Selbourne

Is this for next weeks British Isles cruise? If so, I suspect that the upgrades have just been allocated, hence the changes in availability. I was surprised to see that it was still possible to pay to upgrade just a week or so prior to departure although, as with P&O, the minimum bid prices were excessive IMHO. If we had been prepared to pay that much more we would have done so when we originally booked and had the first choice of cabins!

It looks as though it’s a continuation of the Bridge area, so is most likely connected with that, but whether or not that would be a noise issue is anybody’s guess. I tend to avoid ‘white’ areas on the assumption that they will be!

The comments about Iona last week aren’t 100% clear whether they are just referring to booze being confiscated from hand luggage (which we can assume is a given, as the checking is done with the passenger present, so very easy to police) or also from hold luggage (suitcases etc). It would be good to have first hand feedback from someone who has been called by reception to open one of their checked in suitcases in order to establish specifically what is in the bottle that has been detected.

Everything is possible, but I’m talking about the real world practicality of what you are suggesting and what it would achieve versus the additional cost and delay of doing so. I suspect that a very large proportion of passengers (my wife and me being amongst them) don’t take alcohol on board anyway, so there’s nothing to be achieved with that group. A large proportion of those who do take the now banned booze on board as hand luggage will now stop doing so, either because they don’t want to break the rules or because they know that there’s a good chance that it will be confiscated until the end of the cruise. Some will also be fearful of some ‘consequence’ of being caught, as is evidenced by this thread. All you are left with is those who will ‘smuggle’ a bottle on board in their main luggage, either because they are trying to get around the rules or are ignorant of them. I’d suggest that going forward this will be a tiny proportion of the passenger numbers on board and will not warrant the additional expense, delay and inconvenience of additional luggage checks. OK, if someone is checking in crates of beer or cases of booze then yes, that will be pulled out, but we are talking about a single bottle of spirits here and that’s a different matter altogether. This new policy doesn’t affect me in the slightest, so I have no axe to grind either way, but I do feel that a huge mountain is being made out of a tiny molehill and there’s a lot of scaremongering - all of which will delight P&O as it further ensures compliance. But let’s just have a reality check here and ask what is the worst thing that will happen if this arch criminal passenger is found to have packed a bottle of their favourite balcony tipple in their luggage. Will they be made to walk the plank? Will they be keel-hauled? Will they been thrown off the ship? NO! They will be told that the bottle will be kept and handed back to them at the end of the cruise. If the ability to take a particular bottle of something on board, especially if it’s something that you cannot buy on board, was a deal breaker for me (and, I stress, it’s not) would I be tempted to take the chance when there is no consequence? Probably!

I don’t know for certain, but very much doubt it. If cruise ports adopted airport like security, looking for fluids that could be used to make bombs, then firstly we would know about it and secondly no fluids at all would be allowed on board. For as long as they allow ‘certain’ bottles of drinks I think it’s safe to assume that these checks do not happen, as they would be completely impractical. Also, keep in mind that there is zero consequence if a bottle is found. It is merely confiscated and returned at the end of the cruise.

It sounds to me as though the two bookings that state that your husband requires 1:1 assistance is an error. From what you have said, he sounds as though he doesn’t need it. As for tender step tests on P&O, we tend to avoid cruises with tender ports but on our recent Aurora cruise every single passenger using a tender had to perform a step test immediately prior to boarding the tender. This seems to have replaced the previous system where those who had declared mobility issues had to attend the show lounge on a sea day prior to the first tender port to prove that they could meet the requirement (but only if they wished to disembark at tender ports).

I say this as someone who has never taken alcohol on board and never will, but I’d suggest that your chances of being ‘caught’ are significantly less than 1%. Security scanning is looking for bombs and knives, not bottles, especially as bottles themselves are not banned, just certain contents. Furthermore, the worst case scenario would be that your bottle would be confiscated and returned to you at the end of the cruise. Nobody is going to be denied boarding by attempting to take one bottle aboard in their luggage, especially when people could very easily claim ignorance of this policy change. P&O have already said that those who will be refused boarding are those who are under the influence. Whilst I’m not advocating rule breaking, there’s a lot of scaremongering about what might happen if someone is ‘caught’.

There is yet another case playing out in the media this week of a scooter user being told that he cannot board with his scooter, even though he’d booked an accessible cabin, as he hadn’t declared it via the Onboard Needs Questionnaire in advance. Whilst these instances are usually the fault of the passenger, in every case the reporting paints P&O in a very bad light, in this case “69 year old cancer survivor” who was unable to board (as he couldn’t cope without the scooter) and had to say goodbye to his “crying daughter and family” who had to leave him at the port. Whilst I understand all the reasons for this, the PR people at P&O must be having a headache with this. I guess at least it’s a different story to the usual “Cruise from Hell” headlines!

I’ve never been one of those who laps up positive reviews whilst discounting negative ones, but that’s hardly the most robust review! Give me a good balanced review any day.

The way to cope with all the new rules and regulations Avril is to take a bottle of the strong stuff on board with you to ease the worries. Oops. No, sorry. You’re not permitted to do that anymore 🤣 On a serious note though, as @Megabear2 rightly says, those who use this forum and ask the right questions will be fine. The on board needs declaration is very straightforward and, touch wood, we’ve never had any issues. The biggest worry is that they don’t always acknowledge receipt, or that it’s been processed, so you are left wondering. Thankfully on the Cruise Personaliser for our booked cruises it shows that my wife has been allocated an evacuation chair, so I know that we are sorted. Worst case scenario, I can’t see them denying boarding to someone with a walking stick who just uses it to steady themselves, if they can manage stairs fine. All the reports that I have seen in the press about people being denied boarding have been people turning up with undeclared scooters or wheelchairs.

Although, to be fair, many wheelchair users who can cope with their arms propelling the chair may struggle with their legs, especially climbing steps. That used to be the case with my wife. When she still had some use of her legs I would lift her legs, one at a time, to get on a coach. Now even that’s impossible, so we have to use wheelchair accessible transport.

Every single question across the entire form has an asterisk against it, yet there is no key to say what it means 🙄 I can only assume that it means that you must answer the question.

Now that’s an interesting question. I’ve just checked the On Board Needs form that I submitted for our Cunard cruise next week (I kept a copy just in case), which I think is the same as the P&O one, and this is the second question (which I hadn’t remembered answering for my wife); What level of assistance do you require in case of emergency evacuation?* ✓ I require evacuation chair assistance and I am under 128 kg (282 lbs) I require evacuation chair assistance and I am above 128 kg (282 lbs) One would assume that if you don’t tick either box then you are self declaring that you don’t need an evacuation chair. However, they may determine from answers to subsequent questions that you do. It’s all very confusing!

You don’t request one. They are allocated by P&O.

In which case I think you have very good reason to be extremely unhappy with P&O. Your experience highlights that the whole system needs urgent review. It seems completely unacceptable to me that P&O accepted a booking, you correctly completed the required declaration and they take 3 months to flag a problem. I guess that you now have the dilemma of either not taking the wheelchair and struggling during the cruise, or taking one and risk being denied boarding. Not that I’m advocating rule breaking, but Mobility at Sea will either allow people to collect rented wheelchairs just inside the terminal entrance (which means that you have to check-in with them) or they will deliver them to the cabin (which means that you don’t) 🤔

I’m dreading these lifts, especially as I will be pushing my wife in her wheelchair. It sounds as though a strategy meeting is needed at each lift lobby, with each waiting passenger designated to ‘mark’ a lift and then the winner stands in the doorway to hold it for the others 😂

We are saying the same thing. Impossible to know who is at fault until that very specific question is answered!

I’ve asked the same question (twice) and am still not 100% sure that the OP specifically stated on the very first Onboards Needs Questionnaire submitted immediately after booking that they intended to bring a wheelchair. This is the absolute crux of the issue. If they did then P&O is at fault. If they didn’t (or relied on the TA, or Mobility at Sea, to do so - or didn’t mention the wheelchair until the second submission in April) then, unfortunately, the fault is the passengers. Jury is out for me until that is specifically answered!

My last post was removed as well, possibly because I replied to the post that mentioned the TA. To repeat my point, there is one critical question that I don’t believe has been answered. When the OP completed the onboard needs questionnaire immediately after booking, did they state at that time that they would be bringing a wheelchair and state the dimensions (as is required)? If they did, then the fault lies with P&O. If the passenger was deemed to need an evacuation chair but no more were available, the booking should have been cancelled at that stage. Conversely, if the OP did not state on the Onboard Needs Questionnaire that they were bringing a wheelchair, or somehow assumed that by informing their TA or by booking one through Mobility at Sea that they would be covered, then P&O would deem that the fault lies with the customer for not declaring the wheelchair on the Onboard Needs Questionnaire. It sounds pedantic, but this seems to sum up all the issues that I have read here and elsewhere when people have run into problems. One of the many issues that P&O (and other Carnival brands) need to resolve is that they don’t always acknowledge receipt of the Onboard Needs Questionnaire and that issues flagged have been noted. This leaves the customer with at best a nagging doubt that they might run into difficulties, or at worst being refused embarkation at the terminal.

The problem with MS, especially at the early stages, is that a persons level of mobility can vary enormously from day to day, especially if the person still has a degree of mobility. Some days they can cope reasonably well without much assistance, whereas other days a wheelchair may be essential. I remember this well when my wife was at the earlier stages of the disease. It is therefore quite feasible that someone may be able to make their way to the muster station unaided some days but not others.

I’ve just taken a screenshot of our Cruise Personaliser showing that an Evacuation Chair is required for my wife for our cruise next week, just in case!

The whole system definitely needs reviewing urgently. As well as issues such as these being highlighted on this forum (and no doubt others) there have been several reports in the press recently about passengers with wheelchairs and scooters being denied boarding. Whilst we understand the issue here, the press don’t and the articles are all painting P&O in a very poor ‘anti-disability’ light, which is not the case.

What a nightmare. You say that you completed the on-board needs questionnaire in January. Did you declare that you were intending to bring a wheelchair at that time? If you did, then you should have been told at that stage that you couldn’t be accommodated, not 4 months later. If you didn’t, and have only recently declared that you are bringing a wheelchair then as @molecrochip states, if the limited number of evacuation chairs are already taken then you cannot be accommodated. It’s not discrimination, it’s safety. My wife has secondary progressive Multiple Sclerosis and is now a full time wheelchair user. We have to use an accessible cabin and we declare the wheelchair immediately when we book and an evacuation chair is allocated. On that basis, once they are all allocated you’d assume that further bookings wouldn’t be accepted from those who need to bring wheelchairs. If I’d declared it in January and it had taken until 4 weeks before the cruise to be told this I would be furious. As well as clamping down on people turning up at the terminal with an undeclared wheelchair, presumably as they have a need, it’s high time that P&O also clamped down on the abuse of the assisted embarkation and disembarkation by those who don’t genuinely need it. Folk who cope perfectly adequately walking around the ship and the ports throughout the entire cruise, but then claim that they need to be transported on or off the ship in a wheelchair when they perceive that there is some advantage to be gained by doing so. Even though we have a genuine need, we avoid assisted disembarkation now as it annoys me so much

I can’t abide whisky or coke! 😂

Yes, I can see the logic, as long as runners don’t feel that they have priority and everyone else has to stop, move to the side etc. Walkers are in the majority and the runners should run in such a way to avoid them, not the other way around. If they want a completely unhindered running route then I would have thought that the running machines in the gym are a better bet!