Once again, that makes no sense to me. I don’t see how Disney tried to force anyone to own a time share for an extra 15 years. They gave them an OPTION to extend if for an additional buy-in or let it expire with no change to how they would have previously used it. The language is hostile towards Disney and completely gives the owners a pass.
I also don’t think it’s bullying to ask people to sign a document that reaffirms that their deed ends when they originally agreed that it was supposed to end. I’m sure that some did feel Disney got aggressive after they refused to sign. Not ideal.
But to state that Disney made some material change that harmed current OKW owners in any way or impact how they could use the points or the dues they would pay prior to 2042 does not ring true to me at all.
That’s not what happened. They sent people information that said the extension happened and the cost was $25/pt, with it being $15/pt if they did it by a certain time.
The reports were that the papers said that anyone who did not want to pay, did have the option to opt out of the charge by signing the quit claim deed. It required people to go to notary signing their right to the extension back to Disney. It was not signing something confirming they recognized their original terms…
At the time, people speculated they did it the way they did because they couldn’t find a way to make it a true special assessment. The POS defines when they can do that.
People were told if they didn’t pay or sign by a certain day, their accounts would be locked and charged for the extension. Disney had to back off. So, DVD was indeed heavy handed with owners during this time.
This was not offered as a special promotion It was we did this and this is what it costs, but if you don’t want to pay it, then you can opt out of it.
If it was truly a choice, then owners would not have to do anything. They would simply have been allowed to say no.
Regardless, the contract was changed without owners approval and that is why DVD had to agree, because a complaint was filed, that they would subsidize the capital reserves for any owner who did not plan to own beyond 2042. Those have not started yet and DVC never would say when it would.
So, IMO, it is on DVD and not owners who didn’t want to do either. If what others believe ends up true, and the quit claim deed isn’t actually required for owners to have contracts end in 2042 without having paid, then DVD had no reason not to do it for other resorts.
Plus, there is nothing that prevented DVD to continue to offer the option to buy with the price going up as time went on. They could offer any OKW owner a chance today if they wanted to…there has to be a reason they don’t and instead make signing the quit claim part of the sale process.
We obviously wont agree because I do not think that it’s okay for DVD to materially change the POS, whenever they feel like it, regardless of the reason. And that is what they did.
Good discussion but we probably should either start a new one or get back to rejected offers!