resale market and the resort has not opened yet. There are already 2 families who cannot trade into all the L14 resorts and thousands of resale buyers who cannot book Riviera. Ask them if they feel for them the rules are substantially similar.

This said, this is not an hill I intend to die on. I'll be egoistic here and since it doesn't personally affect me, I'm not going to create a thread like for the points reallocation or do anything to change things. But I still think that if people affected by the resale restrictions do a legal action they'd have good chances to win.

Possibly. I guess I see it that they altered the trading rules for all resorts beginning January, 2019. I think that is how they were able to legally do this and know they would be able to use the own terms language as back up.

i think when you see that they reverted on the 2020 charts..at least in my thoughts..they weren’t sure they were on as solid ground legally.

But, the fact that they did put in language to reverse things down the road means they can change if it causes an issue they deem worthy of a cbange.

Yes, we have had sales but I am of the belief that if you buy something knowing what the restrictions are, then you buy agreeing to those terms,

Time will tell!
 
Possibly. I guess I see it that they altered the trading rules for all resorts beginning January, 2019.

Have they? The only change they did to the L14 resorts POS I'm aware of is to allow multiple UY for each unit. Every change to the POS must be communicated to the membership using letters or emails or other form of publications (like on the DVC website). So I don't think they changed the rules for the L14 resorts
DVCMC has a fiduciary responsibility toward members (who pay them) not toward DVD. If they do a change it has to be done in the interest of the members. Devaluing our contract not allowing people who purchase from us to book the newest resorts is difficult to explain as "done in our interest".
They have changed only the Riviera rules, how people trade out and how people can trade in. That's why resale purchasers at the L14 continue to be able to trade within the L14. If they were able to change rules for existing resorts, then why not restrict everyone at their own resort?

That's why I say Riviera hasn't joined the club under substantially similar terms. It has its own set of rules, different from the rules of every resort already in the Club.
However, unless someone is willing to challenge Disney, this is pure academia.
 


Have they? The only change they did to the L14 resorts POS I'm aware of is to allow multiple UY for each unit. Every change to the POS must be communicated to the membership using letters or emails or other form of publications (like on the DVC website). So I don't think they changed the rules for the L14 resorts
DVCMC has a fiduciary responsibility toward members (who pay them) not toward DVD. If they do a change it has to be done in the interest of the members. Devaluing our contract not allowing people who purchase from us to book the newest resorts is difficult to explain as "done in our interest".
They have changed only the Riviera rules, how people trade out and how people can trade in. That's why resale purchasers at the L14 continue to be able to trade within the L14. If they were able to change rules for existing resorts, then why not restrict everyone at their own resort?

That's why I say Riviera hasn't joined the club under substantially similar terms. It has its own set of rules, different from the rules of every resort already in the Club.
However, unless someone is willing to challenge Disney, this is pure academia.

From what I understand...and could be wrong for sure.,,is that the agreement with BVTC for Rivera included the language to limit L14..that’s what I mean that rules were changed for both.

I also thought that the POS stared something that future resorts aren’t guaranteed? Maybe it is this clause that also supported the change?

But you are right, our thoughts are just that. And selfishly, since the restrictions at this point won’t affect me, and I can see how the rules, with those grandfathered in, fall into an area that keeps them within the rules, I am okay with them at this point from the standpoint of future DVC members are informed With what they are buying.

Now, resale value could be affected, but I never considered it DVCs responsibility to make sure our resale value was worth anything. I think they are responsible for doing things in the interest of members to keep my use of the product I bought the same. And the restrictions haven’t changed my use, Of course, I realize my thinking could be different than many!
 
Have they? The only change they did to the L14 resorts POS I'm aware of is to allow multiple UY for each unit. Every change to the POS must be communicated to the membership using letters or emails or other form of publications (like on the DVC website). So I don't think they changed the rules for the L14 resorts
DVCMC has a fiduciary responsibility toward members (who pay them) not toward DVD. If they do a change it has to be done in the interest of the members. Devaluing our contract not allowing people who purchase from us to book the newest resorts is difficult to explain as "done in our interest".
They have changed only the Riviera rules, how people trade out and how people can trade in. That's why resale purchasers at the L14 continue to be able to trade within the L14. If they were able to change rules for existing resorts, then why not restrict everyone at their own resort?

That's why I say Riviera hasn't joined the club under substantially similar terms. It has its own set of rules, different from the rules of every resort already in the Club.
However, unless someone is willing to challenge Disney, this is pure academia.
In addition, BVTC, when adding new resorts, has to act as a fiduciary and also consider balance of demand at existing resorts. There's also the point that L14 agreements state that if there are new resorts, new members will have the "same terms and conditions," but Riviera's Resort Agreement states new members could have "different terms and conditions" and "different rights of access." I have been asking for clarification from DVC but so far only vague responses - I'm still working my way up the chain. The most I've gotten so far is, If there are many complaints, DVC would reconsider...
 
In addition, BVTC, when adding new resorts, has to act as a fiduciary and also consider balance of demand at existing resorts. There's also the point that L14 agreements state that if there are new resorts, new members will have the "same terms and conditions," but Riviera's Resort Agreement states new members could have "different terms and conditions" and "different rights of access." I have been asking for clarification from DVC but so far only vague responses - I'm still working my way up the chain. The most I've gotten so far is, If there are many complaints, DVC would reconsider...

Great information. I am waiting on my RIV documents to read them all and was hoping there would be something to help understand. Now, the line for then L14 that states new members with same rules certainly seems to contradict the resale restrictions for L14.
 


I have been keeping tract of the threads on the re sale restrictions closely. The responses are interesting that have been posted as to Disney's answers. IMO, Disney is NOT going to do anything until/unless there is an actual law suite filed. Until then, everything is conjecture as to if they are violating Florida law or not (again my guess is Disney is counting on it is not worth anyone's time or money to file such a law suite). Mind you I am not advocating anything, just a very interested bystander.
 
Last edited:
In addition, BVTC, when adding new resorts, has to act as a fiduciary and also consider balance of demand at existing resorts.
Thanks for the update on your work with communicating with Disney.

Can you direct me to where you found there is a fiduciary responsibility to the membership? As I have read it, unlike DVCMC, BVTC has zero fiduciary obligation to the membership. The Disclosure actually states explicitly that BVTC can change anything at will even if it adversely affects ownership rights and benefits or increases our cost of ownership.
The most I've gotten so far is, If there are many complaints, DVC would reconsider...
What was the context of this statement. And who at Disney suggested this? Just trying to figure out if this was just said to placate concerns. Thanks.
 
Can you direct me to where you found there is a fiduciary responsibility to the membership? As I have read it, unlike DVCMC, BVTC has zero fiduciary obligation to the membership. The Disclosure actually states explicitly that BVTC can change anything at will even if it adversely affects ownership rights and benefits or increases our cost of ownership.
Not directed towards me, I realize. But Y told me that BVTC has no fiduciary duty as it is an elective choice via the owners to participate in the exchange and "theoretically" elective for the entire association to be part of the exchange program. I say "theoretically" since DVC maintains their 2% ownership in each unit specifically so we sign away our voting rights to them (it's in the initial contracts for each sale). I will say that @katandmouse stated it does say in all DVC Resort Agreements that BVTC will use their "commercially reasonable efforts, in good faith" to associate a new resort (section 6.2.b)
There's also the point that L14 agreements state that if there are new resorts, new members will have the "same terms and conditions," but Riviera's Resort Agreement states new members could have "different terms and conditions" and "different rights of access."
The exact phrasing is "substantially similar...." which has a different interpretations than "same terms and conditions" one is hard and the other is soft. As for your comment there are these few sections of interest (numbers are from CCV POS). I added the bold for emphasis to the sections of interest. Also be reminded that the actual operation of the trading is to be dictated by the BVTC Disclosure Document which can be fully and swiftly amended without approval (stated as such) by BVTC. Basically I see that the "substantially similar" clause exists; however, we did give power for BVTC to associate resorts under their own terms and conditions and modify the Disclosure Document that dictates how trading works. So the question is which trumps which, also what does "in all material aspects under the circumstances pertaining to each such additional DVC Resort" apply to.

5.1 All reservations made by Club Members amoung the DVC Resorts using the DVC Reservation Component shall be made in accordance with this Agreement and the Disclosure Document as promulgated or amended from time to time by BVTC. BVTC reserves the right to amend the Disclosure Document in its discretion and as it determines necessary or desirable in order to operate and manage the services and benefits made available through BVTC.

6.1 If BVTC associates one or more additional resorts as DVC Resorts, the DVC Resort Agreement executed to effect such association shall be substantially similar to this Agreement in all material aspects under the circumstances pertaining to each such additional DVC Resort.

6.2.b The association of additional DVC Resorts is not subject to the approval of DVCMC, the Association or any Club Member, and any decision to associate DVC Resorts, including terms and conditions under which the DVC Resort is associated, will be mad by BVTC subject to the express written approval of DVD. In making a decision to association additional DVC Resorts, BVTC shall use its commercially reasonable efforts, in good faith and based upon all available evidence under the circumstances, to further the best interests of the Club Members taken as a whole with respect to the Club Members' opportunity to use and enjoy all of the Vacation Homes and related facilities made available through the DVC Reservation Component.

6.2.d BVTC does not anticipate that the rules and regulations governing reservations among the DVC Rresorts will be affected by adding additional resorts as DVC Resorts. However, BVTC has reserved the right to amend the Disclosure Document and DVC Vacation Point schedules to take into account the location and anticipated relative use demand of the added DVC Resorts as may be necessary or as it deems necessary or desirable in order to implement and enforce provisions of this Agreement and Disclosure Document.
 
Is there a place online to find some of these? I don’t see them on the member site unless I am missing them!
 
I wouldn't pay $10 for them. Don't like the look of the resort, don't like the rooms, don't like the location. Restrictions imo are a real deal breaker.
 
Thanks for the update on your work with communicating with Disney.

Can you direct me to where you found there is a fiduciary responsibility to the membership? As I have read it, unlike DVCMC, BVTC has zero fiduciary obligation to the membership. The Disclosure actually states explicitly that BVTC can change anything at will even if it adversely affects ownership rights and benefits or increases our cost of ownership.
Sure. FL Statute 721.552(1)(b) states, "Any person who is authorized by the timeshare instrument to make additions to the multisite timeshare plan pursuant to this subsection shall act as a fiduciary in such capacity in the best interests of the purchasers of the plan as a whole and shall adhere to the demand balancing standard set forth in s. 721.56(6) in connection with such additions. Additions that are otherwise permitted may be made only so long as a one-to-one use right to use night requirement ratio is maintained at all times."
FL Statute 721.56(6) states, "Prior to offering the multisite timeshare plan, the developer shall create the reservation system and shall establish rules and regulations for its operation. In establishing these rules and regulations, the developer shall take into account the location and anticipated relative use demand of each component site that he or she intends to offer as a part of the plan and shall use his or her best efforts, in good faith and based upon all reasonably available evidence under the circumstances, to further the best interests of the purchasers of the plan as a whole with respect to their opportunity to use and enjoy the accommodations and facilities of the plan. The rules and regulations shall also provide for periodic adjustment or amendment of the reservation system by the managing entity from time to time in order to respond to actual purchaser use patterns and changes in purchaser use demand for the accommodations and facilities existing at that time within the plan. The person authorized to make additions and substitutions during the term of the multisite timeshare plan shall also comply with the requirements of this subsection in ascertaining the desirability of the proposed addition, substitution, adjustment, or amendment and the impact of same upon the demand for and availability of existing plan accommodations and facilities."

The BVTC Disclosure doesn't specify anything about adding resorts that I could find. My Multi-Site POS (says rev. 12/13/18 - but it includes the Riviera restriction) section 6.a. Basis for Additions, paragraph 2 states, “In making a decision to associate additional DVC Resorts, BVTC shall use its best efforts, in good faith and based upon all reasonably available evidence under the circumstances, to further the best interests of the Club Members taken as a whole with respect to Club Members’ opportunity to use and enjoy all of the Vacation Homes and related facilities made available through the DVC Reservation Component. In this regard, BVTC may consider such factors as size, capacity, furnishings, maintenance impact, location (including geographic, topographic, and scenic considerations), recreational capabilities, demand, and availability for Club Member use and enjoyment” (p. 28 of my booklet). My BCV DVC Resort Agreement says something similar in section 6.2.b (what @crvetter posted above).

I do see where it says BVTC could make any changes and they could adversely affect a member's rights - BVTC Disclosure section 7.5 Amendment. I took it to mean that a change could adversely affect some members but overall would need to be in the best interest of owners as a whole (sort of like what @Sandisw was saying in a previous post). Or maybe since they have previously reserved this right, they can make any changes regardless? It's one of the questions I have for DVC.

What was the context of this statement. And who at Disney suggested this? Just trying to figure out if this was just said to placate concerns. Thanks.
I was speaking to someone in the legal department I believe, but the CM made clear she was an introductory level CM and did not have all the specific details or the reasoning that the higher ups did when making the restrictions. I could see how she could have been just trying to placate me. She wasn't able to answer my specific questions about the restrictions benefiting members or balancing demand, but I didn't have the time to wait to speak to the next level department/person yet.

Not directed towards me, I realize. But Y told me that BVTC has no fiduciary duty as it is an elective choice via the owners to participate in the exchange and "theoretically" elective for the entire association to be part of the exchange program. I say "theoretically" since DVC maintains their 2% ownership in each unit specifically so we sign away our voting rights to them (it's in the initial contracts for each sale). I will say that @katandmouse stated it does say in all DVC Resort Agreements that BVTC will use their "commercially reasonable efforts, in good faith" to associate a new resort (section 6.2.b)

The exact phrasing is "substantially similar...." which has a different interpretations than "same terms and conditions" one is hard and the other is soft. As for your comment there are these few sections of interest (numbers are from CCV POS). I added the bold for emphasis to the sections of interest. Also be reminded that the actual operation of the trading is to be dictated by the BVTC Disclosure Document which can be fully and swiftly amended without approval (stated as such) by BVTC. Basically I see that the "substantially similar" clause exists; however, we did give power for BVTC to associate resorts under their own terms and conditions and modify the Disclosure Document that dictates how trading works. So the question is which trumps which, also what does "in all material aspects under the circumstances pertaining to each such additional DVC Resort" apply to.
Interesting, thanks for sharing the CCV sections! My BCV Resort Agreement does specifically say "same terms and conditions," in addition to the "substantially similar" clause. Here are the same sections from the BCV DVC Resort Agreement:

section 5.1 "All reservations made by Club Members among the DVC Resorts using the DVC Reservation Component shall be made in accordance with the Disclosure Document as promulgated and/or amended from time to time by BVTC. BVTC reserves the right to amend the Disclosure Document in its sole, absolute and unfettered discretion and as it determines necessary or desirable in order to operate and manage the services and benefits made available through BVTC; provided, however, that the Disclosure Document will only be amended as permitted under Applicable Law."

section 6.1 "In the event BVTC associates one or more additional resorts as DVC Resorts, the DVC Resort Agreement executed to effect such association shall be substantially similar to this Agreement in all material respects under the circumstances pertaining to each such additional DVC Resort."

section 6.2.b is the same - it continues, "In this regard, BVTC will consider such factors as size, capacity, furnishings, maintenance impact, location (including geographic, topographic, and scenic considerations), recreational capabilities, and demand and availability for Club Member use and enjoyment."

section 6.2.c "In the event other resorts are associated as DVC Resorts, the addition of the DVC Resort will result in new Club Members who will have the opportunity to make reservations for the use of Vacation Homes and related facilities through the DVC Reservation Component under the same terms and conditions as existing Club Members, including the Club Members at Disney’s Beach Club Villas, and may also result in an increase in the Annual Dues assessed against each Ownership Interest. If other DVC resorts are associated, demand for use may vary among the various DVC Resorts and the level of Club Member demand for a particular DVC Resort may increase over the level of use demand that existed at the time of purchase by a particular Club Member such that the ability of a Club Member to reserve use at a high demand DVC Resort at a particular time may be impacted. However, new Club Members’ reservation requests will also be subject to the Home Resort Priority Period for each DVC Resort, and in no event shall the addition of a DVC Resort result in a greater than “one-to-one purchaser to accommodation ratio,” as that term is defined in Section 721.05(23), Florida Statutes. In addition, the inclusion of new resorts as DVC Resorts will afford existing Club Members with more DVC Resort Vacation Homes and location reservation opportunities and options.”

section 6.2.d is the same, but the last sentence continues, "as permitted under Applicable Law."

Now the Riviera DVC Resort Agreement takes out the section 6.1 substantially similar clause, so the 6.2 sections become Riviera's 6.1.
6.1.c is where Riviera's states "different terms" and "different rights": "If other resorts are associated as DVC Resorts, the addition of the DVC Resort will result in the addition of new Club Members who will have the opportunity to make reservations for the use of Vacation Homes and related facilities through the DVC Reservation Component along with existing Club Members, including the Club Members at Riviera Resort, and may also result in an increase in the Annual Dues assessed against each Ownership Interest; provided, however, that BVTC may determine to add a DVC Resort under different terms and conditions and provide different rights of access by Club Members from such other DVC Resort to existing DVC Resorts or by Club Members at existing DVC Resorts to the added DVC Resort as it determines in its discretion. If other DVC Resorts are associated, demand for use may vary among the various DVC Resorts and the level of Club Member demand for the use of a particular DVC Resort may increase over the level of use demand that existed at the time of purchase by a particular Club Member such that the ability of a Club Member to reserve use at a high demand DVC Resort at a particular time may be impacted. However, new Club Members’ reservation requests will also be subject to the Home Resort Priority Period for each DVC Resort, and in no event shall the addition of a DVC Resort result in non-compliance with the One-to-One Use Right To Use Night Requirement Ratio standard. In addition, the inclusion of new resorts as DVC Resorts will afford existing Club Members with more DVC Resort Vacation Homes and location reservation opportunities and options.”

I agree with you that it probably comes down to which document takes precedence, but since the BVTC Disclosure does not specify about adding new resorts, I assumed it would defer to the DVC Resort Agreements - also since 6.2.d says to "enforce the provisions of this Agreement" and applicable law.

I also agree that "in all material respects" is a key phrase. I know that my BCV POS says that any changes with regard to previously disclosed rights or that only affect prospective purchasers are considered "non-material changes" (BCV POS Text 7.a). I think this is how DVD/BVTC were able to add in the restrictions. But I have questions about the implications of this and want to ask DVC for clarification.

Is there a place online to find some of these? I don’t see them on the member site unless I am missing them!
I know, and this was one of my comments as well! Although the Membership Extras disclosure (the other resale restrictions) is on the member website, this Riviera booking restriction info is not. I found all this in the Component Site POS and Multi-Site POS booklets I received mailed from DVC. I found Riviera's Declaration on the FL OCC Public Records website - that has Riviera's Membership Agreement and DVC Resort Agreement, but not the BVTC Disclosure.

*Sorry to derail this thread a bit! I've been meaning to start my own thread but was hoping to get more answers from DVC first.
 
Sure. FL Statute 721.552(1)(b) states, "Any person who is authorized by the timeshare instrument to make additions to the multisite timeshare plan pursuant to this subsection shall act as a fiduciary in such capacity in the best interests of the purchasers of the plan as a whole and shall adhere to the demand balancing standard set forth in s. 721.56(6) in connection with such additions. Additions that are otherwise permitted may be made only so long as a one-to-one use right to use night requirement ratio is maintained at all times."
FL Statute 721.56(6) states, "Prior to offering the multisite timeshare plan, the developer shall create the reservation system and shall establish rules and regulations for its operation. In establishing these rules and regulations, the developer shall take into account the location and anticipated relative use demand of each component site that he or she intends to offer as a part of the plan and shall use his or her best efforts, in good faith and based upon all reasonably available evidence under the circumstances, to further the best interests of the purchasers of the plan as a whole with respect to their opportunity to use and enjoy the accommodations and facilities of the plan. The rules and regulations shall also provide for periodic adjustment or amendment of the reservation system by the managing entity from time to time in order to respond to actual purchaser use patterns and changes in purchaser use demand for the accommodations and facilities existing at that time within the plan. The person authorized to make additions and substitutions during the term of the multisite timeshare plan shall also comply with the requirements of this subsection in ascertaining the desirability of the proposed addition, substitution, adjustment, or amendment and the impact of same upon the demand for and availability of existing plan accommodations and facilities."

The BVTC Disclosure doesn't specify anything about adding resorts that I could find. My Multi-Site POS (says rev. 12/13/18 - but it includes the Riviera restriction) section 6.a. Basis for Additions, paragraph 2 states, “In making a decision to associate additional DVC Resorts, BVTC shall use its best efforts, in good faith and based upon all reasonably available evidence under the circumstances, to further the best interests of the Club Members taken as a whole with respect to Club Members’ opportunity to use and enjoy all of the Vacation Homes and related facilities made available through the DVC Reservation Component. In this regard, BVTC may consider such factors as size, capacity, furnishings, maintenance impact, location (including geographic, topographic, and scenic considerations), recreational capabilities, demand, and availability for Club Member use and enjoyment” (p. 28 of my booklet). My BCV DVC Resort Agreement says something similar in section 6.2.b (what @crvetter posted above).

I do see where it says BVTC could make any changes and they could adversely affect a member's rights - BVTC Disclosure section 7.5 Amendment. I took it to mean that a change could adversely affect some members but overall would need to be in the best interest of owners as a whole (sort of like what @Sandisw was saying in a previous post). Or maybe since they have previously reserved this right, they can make any changes regardless? It's one of the questions I have for DVC.


I was speaking to someone in the legal department I believe, but the CM made clear she was an introductory level CM and did not have all the specific details or the reasoning that the higher ups did when making the restrictions. I could see how she could have been just trying to placate me. She wasn't able to answer my specific questions about the restrictions benefiting members or balancing demand, but I didn't have the time to wait to speak to the next level department/person yet.


Interesting, thanks for sharing the CCV sections! My BCV Resort Agreement does specifically say "same terms and conditions," in addition to the "substantially similar" clause. Here are the same sections from the BCV DVC Resort Agreement:

section 5.1 "All reservations made by Club Members among the DVC Resorts using the DVC Reservation Component shall be made in accordance with the Disclosure Document as promulgated and/or amended from time to time by BVTC. BVTC reserves the right to amend the Disclosure Document in its sole, absolute and unfettered discretion and as it determines necessary or desirable in order to operate and manage the services and benefits made available through BVTC; provided, however, that the Disclosure Document will only be amended as permitted under Applicable Law."

section 6.1 "In the event BVTC associates one or more additional resorts as DVC Resorts, the DVC Resort Agreement executed to effect such association shall be substantially similar to this Agreement in all material respects under the circumstances pertaining to each such additional DVC Resort."

section 6.2.b is the same - it continues, "In this regard, BVTC will consider such factors as size, capacity, furnishings, maintenance impact, location (including geographic, topographic, and scenic considerations), recreational capabilities, and demand and availability for Club Member use and enjoyment."

section 6.2.c "In the event other resorts are associated as DVC Resorts, the addition of the DVC Resort will result in new Club Members who will have the opportunity to make reservations for the use of Vacation Homes and related facilities through the DVC Reservation Component under the same terms and conditions as existing Club Members, including the Club Members at Disney’s Beach Club Villas, and may also result in an increase in the Annual Dues assessed against each Ownership Interest. If other DVC resorts are associated, demand for use may vary among the various DVC Resorts and the level of Club Member demand for a particular DVC Resort may increase over the level of use demand that existed at the time of purchase by a particular Club Member such that the ability of a Club Member to reserve use at a high demand DVC Resort at a particular time may be impacted. However, new Club Members’ reservation requests will also be subject to the Home Resort Priority Period for each DVC Resort, and in no event shall the addition of a DVC Resort result in a greater than “one-to-one purchaser to accommodation ratio,” as that term is defined in Section 721.05(23), Florida Statutes. In addition, the inclusion of new resorts as DVC Resorts will afford existing Club Members with more DVC Resort Vacation Homes and location reservation opportunities and options.”

section 6.2.d is the same, but the last sentence continues, "as permitted under Applicable Law."

Now the Riviera DVC Resort Agreement takes out the section 6.1 substantially similar clause, so the 6.2 sections become Riviera's 6.1.
6.1.c is where Riviera's states "different terms" and "different rights": "If other resorts are associated as DVC Resorts, the addition of the DVC Resort will result in the addition of new Club Members who will have the opportunity to make reservations for the use of Vacation Homes and related facilities through the DVC Reservation Component along with existing Club Members, including the Club Members at Riviera Resort, and may also result in an increase in the Annual Dues assessed against each Ownership Interest; provided, however, that BVTC may determine to add a DVC Resort under different terms and conditions and provide different rights of access by Club Members from such other DVC Resort to existing DVC Resorts or by Club Members at existing DVC Resorts to the added DVC Resort as it determines in its discretion. If other DVC Resorts are associated, demand for use may vary among the various DVC Resorts and the level of Club Member demand for the use of a particular DVC Resort may increase over the level of use demand that existed at the time of purchase by a particular Club Member such that the ability of a Club Member to reserve use at a high demand DVC Resort at a particular time may be impacted. However, new Club Members’ reservation requests will also be subject to the Home Resort Priority Period for each DVC Resort, and in no event shall the addition of a DVC Resort result in non-compliance with the One-to-One Use Right To Use Night Requirement Ratio standard. In addition, the inclusion of new resorts as DVC Resorts will afford existing Club Members with more DVC Resort Vacation Homes and location reservation opportunities and options.”

I agree with you that it probably comes down to which document takes precedence, but since the BVTC Disclosure does not specify about adding new resorts, I assumed it would defer to the DVC Resort Agreements - also since 6.2.d says to "enforce the provisions of this Agreement" and applicable law.

I also agree that "in all material respects" is a key phrase. I know that my BCV POS says that any changes with regard to previously disclosed rights or that only affect prospective purchasers are considered "non-material changes" (BCV POS Text 7.a). I think this is how DVD/BVTC were able to add in the restrictions. But I have questions about the implications of this and want to ask DVC for clarification.


I know, and this was one of my comments as well! Although the Membership Extras disclosure (the other resale restrictions) is on the member website, this Riviera booking restriction info is not. I found all this in the Component Site POS and Multi-Site POS booklets I received mailed from DVC. I found Riviera's Declaration on the FL OCC Public Records website - that has Riviera's Membership Agreement and DVC Resort Agreement, but not the BVTC Disclosure.

*Sorry to derail this thread a bit! I've been meaning to start my own thread but was hoping to get more answers from DVC first.

Thank you. You have so much great info. I think the key thing that is sticking out for me is the one regarding changes to future owners not being considered a “material” change. I am going to venture to guess that this language had to play a role in them being allowed to put in restrictions and why the grandfathered points and owners in along the way.

i looked to see if I still had hard copies of any of my previous documents and I dont. But I will be getting RIV in a few weeks so I’ll have thst to look at!
 
Thank you. You have so much great info. I think the key thing that is sticking out for me is the one regarding changes to future owners not being considered a “material” change. I am going to venture to guess that this language had to play a role in them being allowed to put in restrictions and why the grandfathered points and owners in along the way.

i looked to see if I still had hard copies of any of my previous documents and I dont. But I will be getting RIV in a few weeks so I’ll have thst to look at!

I could argue that the changes are not affecting only future oenwers.
Can anyone really predict what will the impact of the restrictions be on the 7 months window. L14 owners won't be able to book the new resorts, while the new buyers will be able to book the L14 resorts. This may cause a greater competition at 7 months for the L14 resorts and lower demand for the new resorts.
Even if the impact is very small, it's still not null.

Also, while I agree that the money spent in DVC should be considered lost, our contracts have a value, the restrictions have a good chance of reducing it, especially for SSR.
 
I could argue that the changes are not affecting only future oenwers.
Can anyone really predict what will the impact of the restrictions be on the 7 months window. L14 owners won't be able to book the new resorts, while the new buyers will be able to book the L14 resorts. This may cause a greater competition at 7 months for the L14 resorts and lower demand for the new resorts.
Even if the impact is very small, it's still not null.

Also, while I agree that the money spent in DVC should be considered lost, our contracts have a value, the restrictions have a good chance of reducing it, especially for SSR.

I guess is that is where we differ! Lol

First come, first serve means no guarantee of any room, on any given date. While I do agree that restrictions could and probably will impact booking patterns, we agree to knowing that everything is subject to that clause.

In a few years, if the restrictions create an extreme imbalance, then I believe DVC has the responsibility to address that. But I am not convinced that what they have done, better or worse, is against what they are allowed to do.

Obviously, the product is now different. There is no arguing that. If I were not a member, I’d have to decide if buying in today recognizing that the current changes are going to make a difference in a lot of aspects of DVC.
As I said, I manage expectations and adjust, which I guess it’s why I bought RIV with my adult kids to get them in as members. I even benefited from the strong resale market which I look at as an unexpected win.

However, I’m looking at this from the standpoint as tomwhat I am and am not entitled to expect from the product that I bought and so far, the restrictions do not change that asI was never guaranteed a good resale value nor guaranteed anything but a chance to book my home resort,
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't pay $10 for them. Don't like the look of the resort, don't like the rooms, don't like the location. Restrictions imo are a real deal breaker.
People will happily pay $16+ to get the points in a one time transfer yet you wouldn’t pay $10 to have 50 years of that. Not well thought out.
 
People will happily pay $16+ to get the points in a one time transfer yet you wouldn’t pay $10 to have 50 years of that. Not well thought out.
Will you be able to get $16 a point when all the prime times are booked up at 11 months out because resale buyers can only book Riviera?
 
Will you be able to get $16 a point when all the prime times are booked up at 11 months out because resale buyers can only book Riviera?

I think a RIV owner renting out points for an 11 month booking or transferring points will be able to as they will have the ability to book early.

However, I agree that if there is no availability at RIV for bookings other than at 11 months an owner won’t be able to command that because at that point it will be like any other 7 month booking.
 
Will you be able to get $16 a point when all the prime times are booked up at 11 months out because resale buyers can only book Riviera?
I think a RIV owner renting out points for an 11 month booking or transferring points will be able to as they will have the ability to book early.

However, I agree that if there is no availability at RIV for bookings other than at 11 months an owner won’t be able to command that because at that point it will be like any other 7 month booking.

It's already hard to rent studios (and some 1 & 2 bedrooms) at the popular resorts at 7 months or less. I really don't think the Riviera will be any different. IMO, most of the available space at 7 months will be quickly booked by other DVC owners. Renting Riviera villas won't be any different than renting at BWV, BCV, BLT, Ploy & VGF. Owners of those resorts will rent during the home resort period if they aren't planning to use their points., too..
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!













facebook twitter
Top