[Rules for Renting Owned Weeks/Points v. Exchanges]

[sparty]

Should the FAQ be updated to say renting Marriott weeks acquired through interval is ok?
http://tug2.net/timeshare_advice/howtorentyourtimeshare.htm

I see this all the time:
[Link to eBay ad disabled.]

The seller must be reputable - he's got 100% positive feedback

 

[tschwa2]

Looking at the feedback most are not timeshare rentals. In fact the last time he rented a week (which may or may not have been an interval week) was over a year ago. Just because this person is doing it doesn't mean II allows it. It may mean he just hasn't been caught.

 

[sparty]

I talked with Marriott about this practice of renting Interval weeks in general - they don't care - Marriott's officially communicated position is it's interval's issue not Marriott's...

Anyone has a timeshare losing money - this appears to be a nice opportunity to cover possible timeshare loss - interval trade to cypress harbor or other Marriott resort and rent - it's a-ok with Marriott.

Agree?

 

[tschwa2]

Yes it is interval's policy and intervals stance is they can freeze your account, and cancel any reservations without refunding either the exchange fee or the deposit if you violate their no rental rule. You would be out and the person you rented the week to would be out as well. There have been TUG members that this has happened to. If you want to risk it you can but I wouldn't want to rent from you if you do and TUG should not say it is ok to do when it is not.

If you have an exchange you can't use you can quietly rent it to a friend or family member and II will probably never know but if you advertise it on Redweek or ebay or do it often you are making yourself a target for II for violating their rules

 

[SueDonJ]

(This thread is being moved to the Buying, Selling, Renting forum.)

I don't believe that TUG should do anything to encourage rentals that are prohibited by clearly-stated rules of II and other exchange companies. Certainly revising a FAQ wouldn't be a good thing.

Marriott and the other developers/managers don't care about rentals of II reservations because it's the II rules that prohibit it, not the timeshare companies' rules. And it's not necessarily a good thing that they don't care - it means that they're not required to intervene on behalf of a renter who finds him/herself in the unfortunate position of trying to check-in to a reservation which II may have cancelled because the II Member violated an II rule.

********
FYI for anybody who wants to know Marriott's rules about Owner rentals:

- Weeks Owners and all Destination Club Members can rent to others any reservations booked using owned Weeks or Points through Owner Services. All that's required is that the Owner call OS and add the guest's/renter's name to the reservation; there is no additional fee and Marriott doesn't use Guest Certificates. Control of such reservations remains with the Owner but an Owner can furnish a renter with a copy of the reservation confirmation indicating the guest's/renter's name.

- Destination Club Members can also rent their Points to any other DC Members via a transfer between DC Member accounts. It requires that the Member(s) contact Owner Services via email or a three-way telephone conversation, again with no fee. Once transferred control of the rented Points and any reservations booked using the Points is assumed by the transferee. Currently there are no limits to the number of DC Points transfers allowed in/out of Member accounts.

 

[dioxide45]

While it is against the T&C you agree to when you sign up for II, it doesn't mean everyone follows those. It is up to II to police these and they do. The problem is that unless the person is using their real name in the listing, it is hard to track these things back to the II member. They can sometimes do it based on confirmed exchanges and recent guest certificate activity, but it isn't always easy. They do thousands of exchanges a day with millions of members. It would be like a needle in a haystack unless someone used their real name somehow in their Ebay handle.

II could easily find out who it was if they were willing to fork out the money to rent the week themselves. Then when they get the guest certificate, they can nail the member to the wall. They just don't want to be out that money they would have to spend before getting their hands on the guest certificate.

 

[spaulino]

(This thread is being moved to the Buying, Renting, Exchanging forum.)

********
FYI for anybody who wants to know Marriott's rules about Owner rentals:

- Weeks Owners and all Destination Club Members can rent to others any reservations booked using owned Weeks or Points through Owner Services. All that's required is that the Owner call OS and add the guest's/renter's name to the reservation; there is no additional fee and Marriott doesn't use Guest Certificates. Control of such reservations remains with the Owner but an Owner can furnish a renter with a copy of the reservation confirmation indicating the guest's/renter's name.

so when owners add the guest/renters name, the guest is allowed to check in and owner does not have to be present I assume?

 

[dioxide45]

so when owners add the guest/renters name, the guest is allowed to check in and owner does not have to be present I assume?

That is correct. Needing to have the owner there would defeat the purpose of renting.

 

[SueDonJ]

so when owners add the guest/renters name, the guest is allowed to check in and owner does not have to be present I assume?

Yes, correct. At check-in the renter will be asked for ID as well as a credit card in his/her name, and if the renter is a Marriott Rewards member s/he can furnish the account number to get the Elite Night and incidental spend credits.

 

[RLS50]

I do wish II's policy allowed for an owner to rent a week they traded for that they can't use. You can't always find a family member or friend at the last minute, even for free.

So if you traded a property with a MF of $1200 and your trading fee was $189, it would be nice to be able to list for rent for $1200-$1400 just to cover your costs.

Even with the E-Plus option, you don't always get a week / location / unit that is as good as your original trade. So instead of settling for an inferior re-trade, you would just rather get your "money back" by renting (selling) it to someone who is going to get a great week somewhere at a great price.

JMO.

 

[dioxide45]

I do wish II's policy allowed for an owner to rent a week they traded for that they can't use. You can't always find a family member or friend at the last minute, even for free.

So if you traded a property with a MF of $1200 and your trading fee was $189, it would be nice to be able to list for rent for $1200-$1400 just to cover your costs.

Even with the E-Plus option, you don't always get a week / location / unit that is as good as your original trade. So instead of settling for an inferior re-trade, you would just rather get your "money back" by renting (selling) it to someone who is going to get a great week somewhere at a great price.

JMO.

II doesn't want you competing against them. They could very well be renting the same week on getaway. They also don't want people gobbling up all the prime weeks just to rent them out. It does happen, but if it happened more often, regular members just wanting to use an exchange would be raving mad.

 

[RLS50]

II doesn't want you competing against them. They could very well be renting the same week on getaway. They also don't want people gobbling up all the prime weeks just to rent them out. It does happen, but if it happened more often, regular members just wanting to use an exchange would be raving mad.

I agree with you and II's general policy.

But I am talking about merely being able to recoup costs of a week that can't be used. Their is no business or competition from somebody selling their week at the same cost they paid for it. Nobody would do that in volume intentionally.

So I think if II finds somebody doing it, they should only take action if the rental is for profit...even $1 over cost.

I have never rented a week I traded for thru II. I just know that I did have to trade one when something came up last minute. The re-trade was a big downgrade from the original. I would have rather had a chance to just recoup my costs.

In effect it would be like renting your deeded week at a price just to cover your MF.

JMO.

 

[SueDonJ]

I agree with you and II's general policy.

But I am talking about merely being able to recoup costs of a week that can't be used. Their is no business or competition from somebody selling their week at the same cost they paid for it. Nobody would do that in volume intentionally.

So I think if II finds somebody doing it, they should only take action if the rental is for profit...even $1 over cost.

I have never rented a week I traded for thru II. I just know that I did have to trade one when something came up last minute. The re-trade was a big downgrade from the original. I would have rather had a chance to just recoup my costs.

In effect it would be like renting your deeded week at a price just to cover your MF.

JMO.

How would II be able to verify the cost of a Member's rental? The only way they could is if they allow the transactions to be processed through their system, which would open them up to risk if there are problems with the private rentals. Plus there could be additional side arrangements between the II Member and renters that II would never know about.

I also wish that II had a process to "insure" an exchange if the member finds s/he can't use it at short notice. But they've had the same limited cancellation terms for years, doesn't seem like they think it's a problem.

 

[RLS50]

How would II be able to verify the cost of a Member's rental? The only way they could is if they allow the transactions to be processed through their system, which would open them up to risk if there are problems with the private rentals. Plus there could be additional side arrangements between the II Member and renters that II would never know about.

I also wish that II had a process to "insure" an exchange if the member finds s/he can't use it at short notice. But they've had the same limited cancellation terms for years, doesn't seem like they think it's a problem.

Yep, I understand and agree. I should have clarified that I was speaking to what I wish was possible. I agree that the logistics of managing that level of detail would not be worth the time or the effort for II. So thus the blanket policy.

 

[PamMo]

Responding to this as someone who follows the rules and owns at "expensive" resorts (heck, what resort ISN'T expensive these days?), it is more than a little frustrating to see rental ads for obvious Interval/RCI trades into my home resorts. I paid/pay a premium to own there, and supposedly have exclusive rights to rent the weeks I own. When someone gets lucky and is able to trade a low cost/demand unit for a 1, 2, or 3BR Marriott Hawaiian resort (as an example) to use as a rental, it increases supply and weakens the price on the rental market.

Sure, my travel plans have unexpectantly changed sometimes (babies, military deployments, job transfers, etc.), but I've always been able to find a friend who could use my exchange reservations if we couldn't. Just last month, I gave away a week in a 2BR at Grand Chateau in Las Vegas to a Tugger. I figure it all comes around.

I'll add that if all exchange weeks were available for rent, I think it would get harder for the average owner to make good trades than it is now. The sophisticated owners/renters would get very good at picking off prime weeks to use for rentals.

 

[Saintsfanfl]

I talked with Marriott about this practice of renting Interval weeks in general - they don't care - Marriott's officially communicated position is it's interval's issue not Marriott's...

Anyone has a timeshare losing money - this appears to be a nice opportunity to cover possible timeshare loss - interval trade to cypress harbor or other Marriott resort and rent - it's a-ok with Marriott.

Agree?

Why would Marriott care? They do not own or control the unit in question. The practice has no decrease in value for them. Interval does care but it seems their threshold is when someone is doing it as a business practice. The accounts that get red flagged for audit are ones that have many reservations. The suspected number is 12 or more in a given year. At that point they will review and analyze to determine what is happening with those reservations. They will temporarily block accounts and if the situation is not rectified they may ban the account permanently.

 

[Saintsfanfl]

I'll add that if all exchange weeks were available for rent, I think it would get harder for the average owner to make good trades than it is now. The sophisticated owners/renters would get very good at picking off prime weeks to use for rentals.

Exactly. If left unchecked Interval's business would literally disappear overnight. You would have a handful of bot controlled accounts grabbing any rent value inventory in exchange for the lowest priced traders capable of pulling the desired exchanges. Regular members would not renew and the entire business would crumble.

 

[dominidude]

Exactly. If left unchecked Interval's business would literally disappear overnight. You would have a handful of bot controlled accounts grabbing any rent value inventory in exchange for the lowest priced traders capable of pulling the desired exchanges. Regular members would not renew and the entire business would crumble.

The very situation you describe (e.g., bot controlled accounts grabbing any rent value inventory) is currently available to any enterprising person right now. And, though is redundant to say, II business has not disappeared and members keep renewing their accounts.

The only real way that II has of monitoring whether members are renting their getaways or exchange weeks is by calling and asking guests or members with accounts having a much higher than average number of exchanges or getaways being bought using a single account.

I know this large, extended family which uses one single account to book as many as 20 getaways a month. They all share the userid and password. They, so far as I can tell, play their cards right, know rules of II, and tell II each time they call how every guest is a family member who has not paid anything in exchange for the getaway.

Therefore, it seems to me this is a non-issue. IMO, all that TUG needs to say in the matter is that II does not allow renting of exchanged weeks and getaways, and if you get caught, you'll get booted off II.

 

[SueDonJ]

... The only real way that II has of monitoring whether members are renting their getaways or exchange weeks is by calling and asking guests or members with accounts having a much higher than average number of exchanges or getaways being bought using a single account. ...

II can also monitor the number of Guest Certificates purchased for Exchanges and Getaways. That's why I mentioned that Marriott (and other developers/managers?) don't require GC's - because if you see an ad that says a Guest Certificate and fee are due, it's probably a rental of an II reservation. Proceed at your own risk.

... Therefore, it seems to me this is a non-issue. IMO, all that TUG needs to say in the matter is that II does not allow renting of exchanged weeks and getaways, and if you get caught, you'll get booted off II.

I like that TUG also gives a warning to the person paying for an II rental that II can cancel rented Exchanges and Getaways in advance of check-in. As the renter you could be notified in time for you to make alternative plans, but, there's also the chance you won't find out until you try to check-in. And, what good is advance notice if it's short and your rental is a high-demand reservation that's no longer available anywhere? Again, proceed at your own risk.

 

[Saintsfanfl]

The very situation you describe (e.g., bot controlled accounts grabbing any rent value inventory) is currently available to any enterprising person right now. And, though is redundant to say, II business has not disappeared and members keep renewing their accounts.

The situation is not available and that is entirely the point. II has loss prevention personnel that monitor high volume accounts. They will absolutely uncover a rental operation and then they will block the account and give an order. This is the reason why the business can sustain with occasional unauthorized rentals.

Someone could set it up and start the process but it would not take long before they are shut down. The 12 reservation threshold provides very little profit for a business. Make it 24, 48, or a 100? At some point it would be an automatic block. II is not going to let anyone run a high volume rental business.

You mention high volume getaways. I personally think II cares less about getaways than any other type of reservation. The reason is because getaways are priced as cash. Those units are already ear marked for where the revenue, cost, and profit belong. Exchanges, AC's, and XYZ's require tighter protection from unauthorized rentals.

 

[icydog]

Yes II Loss Prevention does exist

A friend of mine put a high value Myrtle Beach week up for rent. It was an II Getaway for which he had paid over $1200. II loss prevention found the ad on a rental site and threatened to cut off my friend's II account if he didn't take the ad down. He took the ad down and was stuck with the cost of the Getaway. So, yes, II does police Getaways

 

[dioxide45]

The very situation you describe (e.g., bot controlled accounts grabbing any rent value inventory) is currently available to any enterprising person right now. And, though is redundant to say, II business has not disappeared and members keep renewing their accounts.

I suppose it is possible and likely happening. Those that have the experience and know how could do this. Though if it was happening with enough frequency, II could take measures to stop it, like entering the letters from some image every time you want to do a search. It seems that if it is happening, it isn't enough of an issue for II to take appropriate actions to mitigate the problem.

 

[Alesha]

Renting out exchange weeks, what is/isn't allowed?

I know RCI prohibits renting out of their inventory, as do most of the exchange companies.

My question is, what exchange companies/point clubs/timeshare clubs etc do allow this and which don't? What about Marriot? Others?

 

[SueDonJ]

I know RCI prohibits renting out of their inventory, as do most of the exchange companies.

My question is, what exchange companies/point clubs/timeshare clubs etc do allow this and which don't? What about Marriot? Others?

Your question is being moved to a recent related thread that contains rental info for II, RCI, Marriott, etc. Owners of other systems should feel free to add to the discussion.

 

[DeniseM]

I know RCI prohibits renting out of their inventory, as do most of the exchange companies.

My question is, what exchange companies/point clubs/timeshare clubs etc do allow this and which don't? What about Marriot? Others?

This is really too broad of a question to answer - let's go about it this way:

What is your goal - are you trying to buy something for your own use, and an occasional rental, or start a rental business?