Passenger anger at itinerary change

Shadow was not a happy ship after it was announced that Manilla would be missed on the Singapore To HK cruise which disembarked on Nov 22.

The loss of the 2 day visit to the capital city was the highlight of the itinerary and was was cancelled due to Asia Pacific summit clash.Apparently a no fly/sail zone had been imposed.

The replacement was the former US navel base of Subic bay which was dull and uninteresting even though the locals tried hard to make it welcoming.

Silversea tried to claim that they did not know of the cancellation prior to boarding and announced it on day 2 of the cruise.

Passengers asked for it to put in writing which was refused until many militant passengers insisted.

As a significant change like this would have triggered the option to cancel or change cruise many felt that this deliberately concealed until the ship has sailed.

Whatever the truth this debacle left a bad taste and claims of sharp practise.Some said they would be consulting "my learned friend" on return to home ports.

Having returned to Silversea after a 5 year gap it will certainly be at least that before I return.Things happen at Sea but that's no excuse for not dealing with them in the correct way.

We missed a major port in South Korea on another cruise line in 2012. We only found out about it on the ship. It was because of the added security of a summit. While disappointed we understood and this was something that the cruise line could not have anticipated. The substitute didn't compare in anyway to the original port but again we know that things happen.

We did get notification in writing.

Again, there was disappointment but I saw no evidence of anger. We certainly weren't angered and understood that things happen.

I have not read that these changes happen very often and while earlier notification would have been nice many times this is not known up front and with recent world events sometimes security is raised at the last minute.

I highly doubt that Silversea knew this in time to have allowed passengers to have cancelled the cruise without substantial penalties for the cruise and their airfare.

Life is short. Sometimes people should take a deep breath.

One could have been killed in Paris by being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Just my two cents.

Keith

I would not be "angry" but definitely would be disappointed. The Captain has the authority to cancel or change ports at the last minute if he/she determines that it is necessary. Cancellations are happen on all cruise lines - not only Silversea. With current conditions in the world, those of us fortunate enough to be able to cruise should book cruises with the understanding that things can change at a moment's notice.

Agree with Keith -- take a deep breath and relax.

I'm thinking major disappointed for crew. A much bigger deal for them than passengers. Imagine relatives making the trip to Manila.

I also was thinking how disappointed the crew would have been. So many were probably planning to see family.

Changes in itineraries happen for all sorts of reasons. This sounds like something that was out of Silversea's control, and given recent events around the world, I suspect that the no sail zone was truly put in place after embarkation. I too would be disappointed, but I think being angry is wasting time and energy.

This was apparently a two day visit -- not a quick in and out. Thus, I can understand the special disappointment of passengers. SS has a knack of hiding unpleasant information until it is too late for a passenger to process and act upon it. This was evident in spades in the noisy, dusty, disruptve boutique renovations which had clearly been planned well in advance (workers taking cruises to do the work, etc.) but which often came as surprises to passengers in nearly suites.

I also was thinking how disappointed the crew would have been. So many were probably planning to see family.

 

Changes in itineraries happen for all sorts of reasons. This sounds like something that was out of Silversea's control, and given recent events around the world, I suspect that the no sail zone was truly put in place after embarkation. I too would be disappointed, but I think being angry is wasting time and energy.

Totally agree. Some of the crew will have been looking forward to this visit for most of 2015 and it will have made seeing their families much more difficult.

To the OP, did SS try and arrange any transportation to Manilla, or assist the guests or crew in any way. Were all the original tours still run. Finally who was the HD onboard?

Having been fortunate to visit Manila on two previous SS cruises the lasting memory on both occasions was the emotion on quayside between the fabulous SS staff and their hundreds of friends and relatives who were meeting up for the first time for ages.It was a much more moving than Manila itself and it is happily stored away in the memory bank.Dont be angry just think how the crew would feel at missing something they had been looking forward to for a long time like seeing family they had not seen for ages.

Although both SS and the Phillipines authorities knew the timing of the APEC meeting in Manilla neither knew the timing of the Paris attacks.The measures you are angry about were put in place after that attack.

http://www.manilatimes.net/manila-fortifies-apec-security/229296/

And I agree with the posters above.It inconvienced the crew much more than the guests.The crew would have known about it if this decision was made before sailing so it would be likely you would have seen a lot of sad faces when you boarded and likely some guests would have found out pretty quickly.

At the pier side, a desk full of hundreds of passports or IDs of the crew's relatives and the ship was full of them wondering around and taking photos. My butler and others even took a night drive to Manila and came back the next morning. I think the crew had been well informed in advance of this change of port of call.

I was not particularly disappointed as I have been to Manila several times. But Subic Bay is really an uninteresting place. Silversea cancelled all tours for Manila, and only arranged 3 local tours as replacement which one can do easily by oneself. And Internet was down during the two day stay, and no refund.

Wondering why the Captain did not decide to stay in the previous ports a day or two longer, probably a stay in Subic bay is the cheapest solution.

I'm sorry but I still don't get why anyone would be upset. Disappointed, yes, Upset sorry but why. And that includes the crew.

If the reason the ship could not go to it's original port because of the restrictions that were imposed than that clearly is out of Silveursea's hands. And again I will tell you that when there was a major summit attended by world leaders in 2012 the decision made that we could not dock as originally planned in South Korea came shortly before we were going to arrive. This meant that the ship with support from corporate had to figure out where we would go and had to then scurry around to pull together shore excursions. And yes, the replacement was far less of interest than the original port.

When we choose to cruise we always know we might not make a port due to various reasons ranging from security to mother nature to even other safety or mechanical issues related to the ship. Maybe I am unique but we have had various ports cancelled over the years and some came with very little notice due safety issues (Morocco in 2007 comes to mind, Bangkok, Seychelles, and Seoul South Korea canceled due to a Summit). I can probably add another 20 ports from safety to mechanical to mother nature to the port not having the proper facilities.

Anyway, while cruise lines just like all companies do make mistakes sometimes they have their hands tied which with as little details that have been provided seems like that could be the case here.

And, sometimes some passengers think they are entitled and get very loud and then others do the same.

And why people would take it out on the crew is always amazing to me. If one wants to be upset than when you arrive home get your TA involved if you think the cruise line handled this wrong.

Things happen. Think about those in Paris who have just lost their lives.

If you can cruise on Silversea, life is good. Sometimes, put things in perspective and take a deep breath, say a toast and be happy.

OK, I've probably said more than I should but..........

Keith

I can understand disappointment, not anger.

When you book a cruise you know that no Port is guaranteed..

WE have missed at least one Port on half of our cruises.

If a Port is make or break for you don't cruise it is that simple.

Shadow was not a happy ship after it was announced that Manilla would be missed on the Singapore To HK cruise which disembarked on Nov 22.

The loss of the 2 day visit to the capital city was the highlight of the itinerary and was was cancelled due to Asia Pacific summit clash.Apparently a no fly/sail zone had been imposed.

The replacement was the former US navel base of Subic bay which was dull and uninteresting even though the locals tried hard to make it welcoming.

Silversea tried to claim that they did not know of the cancellation prior to boarding and announced it on day 2 of the cruise.

Passengers asked for it to put in writing which was refused until many militant passengers insisted.

As a significant change like this would have triggered the option to cancel or change cruise many felt that this deliberately concealed until the ship has sailed.

Whatever the truth this debacle left a bad taste and claims of sharp practise.Some said they would be consulting "my learned friend" on return to home ports.

Having returned to Silversea after a 5 year gap it will certainly be at least that before I return.Things happen at Sea but that's no excuse for not dealing with them in the correct way.

In response to your specifics and avoiding debates about terminology and whether the crew's dissapointments is pertinent, the key issue is whether Silversea knew within the cancellation period of this significant change and sought to avoid lower-penalty cancellations by not passing on the information at the earliest moment. If this were the case then certainly in the UK and other EU countries .... and Ozland it would be possible to bring a compensation claim and it is an odds-on gamble of it being successful. In the US the law of contract is more corporation biaised and favoured and provides little consumer protection.

Obviously some think it important - others do not and in my view people shouldn't judge everyone esle on what is personally important to themselves. It is personal choice. Whether one is upset, angry or merely dissapointed is irreleavent. It is whether it purposefully prevented cancellations by withholding relevant change information that might have allowed customers to reconsider.

Personally I feel that we will always get this type of treatment if there is no financial downside or penalty to the line. In places where there is advanced consumer protection the case would hinge on wheter you could show (a) the visit to Manilla was a significant part of the reason the booking was made and that (b) Silversea didn't forewarn at the earliest possible time which would need to be supported with evidence. The refusal to put in writing the ause of shange seems telling. Put simply Silversea will continue to do this type of thing untul customers make it a less attractive option for them.

Jeff

I believe the Whisper left Singapore on November 13.The Paris attacks would have occurred after it left port.The extra security was announced in Manilla on November 14th ie the second day of your cruise.It appears the captain was speaking the truth.

The ship arrived in Subic Bay on November 19th so several days for the crew to notify family and arrange visits to Subic Bay.

Yes, I know. But that wasn't the link that Silversea seem to have clearly made.

If it was a recent imposition due to increased security post Paris rather than an general imposition made earlier, then SS could have told passengers. They had a good motive to do so. If they had explained that then they are blameless. If that were the reason but failed to explain it they are merely clueless. If it were a general security procedure decided pre-Paris they might still therefore be culpable.

Jeff

Yes, I know. But that wasn't the link that Silversea seem to have clearly made.

 

If it was a recent imposition due to increased security post Paris rather than an general imposition made earlier, then SS could have told passengers. They had a good motive to do so. If they had explained that then they are blameless. If that were the reason but failed to explain it they are merely clueless. If it were a general security procedure decided pre-Paris they might still therefore be culpable.

 

 

Jeff

You should read the link in my first post.The announcement of the extra security measures was announced on the 14th ie the second day of the cruise.

And remember as the Whisper was east of Singapore the Paris attacks took place on the morning of November 14th Whisper time.

Please stop guessing the change of port of call has anything to do with the Paris attack. Most major airlines announced end of Oct. that they would cancel flights to/from Manila during the Apec meeting days and so must be the port authority. The Shadow left Singapore Nov. 10th and Silversea must be telling a big lie that they did not know the no sail zone measure before sailing. They had plenty of time to adjust the schedule instead of ending at the most dull port Subic Bay. You should see how happy the Philipina crew were, not a single sad face. They took very good care of themselve, with many relatives visiting the ship bringing on and off big and small luggage exchanging gifts or things needed, having a wonderful party onboard the ship. And of course, room service was a bit lacking, which I could understand.

You should read the link in my first post.The announcement of the extra security measures was announced on the 14th ie the second day of the cruise.

And remember as the Whisper was east of Singapore the Paris attacks took place on the morning of November 14th Whisper time.

Silversea can have you re-write the ship's chronicle. Just a joke.....

I still don't understand any anger on this.

I suspect that Silversea didn't know too far in advance about this.

While these summits are a long time in the making, the security precautions are usually not announced until much closer to the summit.

That was our experience.

Keith

And Internet was down during the two day stay, and no refund.

If you had paid for Internet access as part of a daily rate then I am surprised that you did not get a refund. If it was the 'free' access, then I am not surprised.

If you had paid for Internet access as part of a daily rate then I am surprised that you did not get a refund. If it was the 'free' access, then I am not surprised.

What is "free" access ? I would not mention this if I chose the minute package. I paid the unlimited usage daily rate for the whole cruise.

I asked the CD who said I could talk with reception, who said they will arrange and noted down my cabin number, and another woman officer said not approved by head office yet and that was the end of it.

By the way, although unlimited, you need to log in every few minutes, very inconvenient and annoying.

I still don't understand any anger on this.

 

I suspect that Silversea didn't know too far in advance about this.

 

While these summits are a long time in the making, the security precautions are usually not announced until much closer to the summit.

 

That was our experience.

 

Keith

And they change.

If you had paid for Internet access as part of a daily rate then I am surprised that you did not get a refund. If it was the 'free' access, then I am not surprised.

This complaint I agree with.On the Explorer cruise Nassau to Colon we had our internet jammed for 2 days in Santiago De Cuba.We were paying the daily rate and didn't get a refund either.

On the other hand it is not such a great amount that it was not worth a fuss but SS shouldn't antagonise passengers over those small amounts and would have gained kudos had they refunded the internet charges.

This complaint I agree with.On the Explorer cruise Nassau to Colon we had our internet jammed for 2 days in Santiago De Cuba.We were paying the daily rate and didn't get a refund either.

On the other hand it is not such a great amount that it was not worth a fuss but SS shouldn't antagonise passengers over those small amounts and would have gained kudos had they refunded the internet charges.

We agree completely.

What is "free" access ? I would not mention this if I chose the minute package. I paid the unlimited usage daily rate for the whole cruise.

I asked the CD who said I could talk with reception, who said they will arrange and noted down my cabin number, and another woman officer said not approved by head office yet and that was the end of it.

 

By the way, although unlimited, you need to log in every few minutes, very inconvenient and annoying.

I am surprised, on both Whisper voyages this year there was at least one day of internet outage and a polite request to the Guest Relations Manager produced a refund for the appropriate period.

I agree you have every right to be annoyed with your treatment.