Luftner / Luetner River Cruises - Buyer Beware

We recently were supposed cruise the Danube from Passau, Germanyto Budapest, Hungary. It was a tour organized by Santana Adventures that specializes in tandem bicycle tours. The night before we were supposed to depart from Prague, we were informed that the boat had broken one of it's two motors and was stuck in Vienna. They had no spare boats available and thus we would be spending 5 days in Vienna on the boat before being bussed to Budapest by our tour operator, Santana Adventures, for the last two days. Needless to say, this is not the tour we signed up for. To pour salt on the wound, Luftner refused to compensate the tour operater and thus us, invoking a force majeur claus in their contract with Santana Adventures. First I hold Santana Adventures responsible for not fully understanding the contract before hand. But I also find it unconscionable that Luftner would keep our monies when they basically could not fulfill their contract for transporting us from Passau to Budapest. While Santana Adventures is trying to make right by their customers by offering discounts on future trips, it is hard for them to do as much as they would like without cooperation from Luftner. There are 150 unhappy passenger / patrons of Luftner as a result. So buyer beware to anyone considering a Luftner cruise.

Considering this was a tandem bicycle tour, did Luetner do anything at all to plan for that with the boat stuck? It seems to me it would not be that hard for you all to be bussed and the bikes bussed along the river so you could ride your course each day and they could pick you and the bikes up by bus afterwards. Or was Luetner's idea you would just ride around on a bus to the various ports instead and forego the bicycle tour altogether?

Well to completely understand our unhappiness you need to understand that Santana Adventures usually schedules a completely full day with many attractions. And unlike normal cruising were you would pull into a port, ride around and return to that port, this was designed as a moving feast. You could ride the morning, rejoin the boat at it's next port, and take an afternoon nap or you could go for a ride all day long, to be picked up at some point down the river. So when the ship was stuck, the following got struck from the agenda:

A stop at Pilsn in Czech Republic on your way from Prague.

Wine tour at Vilshofen.

A ride through the Schlogen (supposed to be spectacular)

A stop at Malthausen

The Danube Bend

Afternoon Naps

(Those are the ones I could remember. There was more but the original itinerary is now gone).

So now we are stuck in Vienna which to go anywhere takes almost an hour to just get of Vienna, particularly headed south. And the logistics of dealing with 75 tandems requires loading and unloading them from the truck. So rides now had about a 4 hour overhead built in unless you wanted to ride just from the boat which we did the first two days. (So naps were sacrificed).

Since Santana now had to draw up a whole new itinerary on the spot, it suffered from no pre-cruise shakedown so there were some backtracking from misleading route sheets (actually a pink line on a Garmin) and rushing to see most attractions.

There were non bicyclists (former tandem partners that could no longer ride in particular) that were now stuck riding a bus if they wanted to see something instead of simply enjoying the cruise and getting off for some site seeing when they felt like it.

Now Santana Adventures did a yeoman's job of finding buses (three required) at the last minute to try to still get us to some of the rides and attractions. They were not helped in any regard with this acquisition (as I understand) by Luftner. They had to pay through the nose for the last minute charters.

While stuck in Vienna, more often that not we had another Luftner boat tied up to us so half the ship could not see anything and the other half saw just the bank.

This simply was not the relaxed, pick what you want to do, see sites not normally seen by other cruise ships, trip we had envisioned.

The insensitivity of Luftner to all these detractions to the cruise just astounds me.

I understand your outrage -- this is unconscionable. Did you already go on this tour? This is a case where 'cancel for any reason' insurance would really have paid off.

So sorry that this has severely affected your holiday but unfortunately I don't think it would have been different for any other river cruise company who charters out their vessels.

FM clauses usually state that seller is not liable for consequential damages due to the seller's non performance due to the FM event. Also, quite often the penalty paid by the seller to the buyer for non performance is usually capped at the $ value of the service/good involved. The FM clause (and definitions of FM events) is usually part of the seller's GTs&Cs which they will not change for a particular buyer (Santana) unless it is a very important customer.

So at best, Santana would have a contingency plan but it is unlikely in peak season that they will be able to do more than what they have already done with respect to alternative arrangements and future discounts.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

This is a case where 'cancel for any reason' insurance would really have paid off.

Don't most of those have a 48 hour before departure limit?

Often no help when the problem is not disclosed to the traveler until the day of or the day before...

So sorry that this has severely affected your holiday but unfortunately I don't think it would have been different for any other river cruise company who charters out their vessels.

FM clauses usually state that seller is not liable for consequential damages due to the seller's non performance due to the FM event. Also, quite often the penalty paid by the seller to the buyer for non performance is usually capped at the $ value of the service/good involved. The FM clause (and definitions of FM events) is usually part of the seller's GTs&Cs which they will not change for a particular buyer (Santana) unless it is a very important customer.

So at best, Santana would have a contingency plan but it is unlikely in peak season that they will be able to do more than what they have already done with respect to alternative arrangements and future discounts.

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

I agree. Most lines do not have boats sitting around just in case of situations like this. It is the chartering company's responsibility to offer an alternative program, same as it would be the responsibility of the cruise line if they were dealing with water level issues that affected the sailing, or similar.

So sorry that this has severely affected your holiday but unfortunately I don't think it would have been different for any other river cruise company who charters out their vessels.

FM clauses usually state that seller is not liable for consequential damages due to the seller's non performance due to the FM event. Also, quite often the penalty paid by the seller to the buyer for non performance is usually capped at the $ value of the service/good involved. The FM clause (and definitions of FM events) is usually part of the seller's GTs&Cs which they will not change for a particular buyer (Santana) unless it is a very important customer.

So at best, Santana would have a contingency plan but it is unlikely in peak season that they will be able to do more than what they have already done with respect to alternative arrangements and future discounts.

I understand that a cruise ship cannot be held responsible for high / low water or broken engines but to offer NO compensation is not acceptable. That's like showing up at the aiport to find your plane has been rendered inoperable by lightening and the airline refusing to rebook you because an act of god took the plane out of service.

We contracted to be shiiped from Passau to Budapest. Luftner failed to fulfill that contract.

I understand your outrage -- this is unconscionable. Did you already go on this tour? This is a case where 'cancel for any reason' insurance would really have paid off.

CFAR insurance would have been no help. As the other poster stated, there is a set time before you start your travel, in which you must cancel.

And, most policies I've seen refund only 50% of what you've paid (though some will pay more, but none reimburse 100%).

I understand that a cruise ship cannot be held responsible for high / low water or broken engines but to offer NO compensation is not acceptable. That's like showing up at the aiport to find your plane has been rendered inoperable by lightening and the airline refusing to rebook you because an act of god took the plane out of service.

 

 

 

We contracted to be shiiped from Passau to Budapest. Luftner failed to fulfill that contract.

Santana is the contractual party with Luftner (not you) on an agreed set of terms (whole vessel, FM clause, etc).

Likewise, your contract is with Santana on a different set of terms (one room, tandem bikes, different clauses, etc)

By packaging different items from different suppliers/contracts to sell to you, Santana has taken on the risk for any difference in the terms in their contracts with suppliers and yourself.

Assuming Luftner is applying the FM clause correctly, they are not in breach of their contract with Santana.

Your recourse is to Santana not Luftner. And Santana seems to be trying its best under this situation.

Sent from my iPad using Forums

We contracted to be shiiped from Passau to Budapest. Luftner failed to fulfill that contract.

How was the cruise sold to you?

Was it a 'Santana Adventures' cruise, or a Luftner cruise arranged by Santana Adventures?

There is the potential added complexity of disclosed or undisclosed agency in all this, but if it was just a 'Santana Adventures' cruise, then I'm afraid that anything Santana says about their problems with Luftner is just a smoke screen to try and gain sympathy from you for the service and experience you are receiving.

To degree to which Santana failed to protect themselves from the risks of Force Majeure, is a matter purely for Santana and is not an excuse they can use when failing to deliver what you paid for.

From the sound of things the degree to which this trip is varying from the one you purchased would seem to be immense, and to be honest I would probably have insisted on a full refund the moment the news about the ship became known. The longer Santana can keep you onboard and accepting the product they are offering, the less you will be able to reasonably claim back at the end of this experience...

Santana Adventures is more of a mom and pop enterprise and consequently they do not have large resources (read cash) at their disposal. The refusal of Luftner to offer any form of compensation for a trip completely prepaid by Santana and us is the issue here. While I hold Santana ultimately responsible for this, the fact that Luftner will not budge in their position is flabbergasting.

While I hold Santana ultimately responsible for this, the fact that Luftner will not budge in their position is flabbergasting.

If Luftner are adhering to the terms of their contract with Santana then why would they feel any need to 'budge'.

Santana should be carrying insurance sufficient to cover their risks and should have negotiated their contract with Luftner accordingly.

Being a small company just means Santana probably need more insurance since they don't have the resources to handle problems, it doesn't absolve them of the need to deliver what they sold...

How was the cruise sold to you?

 

Was it a 'Santana Adventures' cruise, or a Luftner cruise arranged by Santana Adventures?

There is the potential added complexity of disclosed or undisclosed agency in all this, but if it was just a 'Santana Adventures' cruise, then I'm afraid that anything Santana says about their problems with Luftner is just a smoke screen to try and gain sympathy from you for the service and experience you are receiving.

To degree to which Santana failed to protect themselves from the risks of Force Majeure, is a matter purely for Santana and is not an excuse they can use when failing to deliver what you paid for.

From the sound of things the degree to which this trip is varying from the one you purchased would seem to be immense, and to be honest I would probably have insisted on a full refund the moment the news about the ship became known. The longer Santana can keep you onboard and accepting the product they are offering, the less you will be able to reasonably claim back at the end of this experience...

It was a Santana Adventures arranged trip.

And I should add that Santana is trying to do the right thing by offering a discount on future trips. And they did offer full refunds to anyone who wanted to cancel by the next morning. However dealing with tandems, particularly their transportation, is not easy so we just hoped for the best and continued with the trip.

And there is a difference between being legally correct and doing the right thing for customer. I doubt Santana will book any future travel with Luftner and I know we will NEVER book anything with them.

And there is a difference between being legally correct and doing the right thing for customer. I doubt Santana will book any future travel with Luftner and I know we will NEVER book anything with them.

I'm glad to hear that Santana offered a full refund at the start of all this.

Right now you need to focus on making the best of where you are, so I hope you manage to have some fun along the way.

...if Santana are dumping all the blame on Luftner rather than owning the problem and dealing with it. I imagine that Luftner may well not want to take future bookings from Santana either...

Of course, if Luftner are claiming FM for something that is actually just a lack of routine maintenance that will give Sanatana something to work with in the aftermath.

It may seem like I'm being harsh with Sanatana, but the reality is, if you are going to be in this business you have to be robust enough to own the problems and keep your customers happy, not expose the failings of your own business arrangements and use them as excuses as seems to be the case here...

CFAR insurance would have been no help. As the other poster stated, there is a set time before you start your travel, in which you must cancel.

And, most policies I've seen refund only 50% of what you've paid (though some will pay more, but none reimburse 100%).

You need a better insurance agent. There are indeed 100% CFAR coverage policies available: "If you do need to cancel, you will be reimbursed 100%"

https://www.insuremytrip.com/travel-insurance-plans-coverages/trip-cancellation-vs-cancel-for-any-reason/

If Luftner are adhering to the terms of their contract with Santana then why would they feel any need to 'budge'.

 

Santana should be carrying insurance sufficient to cover their risks and should have negotiated their contract with Luftner accordingly.

 

Being a small company just means Santana probably need more insurance since they don't have the resources to handle problems, it doesn't absolve them of the need to deliver what they sold...

I agree and, without being privy to the exact contract terms, would not be blaming the cruise line when it was a package sold by Santana. It is they who sold to YOU and not the cruise line. IMO it is tacky for Santana to openly lay the blame on Luftner.

You need a better insurance agent. There are indeed 100% CFAR coverage policies available: "If you do need to cancel, you will be reimbursed 100%"

... but are there any without this part though... ?

Cancellation with the travel supplier must occur 48 or 72 hours before departure date, depending on the plan

Mine only requires 24 hrs notice, and I get all but what I paid for the insurance back. It won't cover my air, as I am doing that on my own.

How much are you paying for 100% cancel for any reason coverage? As someone in the insurance industry (life insurance) this isn't an insurable risk.

I understand that a cruise ship cannot be held responsible for high / low water or broken engines but to offer NO compensation is not acceptable. That's like showing up at the aiport to find your plane has been rendered inoperable by lightening and the airline refusing to rebook you because an act of god took the plane out of service.

 

We contracted to be shiiped from Passau to Budapest. Luftner failed to fulfill that contract.

Actually they can be held responsible for broken engines. Low water no, but mechanical failures yes. Mechanical failures are usually not interpreted by the courts under force majeure. It was not an act of god, it was not a terrorist event, a war or some other activity outside of control of the company. It was a mechanical breakdown of an engine that was in the companies control and was being maintained by the company.

You did not contract with Luftner, you contracted with Santana Adventures. They should be compensating you. The fact that they are passing the buck to Luftner and saying that they cannot compensate you because Luftner won't compensate them is a cop out. Santana Adventure made the decision to use Luftner and agreed to the contract with them. The losses due to the problems based upon their decision of contractors in their responsibility.

Sounds like Santana Adventures is doing a good job of PR in passing the buck.

What does your agreement with Santana Adventures say.

Actually they can be held responsible for broken engines. Low water no, but mechanical failures yes. Mechanical failures are usually not interpreted by the courts under force majeure. It was not an act of god, it was not a terrorist event, a war or some other activity outside of control of the company. It was a mechanical breakdown of an engine that was in the companies control and was being maintained by the company.

I don't think we have anything like enough information to make that determination, but I agree that as long as the contract was with Santana as provider and not as a disclosed agent, it doesn't really matter.

I just took a quick look at the Santana Adventures website, doesn't look like they have left themselves any room to pass the buck to their charter provider, even though that seems to be what they are trying to do...

I do now understand the somewhat defensive attitude of the passengers towards Santana though, as it is more like a cycling club than a travel agent.

I'm guessing they will work on their T&C for the future though as they really need a bit more than a two line cancellation policy before entering a binding agreement.

How much are you paying for 100% cancel for any reason coverage? As someone in the insurance industry (life insurance) this isn't an insurable risk.

It is very pricey and most policies have a 50-75% reimbursement. When I have priced this, it runs up the cost by 50% on average, and sometimes more.

Ours was only a couple of hundred $$ over what we paid a few years ago for a 5 day trip out of the country. Considering this time we will be out of the country for 12 days, and I was buying it far in advance I figured it was worth it. My parents are healthy, but getting older, and I have had to cancel land trips for illness before. They were easier, just cancel hotels etc, but with the cruise, I wanted to be sure we would be ok.