Why is nobody talking about...

WilsonFlyer

DIS Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
The fact that we finally have a property being sold in DVC that doesn't have a deeded real estate interest and is instead being sold as rights in some kind of 'trust plan?" Inquiring minds want to know. It's like that whole discussion fell off the face of the earth unless I missed something.
 
There was a lot of discussion about it, but I think the fact that it wasn't even disclosed by DVC/DVD and was found, I believe, but the super sleuths on here who read permits and filings and stuff, there's not much to go on. It's all just speculation at this point what it is, if it's only because CFW are not permanent structures like general real estate, or if it's going to encompass some/all of the leftover unsold points at Riviera, Aulani, CFW, and possibly Poly 2.0. We don't know what we don't know. It's frustrating and doesn't give me confidence in the system. I was a HUGE fan of DVC and definitely preached the good word. I still love the product, as in the resorts and their amenities adjacent to cool theme parks, but the underlying system has really been in flux. IDK. Even the guides seem to be clueless and have no CFW model homes to view, let alone knowledge of the trust structure.
 
We discussed it a lot in the DVC survey thread….i think many of us are at the point that we need to see if they do anything with Poly tower and the trust in order to speculate what this could all mean.

Some are leaning that this was needed to sell the cabins…others, like me, think it is the way forward and we will see them shift from leashold condo to trust use plans for all future resorts.

The other thing to look out for is a shift of some of the VDH undeclared units to go into the trust since the bulk of that resort is still undeclared…at one point, I thought we might see RiV and AUL…but not enough of those left to make it make sense for me.

i also now have to wonder if the pricing of CFW, with lack of strong incentives, is a clue that we are in for a surprise with Poly tower….
 
If I had to guess, it would be to reduce the paperwork. In the current DVC properties, a selection of rooms in the same building are grouped together and subdivided to create the statutory real estate interest. If they did that at CFW, they would have 350 free standing units to subdivide. They were probably after an ownership structure that did not require treating each cabin as a separate ownership interest. It also might make things more complicated if they needed to tear down, renovate, or move a single cabin.
 


I have been reviewing the POS documents filed with the Orange County Comptroller, and Florida law on real property versus personal property and applicable timeshare laws. Exactly what DVD is doing is not totally clear, but there may be an issue as to whether what it has created is a legal "timeshare estate" under Florida Statute §721.05(34), which the POS claims it is.

A. The Cabins Use Plan

Section 721.05(34), which provides the definition of a timeshare estate, is designed to apply to real property timeshares and provides:

“Timeshare estate” means a right to occupy a timeshare unit, coupled with a freehold estate or an estate for years with a future interest in a timeshare property or a specified portion thereof, or coupled with an ownership interest in a condominium unit pursuant to s. 718.103, an ownership interest in a cooperative unit pursuant to s. 719.103, or a direct or indirect beneficial interest in a trust that complies in all respects with s. 721.08(2)(c)4. or s. 721.53(1)(e), provided that the trust does not contain any personal property timeshare interests. A timeshare estate is a parcel of real property under the laws of this state."

Timeshare estate is one of three ways timeshare properties can become a timeshare. There is also a definition for a personal property timeshare interest and for a timeshare license, which applies if what you have is neither a timeshare estate or a personal property timeshare interest. All the prior DVC Resorts were created as real property condominium timeshare estates.

The Cabins Use Plan is created under the trust portion of the timeshare estate definition. Section 721.08(2)(c)4, relates to a single resort (DVC home resort) timeshare, and 721.053(1)(e) for the multisite plan, which statute applies because, under the DVC Resort Agreement, a multisite timeshare exists and members can reserve non-owned resorts at 7-months out using the DVC Reservation Component of the reservation system. Both those statutes set out what a developer must set-up to have a valid trust before allowing timeshares to be sold and used, and both contain the same essential terms. Two key terms are the following:

1. The trustee (the person or company) must be "independent" of the developer (here DVD) and the manager (here DVCM).

2. The "accommodations" or all use rights therein must be transferred to the trust and such transfer must be accepted by the trustee.

"Accommodations" are the timeshare units that are intended to be used for overnight stays. The definition of the term includes items that can be real property and some personal property. "Cabin" is one of the terms that has been included in the definition from early on in the history of the timeshare statutes when only only real property could become a timeshare; personal property was not added until 1991.

The named independent trustee is First American Trust FSB (which happens to also be Marriot's trustee for its timeshare plans). It was added to the program via documents filed at the end of December. Before then, the documents indicated that Palmetto Trust Association, a corporation formed as a trust, may be the trustee, but such would have violated the statute because it is completely controlled by DVD. The "Palmetto Trust" is now controlled by First American as trustee. The Palmetto Trust Association, though still legally a trust, is now the association of the timeshare plan and not the designated independent trustee. The Association is the beneficiary of the trust. It holds the Cabins Use Plan. Actual control of that has been transferred to DVCM.

Purchasers will be purchasing an interest in the Cabins Use Plan, which plan is the designated DVC Resort, and become members of the association by doing so. DVD has transferred to the trust a 50-year land lease it got from the Walt Disney Parks and Resorts Co. That lease includes the land but not the cabins on the land. Under the Cabins Use Plan, purchasers will receive points for making reservations, which a points are attached to the land lease, and will be members covered by the DVC Membership Agreement and DVC Resort Agreement, which control all the resort reservations of the cabins, 11-months out under the membership agreement for home resort, and seven for other resorts under the DVC Reservation Component controlled by BVTC. Basically, the main thing purchasers will be purchasing in the Cabin Use Plan is points to make reservations. Purchasers are supposed to receive a deed showing they have a real property beneficial interest in the trust via the use plan held by the association, which relates to the land lease.

B. Personal Property Issue

DVD still owns the cabins, which have not yet been transferred to the trustee. There appears to be an issue as to whether that transfer can be done. As noted in the timeshare estate definition, the trust cannot have person property timeshare interests. The issue appears to be whether the cabins are in fact "mobile homes" as that term is defined under Florida law. There is actually a Florida Constitutional provision, Fl Const. §VI(1), which provides that mobile homes are to be subject only to licensing (personal property) taxes and not ad valorem (real property) taxes, although the legislature gets to define what a mobile home actually is.

The statutes set out the rules to determine whether a mobile home is real property or personal property if it is permanently attached to land (and permanently means hooked up to water, gas, and electric lines where they are). First, it has to, in fact, be a "mobile home" in that it has a chassis with wheels to which tires are, or can be, attached. A modular or manufactured home that is created and transported to a site without a chassis for wheels, is, when attached to land, deemed to be real property. If it has that chassis, it always remains personal property unless both the owner of the mobile home and the owner of the land are the same person or entity, in which case it becomes real property. See, e.g., See, e.g., Fl. Stat. §§320.01(2)(a), 320.015(1), 193.075(1). And the owner is required to purchase an RP sticker that designates the mobile home as real property. The land ownership required for mobile homes on the land to be deemed real property is a fee interest; having a long term lease in the land is not enough. Zappo v. Gilreath, 790 So.2d 651 (2001).

Since neither DVD nor the trustee have a fee interest in the land, but only a long-term lease, the cabins would likely be personal property if they are actually mobile homes, i.e., the fact they are called "cabins" does not make them real property cabins under the definition of accommodation. And DVD's failure, and inability, to transfer the cabins to the trust could mean there is not a valid timeshare estate.

So are the cabins mobile homes? The fact that DVD has gone through so many complicated steps to somehow create a timeshare estate without actually transferring the cabins to the trust, indicates they could be personal property mobile homes. If they were real property modular homes, DVD could have made them condominiums. The prior cabins that were on the site were mobile homes. There is also a peculiar definition in the Declarations filed of "Resort Property," which is property controlled by the association (and thus DVCM), is mentioned in many places, and is part of the Cabins Use Plan. Resort Property is defined as:

"[T]he lands , leaseholds, easements, and personal property that are subjected to this Declaration from time to time as part of the Resort Property, whether contiguous, including those improvements or portions of improvements that are specifically identified in the survey materials in Exhibit “A” and in any survey materials attached as part of any amendment to this Declaration adding a phase to the Resort Property in accordance with Article 19, and all appurtenant easements and rights intended for use in connection with the Resort Property."

Note how the first line of the definition does not say "and real or personal property" but only "personal property" and then says that includes the "improvements specifically identified in the survey materials in Exhibit 'A'" to the declarations, which has maps of the land with cabins added as the improvements to the land, which are called "Vacation Homes."
 
Last edited:
First, it has to, in fact, be a "mobile home" in that it has a chassis with wheels to which tires are, or can be, attached.
Do the current cabins have a chassis with wheels underneath the cladding? I don’t think we know about the new DVC ones yet.
a mobile home is real property or personal property if it is permanently attached to land (and permanently means hooked up to water, gas, and electric lines where they are
These conditions are currently and I believe will be met.

So if the new DVC cabins do not have chassis/wheels, they can become part of a timeshare estate, or have I misunderstood?
 
Do the current cabins have a chassis with wheels underneath the cladding? I don’t think we know about the new DVC ones yet.

These conditions are currently and I believe will be met.

So if the new DVC cabins do not have chassis/wheels, they can become part of a timeshare estate, or have I misunderstood?

There was a post somewhere that said the guide stated they do not have wheels and are situated on the pad..
 


If the cabins actually have bottoms that have no integral chassis attached for wheels, they would not be "mobile homes" under Florida law, and instead would be deemed prefabricated or modular homes and would be real property. E.g., Fl Sat §320.015(1). If they lack that chassis, and thus are real property, the issue becomes why is DVD doing what it is doing. It can just transfer the cabins to the trust and create a timeshare estate without going through all the maneuvering it has done to apparently do otherwise. It could have defined Resort Property to refer to the cabin improvements on the property as real property. In fact, it could have made the cabins condominiums rather than use the trust method.
 
Last edited:
Shhhhhh, the guides at VDH can’t yet discuss the place. Not California sales approved as of this past weekend. 😂
 
See? I think all that speculation and inuendo in the other threads was just that. Speculation and inuendo.

The trust was set up as a dumping ground for DVD property(ies) likely because of the dissolution of RCID and some legal jargoning because of the cabins and what they are. Do I know this? Nope. Not any more than any of the hundreds of posts in the other threads speculating on 10 other 'may be' things.

The cabins are being sold as a deeded lease. Just as every other property ever has from DVC. Nothing changed. Nothing is going to change. It's a model that has worked and will continue to work.

The Poly Tower will be sold as deeded expiring leases. More likely than not as an extension to Poly Village. Why? Because it already exists and they have so much as said so anyway. Because it's proven and it works.

Will there be some sort of trust points model in the future? Probably. They've put a structure together that could potentially house such a thing along, with future properties put into it. And it's a great model for dumping points that have proven themselves hard to sell and make it a limited-time and not always available product. Genius. It will be from a business standpoint.

500+ posts through numerous threads over multiple threads, of fear, uncertainty and doubt, and nothing changed. That's my point. And crickets about the one thing many agreed would certainly bring the change. And didn't.
 
Last edited:
See? I think all that speculation and inuendo in the other threads was just that. Speculation and inuendo.

The trust was set up as a dumping ground for DVD property(ies) likely because of the dissolution of RCD and some leagal jargoning because of the cabins and what they are. Do I know this? Nope. not any more than any of the hundreds of posts in the other threads speculating on 10 other 'may be' things.

The cabins are being sold as a deeded lease. Just as every other property ever has from DVC. Nothing changed. Nothing is going to change. It's a model that has worked and will continue to work.

The Poly Tower will be sold as deeded expiring leases. More likely than not as an extension to Poly Village. Why? Because it already exists and they have so much as said so anyway. Because it's proven and it works.

Will there be some sort of trust points model in the future? Probably. They've put a structure together that could potentially house such a thing along, with future properties put into it. And it's a great model for dumping points that have proven themselves hard to sell and make it a limited-time and not always available product. Genius. It will be from a business standpoint.

500+ posts through numerous threads over multiple threads, of fear, uncertainty and doubt, and nothing changed. That's my point. And crickets about the one thing many agreed would certainly bring the change. And didn't.


We all knew that the cabins would be sold differently under a trust use plan and guides have been explaining the differences to new buyers, with the obvious spin that it doesn’t change how it can be used right now.

What we don’t have is any other info wi th regards to other projects and most of those threads were about that. What was the purpose for the change to a trust model and will it impact other new resorts or will this be cabins only.

So, we can’t go further in the discussion until DVD makes the next move in terms of second property being added to the trust in some way and sold like CFW or added and sold the same way as previous projects.

Since Poly tower is the next project we won’t have anything more to discuss until , those documents are actually filed and we know how it is going to be sold officially,
 
Last edited:
We all knew that the cabins would be sold differently under a trust use plan and guides have been explaining the differences to new buyers, with the obvious spin that it doesn’t change how it can be used right now.

What we don’t have is any other info wi th regards to other projects and most of those threads were about that. What was the purpose for the change to a trust model and will it impact other new resorts or will this be cabins only.

So, we can’t go further in the discussion until DVD makes the next move in terms of second property being added to the trust in some way and sold like CFW or added and sold the same way as previous projects.

Since Poly tower is the next project we won’t have anything more to discuss until , those documents are actually filed and we know how it is going to be sold officially,

It's still a deeded real estate interest is it not?
 
It's still a deeded real estate interest is it not?

It’s a deed to a right to use plan and not to a specific unit on which you have a fractional ownership.

So, it is not the same thing at all. It currently functions the same way…because it’s only one property…

but they have the ability to add other rooms at a different property to that same trust use plan and someone would then get access to multiple home resorts all at once.

Thst is why we have no idea the implications until the choose to add other resort property to it.
 
Last edited:
The only difference I see in these official documents, that must meet FL TS legal requirements is the addition of the word "interest" for the cabins. The other one was from GCV or whatever it's being acronymed as this week.

Maybe the word 'interest' here has a meaning different from what I know it to mean.

So you folks are saying that there will be no real estate deed for CFW? There sure doesn't appear to be any difference in the wording in the marketing materials. If it were going to be that substantially different, I would think it would be much more explicit in the offering. These types of materials carry strict legal requirements from what I have been told in the past.

1707327771716.png

1707327709632.png
 
but they have the ability to add other rooms at a different property to that same trust use plan and someone would then get access to multiple home resorts all at once.

Thst is why we have no idea the implications until the choose to add other resort property to it.
So this issue could be open-ended…forever.
 
The only difference I see in these official documents, that must meet FL TS legal requirements is the addition of the word "interest" for the cabins. The other one was from GCV or whatever it's being acronymed as this week.

Maybe the word 'interest' here has a meaning different from what I know it to mean.

So you folks are saying that there will be no real estate deed for CFW? There sure doesn't appear to be any difference in the wording in the marketing materials. If it were going to be that substantially different, I would think it would be much more explicit in the offering. These types of materials carry strict legal requirements from what I have been told in the past.

View attachment 832212

View attachment 832210


That is correct in that you don’t own a deeded ownership interest in a cabin. You own an interest in the Cabins Resort use plan that is presented to you in the form of a deed.

So, the wording can be the same because you are getting a deed for what you own as part of your vacation plan , it’s just that it’s not ownership in the actual cabins, but the right to use any property activated under the plan you bought into. That is why they can technically add Rooms at other component sites to the trust, activate them into the Cabins plan and then those become part of what you have access to as a home resort….though, I am not sure we will see that…

And, when people are buying, guides have said what is being purchased and that your ownership is part of a trust association instead of a condo association…but that doesn’t impact the use. It currently will work the exact same way.
 
So this issue could be open-ended…forever.
I think when we get the filed documents for Poly tower, we will have more info on whether this is something they plan to shift to now, if it was just for the cs in, or if maybe its for the future.

if Poly tower has nothing to do with the trust, then I do think it leads to being more for CFW, then a shift in strategy right now.
 
I can't find any deeds recorded yet for the cabins. I would have thought there would have been some by now.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!













facebook twitter
Top