Marriott Corporate booked my week on Redweek?

[dioxide45]

I'm aware that this has happened in the past. In that instance, someone who was a big wig in the company was supposed to have had reservations made and someone messed up; and in order to remedy the situation, the company actually rented a unit from an owner.

Probably someone who called in to modify a reservation and the rep f'd up and lost it.

 

[davidvel]

I'm aware that this has happened in the past. In that instance, someone who was a big wig in the company was supposed to have had reservations made and someone messed up; and in order to remedy the situation, the company actually rented a unit from an owner.

Sounds like commercial activity to me.

 

[dioxide45]

Sounds like commercial activity to me.

It almost sounds like they are also condoning the commercial activity by renting from an owner. It also sounds like they are subletting the rental which I thought was not allowed per the Redweek contract.

 

[LeslieDet]

It almost sounds like they are also condoning the commercial activity by renting from an owner. It also sounds like they are subletting the rental which I thought was not allowed per the Redweek contract.

That is silly to claim a direct rental from an owner was "commercial" activity. Remember, the focus isn't on the person paying to rent the reservation, it is on the intent of the owner who is renting out their reservation.

BTW - The restrictions on commercial activity for owned Trust Points is as follows:

"Residential Use and Prohibition on Commercial Use. Accommodations, Special Benefits, and Use Periods may not be used for any commercial purpose. This prohibition on commercial use includes, but is not limited to, any illegal activity or a pattern of occupancy, rental, leasing, or use by a Trust Owner that Program Manager, in its reasonable discretion, could conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or practice. In the event a Trust Owner is determined to be reserving or using the Accommodations, Special Benefits, and Use Periods for any commercial purpose Program Manager may immediately cancel any current reservation(s) made by such Trust Owner and may impose such additional penalties or restrictions as determined by Program Manager, in its sole discretion, from time to time. The restrictions of this paragraph do not apply to the Developer, Trust Manager, any Exchange Company, or their affiliates or designees."

I am not going to bother to pull the info for deeded ownership, or for the VSN reservations, I would assume it is similar.

 

[dioxide45]

That is silly to claim a direct rental from an owner was "commercial" activity. Remember, the focus isn't on the person paying to rent the reservation, it is on the intent of the owner who is renting out their reservation.

BTW - The restrictions on commercial activity for owned Trust Points is as follows:

"Residential Use and Prohibition on Commercial Use. Accommodations, Special Benefits, and Use Periods may not be used for any commercial purpose. This prohibition on commercial use includes, but is not limited to, any illegal activity or a pattern of occupancy, rental, leasing, or use by a Trust Owner that Program Manager, in its reasonable discretion, could conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or practice. In the event a Trust Owner is determined to be reserving or using the Accommodations, Special Benefits, and Use Periods for any commercial purpose Program Manager may immediately cancel any current reservation(s) made by such Trust Owner and may impose such additional penalties or restrictions as determined by Program Manager, in its sole discretion, from time to time. The restrictions of this paragraph do not apply to the Developer, Trust Manager, any Exchange Company, or their affiliates or designees."

I am not going to bother to pull the info for deeded ownership, or for the VSN reservations, I would assume it is similar.

There are other sections of the Abound Exchange Procedures that refer to commercial activity which you didn't provide. The resort CC&R are rather vague as was indicated in what you quoted from the Exchange Procedures. As noted though, a single owner rental isn't necessarily commercial activity, but given the Resorts Owned list of the OP and past posts I would hazard to guess that they are running a commercial operation. I could be wrong though. But they probably aren't renting point reservations.

 

[LeslieDet]

There are other sections of the Abound Exchange Procedures that refer to commercial activity which you didn't provide. The resort CC&R are rather vague as was indicated in what you quoted from the Exchange Procedures. As noted though, a single owner rental isn't necessarily commercial activity, but given the Resorts Owned list of the OP and past posts I would hazard to guess that they are running a commercial operation. I could be wrong though. But they probably aren't renting point reservations.
View attachment 96784

You're missing the context of my response. You responded to some comment that basically concluded that simply because corporate was renting the unit out meant it was by definition a "commercial activity." All I am saying is that simply because corporate is the renter paying the money in this instance does not define the transaction as "commercial activity." Who knows what that owner is doing; I don't. And, if the owner in this particular feed is a Westin owner, then we all know that the restrictions on rentals are more stringent for that brand.

And, yes, there are multiple instances in the Trust documents that have the wording and restriction against renting for commercial purposes. The section I pulled had some more definitions than the section you pulled about the Priority 1 Period, but the wording in those sections does not give the detail of the main section I pulled for reference. Moreover, the section I pulled specifically states that the developer is not subject to the restrictions. Which, once again, results in the claim that the developer being the renter (ie the one paying the money) by definition means "commercial" activity is silly.

And, let's not forget that in the other feed folks are complaining over and over again that they should be able to do what ever they want and not be restricted to making a guest name change in the last 30 days prior to the reservation.

 

[billymach4]

MVW is repeating the old adage.

"Do as I say, not as I do"

 

[LeslieDet]

MVW is repeating the old adage.

"Do as I say, not as I do"

LOL - well, when the disclosure is in black and white in the documents every purchaser signs, it is kind of difficult to claim that MVW is being sneaky. And, in this instance, there are many legitimate reasons why the developer is allowed to rent out units vs owners.

 

[timsi]

I'm aware that this has happened in the past. In that instance, someone who was a big wig in the company was supposed to have had reservations made and someone messed up; and in order to remedy the situation, the company actually rented a unit from an owner.

I assume that Echino has already googled the name of the renter and could not identify them as a 'bigwig' within the company, or even if the guest works for the company at all. Regardless, it is likely just showing that in a floating inventory environment, allocating weeks to certain buckets in anticipation of future demand and/or deposits is a lot less precise a science than some would claim.

Aside from that, aren't those 'bigwigs' supposed to book their vacations like everyone else?

 

[billymach4]

LOL - well, when the disclosure is in black and white in the documents every purchaser signs, it is kind of difficult to claim that MVW is being sneaky. And, in this instance, there are many legitimate reasons why the developer is allowed to rent out units vs owners.

We live in a world where the disclosure is TLDR. But we have sleuths here in TUGland to keep us focused on the black and white details. Thanks to you @LeslieDet and @dioxide45 .

 

[Hindsite]

Aside from that, aren't those 'bigwigs' supposed to book their vacations like everyone else?

Ha! no my dear, they just don't have the time for that sort of trivia and apparently neither does my other half or, from reading on TUG, do many people's adult offspring.