Vistana rep refused to add a guest name for 10/5 on SBR deeded week, sent me a form to fill out.

[SueDonJ]

As an Owner you are allowed to rent your VOI (timeshare) at least for WKORV/N, WKV, WPORV and WSJ, but NOT for commercial purposes. This is what their CCRs state. Otherwise, they would state that no renting is allowed (or more likely - renting not allowed for commercial or non-commercial purposes...)
Also, a commercial business is one that files taxes as such with the IRS as a Business (or supposed to) and deal with the associated tax implications.
A normal owner renting their timeshare does not file as a business, but is required to capture the gain on their individual tax filing (forgot which form) - a Tugger has posted info on this.

If MVC restricts you because they are claiming commercial renting, and a person were to fight them, I would imagine MVC would ask for Legal Discovery that includes tax documentations.

btw - whatever a salesperson tells you is not binding unless in contract (that includes CCRs). I was also told I could rent by sales more than once, but don't care because it was obvious to me that non-commercial renting is allowed by the CCRs at the time.

On the other note - if you want an instruction manual for an appliance - they are online. I've used this method more than once.

Probably if it got that far a lawyer would try to argue that an owner isn't running a "commercial business" unless taxes are filed and other similar business-related actions are provable. Of course that's a possibility. But if the owner hasn't dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's, my money would still be on Marriott prevailing because the related language in the governing docs allows them to infer a conclusion without such documentation: i.e. "... that the Association or the Declarant, in their reasonable discretion, could conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or practice ..."

Aside from that, are we so naive as to think that all owners who rent out their timeshares are above-board with filing the proper notices and tax forms? I don't think that's the case at all, meaning that an owner who's engaged in the rental market to the extent that Marriott challenges it might not be in the position where s/he wants to invite any legal scrutiny of the quasi-business.

Our adventure with that washer/dryer was so long ago that it never occurred to me to look online, but these days it's the first place I look whenever anything isn't working.

 

[bnoble]

a lawyer would try to argue that an owner isn't running a "commercial business" unless taxes are filed

"We broke the law and didn't file taxes on taxable earnings" is probably not a winning strategy.

 

[SueDonJ]

"We broke the law and didn't file taxes on taxable earnings" is probably not a winning strategy.

Right? If your pattern of rentals invites Marriott's scrutiny, you're really damned if you do/damned if you don't.

Owner: "My business is registered; I've filed all the required forms and taxes with authorities."
Marriott: "Exactly. You've done our work for us; we're shutting you down."

-or-

Owner: "I'm not running a business. The forms and tax filings for a registered business don't exist because I never did them."
Marriott: "That doesn't matter, we rightly have discretion to call your enterprise a business without them. But let's ask the IRS to take a look just to be sure."

When I talked to Marriott about this form and the change to Club Points transfer-in rules (which now allow a 20,000 max per year,) one of the people I talked with mentioned an Owner who churned thousands of transferred points through his/her account, using all of them to book at the earliest reservation windows multiples of the highest-demand intervals at the highest-demand resort, and the pattern had been going on for years. They inferred that that's the kind of rental activity in their sights, not owners who rightly rent out their few Weeks. We're all paying for the rental business' wrongs, though, because things like this form are a mechanism that Marriott's chosen to implement in their efforts to catch them.

 

[dioxide45]

As an Owner you are allowed to rent your VOI (timeshare) at least for WKORV/N, WKV, WPORV and WSJ, but NOT for commercial purposes. This is what their CCRs state. Otherwise, they would state that no renting is allowed (or more likely - renting not allowed for commercial or non-commercial purposes...)
Also, a commercial business is one that files taxes as such with the IRS as a Business (or supposed to) and deal with the associated tax implications.
A normal owner renting their timeshare does not file as a business, but is required to capture the gain on their individual tax filing (forgot which form) - a Tugger has posted info on this.

If MVC restricts you because they are claiming commercial renting, and a person were to fight them, I would imagine MVC would ask for Legal Discovery that includes tax documentations.

btw - whatever a salesperson tells you is not binding unless in contract (that includes CCRs). I was also told I could rent by sales more than once, but don't care because it was obvious to me that non-commercial renting is allowed by the CCRs at the time.

On the other note - if you want an instruction manual for an appliance - they are online. I've used this method more than once.

I thought the revenue was claimed on Schedule E regardless. I didn't think that it would become Schedule C income because it crosses some "commercial activity" line.

 

[clifffaith]

I have some experience with those combination washer-dryers, and my opinion is that they fit the old expression, jack of all trades and master of none. Yes, they wash, and yes, they dry, but they don’t do either very well, and they do them sloooooooowwwllllyyyyyy.

Maybe somebody has developed an all-in-one machine that can prove me wrong, but I haven’t yet seen it.

We finally unplugged one to get our clothes out so we could pack. I think it was at four hours and counting. Try explaining your concerns when you don’t speak French and the front desk clerk doesn’t speak English!

 

[rickandcindy23]

This "pattern of rental activity" is why I am selling my Sheraton Broadway Plantation weeks, as many as I can get sold, closing and transfer fees included. I just had an inquiry this morning. First, it's stressful and basically a gamble to get them rented; Second, the fees keep going up and the profit gets less each year; Third, I feel that it's just a hassle I don't need in my life for very little profit.

Our daughter always made the lion's share, and we were always just grateful to have her help with all of it. She was basically asking more for the weeks than people wanted to pay, so not much rented for 2024.

I may just deed them back after offering them free on TUG at some point. I might like to keep some of the lockoffs, but not many.

 

[sjlola]

It's true that every owner has the ability to try to book at there exact second the reservation window opens and hopefully secure even the most difficult-to-get dates, but "normal" owners aren't always that proactive or experienced at competing for the most popular weeks. The commercial renter IS and will probably always get what they want. I can imagine that enough commercial owners might make it nearly impossible for "normal" owners to reserve certain popular dates.

Good point. we were at the GM's meeting in January along with senior staff for owners and there were quite a few very long-time owners who were convinced there was shenanigans going on as they could 'never get a good villa assignment and sometimes desired villas are not even available' in over 20 years despite making the reservation a year in advance. Turns out they were waiting to call when Owner Services opens at 9 am Orlando time and at that point completely missed the boat for a good time stamp for whale season; completely unaware of the online dashboard.

 

[daviator]

Unfortunately, having the instruction manual doesn't make those washer/dryer combos work any better, they are terrible. At least might it drive the world back to realizing that great big yellow ball in the sky is great at drying things and is free

Are you suggesting that they install clothelines on the balconies? Not holding my breath for that!

I agree that those combo units are pretty worthless. Better than a washboard in the stream, but just barely.

 

[daviator]

When I talked to Marriott about this form and the change to Club Points transfer-in rules (which now allow a 20,000 max per year,) one of the people I talked with mentioned an Owner who churned thousands of transferred points through his/her account, using all of them to book at the earliest reservation windows multiples of the highest-demand intervals at the highest-demand resort, and the pattern had been going on for years. They inferred that that's the kind of rental activity in their sights, not owners who rightly rent out their few Weeks. We're all paying for the rental business' wrongs, though, because things like this form are a mechanism that Marriott's chosen to implement in their efforts to catch them.

The kind of owner you describe is exactly the type of owner I'm happy to see MVC crack down on. I don't think that describes anyone (that I know of) who regularly participates here. But I know that commercial owners like that are out there.

 

[Hindsite]

I don't think that describes anyone (that I know of) who regularly participates here. But I know that commercial owners like that are out there.

Oh they pop out of the woodwork now and then. When the limit of 20k club points per year was introduced there were a couple of posters warning about the dire impact on elderly vulnerable fractional owners who use their broker services to rent out their gazillions of club points. There's also similar on FB pages.
There's also a routine poster on another forum who clearly does this with other brands.
Interesting to note over on the GR thread, that nearly 50% of their eligible GR owners elect for club points. If you've got enough $$ GR is a route to elected club points at lower MF than Trust points.

 

[wmgjr]

Second, it is the "Association" (i.e the HOA) that has the discretion to decide whether a rental pattern constitutes a commercial activity -- not the manager (i.e. Marriott). I won't speculate what due process issues may exist, but an arbitrary decision by the manager doesn't pass muster.

I see both sides of the issue, but the CC&R's don't support what Marriott is doing.

Youd have to see the management agreement. Does the management contract give rise to agency/representation? This could give the manager the same discretion as the HOA.

 

[wmgjr]

To be fair, I don't think Marriott/Westin/Sheraton/Hyatt are the slightest bit concerned about whether or not Redweek survives. That's not their business, both literally and figuratively. As long as they get their MFs they don't care that nobody is renting through Redweek, or Koala or anywhere else for that matter.

They have plenty reason to care especially the managers

 

[wmgjr]

In every single one of these conversations, I see a lot of people who are convinced they know what "commercial activity" is. I am pretty sure none of them are precisely correct.

Exactly bc commercial rental as defined is whatever the board or agent decides.

Too many owners renting their week completes with allocated, unsold or "treasury weeks" that may be rented by the manager which benefits the manager and the associated hotel chain

Airbnb and the democratizing of vacation rental scale is causing all of the companies to react.

 

[wmgjr]

That wasn't the point. The point was that the sheer number of rentals is astounding. I don't think Marriott cares one bit about Redweek.

I personally wouldn't mind seeing RW fail after the takeover of the company by big business just a few years ago.

Case in point: I have some reservations for rent without verify/ protect, and renters are very hesitant to rent without it. These renters don't realize what expense is involved in the verify/ protect process.

It's become a big problem for my least-expensive rentals of Peacock Suites. Most people will not rent anything from me without verify/ protect, even at my cost. I am pretty surprised, as this is new. I tell them to go to Koala, and they complain about the asking price. I tell them it would be more with Redweek full service. Never hear from them again.

Well you've said redweek inventory isn't renting (quite a bit in many different threads) So unrented or unsold units that never get a guest cert attached would not trigger commercial flags. It's literally only successful rentals with a guest certificate I assume that create the funnel for examination of the account. No?

And I doubt renters care about your cost to post an ad. They are looking for the deal that best serves them. I'd suggest continuing to use a platform that highlights the dichotomy of different rental types is flawed if you're not going to take the approach that gets highlighted. Without redweek taking any accountability for the ad, the rise of scammers has likely harmed what was previously a viable option

 

[daviator]

Well you've said redweek inventory isn't renting (quite a bit in many different threads) So unrented or unsold units that never get a guest cert attached would not trigger commercial flags. It's literally only successful rentals with a guest certificate I assume that create the funnel for examination of the account. No?

“Guest Certificate” implies you are talking about II exchanges, which you are never allowed to turn around and rent out to someone else. Or are you just talking about the “guest of owner form” that gets filled out online to change the name on normal weeks or Club Poinfs reservation?

 

[wmgjr]

“Guest Certificate” implies you are talking about II exchanges, which you are never allowed to turn around and rent out to someone else. Or are you just talking about the “guest of owner form” that gets filled out online to change the name on normal weeks or Club Poinfs reservation?

More the latter.

My intention was any form of procedures to notify a resort that someone other than the owner would be using the unit. With a rental I assume some form of guest certificate is required whatever each brand calls it and procedures they create to implement it

 

[sponger76]

They have plenty reason to care especially the managers

Such as? I highly suspect that absolutely nothing about Redweek shows up on the manager's performance metrics.

 

[wmgjr]

Such as?
@sponger76
See post 113

 

[LeslieDet]

Exactly bc commercial rental as defined is whatever the board or agent decides.

Too many owners renting their week completes with allocated, unsold or "treasury weeks" that may be rented by the manager which benefits the manager and the associated hotel chain

Airbnb and the democratizing of vacation rental scale is causing all of the companies to react.

If the manager is renting out units, the source of the unit could be an owner who has requested the manager rent the unit for them. It could be a HOA owned unit (obtained as a result of foreclosure for non payment of maintenance fees). It could be unsold inventory technically owned by the developer. The “associated hotel chain” is not benefiting from those rentals. But if the owner opted for BonVoy points in lieu of occupancy, then that unit does indeed fall under the control of Marriott Inc, and Marriott Inc can rent that unit for cash or offer it for BonVoy point redemption. Nothing is wrong with any of those scenarios. That’s not anything considered “commercial activity” by the deeded week owner. And, despite your claim, the term won’t be defined arbitrarily. It isn’t a whim by management.

 

[sponger76]

Such as?
@sponger76
See post 113

Not convinced that Redweek in and of itself is something they are all that concerned about. Rentals are a very small part of their revenue; the vast majority of their money comes in from the sale of timeshares and the fees they earn off of managing the resorts (their percentage of the MFs). But the point I was making in my original response was really that the timeshare companies aren't interested in actually helping Redweek stay in business. Perhaps I could have worded it better. Your post 113 would support that idea.

 

[DavidnRobin]

Probably if it got that far a lawyer would try to argue that an owner isn't running a "commercial business" unless taxes are filed and other similar business-related actions are provable. Of course that's a possibility. But if the owner hasn't dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's, my money would still be on Marriott prevailing because the related language in the governing docs allows them to infer a conclusion without such documentation: i.e. "... that the Association or the Declarant, in their reasonable discretion, could conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or practice ..."

Aside from that, are we so naive as to think that all owners who rent out their timeshares are above-board with filing the proper notices and tax forms? I don't think that's the case at all, meaning that an owner who's engaged in the rental market to the extent that Marriott challenges it might not be in the position where s/he wants to invite any legal scrutiny of the quasi-business.

Our adventure with that washer/dryer was so long ago that it never occurred to me to look online, but these days it's the first place I look whenever anything isn't working.

My point stands - Commercial activity is a Business activity. Otherwise, No renting allowed could be easily stated broadly in the CCRs.
I rent and they would have a tough time proving this is a commercial activity and I could easily prove I do not.
There are certainly lots of people renting out SOs and multiple VOIs based on what I've seen on TUG and FaceBook and RedWeek.
If someone who chooses not to file properly with the IRS is on them.
I am not inclined to think that everything MVC/Vistana is nefererous. I do believe MVC has the right to and should come after renting of non-HomeResort SOs and VOIs as a Business. Are they going to come after someone renting out random weeks of their Ownership? Not in my opinion.

 

[wmgjr]

If the manager is renting out units, the source of the unit could be an owner who has requested the manager rent the unit for them. It could be a HOA owned unit (obtained as a result of foreclosure for non payment of maintenance fees). It could be unsold inventory technically owned by the developer. The “associated hotel chain” is not benefiting from those rentals. But if the owner opted for BonVoy points in lieu of occupancy, then that unit does indeed fall under the control of Marriott Inc, and Marriott Inc can rent that unit for cash or offer it for BonVoy point redemption. Nothing is wrong with any of those scenarios. That’s not anything considered “commercial activity” by the deeded week owner. And, despite your claim, the term won’t be defined arbitrarily. It isn’t a whim by management.

You totally misunderstood my thread.

Slow down
Read
Interpret
Repeat

 

[wmgjr]

Not convinced that Redweek in and of itself is something they are all that concerned about. Rentals are a very small part of their revenue; the vast majority of their money comes in from the sale of timeshares and the fees they earn off of managing the resorts (their percentage of the MFs). But the point I was making in my original response was really that the timeshare companies aren't interested in actually helping Redweek stay in business. Perhaps I could have worded it better. Your post 113 would support that idea.

Exactly. I don't believe nor did I ever say the management companies care about redweek or any other rental aggregate being viable.

What they care about is their own success.
Competition threatens that regardless which platform an owner chooses to advertise.

They have the ability to quash competition.
Why would they not do it?

If I really wanted to make a stretch of an argument, the HOA could hold them liable if they don't limit rentals from owners, because the HOA relies on them to rent deeds that are in foreclosure and unsold inventory to balance the maintenance fee budget. You could argue it's part of their fiduciary responsibility. On top of the fact that there's a commercial limitation in the actual HOA documents.

But my main point being, management has many factors in their side to limit rentals and competition to their own business they will certainly do it if it becomes a threat

 

[timsi]

I don't know specifically about SBR or any other Vistana resorts, but many resort CC&Rs do have commercial activity restrictions. Marriott has them in most of their resort CC&R documents. No different than a homeowner's HOA limiting the number of rentals in a community or other limitations or restrictions on rental properties.

At Lagunamar, there are no explicit restrictions preventing members from frequently renting their units to other guests for vacation purposes, as long as the units remain used as vacation accommodations. The relevant section starts with:

"Personal use restriction. Each Vacation Unit shall be occupied only as vacation accommodations."

Since "Each Vacation Unit shall be occupied only as vacation accommodations, clearly "Commercial purposes" later in the same paragraph refers to banning things like setting up a business at the resort (say a barber shop), not to renting for vacation stays.
If the frequency of renting were a significant issue, the bylaws would have provided a definition or specific limits on how frequently a unit can be rented. The absence of such detail further tells us that the primary concern is not the frequency of rentals but rather maintaining the units' use as vacation accommodations and preventing them from being used for non-vacation commercial activities, like running a business.
This means that renting units is allowed as long as they are still used for vacation purposes, and frequency is not important.

 

[timsi]

Let me take this a step further. Even if I were mistaken and "commercial activity" applies to rentals, not just vacation use, the bylaws clearly state that enforcement of this rule falls under the association's responsibility. Is there any evidence that ANY association has formally interpreted this rule and delegated enforcement authority to the property manager? If not, how can the manager have any say in this matter when it falls outside their prerogatives?