This is entirely the issue -- this is what is happening today -- it is common for a 3BR points reservation to require a room change, even if it is on a single reservation number. This has been the entire conversation with them, not multiple reservations cobbled together.
So yes, I think they need the add the second sentence that you have indicated. And then they are free to do whatever room assignments they deem appropriate.
I think TUGgers need to recognize that it is the exception where the 3BR point user gets to stay in the same room when crossing a Saturday. And I'm asking them to positively affirm that they believe the point user should stay in the same room in preference to a fixed week owner who is lucky to get the overlapping room opportunity.
Both are "exchangers" -- so who gets the preference? I know smart TUGgers disagree with me on this issue, but as another example, I would want MoxJo to stay in his fixed week at Monarch, instead of having to move to a different unit because there weren't enough units to satisfy both him and a point user (I don't think that is relevant at Monarch, but I'm trying to broaden the situation beyond just me). Again, this is a very rare circumstance, perhaps only at MOC 3BRs.
Best,
Greg
It still doesn't make any sense to me, that a single reservation can require a unit change. I'd be asking whoever it is you're dealing with to prove what they're saying, to show you exactly what it looks like in a my-vacationclub.com account when it happens.
Beyond that, to your question asking us to, "
positively affirm that they believe the point user should stay in the same room in preference to a fixed week owner ..."
Yes, even with the qualifier that a single reservation number might require a move over a multi-night stay, I think MVW handled this particular situation correctly. By moving you out of one unit and into another on the check-out/in day of your two stays attached to two separate reservation numbers, they were able to keep both you and The Other Guy in the same unit for each of your multi-night stays to which single reservation numbers were attached. If they'd kept you in the same unit, The Other Guy's single-reservation-number stay would have had to be broken up into two units.
Whether what they did is what they had to do, which based on what they're telling you may not be the case (but I still don't believe it without proof,) I think it's the best thing they could have done. It's how I would want them to handle my reservations if ever I'm in the same situation as The Other Guy. And, I'll have no problem accepting it if ever I'm in the same situation as you.
We've been disagreeing on this since the beginning (friendly though, I hope you agree?) and likely always will. But I don't think we're looking at it through the same lens - I just don't see it as a priority issue or a Weeks Owner v. Points Member issue, but rather an inventory management one. Even if what they're telling you is correct, the way you're suggesting they should have handled your particular situation if implemented on a routine basis would create additional nightmares for the Unit Placement and Front Desk staff who already face too many. Imagine every Points Member who checks in asking to be moved from unit to unit so they can enjoy different views during a single stay?? If what MVW is telling you is correct, that there's nothing to prevent them from moving Points Members during a multi-night stay, what's to stop any Points Members from demanding the right to move?
