[2/10/17 UPDATE] VSE charging for 3rd party reservation changes! [+Contact Info. for complaints]

[Helios]

Not an IT person - but I would bet that the next iteration (version) of the on-line reservation system will have the ability to put in a name change for HomeResort reservations (hopefully with name, address, phone, and email fields) - too easy not to do - and reduces resources for Owner Services since no fee is charged anyway.

Any takers?

I certainly hope so...

 

[DavidnRobin]

I was referencing reservations past 8 months.

past 8 months = <8 months - right? I knew what you meant, but terminology is important as not to add to confusion.

Banked SO and HO used at < 8 months are VSN Reservations - can't speak to non-VSN VOIs.
As DeniseM stated - you would have to call in - still unclear why this is important other than interesting.

 

[DeniseM]

Pure speculation here, but I don't think Vistana is going to return to asking for guests' contact info., because I think they are intentionally distancing themselves from renters. (Plausible deniability.)

BTW - Marriott doesn't ask for the guest's contact info. either.

 

[DavidnRobin]

It only matters in the original context, can it be rented per the rules? If you make it before 8 months the answer is clearly yes. If you make it past eight months is the question. Denise's 3:43 post indicates yes. Even if the tag is VSN Reservation.

This has been discussed - it is far from clear from the CCRs I have seen. (the actual text has been copied here before).
People tend to believe what is useful to them to believe. Overall, it would be hard to enforce by VSN, and unlikely what they are concerned about. They can view it for what type it is. Will they? Doubt it. But, proceed at your own risk.

 

[DavidnRobin]

Pure speculation here, but I don't think Vistana is going to return to asking for guests' contact info., because I think they are intentionally distancing themselves from renters. (Plausible deniability.)

BTW - Marriott doesn't ask for the guest's contact info. either.

Thus... the word 'hopefully'. Why? Because if there was a need to contact them regarding resort issues (e.g. hurricane) - it would be wise not have to rely on Owner to relay that important info. I already relay to Renters resort updates, but I pay attention (and not renting as a side business).

 

[DeniseM]

Again - I'm just speculating. It has always been Vistana's/Starwood's policy to contact guests through the owner, and I know of no situation in which they have contacted a guest directly, so I wouldn't expect that to change.

 

[Helios]

past 8 months = <8 months - right?

Correct.

 

[Helios]

because I think they are intentionally distancing themselves from renters. (Plausible deniability.)

I agree with this,why enforce their own rule...

 

[Helios]

People tend to believe what is useful to them to believe. Overall, it would be hard to enforce by VSN, and unlikely what they are concerned about. They can view it for what type it is. Will they? Doubt it. But, proceed at your own risk.

I think it could get very hard to enforce for them and get away with it. You would be reserving exactly what you own, granted that it would be reserved at less than 8 months, but it would still be exactly what you own.

 

[DavidnRobin]

I think it could get very hard to enforce for them and get away with it. You would be reserving exactly what you own, granted that it would be reserved at less than 8 months, but it would still be exactly what you own.

You are not reserving 'exactly what you own' - VSN reservations (for VOIs that are within VSN) lose guaranteed villa location (and season if applicable) - they are not the same as Home Resort reservations. (see 4 pillars of VSE)

 

[dioxide45]

Again - I'm just speculating. It has always been Vistana's/Starwood's policy to contact guests through the owner, and I know of no situation in which they have contacted a guest directly, so I wouldn't expect that to change.

Marriott does the same. Even when you buy a getaway and attach a guest certificate to it, they still send the pre-arrival email to the owner that made the reservation.

 

[DeniseM]

You are not reserving 'exactly what you own' - VSN reservations (for VOIs that are within VSN) lose guaranteed villa location (and season if applicable) - they are not the same as Home Resort reservations. (see 4 pillars of VSE)

What if you own Ocean Front, and you reserve Ocean Front with Staroptions?

What if you own at a resort with no deeded views and you reserve the type of unit/season that you own with Staroptions?

 

[Helios]

You are not reserving 'exactly what you own' - VSN reservations (for VOIs that are within VSN) lose guaranteed villa location (and season if applicable) - they are not the same as Home Resort reservations. (see 4 pillars of VSE)

I'll disagree here. If I own a deed for a HAR 2BRLO in Plat+ VOI, I feel I have the right as a deeded owner to reserve exactly that (and rent it if I choose to) no matter when I make the reservation. I see your point about the 4 pillars, but I still disagree. I guess like you said (paraphrasing) I am seeing this matter the way it works for me.

 

[dss]

FYI - I would love to be wrong but I absolutely think they are going to charge a "reduced" online fee for this once the functionality is lit up.

 

[Helios]

What if you own Ocean Front, and you reserve Ocean Front with Staroptions?

What if you own at a resort with no deeded views and you reserve the type of unit/season that you own with Staroptions?

I would say it depends on the first paragraph case. If you use your OF unit to reserve an OF of the same size in the same season at 8 months or closer to check in, the resie should be treated as a Home Resort.

Second paragraph I am with you 100%. At some resorts there may be a phase issue that could come into play (like SVR) but that is beyond the scope of my argument.

 

[okwiater]

I'll disagree here. If I own a deed for a HAR 2BRLO in Plat+ VOI, I feel I have the right as a deeded owner to reserve exactly that (and rent it if I choose to) no matter when I make the reservation. I see your point about the 4 pillars, but I still disagree. I guess like you said (paraphrasing) I am seeing this matter the way it works for me.

"As a deeded owner" only applies until 8 months. As a member of VSN, you agreed to have your unit automatically deposited into the network. At that point, you can only reserve with StarOptions.

 

[Helios]

"As a deeded owner" only applies until 8 months. As a member of VSN, you agreed to have your unit automatically deposited into the network. At that point, you can only reserve with StarOptions.

OK, not familiar with all the ins and outs of the agreement. If ^ this is correct, the renting my example is not allowed...

 

[DavidnRobin]

What if you own Ocean Front, and you reserve Ocean Front with Staroptions?

What if you own at a resort with no deeded views and you reserve the type of unit/season that you own with Staroptions?

Sorry - is this to me? Losing track...

My read of the SVN disclosures as part of the WKORV/N disclosures (aka Owners Manual) - as copied a while ago (I have not seen VSE/VSN update). Same wording in my WKV and WPORV docs.

To put simply - if reservation is within 8-12 months - it is a Home Resort reservation.
The various other types are not HR reservations. This is aligned with conversation with SC (SVP) offices from years ago when the SO rental issue were brought up.

As always - there are going to be situations handled by Resolution Services (e.g. Illness) that retain HR status.

I guess I should follow with IMO - but the CCRs clearly defines the HR period.
This is for WKORV/N, WPORV, and WKV. YMMV with others.

Now... to enforcement? That is another matter. The <5% comment was telling.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JudyS]

I made the following remark, which I want to clarify:

I really don't get why people say its OK to rent out VSN exchanges. Pretty much everyone on TUG says its wrong to rent out II or RCI exchanges. Why should VSN exchanges be any different?

What I meant was, some people on TUG seem to think it is *morally* OK to rent out StarOption reservations. I *have* heard people express this view on TUG in the past. I, on the other hand, think it is unethical to rent out SO reservations.

The VSN T&C are clear that rental of SO reservations is prohibited. I did not mean to suggest otherwise.

And I know Starwood didn't enforce the rule against renting SO reservations. But, now the owner is VSE (which is a subsidiary of Interval Leisure Group), not Starwood. Given Interval's strict enforcement of no-rental rules in the past, I would not be surprised at all if VSE started enforcing the rule.

 

[DavidnRobin]

Not sure if 'morally' is the correct term - however, from what I observe is that people's view on this is based on their vested interest since some are renting TSs as a side business. They just do not discuss it anymore (to stay under the radar, and due to backlash), but assuredly it is still going on. From an enforcement standpoint - the % may not be sufficient for VSE/VSN to use resources to enforce.

 

[okwiater]

Not sure if 'morally' is the correct term

If people are violating the T&Cs of their ownership, to the detriment of other owners, then the behavior is simply wrong. As such, it seems to be an appropriate use of the word "morally," particularly if they engage in this behavior knowingly. This isn't a gray area subject to one's personal feelings or interpretations. People may still choose to do it, but that doesn't make it right.

 

[SMHarman]

Not sure if 'morally' is the correct term - however, from what I observe is that people's view on this is based on their vested interest since some are renting TSs as a side business. They just do not discuss it anymore (to stay under the radar, and due to backlash), but assuredly it is still going on. From an enforcement standpoint - the % may not be sufficient for VSE/VSN to use resources to enforce.

If people are violating the T&Cs of their ownership, to the detriment of other owners, then the behavior is simply wrong. As such, it seems to be an appropriate use of the word "morally," particularly if they engage in this behavior knowingly. This isn't a gray area subject to one's personal feelings or interpretations. People may still choose to do it, but that doesn't make it right.

To the detriment of others. And that's the kicker.

Someone using WKV points to rent a WKORV week that is in high demand and prevent another owner from staying using their points is detrimental.

Someone using their points to book into say January in Cancun where there is usually high availability is not detrimental to other system users.

 

[tschwa2]

To the detriment of others. And that's the kicker.

Someone using WKV points to rent a WKORV week that is in high demand and prevent another owner from staying using their points is detrimental.

Someone using their points to book into say January in Cancun where there is usually high availability is not detrimental to other system users.

If you are using low cost options to book into locations with higher MF then you could be undercutting owners trying to rent. For example a one bedroom premium in October at Harborside cost the owner $1800. That's for a 44,000 SO reservation. I think pretty much everyone pays less per SO, so renting out those weeks with SO's from other locations still hurts owners even though there is plenty of availability.

 

[okwiater]

To the detriment of others. And that's the kicker.

Someone using WKV points to rent a WKORV week that is in high demand and prevent another owner from staying using their points is detrimental.

Someone using their points to book into say January in Cancun where there is usually high availability is not detrimental to other system users.

I agree in theory, but I'm not sure it's possible to make your 2nd claim -- unless you purposely book a week at a less-desirable resort during a less-desirable season (bad rental strategy) and continue to check availability to ensure you haven't locked out other owners (unrealistic) with the intention of cancelling your reservation and attempted rental if that were to happen (yeah, right).

 

[okwiater]

If you are using low cost options to book into locations with higher MF then you could be undercutting owners trying to rent. For example a one bedroom premium in October at Harborside cost the owner $1800. That's for a 44,000 SO reservation. I think pretty much everyone pays less per SO, so renting out those weeks with SO's from other locations still hurts owners even though there is plenty of availability.

Didn't even think about that scenario, but you're absolutely right.