# Ocean Walk status



## Jan M. (Oct 7, 2016)

Has anyone heard if Ocean Walk sustained any damage?


----------



## am1 (Oct 7, 2016)

One would think Wyndham could come out with a statement today at some point.


----------



## whitewater (Oct 8, 2016)

am1 said:


> One would think Wyndham could come out with a statement today at some point.



I have friends in dayton area and they said things were fine.  Just some light debris and other junk flung around.  I think you will be fine but have not heard specifically on oceanwalk.


----------



## Miss Marty (Oct 8, 2016)

*Surviving the Storm - Then and Now - Daytona Beach*

Hurricane Matthew stormed into Flagler County on Friday Oct 7, 2016 and swept away chunks of State Road A1A before continuing on its way up the Florida coast.

Flagler County hopes to begin letting residents west of Intracoastal Waterway return home soon.


----------



## Miss Marty (Oct 8, 2016)

*Daytona's beachside absorbs Matthew's blows*

Recent renovations and Damage by Hurricane Matthew

Ocean Walk North Tower pool closed for renovations Sept. 6 to Sept. 23, 2016 and additional work was/is scheduled for October 17 to October 23, 2016. One indoor pool and the other outdoor pools will be open during this time. Dates are subject to change. 

If you have an "upcoming reservation" at Wyndham Ocean Walk in Daytona Beach Florida please contact the resort directly by phone @ 386-323-4800 to ensure you receive the most accurate information.


----------



## nkldavy (Oct 8, 2016)

*Posted in TUG Lounge ...*

... under hurricane Matthew.

Uncle Davey


----------



## JimMIA (Oct 8, 2016)

Miss Marty said:


> Hurricane Matthew stormed into Flagler County on Friday Oct 7, 2016 and swept away chunks of State Road A1A before continuing on its way up the Florida coast.
> 
> Flagler County hopes to begin letting residents west of Intracoastal Waterway return home soon.


Daytona Beach is not in Flagler County.  It's south of Flagler county.  

I would check Orlando or Daytona media outlets to get an idea of the damage.  Or call the resort.

Just from following the hurricane the last couple of days, I would expect extensive storm surge and wave damage anywhere along the beaches from Palm Beach to Jacksonville, but I don't know anything about Daytona Beach specifically.


----------



## vacationhopeful (Oct 8, 2016)

In Volusia county. DeLand is the county seat.


----------



## jjmanthei05 (Oct 9, 2016)

I got a call today that all reservations through Wednesday were canceled at Ocean Walk.


----------



## am1 (Oct 10, 2016)

After canceling reservations that included days the resort was going to be closed.  Wyndham has decided to reinstate those reservations instead of opening them up to everyone.  I do appreciate this decision but would have preferred not to have to go through the stress and uncertainty of them not just doing it this way in the first place.


----------



## JimMIA (Oct 11, 2016)

am1 said:


> After canceling reservations that included days the resort was going to be closed.  Wyndham has decided to reinstate those reservations instead of opening them up to everyone.  I do appreciate this decision but would have preferred not to have to go through the stress and uncertainty of them not just doing it this way in the first place.


In responding to hurricanes, managers have to make a lot of decisions with limited information and they have to plan for worst-case scenarios.  Given that Ocean Walk is directly on the ocean, that roads were washed out and there was water waist-deep in the streets just a few miles away, and that there was one fatality in Daytona Beach, I'd bet they made sure to err on the side of caution.  

_Inconvenient_ safety is not a bad thing, nor a bad decision.

Once they had time to safely assess the damage, they chose a reasonable manner of re-opening.  I don't see any complaint here.


----------



## Explorer7 (Oct 11, 2016)

JimMIA said:


> In responding to hurricanes, managers have to make a lot of decisions with limited information and they have to plan for worst-case scenarios.  Given that Ocean Walk is directly on the ocean, that roads were washed out and there was water waist-deep in the streets just a few miles away, and that there was one fatality in Daytona Beach, I'd bet they made sure to err on the side of caution.
> 
> _Inconvenient_ safety is not a bad thing, nor a bad decision.
> 
> Once they had time to safely assess the damage, they chose a reasonable manner of re-opening.  I don't see any complaint here.



I was personally very disappointed that Wyndham would not allow me to cancel my Myrtle Beach reservation to check in on the 10th until the afternoon of the 9th.  They held a very firm position to hold the points hostage until the 11th hour in my case. Don't know if everyone with a Myrtle beach check in date of the 10th had the same hard line experience.


----------



## am1 (Oct 11, 2016)

JimMIA said:


> In responding to hurricanes, managers have to make a lot of decisions with limited information and they have to plan for worst-case scenarios.  Given that Ocean Walk is directly on the ocean, that roads were washed out and there was water waist-deep in the streets just a few miles away, and that there was one fatality in Daytona Beach, I'd bet they made sure to err on the side of caution.
> 
> _Inconvenient_ safety is not a bad thing, nor a bad decision.
> 
> Once they had time to safely assess the damage, they chose a reasonable manner of re-opening.  I don't see any complaint here.



You are missing the point.

The people who had reservations booked for the dates should be entitled to those reservations if the resort is open during the dates they have reserved.  If the resort is closed then no one would get those reservations


----------



## JimMIA (Oct 11, 2016)

*I guess I misunderstood your post, and therefore didn't understand what you were complaining about:*


am1 said:


> After canceling reservations that included days the resort was going to be closed.


I interpreted this to mean they canceled reservations for days when they anticipated the resort would be closed...which makes perfect sense.  In that case, obviously folks got their points back.





> Wyndham has decided to reinstate those reservations instead of opening them up to everyone.


I interpreted this to mean that when the resort did not need to be closed _as long as they expected,_ they returned the room-nights to the people who originally reserved them.  

And implicit in that understanding is that it would have been _optional_ whether people reclaimed the ressies.  Obviously, if you cancel a ressie and the guest cancels their trip, you can't very well try to hold them to a reservation you canceled and then arbitrarily reinstated.

Seems fair to me, and you seem to agree. 





> I do appreciate this decision but would have preferred not to have to go through the stress and uncertainty of them not just doing it this way in the first place.


I didn't actually know what you were trying to say here -- unless it was that you wished they'd known up front how long they would be closed.  

That, of course, is utterly impossible.  They could have been closed for one day...the resort could have been completely destroyed...or anything in between.


----------



## am1 (Oct 11, 2016)

JimMIA said:


> *I guess I misunderstood your post, and therefore didn't understand what you were complaining about:*I interpreted this to mean they canceled reservations for days when they anticipated the resort would be closed...which makes perfect sense.  In that case, obviously folks got their points back.I interpreted this to mean that when the resort did not need to be closed _as long as they expected,_ they returned the room-nights to the people who originally reserved them.
> 
> And implicit in that understanding is that it would have been _optional_ whether people reclaimed the ressies.  Obviously, if you cancel a ressie and the guest cancels their trip, you can't very well try to hold them to a reservation you canceled and then arbitrarily reinstated.
> 
> ...



Ok.  They originally stated all reservations that included October 7, 8 would be cancelled.  Then it was 9, 10 and 11 as well.  They stated that when the resort reopened that new reservations would have to be booked if they included those nights but the check out was up to the 16th.  This created a lot of uncertainity and panic.  

I would not fault a resort for not knowing when they can reopen after a hurricane or other situation but more communication would help.  Even on the 8th Wyndham was still stating the resort may open on the 9th but probably not the case considering it will now open on the 12.  Furthermore, Wyndham failed to update their website for a few days when it was very important to do so.  I had guests travel 24 hours to be find out different info then what they expected and read.


----------



## JimMIA (Oct 11, 2016)

Reading between the lines here, I think there are three possible perspectives:

One is a *regular owner* with a reservation
another perspective is that of an *owner renting a reservation* for someone else
and the third is the *person* *renting the reservation* who probably knows little or nothing about Wyndham.
I don't have anything against mega-renters; I think they should have the same use of their points that I do.  But I can understand a newbie renter freaking out.



am1 said:


> Ok.  They originally stated all reservations that included October 7, 8 would be cancelled.  Then it was 9, 10 and 11 as well.  They stated that when the resort reopened that new reservations would have to be booked if they included those nights but the check out was up to the 16th.


So reservations Oct 7-11 were canceled.  If they were rebooked with no penalty, the checkout could be up to Oct 16.  

To me, that means they would allow rebooking only in a very short timeframe -- OR cancellation with no penalty, points back in the account.

Frankly, allowing stays to extend through Oct 16 is a bit of a stretch because they would be impinging on other owners' reservations between Oct 11-16 -- but I guess it's a slowish time and they calculated that they had enough flexibility to do that.

It seems like a reasonable adjustment to me, if in fact they were able to pull it off without ruining other owners' reservations. 





> This created a lot of uncertainity and panic.


It seems pretty clear to me, but I can see a *renter* of a reservation not understanding and becoming panicked. 

And -- if it was first 10/7-8, and later 10/7-11, I can see that causing confusion for everyone...although maybe understandable considering the fluid situation with the storm.



> I would not fault a resort for not knowing when they can reopen after a hurricane or other situation but more communication would help.  Even on the 8th Wyndham was still stating the resort may open on the 9th but probably not the case considering it will now open on the 12.  Furthermore, Wyndham failed to update their website for a few days when it was very important to do so.  I had guests travel 24 hours to be find out different info then what they expected and read.


That seems pretty clumsy on Wyndham's part, but having made decisions in the face of advancing hurricanes, I can understand it somewhat.  

They didn't want to _unnecessarily_ cancel people's vacations, but they didn't really know what the storm would do.  They were thinking in terms of keeping the reservation open for the guest, but not thinking about the guest's need to know *exactly* where they stood because they might have to change flights, etc.


----------



## am1 (Oct 11, 2016)

It would be up to October 16 depending on what the original reservation.  None would be extended longer then what they were for originally.

As it turns out I was only contacted on one of my accounts to have reinstate.  The Wyndham rep could not touch the other reservations in the other accounts.  Furthermore the reservation could only be reinstated for the original guest even if they decided they no longer were going but the other (9) in the group wanted to go.  The guest name could not be changed.  

At Bonnet Creek, I had a father decide not to come, room was in his name, but the rest of the group were coming and Wyndham would not add the first name to the guest reservation without another guest confirmation fee.  Very unaccomodating, given the circumstances and lack of communication on Wyndhams part.

No wonder people want nothing to do with timeshares.  

I use to be a big supporter of Wyndham timeshares if used correctly but now it is not worth the hassle for someone to buy no matter how good a value it could be for them.  It is just too unstable.


----------



## JimMIA (Oct 12, 2016)

am1 said:


> As it turns out I was only contacted on one of my accounts to have reinstate.  The Wyndham rep could not touch the other reservations in the other accounts.  Furthermore the reservation could only be reinstated for the original guest even if they decided they no longer were going but the other (9) in the group wanted to go.  The guest name could not be changed.


Sounds to me like they are singling you out because you're renting reservations.  They are not going to do much to help someone who they view (rightly or wrongly) as a competitor.


----------



## am1 (Oct 12, 2016)

JimMIA said:


> Sounds to me like they are singling you out because you're renting reservations.  They are not going to do much to help someone who they view (rightly or wrongly) as a competitor.



Is that not what more than 50%?? of biketoberfest reservations would be?


----------



## comicbookman (Oct 13, 2016)

am1 said:


> It would be up to October 16 depending on what the original reservation. None would be extended longer then what they were for originally.
> 
> As it turns out I was only contacted on one of my accounts to have reinstate. The Wyndham rep could not touch the other reservations in the other accounts. Furthermore the reservation could only be reinstated for the original guest even if they decided they no longer were going but the other (9) in the group wanted to go. The guest name could not be changed.
> 
> ...



While I agree that Wyndham could be much more accommodating, you seem to be expecting Wyndham to deal with all the costs involved in the disruption to your business.  In this case, Wyndham did not cause the issue, Mother Nature did.  Given their size, Wyndham could better absorb the costs of disruptions, but is under no obligation to do so.  If they would normally charge you for a last minute change in guest name, then why do you feel it is their obligation to waive this fee now?  It would of course be a nice gesture, but it is a risk you take with your business.  (I am not against mega-renters, and have been known to rent out reservations on occasion myself)


----------



## am1 (Oct 13, 2016)

comicbookman said:


> While I agree that Wyndham could be much more accommodating, you seem to be expecting Wyndham to deal with all the costs involved in the disruption to your business.  In this case, Wyndham did not cause the issue, Mother Nature did.  Given their size, Wyndham could better absorb the costs of disruptions, but is under no obligation to do so.  If they would normally charge you for a last minute change in guest name, then why do you feel it is their obligation to waive this fee now?  It would of course be a nice gesture, but it is a risk you take with your business.  (I am not against mega-renters, and have been known to rent out reservations on occasion myself)



If Wyndham stated all reservations would be honored until their check out date once the resort reopens and rooms are not for repair then there would not have been the uncertainity of if I would even have these rooms.  The resort closed not me.  I paid the guest confirmation fee based on the guest being able to check in on the check in date.  Any changes to that and the the guest confirmation fee should be refunded if the decides to no longer travel.


----------



## Sandi Bo (Oct 13, 2016)

Well.. forget the hurricane.  For me it first boils down to is it right that Wyndham charges the guest fees they do - especially after they've been paid once. It is REALLY hard to explain to someone why there's a $99 fee for a spouse to checkin instead of the original person on the GC. 

My take-away on how the hurricane closures were handled:  

Wyndham did a decent job policy-wise as far as refunding points. I am disappointed they didn't credit guest confirmations. I think they should have. As a renter - I offered to - because it seems to me like the right thing to do.

The communication was horrible. Surely Wyndham should have a policy as far as what to do for weather (or other unforeseen situations such as Hurricane Matthew). 

Many of of us got phone calls (recordings) sent accidentally - telling us reservations were cancelled that weren't. You had to call and hold (some for 1-2 hours) to find out why you got a phone call.  VC's could look and search and find nothing.  Hmmm... way are wait times so long? Miscommunications coupled with instructions to call VC's who had no idea what was going on sure doesn't help.

For resorts with cancellations, people weren't offered the option of keeping their reservation and checking in late.  Reservations were cancelled and we were told they could be rebooked.  But they couldn't be rebooked right away. The whole process was fuzzy and seemed to be being made up as we went along.  

I suspect those with suspended accounts were even worse off (could they rebook a cancelled reservation)?  I think not, but I don't know for sure.

I totally understand the unpredictability of a hurricane. I totally understand that safety for all comes first. But you have people with travel plans, plane tickets, people already at the resort or maybe already in the area and in need of lodging, all sorts of situations.  Wyndham fell short, IMO, of having a well thought out and communicated plan/policy.  Cancelling and recharging guest fees, on top of everything else, didn't seem right to me.


----------



## comicbookman (Oct 13, 2016)

am1 said:


> If Wyndham stated all reservations would be honored until their check out date once the resort reopens and rooms are not for repair then there would not have been the uncertainity of if I would even have these rooms.  The resort closed not me.  I paid the guest confirmation fee based on the guest being able to check in on the check in date.  Any changes to that and the the guest confirmation fee should be refunded if the decides to no longer travel.



It still seems to me that you are expecting Wyndham to eat the change fee cost due to the hurricane, rather than you.  Both of you were victims of the weather.  Both of you are running a business.  While I agree that Wyndham can better stand the cost, I do not see why it is automatically their responsibility.  To wave the fees to make it easer for you to deal with the weather.  A good PR move on there part, yes, but a responsibility no.  When I owned a small shop, if weather screwed up a shipment and I had to incur additional costs, my distributers rarely reimbursed me.  Poor communication, is definitely on Wyndham, but even small business need to deal with weather related costs.


----------



## am1 (Oct 13, 2016)

comicbookman said:


> It still seems to me that you are expecting Wyndham to eat the change fee cost due to the hurricane, rather than you.  Both of you were victims of the weather.  Both of you are running a business.  While I agree that Wyndham can better stand the cost, I do not see why it is automatically their responsibility.  To wave the fees to make it easer for you to deal with the weather.  A good PR move on there part, yes, but a responsibility no.  When I owned a small shop, if weather screwed up a shipment and I had to incur additional costs, my distributers rarely reimbursed me.  Poor communication, is definitely on Wyndham, but even small business need to deal with weather related costs.



I guess we can disagree.  Wyndham did not provide the service (allowing guest to check in on the date they were suppose to).  Reason really does not matter.  At that point guest confirmation fees and all other incurred Wyndham fees should have been refunded.  It was Wyndhams resort that closed not mine.


----------



## team2win (Dec 3, 2016)

am1 said:


> I guess we can disagree.  Wyndham did not provide the service (allowing guest to check in on the date they were suppose to).  Reason really does not matter.  At that point guest confirmation fees and all other incurred Wyndham fees should have been refunded.  It was Wyndhams resort that closed not mine.


I agree with am1, this is basic business. They collected a fee for guest confirmations, if reservations can't be honored, any money paid for that reservation should be refunded. Doesn't matter if its wyndham, hilton, marriott or joe schmoe's hotel. What's more disheartening is the fact I wouldn't want any owner who paid a guest certificate fee for a reservation not get reimbursed that fee, due to any reservation not honored. This means florida, south carolina,north carolina, doesn't matter what city/state.  What if a person rented points out of pocket, shouldn't that be reimbursed? Yes on both counts and is pretty relevant.

 If an owner is against another owner getting reimbursed, then I would say when a resort closes for whatever reason, the precedent is set that wyndham is more than hoping they don't have to honor reservations and either keep points and/or keep all funds associated with the reservations. Think along those lines and now you will see why things were murky, misinformation, etc. This isn't the 1st hurricane situation that wyndham has been through. Bad business in my estimation and shame on wyndham.


----------



## massvacationer (Dec 17, 2016)

I stayed at Wyndham Ocean Walk last weekend (December 10th), in Daytona Beach

The resort is in fine condition - everything looked great.   They were cleaning or painting the exterior of the North Tower, but it didn't really affect any of the resort amenities.

I saw some evidence of the Hurricane in surrounding areas (some downed trees , etc.) I  believe there are  a few Daytona restaurants that got damaged and are closed, etc.   But, everything around Ocean Walk looks fine, and the resort itself, the shopping mall next door and the Hilton are all fine.

The resort is nice and I would definitely stay there again.


----------

