Can we refuse to change room in the middle of week's stay?

[Ron98GT]

But Sue, it does! I don't know why you don't believe it but Maui Ocean Club confirmed that it does and it happens with some frequency. I really think the discussion should flow from how the system really operates, and now how we think it should operate.

Greg, I believe you. After just returning from a 2 week stay at MOC and meeting so many MOC owners (most of the people that we talked with) that stay in the their units, no trading, the same units year-after-year, I totally believe you. I'm just lucky that we got stay in the same units, 6210 & 6209, for the 2 weeks.

I also agree with your last statement, in red. And it's not just a Marriott thing, other TS companies do the same thing.

Boy I miss Maui & MOC

 

[SueDonJ]

Digging into the legalities, this is how a reservation is defined on Page 22 in the Exchange Procedures document:

"Use Period means the time period(s) during which each Program Member has reserved the use and occupancy of an Accommodation in accordance with the provisions of these Exchange Procedures. All Use Periods shall be subject to the minimum and maximum number of evenings identified in these Exchange Procedures."

Throughout the docs there are numerous references to availability being the overriding metric, that there's no guarantee that any and all desired intervals will be available. But when a desired interval is available and the system allows it to be booked, it's classified as a "Use Period." This definition states that a single Use Period consists of (bolding mine), "occupancy of an Accommodation." "An" meaning a single, not multiples, for each interval with a specified check-in and check-out day.

I've read through the docs a number of times now and haven't found anything that says a single reservation with a single confirmation number may require a unit change, other than when maintenance or other issues prevent occupancy of a unit by anyone.

To me the "Use Period" definition combined with the lack of any language that gives them leeway to split up a single reservation into multiple accommodations isn't ambiguous at all. It would be the basis for the argument I'd take up with MVW exec level representatives, and I'd expect to prevail if represented by a qualified attorney.

 

[GregT]

But how do you explain those instances where we DC Members can see that individual consecutive nights in the exact same unit configuration at a single resort are available to book individually or in segments with different confirmation numbers, but not as a single reservation with a single confirmation number?

Sue,

I can only speak for Maui Ocean Club because that's the property I've studied the most. As already noted, I can search online for a 1BR MV in the original tower and see nothing, and then when I search for individual nights they appear.

But when I book those individual nights, some are Dedicated 1BR MVs and others are the Master Suite of a 2BR MV Lock-off. Both appear in the search as 1BR MV's, and I can't tell which is which until a reservation is confirmed.

Same with 2BR OF in new towers. It can be either a 2BR OF (that locks-off) or the Master Suite of a 3BR OF. Or 2BR OV's/MV's can be either a Dedicated 2BR, or a 2BR L/O.

So, I think the system is managing inventory based on the Room Category (like the II Unit Code), more granular than a simple view category but less granular than the actual underlying units.

Best,

Greg

Edited to add: I have no idea if Marriott intended the system to run in this manner, but it does and they may feel that no one is harmed enough by it to warrant making the software changes required. I will bet that we will begin to see the language online and in confirmations about potential for a room change.

 

[SueDonJ]

Sue,

I can only speak for Maui Ocean Club because that's the property I've studied the most. As already noted, I can search online for a 1BR MV in the original tower and see nothing, and then when I search for individual nights they appear.

But when I book those individual nights, some are Dedicated 1BR MVs and others are the Master Suite of a 2BR MV Lock-off. Both appear in the search as 1BR MV's, and I can't tell which is which until a reservation is confirmed.

Same with 2BR OF in new towers. It can be either a 2BR OF (that locks-off) or the Master Suite of a 3BR OF. Or 2BR OV's/MV's can be either a Dedicated 2BR, or a 2BR L/O.

So, I think the system is managing inventory based on the Room Category (like the II Unit Code), more granular than a simple view categorybut less granular than the actual underlying units.

Best,

Greg

But that's just it - when I come across the same thing with individual nights available but not the sum total of them as a multi-night stay, I'm not able to book the sum total as a single reservation. The system forces me to book them individually with separate confirmation numbers, which leads me to expect that I may be required to change units during the stay. The same happens when calling in to Owner Services - the rep advises that the stay must be booked in segments with separate confirmation numbers. When you come across this, are you able to book the multi-nights as a single reservation with a single confirmation number?

Edited to add: I have no idea if Marriott intended the system to run in this manner, but it does and they may feel that no one is harmed enough by it to warrant making the software changes required. I will bet that we will begin to see the language online and in confirmations about potential for a room change.

I would prefer that they do whatever is necessary to make their practices conform to the language in the docs, either by fixing their IT system to not allow single reservations when a change is required (if that's what the system allows and again, I'm not convinced it does) or, by issuing a system-wide directive to all of their room controllers that single reservations with single confirmation notices must be accommodated in a single unit (which is I think the reason why this OP is being forced to move, because they are incorrectly accommodating in a single unit another guest with multiple reservations.) But whatever they do to fix this mess is okay by me because I don't want them to be left vulnerable to legal challenges that they can lose, which is what appears to be happening now.

It's funny but not in a ha-ha way. I just never thought I'd see the day when any TUGgers would be able to justify MVW being given carte blanche to move a guest from one unit to another despite the guest having a single reservation confirmation for a multi-night stay.

 

[tschwa2]

If it wasn't the case of a fixed unit/fixed week resort with an overlay of points and the reservation in question not conforming to a regular check in/out day, I would be more concerned. Throw in a prime time holiday week that Marriott was unable to manage inventory to avoid the problem. System wide it isn't going to have any affect on most reservations.

 

[GregT]

When you come across this, are you able to book the multi-nights as a single reservation with a single confirmation number?

In the example above, I did have to book the 1BR MV's as different reservations, because they have different unit codes (using the II unit code) for the Dedicated 1BR and the 1BR L/O. This did not surprise me because there were different unit codes for the Dedicated versus the L/O.

I've also been able to book 3BR OF at MOC in a single reservation where it crossed a Saturday. This also did not surprise me because both underlying weeks have the same II unit code, even though (I believe) they were different units, and thus require a room change for my single reservation.

Again, I have no idea if this is how Marriott intended the system to operate, but it is how it functions.

Best,

Greg

 

[SueDonJ]

In the example above, I did have to book the 1BR MV's as different reservations, because they have different unit codes (using the II unit code) for the Dedicated 1BR and the 1BR L/O. This did not surprise me because there were different unit codes for the Dedicated versus the L/O.

I've also been able to book 3BR OF at MOC in a single reservation where it crossed a Saturday. This also did not surprise me because both underlying weeks have the same II unit code, even though (I believe) they were different units, and thus require a room change for my single reservation.

Again, I have no idea if this is how Marriott intended the system to operate, but it is how it functions.

Best,

Greg

I'm trying to be clear here, not trying to nitpick you to death. About what I bolded - were you actually required to change units during that stay for which you had a single confirmation?

 

[SueDonJ]

Another interesting angle ... for those who rent out reservations with a single confirmation number that were booked with your DC Points. Have you or are you prepared to advise your clients that they may be required to change units during the stay that you rent to them? And what's the reaction?

 

[PamMo]

Another interesting angle ... for those who rent out reservations with a single confirmation number that were booked with your DC Points. Have you or are you prepared to advise your clients that they may be required to change units during the stay that you rent to them? And what's the reaction?

Wow. I would be very unhappy if I were the OP, or a renter who was told while checking in that I'd have to move into a new room for my last night, because an owner needed their villa. Give me a little respect and a heads up, please. Surely they knew the owner was coming in well ahead of check in.

I don't think I would even consider renting a week if I thought my family would have to change units during our stay. Especially for a holiday ski week. With two travel days bookending a week vacation, I wouldn't want to lose part of a third day to pack, move, and unpack all that winter gear! Not to mention baby/toddler/teen stuff! Ugh. We stay in timeshares because of the convenience of having a home base. We know we may have to change rooms for a multiple week timeshare vacation, but if resorts move you around during a single week reservation and that is considered normal, I'll go back to vacation home rentals.

 

[SueDonJ]

Wow. I would be very unhappy if I were the OP, or a renter who was told while checking in that I'd have to move into a new room for my last night, because an owner needed their villa. Give me a little respect and a heads up, please. Surely they knew the owner was coming in well ahead of check in.

I don't think I would even consider renting a week if I thought my family would have to change units during our stay. Especially for a holiday ski week. With two travel days bookending a week vacation, I wouldn't want to lose part of a third day to pack, move, and unpack all that winter gear! Not to mention baby/toddler/teen stuff! Ugh. We stay in timeshares because of the convenience of having a home base. We know we may have to change rooms for a multiple week timeshare vacation, but if resorts move you around during a single week reservation and that is considered normal, I'll go back to vacation home rentals.

I've only put guests into two DC reservations, one earlier this year and one about a month ago, but I don't intend to make a habit of it the way some TUGgers do. It never occurred to me that the possibility was on the table so I didn't advise my guests - but it'll be in the back of my mind from now on and I'm as willing to take up the fight for them as I am for myself. I just don't see this making sense by any stretch of the imagination, and I'm saying that as someone who can usually understand MVW's position when questionable situations come up. It simply boggles my mind (and obviously, I'm finding it difficult to let go for which I apologize. )

 

[davidvel]

I've only put guests into two DC reservations, one earlier this year and one about a month ago, but I don't intend to make a habit of it the way some TUGgers do. It never occurred to me that the possibility was on the table so I didn't advise my guests - but it'll be in the back of my mind from now on and I'm as willing to take up the fight for them as I am for myself. I just don't see this making sense by any stretch of the imagination, and I'm saying that as someone who can usually understand MVW's position when questionable situations come up. It simply boggles my mind (and obviously, I'm finding it difficult to let go for which I apologize. )

I wholeheartedly agree. The expectation of just about anyone (I thought EVERYONE until reading this thread) that makes a reservation over a span of time with a single confirmation number, is that they will have the same room for that time.

Imagine showing up for your rental car you reserved for a week and being told, "You'll have to bring this back in 6 days to swap out your car for a different one." Just as absurd.

 

[tschwa2]

The only reason I don't always have the expectation of a single unit for a single resort confirmation is that I have seen the same thing happen (moves required) when a points system is overlayed on a fixed unit/fixed week resort and the single reservation did not have a check in/out on the traditional check in day.

The only difference is in the other system (RCI points) the possibility is clearly stated on the page before confirming.

 

[GregT]

I'm trying to be clear here, not trying to nitpick you to death. About what I bolded - were you actually required to change units during that stay for which you had a single confirmation?

Sue,

These were experimental reservations that I made for May 2016, where I booked reservations with a Friday check-in that crossed Saturday. I did not use the reservations so I can not confirm the room change.

However, there were three weekends in May that all showed that availability pattern (Friday check-in, across a Saturday) and yet the Trust only has 5 3BR weeks in it for May, none of which connect Week 1 to Week 2.

What is the probability that all three of those reservations were for connecting units? The odds of any particular unit being redeemed is 1/22nd -- so the odds of the same unit being redeemed for both Week 1 and Week 2 for a reservation are 1/484th? And the odds of this happening three times in a month? 1 out of 114 Million?

Here is where I referenced it. I do think you should consider the possibility that the availability is based on Room Category and not specific units.

And I think Marriott needs to add a disclaimer.

Best,

Greg

 

[dioxide45]

I think that we need to remember that the reservation system that MVCI is using is still the Marriott International infrastructure. There is a reason that your reservation shows up instantly on Marriott.com when you make a reservation on the phone or online and why you don't see that same unit show back up instantly when you cancel a Vacation Club Reservation. The system of record is still Marriott International's reservation system, and it likely always be while MVCI is licensing the Marriott name for its properties.

Marriott hotels are all floating unit properties. YOu are never guaranteed a certain unit when making a Marriott.com reservation unless there is only one unit of that type at the property. It would make sense that Marriott International wouldn't program anything in to their reservation system to account for fixed weeks at MVCI properties. MVCI only accounted for 5% of the companies overall valuation at spin-off and this wasn't an issue until DC came along and then the spin-off wasn't far behind. Marriott International isn't going to pour a lot of money in to this when MVCI reservations probably make up less than 1% of all reservations in their system.

What we all call the "Marriott II Unit Code" is more important than we all think. It is the one of the key inventory details that drives the reservation system for Marriott.com. That is essentially the unit category that Greg is referring to. If there are adjacent dates with different unit codes, the system won't allow you to book a consecutive reservation. This makes sense on the hotel side too because they wouldn't want cross over where someone needs to move unit types mid stay.

A problem arises where MVCI properties have fixed units and weeks where the unit has the same Marriott Unit Code. The system sees adjacent available inventory that can be booked, but it can't account for fixed units. The only way they could fix this would be to have a different Marriott Unit Code for every fixed week in the system. Sure it could be done, but it would be daunting and it could, as Greg suggests, prevent people from getting a reservation. Or at best it would require people to have two confirmation numbers for a single stay.

I would say that overall rooms control does an excellent job keeping people in the same villa for their entire stay. Even if they have many different confirmation numbers. They work hard to prevent people from having to move. But nothing is perfect and in rare cases we have situations like the OP is having. That said, I don't think the property is handling the move very well.

I have always thought that MVCI housekeeping does a pretty poor job of prioritizing units to clean. There is no reason that a guest needs to be out of a unit between 10:00 and 5:00 when a move is needed. We know that all villas need to be vacated by 10:00 (in rare cases this may not always happen). If a unit is one that someone currently at the resort is scheduled to move in to, that should be the first unit on a housekeepers manifest. The guest being moved should be in that unit by 11:30 or 12:00 tops.

The HHI properties are the best by allowing guests to stay in their current villa until the new villa is ready. There is no reason every property can't do this. I think this is the OPs main gripe. I can understand the need for a move, but to be told you will be out of the villa perhaps for many hours unnecessarily is irritating.

We have cruised many times and it seems that the cruise lines are masters at turning over rooms and guests. They ask when you during online checkin and often part way though your stay what your flight information is. They then prioritize peoples debarkation times based on that. MVCI could do something similar. Slip a card under the door a few days before checkout and ask when your anticipated checkout time will be. How many times does someone vacate a villa at 6:00am and that is perhaps the last villa that is cleaned? It probably happens more than we would want to know. This should be the first villa that is cleaned. I don't know what time housekeeping starts, but they could use this advance information to schedule housekeeping earlier. I don't usually see housekeeping in the halls until 8:00. 6:00-8:00 is one villa per housekeeper that could be cleaned.

 

[dioxide45]

Here is where I referenced it. I do think you should consider the possibility that the availability is based on Room Category and not specific units.

And I think Marriott needs to add a disclaimer.

Best,

Greg

Greg, I do think this is exactly the case. There is nothing in the underlying inventory record that indicates inventory comes from a fixed week fixed unit interval. The only thing that exists is the "Marriott II Unit Code". We know that isn't the best identifier because at resorts where fixed units exist, the Unit Code is the same for all the units in the same unit size and view. As I mentioned previously, they could fix this by applying a different Unit Code to every fixed week interval. Though I don't know how feasible that really is when this probably comes up with only one half of one percent of all reservations. MVCI has to decide where to allocate its resources and it has determined that this isn't important enough to spend the money on it.

 

[bazzap]

Club Son Antem now do as you describe.
Housekeeping leave a note requesting your departure/flight details to enable them to effectively schedule villa cleaning between guests, along with with a helpful summary of what services are provided on which days.

 

[spottie]

I talked to the General Manager this morning, he said he would look into this and talk to the owner to see if and when they are coming in, so we might avoid the move. He said since it was the holiday week, most likely we would still need to move, he would make sure our move is as smooth as possible. He said the reason this happened was because this is a fixed week resort. We will see what they can come up with in the next few days.

For Grand Residence Tahoe, are they fixed unit as well as fixed week? Do the owner stay in the exact unit they bought into?

By now the OP should have spoken with someone in management and rec'd an answer.

 

[SueDonJ]

Sue,

These were experimental reservations that I made for May 2016, where I booked reservations with a Friday check-in that crossed Saturday. I did not use the reservations so I can not confirm the room change.

However, there were three weekends in May that all showed that availability pattern (Friday check-in, across a Saturday) and yet the Trust only has 5 3BR weeks in it for May, none of which connect Week 1 to Week 2.

What is the probability that all three of those reservations were for connecting units? The odds of any particular unit being redeemed is 1/22nd -- so the odds of the same unit being redeemed for both Week 1 and Week 2 for a reservation are 1/484th? And the odds of this happening three times in a month? 1 out of 114 Million?

Here is where I referenced it. I do think you should consider the possibility that the availability is based on Room Category and not specific units.

And I think Marriott needs to add a disclaimer.

Best,

Greg

The reason I don't think the II unit code is the only metric in play is because I've seen these segmented reservations happen where all same-configuration units in a single resort have the same II code, i.e. at the Hilton Head resorts where I own. That's why I believe that, 1.) the system takes into account at the time of booking ALL metrics including the II code but also any other variables that result in Weeks breakage, such as enrolled Weeks being exchanged for DC Points and thus available to be booked by DC Members as single nights, and 2.) that the system will not allow requested intervals to be booked as a single reservation with a single confirmation number if multiple-unit breakage is necessary to fulfill the request.

There's no way that this is a case of overbooking the same exact unit for the same exact night. That would jeopardize MVW's licenses faster than my head could spin, and there has never been a verified report to TUG of Marriott or MVW overbooking any inventory. It doesn't happen.

I really think this is a situation similar to the one you detailed in your 6206 experiment thread in which you were the Fixed Week owner requesting that you be allowed to stay in the unit for your consecutive DC Points stay, but the rooms controller required you to move because 6206 was the only unit that would be available for a guest coming in the next day with a single DC Points reservation for the entirety of his multiple nights. Except in this case, the onsite rooms controller appears to be satisfying the request of the guest/owner who is in a position similar to the one you were in, i.e. s/he's holding multiple reservations involving breakage inventory for multiple nights, and thus displacing the OP from the unit which was showing as available at the time of booking. I didn't think the request you proposed in your situation was correct and I don't think this one is either.

Even if Mr. Marriott himself were checking in last-minute and the rooms controller was put in the unfortunate position of moving another guest to accommodate Mr. Marriott's desired stay, there's no way it would happen the way that it's happening to this OP with the guest being told at check-in by a rep who's in no position to justify it. The displaced guest would be told as far in advance by someone in a position of authority, it would be presented as a favor being requested rather than a demand, and more-than-suitable compensation would be offered without the guest having to ask.

Something is wrong with the process being used here and the OP has every right to demand an explanation as well as compensation. There is no good excuse.

 

[bogey21]

For Grand Residence Tahoe, are they fixed unit as well as fixed week? Do the owner stay in the exact unit they bought into?

One of the things that caused me to sell my Floating Weeks many years ago was the uncertainty factor. After I sold I bought Fixed Week, Fixed Unit Weeks at 6 different Resorts. It was great. For years I knew exactly where and when I would be staying. Never did I get assigned to a Unit that wasn't mine.

George

 

[tschwa2]

Originally Posted by spottie
For Grand Residence Tahoe, are they fixed unit as well as fixed week? Do the owner stay in the exact unit they bought into?

Per Frank in post #10. Units were sold as fixed week/ fixed units and owners stay in their deeded unit.

 

[billymach4]

What if someone refused to Move!

What would go down if the resort manager ran into a snot nosed, self centered, self entitled SOB that absolutely refused to vacate the unit?

How do you think the Manager of the resort would handle this?

 

[SueDonJ]

What would go down if the resort manager ran into a snot nosed, self centered, self entitled SOB that absolutely refused to vacate the unit?

How do you think the Manager of the resort would handle this?

In this particular situation the OP is, in my opinion, completely entitled to the belief that s/he shouldn't be required to change units. Not because s/he's any of the derogatory terms you used but because the governing docs of the system s/he used to book the reservation appear to support the entitlement.

As far as what the resort manager will do if s/he refuses to comply? I have no idea, but it's not the OP's problem to solve.

As an aside, it seems I've seen the same self-entitled jerks that you have at the check-in counters and maddeningly, the reps are usually forced to placate them at the expense of other guests. In fact I'm thinking that's what actually happened to cause this OP's current situation.

 

[PamMo]

I love my deeded fixed weeks/units at some resorts, and always use them. What dismays me (as an owner who enrolled in the DC points program) is that Marriott would book guests in a unit for part of the week, and without considering the needs of that guest and their family, make them change units without notifying them ahead of time. This should all be made entirely clear at booking.

 

[billymach4]

Sue,

I totally agree that the OP is entitled to remain in this unit for the duration of the stay. Not suggesting that the OP act unsavory at all. Agree with your assessment of other guests acting like jerks at check in. This is a very interesting situation indeed.

 

[dioxide45]

Sue,

I totally agree that the OP is entitled to remain in this unit for the duration of the stay. Not suggesting that the OP act unsavory at all. Agree with your assessment of other guests acting like jerks at check in. This is a very interesting situation indeed.

I am not sure that the OP is entitled to stay in the unit they are currently in. That would infringe upon the actual fixed week fixed units deeded usage rights. The OP has no rights other than a reservation that they obtained through the MVC Exchange Company. They have no deeded rights at Grand Residence Lake Tahoe.

Perhaps they had an entitled right to a single stay in a single unit for all seven nights, but not that they are entitle to stay in the unit that they are currently in. A deed owners rights trump everything.

The property may be able to evict the guest, hotels have many more rights in evicting guests at hotels than a regular landlord would have with a tenant renting a home or an apartment long term. They don't usually have to go through the courts to evict someone.