Name change for MVC Reservation

[Sicnarf]

(Warning - conspiracy theory alert!)

It's hardly "equal opportunity" when you compete against a computer that also controls hundreds of weeks at the same resort and books them all consecutively or concurrently in a fraction of a second. The problem may routinely be the Abound system booking instantaneously at 13, 14, 15, 16 or 18 months out and locking out owners. Then MVC can conveniently blame the "mega-renters".

I obviously only have circumstantial evidence, but I routinely have problems getting a Saturday checkin for some weeks when I try to book them at 14-15 months out. Given that half the weeks inventory is supposed to be available at 13+ months out, I always find it very hard to believe that so many other owners (it's a very big resort) are that diligent.

Since this is the Vistana board, I'll just elaborate that MVC weeks reservation rules allow owners to book 2+ week consecutively or concurrently at 13 months out (they do not have to be at the same resort). An owner who owns multiple weeks can book the first at 13 months out, the second at 13 months + 1 week, the third 13 months + 2 weeks etc and can also book multiple weeks concurrently at the same time. So, an owner (or Real Estate Trust) owning 10 weeks for example, would be booking the 10th week at 15+ months out. I annual personal experience is booking several weeks in a row with a Saturday checkin and then when I get to the 4th or 5th they tell me "sorry, I only have Sunday or Friday". I obviously always call at 9am at 13 months out to book the first week, and booking via phone is the only method for owners to book at 13+ months out. While those are competitive weeks to get, I've always suspected the lack of Saturday checkins that far out has to do with Abound eating up that inventory somehow. I find that more credible than the explanation that hundreds of owners beat me to it.

Now imagine that you are a real estate trust that owns thousands of weeks at multiple resorts, or maybe it's exchange inventory from owners who deposited weeks way in advance, and you get to use the 13-month rule to book all the weeks you control consecutively and concurrently (remember that to use this rule the weeks don't even have to be at the same resort). What can possibly go wrong for other individual owners?

As @jabberwocky mentioned, there is no conclusive proof that MVC is usurping prime dates especially since regular owners are booking and renting those prime weeks. If they do, then we regular owners are at huge disadvantage.

 

[dioxide45]

Owners are not allowed to rent as a commercial activity, but there is an exception for the developer and related entities. Those are also owners, but are allowed to rent as a commercial activity. This is the problem. Not the actual owners renting. Even "mega-renters" are much smaller than developer renting. The developer sees owner rentals as competition and attempts to shut them down, or at least limit - for their own commercial gain. These limits have nothing to do with benefiting anyone other than the developer.

The developers made the rules when they wrote up the governing resort documents or created the exchange procedures we all agree to for point based reservations. If we don't like the requirements, we don't have to buy the product. I see the 20,000 Club Point transfer limit in Abound as toothless. The big players that were doing this have already adjusted to now brokering point reservations. They rent points from an owner, owner gives them their account login credentials for the broker to make one or more reservations. No points get transferred at all. Owners in these cases don't make much over maintenance fees and the broker makes the profit. Though many do pay upfront, so they could be sitting on points they can't make a reservation to rent. It is possible that the cat and mouse game continues and Marriott makes further changes like limiting guest name changes or even further to what Wyndham has done by preventing guest names being added to certain reservation time periods (beyond a limit).

 

[DanCali]

As @jabberwocky mentioned, there is no conclusive proof that MVC is usurping prime dates especially since regular owners are booking and renting those prime weeks. If they do, then we regular owners are at huge disadvantage.

Usurping can happen in subtle ways like taking all the Saturday checkins and no Fridays, for example. I just don't buy the explanation I get annually from owner services that a week I try to book at 14.5 months out at 9:00am has no Saturday checkins because 200+ owners beat me to it. And the same thing happens year after year. I will add that I sometimes fix that by trying again at 12 months out when more inventory is available, but that's a situation I don't want to be in especially because I can't book online at 12 months if I'm already holding a reservation.

I agree - we'll likely never really know, and we'll definitely never get conclusive proof for either scenario. But there are only a handful of explanations for such a situation. In the absence of proof, you just have to decide for yourself which is more probable than the other.

 

[dioxide45]

Usurping can happen in subtle ways like taking all the Saturday checkins and no Fridays, for example. I just don't buy the explanation I get annually from owner services that a week I try to book at 14.5 months out at 9:00am has no Saturday checkins because 200+ owners beat me to it. And the same thing happens year after year. I will add that I sometimes fix that by trying again at 12 months out when more inventory is available, but that's a situation I don't want to be in especially because I can't book online at 12 months if I'm already holding a reservation.

I agree - we'll likely never really know, and we'll definitely never get conclusive proof for either scenario. But there are only a handful of explanations for such a situation. In the absence of proof, you just have to decide for yourself which is more probable than the other.

But Marriott doesn't rent out in 7-night increments on Marriott.com, so why do they care if they have a Friday or Saturday checkin? They probably have inventory from the prior week also, so the checkin days they scoop really shouldn't matter. They also use inventory they hold for certain preview package reservations that can checkin any day of the week and are usually three or four nights.

 

[DanCali]

But Marriott doesn't rent out in 7-night increments on Marriott.com, so why do they care if they have a Friday or Saturday checkin? They probably have inventory from the prior week also, so the checkin days they scoop really shouldn't matter. They also use inventory they hold for certain preview package reservations that can checkin any day of the week and are usually three or four nights.

I wasn't really thinking about Marriott making booking to rent on marriott.com.

When you go to make a points reservation and select to see availability for a particular month, you can see which dates are available to book. Doesn't that imply that those dates are already held by the exchange company somehow? So I was thinking more in terms of the trust or exchange company making reservations using either (1) trust inventory - that later maybe goes into the exchange, or (ii) reservations for weeks that were elected for points. In particular, if you think of these as entities owning/controlling multiple weeks and they can book at 13+ months out like any other owner, they have a lot of weeks to play with both consecutively and concurrently. Hypothetically, they can book winter in Utah and Vail at 13 months out, Spring in the Caribbean at 16 months out, and Summer at Newport Coast at 20 months out. I'm not aware of anything that would limit an MVC owner of doing that if they had all those weeks and that many of them as home resorts.

Why they would necessarily prefer Saturdays over Fridays or Sundays I actually don't know because, as you say, it doesn't seem to matter... Maybe they just systematically book Saturdays because they also don't think it matters from their perspective and it's just what the system does? I just know that from my own personal experience I get a rep on the phone who tells me at 14+ months out that I can't book a Saturday for a particular week after I just booked a bunch of Saturdays in a row.

 

[timsi]

As @jabberwocky mentioned, there is no conclusive proof that MVC is usurping prime dates especially since regular owners are booking and renting those prime weeks. If they do, then we regular owners are at huge disadvantage.

Westin Resort and Spa Cancun (WCU) is not in any trust (including Aventuras) but it can be booked using Staroptions. WCU has less rental value than Westin Lagunamar on Marriott.com but Vistana chose to make them equal in VSE. Lagunamar has become harder to book (winter months) and availability pops up more frequently for WCU. So Marriott deposits WCU in VSE, presumably using the Staroptions chart to get something of “equal” value in exchange. Is this “conclusive” enough?

By the way, it is on Marriott to make public how they book their huge inventory that they rent out but they would not do it. Why not if they have nothing to hide?

 

[sponger76]

I do not see it as a problem as everyone has equal opportunity to book that week regardless I rent or use it for myself.

Except the intent of the system is not for you to become a mini vacation rental tycoon. I have no problem with the idea of being beat out by other owners who will be actually using the week. I do have a problem with the idea of being beat out by a business that then puts prime reservations in the hands of non-owners with no skin in the game.

 

[sponger76]

(Warning - conspiracy theory alert!)

It's hardly "equal opportunity" when you compete against a computer that also controls hundreds of weeks at the same resort and books them all consecutively or concurrently in a fraction of a second. The problem may routinely be the Abound system booking instantaneously at 13, 14, 15, 16 or 18 months out and locking out owners. Then MVC can conveniently blame the "mega-renters".

I obviously only have circumstantial evidence, but I routinely have problems getting a Saturday checkin for some weeks when I try to book them at 14-15 months out. Given that half the weeks inventory is supposed to be available at 13+ months out, I always find it very hard to believe that so many other owners (it's a very big resort) are that diligent.

Since this is the Vistana board, I'll just elaborate that MVC weeks reservation rules allow owners to book 2+ week consecutively or concurrently at 13 months out (they do not have to be at the same resort). An owner who owns multiple weeks can book the first at 13 months out, the second at 13 months + 1 week, the third 13 months + 2 weeks etc and can also book multiple weeks concurrently at the same time. So, an owner (or Real Estate Trust) owning 10 weeks for example, would be booking the 10th week at 15+ months out. I annual personal experience is booking several weeks in a row with a Saturday checkin and then when I get to the 4th or 5th they tell me "sorry, I only have Sunday or Friday". I obviously always call at 9am at 13 months out to book the first week, and booking via phone is the only method for owners to book at 13+ months out. While those are competitive weeks to get, I've always suspected the lack of Saturday checkins that far out has to do with Abound eating up that inventory somehow. I find that more credible than the explanation that hundreds of owners beat me to it.

Now imagine that you are a real estate trust that owns thousands of weeks at multiple resorts, or maybe it's exchange inventory from owners who deposited weeks way in advance, and you get to use the 13-month rule to book all the weeks you control consecutively and concurrently (remember that to use this rule the weeks don't even have to be at the same resort). What can possibly go wrong for other individual owners?

And what is MVC doing with all these prime weeks they are supposedly hovering up? I know you can rent MVC/Vistana properties on marriott.com, but I feel like I've seen more prime holiday inventory on Redweek than the hotel website. When I've looked for holiday weeks (usually Christmas week at ski locations) on marriott.com at MVC resorts there was usually very little to no availability, while Redweek had plenty.

 

[jabberwocky]

Except the intent of the system is not for you to become a mini vacation rental tycoon. I have no problem with the idea of being beat out by other owners who will be actually using the week. I do have a problem with the idea of being beat out by a business that then puts prime reservations in the hands of non-owners with no skin in the game.

But what is the solution then? I’m not a fan of people turning this into a business, but I would prefer that we be liberal in providing owners the ability to rent out their units when they cannot personally use them for whatever reason.

Unscrupulous rental businesses will usually find away around whatever rules are put in place to dissuade rentals.

 

[sponger76]

But what is the solution then? I’m not a fan of people turning this into a business, but I would prefer that we be liberal in providing owners the ability to rent out their units when they cannot personally use them for whatever reason.

Unscrupulous rental businesses will usually find away around whatever rules are put in place to dissuade rentals.

Hopefully someone who's a lot smarter and makes way more money than me will figure that out. But sometimes there is no good solution, and all people like me can do is whine about it, and if the problem gets severe enough, leave.

 

[timsi]

Except the intent of the system is not for you to become a mini vacation rental tycoon. I have no problem with the idea of being beat out by other owners who will be actually using the week. I do have a problem with the idea of being beat out by a business that then puts prime reservations in the hands of non-owners with no skin in the game.

Isn't Marriott the business you are referring to? And it can book any unit any time.

 

[NotaBene]

I have owned Marriott weeks since 1998 and points since 2010 and took updates at least yearly until Mar 2020. Throughout this time sales (even at senior levels) encouraged rentals as a means to offset maintenance fees and justify additional ownership. In fact, associates promote RedWeek and VacationCandy (Salt Lake City) even now, but only for now. These guest registration detail coordinates were required for the past year but you had to ask for Bonvoy info to be removed. The form was introduced in April'23 as part of the Abound change. I was bothered by two clauses "Should MVCI be unable to verify the Guest information prior to arrival, the Guest will not be allowed to check-in" and "I certify that this reservation is not for any commercial purpose and release Exchange Company and its affiliates from any and all liability relating to or arising from such reservation cancellation". Marriott's back-office took 32 days to clarify this as "Renting out ownership reservations either on your owner or through third party rental sites like Vacation Candy is against the program rules, it is now being enforced and this activity will be monitored."

In Feb, I used the owner services desk for a name change, with coord details, and confirmation was issued to me, in April I used the Bonvoy online name change for another res. and it appeared fine. In May I was told by owner services that neither were recognized, which turned out to be wrong. Bonvoy online change was deleted. With the new form, I do not get a name change confirmation because I confirmed the new name and certified their coordinates therefore only they are informed. Both the Feb and Apr confirmations with the old and new processes are valid because a supervisor confirmed an authorized Salt Lake associate's ID was on file.

It seems near-term rentals by any means are being approved and I asked the MVWOwnerServicesSupervisor If they could add a hyperlink to the commercial clause to provide in a positive way what we as owners are allowed to do under these new rules for rental because there is a communication gap with the Associates understanding and what we have been told by Sales.

 

[daviator]

Two of my Vistana ownerships were sold to me using the specific justification that I could rent them out during certain popular weeks and easily make the cost of maintenance fees just renting one side or the other. That claim is absolutely what I relied on in making those purchases.

Now as it turns out, most years I have used those ownerships personally, but I have occasionally rented them out without great difficulty. If Marriott suddenly were to define that as "commercial activity" and make it difficult or impossible to do, I'd be pretty unhappy. That seems like the very definition of bait and switch.

 

[dioxide45]

Two of my Vistana ownerships were sold to me using the specific justification that I could rent them out during certain popular weeks and easily make the cost of maintenance fees just renting one side or the other. That claim is absolutely what I relied on in making those purchases.

Now as it turns out, most years I have used those ownerships personally, but I have occasionally rented them out without great difficulty. If Marriott suddenly were to define that as "commercial activity" and make it difficult or impossible to do, I'd be pretty unhappy. That seems like the very definition of bait and switch.

Sadly, if you relied on the salesperson's word, it isn't worth anything. You sign away any verbal promises when you sign the purchase contract.

 

[daviator]

Sadly, if you relied on the salesperson's word, it isn't worth anything. You sign away any verbal promises when you sign the purchase contract.

Yes, but a lot of people were promised this. If Marriott takes that ability away, an awful lot of people might make good plaintiffs. It isn’t something I’d initiate but there are people who might.

i think MVC is right to try to limit the true commercial operators, but they should do so without disallowing occasional rentals by those who regularly use their ownerships. It’s probably a bit of a tightrope for them to walk.

 

[dioxide45]

Yes, but a lot of people were promised this. If Marriott takes that ability away, an awful lot of people might make good plaintiffs. It isn’t something I’d initiate but there are people who might.

i think MVC is right to try to limit the true commercial operators, but they should do so without disallowing occasional rentals by those who regularly use their ownerships. It’s probably a bit of a tightrope for them to walk.

There are some people that may try, but generally they will have to spend their own money to fight in litigation. Marriott has a bigger bankroll. Wyndham played this game and for the few that fought, in most cases they agreed to take the timeshare deeds back. Of course most of these people bought them for $0 resale.

I certainly agree that Marriott will tread lightly here, at least for now. What do they define as commercial operation? Very few, if any, of the timeshare developers define this term in their contracts and CC&Rs. They do not define it so they can define it as they need to and adjust as needed. Is someone who is renting 10 intervals a commercial operation? 5? 20? What about someone who owns 10 weeks and travels 5 and rents the other 5 to cover 100% of their maintenance fees. We can't answer the question really, the developer defines "commercial purposes" and the only way an owner can define it if challenged my Marriott is to fight the developer in court.

 

[NotaBene]

There are some people that may try, but generally they will have to spend their own money to fight in litigation. Marriott has a bigger bankroll. Wyndham played this game and for the few that fought, in most cases they agreed to take the timeshare deeds back. Of course most of these people bought them for $0 resale.

I certainly agree that Marriott will tread lightly here, at least for now. What do they define as commercial operation? Very few, if any, of the timeshare developers define this term in their contracts and CC&Rs. They do not define it so they can define it as they need to and adjust as needed. Is someone who is renting 10 intervals a commercial operation? 5? 20? What about someone who owns 10 weeks and travels 5 and rents the other 5 to cover 100% of their maintenance fees. We can't answer the question really, the developer defines "commercial purposes" and the only way an owner can define it if challenged my Marriott is to fight the developer in court.

Marriott made some changes to the form that I suggested in April including this current commercial clause which they refuse to clarify in positive ways. But like you say they want to keep their options open on defining non-commercial.

 

[Sicnarf]

I do not know of anyone becoming a mini vacation tycoon renting Marriott timeshares. Who in their right mind would create a business entirely dependent on the good graces of MVC which can change program rules, increase maintenance fees, or control premium inventory?
And what advantage an owner doing this for business has over other owners who don't? I certainly couldn't think of any.

Except the intent of the system is not for you to become a mini vacation rental tycoon. I have no problem with the idea of being beat out by other owners who will be actually using the week. I do have a problem with the idea of being beat out by a business that then puts prime reservations in the hands of non-owners with no skin in the game.

 

[DanCali]

We have traveled extensively every year since our first purchase in 1997, until 2020. Now for health reasons, (my wife cannot fly, is immune compromised, and southern states are pro-gun and promote daily mass shootings with AR15s)

Is this really what they think in Canada of "Southern States"?

You should see what the creators of South Park think of Canada. Doesn't make it true...

 

[Venter]

Our focus is a justification for our "legal standing" and financial loss caused by Marriott's actions regarding the use of our hybrid timeshare portfolio.

Can you explain how you see financial loss?
Sorry for your wife's health problems. Could you go to California and meet with your family where you may feel safer?

I can see financial loss and usage loss for me because, if for some reason I find out that I cannot use my reservation within 30 days of check in my options are really limited as I will not be able to rent it out to recuperate my financial loss, or gift to someone else in the family, and that restricts my usage. I do not feel being able to still cancel is a good option as I will then have restricted points which is exactly that - restrictive. Therefore, my usage is once again impeded.
Another scenario is that if I do intend to rent due to some circumstance where I just need to pay my MF's for the year or so till I can start using it again I will have to probably rent for less than covering my costs to make sure I get it rented within a timeframe 60 days before check in because, this is when I will have to cancel to get my points or week back "unrestricted". I say "unrestricted" in quotes because there is still loss due to the booking windows and availability that will be reduced, as will II trade strength if I want to deposit. So really this is a bit of a bad policy for all of us.

Now for the one good part I can envisage. For those people who are not planners and who are higher up in ownership levels this can be good. There may be more cancellations within 60 days which may open more availability and for higher level owners a chance to get discounts on the points to use for those reservations.

Just wondering where other people see problems or opportunities.

 

[NotaBene]

Marriott made some changes to the form that I suggested in April including this current commercial clause which they refuse to clarify in positive ways. But like you say they want to keep their options open on defining non-commercial.

For reference, a Florida Director of Marketing in 2020 was renting his MVC point reservations for $100 less than the Bonvoy list price which is much more than non-commercial in my opinion. Therefore I too will stop asking how I can rent in MVC terms and below I define my terms. In contract law, the receiver gets the right of interpretation if unclear. Of course Marriott will have other CYA clauses and I cannot aford to argue. Asking foregiveness imay be less complicated than asking permission.

I contracted to buy more points to the Chairman level in Feb 2020 and forfeited my deposit in Aug 2020 since MVC no longer honored the buy-back offer, and our investments dropped 50%.

We have traveled extensively every year since our first purchase in 1997, until 2020. Now for health reasons, (my wife cannot fly, is immune compromised, and fearful of viruses and violence) and because we want to see our grandchildren mature as long as possible. We tried to sell/give away our portfolio of timeshares in 2020 even to give back to the developers but without success. We have rented successfully in 2021/2022 as previously instructed by Marriott senior salespersons We have canceled this year's rental reservations except where they are in holding. In the future, we will gift to friends and family at the replacement cost of points used. That is my definition of non-commercial and of gifting, ie no intended profit. If our rentals were commercial we would also right-off capital investment.

 

[NotaBene]

Can you explain how you see financial loss?

I can see financial loss and usage loss for me because, if for some reason I find out that I cannot use my reservation within 30 days of check in my options are really limited as I will not be able to rent it out to recuperate my financial loss, or gift to someone else in the family, and that restricts my usage. I do not feel being able to still cancel is a good option as I will then have restricted points which is exactly that - restrictive. Therefore, my usage is once again impeded.
Another scenario is that if I do intend to rent due to some circumstance where I just need to pay my MF's for the year or so till I can start using it again I will have to probably rent for less than covering my costs to make sure I get it rented within a timeframe 60 days before check in because, this is when I will have to cancel to get my points or week back "unrestricted". I say "unrestricted" in quotes because there is still loss due to the booking windows and availability that will be reduced, as will II trade strength if I want to deposit. So really this is a bit of a bad policy for all of us.

I see financial loss the same as you, except my family does not want to travel to the US in this current environment. Marriott still requires mf to be paid but is restricting my ability to rent. Maintenance fees are very substantial and expenses to rent are additional. Our only pension is OAS. Marriott recommended gifting our reservations and suggesting we can deed back to Marriott, ie gift Marriott but not until the contracts are unencumbered by any transaction including point election, or the full EOY mf is paid. That is a substantial financial loss in my budget and my friends have their own TS weeks to utilize and do not want mine.

 

[YYJMSP]

I see financial loss the same as you, except my family does not want to travel to the US in this current environment. Marriott still requires mf to be paid but is restricting my ability to rent. Maintenance fees are very substantial and expenses to rent are additional. Our only pension is OAS. Marriott recommended gifting our reservations and suggesting we can deed back to Marriott, ie gift Marriott but not until the contracts are unencumbered by any transaction including point election, or the full EOY mf is paid. That is a substantial financial loss in my budget and my friends have their own TS weeks to utilize and do not want mine.

these are not an investment, they are basically (partially) prepaid vacation accommodations that you have to consume each use year.

if you want to keep them, if they are Abound eligible, why not pay the MFs, convert, and list the points for rent and recover some of your MFs?

or if you don't want to keep them, which sounds like is the case, as you said, pay the next MFs one last time, stop using them, and then Marriott will take them off your hands?

 

[NotaBene]

these are not an investment, they are basically (partially) prepaid vacation accommodations that you have to consume each use year.

if you want to keep them, if they are Abound eligible, why not pay the MFs, convert, and list the points for rent and recover some of your MFs?

or if you don't want to keep them, which sounds like is the case, as you said, pay the next MFs one last time, stop using them, and then Marriott will take them off your hands?

I see them as a vacation investment that I can pass on to heirs. I appreciated Bill Marriott, Sr attitude in his books which was bourne out in practice. He disbanded his architectural division and sold many properties to enter partnerships with investors. For my early purchases of MVCI I saw a parallel of Timeshare HOA and MVC partnership. I attended many board meetings and AGMs at our different properties and saw a difference between Marriott and other corporations. I bought everything from developers and have benefited from grandfathering and management relationships. As I got more HOA exposure I learned owners are not at all partners but Marriott Associates have a different attitude of service largely because of Bill's management by walking around his properties incognito to the extent possible. He then made policy changes based on his guest-level experiences. His heirs are more hands-off and the corporation is so fragmented (just too big to be intimate) that I considered divestiture and learned more about Marriott rules. But the experience at a Marriott resort is 10x that of the competition because Marriott bought the good ones and rebranded successfully. Marriott has removed their name from some properties because the new owners went off-brand in practice. I started renting with Marriott in 2000 and it was bad. We booked 9 weeks in Europe using our Marriott TS investment. Then stayed for seven months as snowbirds in the southeast USA in our timeshares. Only after 2020 did we implement the recommendations by Marriott Sales to use RedWeek rental in 2021/22. We did see the possibilities but that has gone now. The present negative travel environment will pass away. Since we are in our eighties, I am looking for a legal policy and procedure method of operating that my heirs can utilize and enjoy their own family vacations. It is important to their health.

By the way, owners do not need to consume each year. There are other options. We have 4,000,000 reward points for decades, four years of points access, and up to five years of Interval usage. But we have 300,000 Bonvoy points, and TS 8 weeks expiring. But this is complicated and temporary. We want to get back to annual usage and now that we have Mexico our kids and their friends are getting interested. We are not interested in financing non-Friens&Family vacations, or Marriott .

 

[sjlola]

Has anyone gone through this new process to change a name on a VISTANA reservation? We made a reservation last September for friends to stay at WKORV-N this September and immediately changed the reservation to their name in Vistana. I'm assuming we now need to do this with Abound, but although we went ahead and paid our Abound club dues, we haven't created an account on the website yet. I'm assuming we need to do this first? I'd appreciate hearing from someone in my situation with a guest name change with a Vistana reservation. TIA!