mynameisvlad

+1 to all the people saying they received ridiculously long dispute responses while they sit on the refunds. They were able to prepare 2 40+ page documents for my disputes over a month  ago which claimed I accepted the FCC (incredibly shady on their part, considering they auto-added it to the account) and have therefore been made whole. I re-opened all the disputes claiming that no, in no uncertain terms did I accept a FCC and indeed specifically followed their process for declining the FCC and refunding and they've been sitting pending for a while.

I just got the email that my refund is being processed within 7-10 business days, which was shocking given I was on a May cruise, but looks like I'll be closing the disputes soon enough (whenever the money shows up). Maybe they're just really fast on their processing (although I doubt it).

10 minutes ago, winterbliss said:

As well, I witnessed 3 people in 3 vehicles wearing masks while driving today. My go to question now is what I've heard some braver health care professionals ask, "Does that make sense?"

Yes. If they touch their face, they're touching the mask not their mouth or nose. It makes a massive difference to virus transmission.

Listen, you clearly don't care for or believe in masks. That's fine, you do you. But don't chastise people for trying to protect themselves or their loved ones. It's not a good look.

On 5/13/2020 at 5:53 AM, graphicguy said:

You’re really doing those a disservice who happen to have mental illnesses, to the point they want to end their lives.

How dare you say that while in the exact same comment implicitly comparing suicides to someone going on a "hunger strike" for not getting to play their console 8 hours a day. You have some gall.

For future reference, Nintendo is the company who makes several consoles. Your boomer is showing.

2 minutes ago, hallux said:

Not to mention that they also need to match the refund requests to credit card charge-backs to make sure they don't double credit someone.

That’s not how it works. The banks will be the ones responsible for that. They constantly monitor for similar refunds and reverse the chargeback credit when they see it come in. 

3 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

All your posts ignore the fact that everyone getting  a refund had to choose whether they want an FCC or a cash refund. That means every refund request has to be manually entered into the system. The "technology' as you call it doesn't know  that you want a refund until it's told.

And in the same vein, all your comments ignore that this is all code written by a person. The system is set up that way because NCL wanted it set up that way. A programmer could have just as easily made refunds the automated action instead of FCCs, or integrated the refund request into the actual refund system to mark the account as requiring a refund, then having automated systems pick up and do the basic accounting needed to generate a refund. 
 

These aren’t complicated unsolved problems, either. E-commerce has been done to death, and the entirety of the issue is that NCL doesn’t want to issue refunds and made the system as opaque and inconvenient as possible on purpose as a way to refund as little as possible. 

2 hours ago, Corliss said:

I think the majority of you are way too pessimistic and are in for a bit of a surprise.  As you may remember President Trump was originally looking to begin opening the country up at Easter.  When the original "15 days to slow the curve" was about to end Drs. Fauci and Birx showed him their "models" which projected 100,000 to 200,000 deaths with continuing complete mitigation and talked him into extending the shut down for an additional 30 days.

 

I don't think there is any chance he will delay the "opening" (gradual though it may be) again.  Now the "models" show dramatically lower deaths and much earlier peaks in all the states than previously predicted and they are down to 60,000 total deaths nationally (which will likely ALSO be too high.)  Even so called new "hot spots" aren't really hot spots.  Michigan is projected to hit its "peak" tomorrow and the "curve" doesn't "flatten" there: it begins an immediate decline.  They (the model) expect daily death rates to half in the following week.

 

Louisiana, the other supposed "hot spot" reached its projected peak yesterday with a death rate of 70 and like Michigan is expected to half the death rate 10 days later.

 

Earlier today I posted some articles about European countries announced plans to reopen various parts of their economies now.  I think our reopening will begin by the end of the month.

This is literally exactly what I meant to detract against by posting my warning, did you read it? 

The projections you posted and are talking about explicitly assume a shelter-in-place order until the end of May. Anything earlier than that will cause another spike in cases. Period. Even beyond that, scientists strongly believe that there would be spikes if all restrictions were lifted.

Please note to everyone posting and talking about the IHME data, they specifically are only talking about the first wave only, and assuming continued stay at home through the end of May. This means that even though projections are going down, we should not celebrate yet. They're going down because social distancing is effective, but just as quickly as they go down they can also spike if restrictions are loosened too quickly.

Here's an excerpt from their FAQ:

http://www.healthdata.org/covid/faqs

Will we need social distancing until there is a vaccine?

Our model suggests that – with social distancing maintained throughout – the end of the first wave of the epidemic could occur by early June.

The question of whether there will be a second wave of the epidemic will depend on what we do to avoid reintroducing COVID-19 into the population. By the end of the first wave of the epidemic, a substantial proportion of the population of the United States and EEA countries are likely to still be susceptible to the disease and thus measures to avoid a second wave of the pandemic prior to vaccine availability will be necessary. Maintaining some social distancing measures could be supplemented or replaced by nation-wide efforts such as mass screening, contact tracing, and selective quarantine. We are continuing to develop our modeling framework and are exploring alternate scenarios where social distancing measures are incompletely applied or are lifted before the projected first wave of the epidemic has passed. We will make these projections available as soon as development is complete.

12 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

Tell them that the cruise line has agreed to give you a refund within 90 days

This is not what they agreed to. They agreed to give a refund after 90 days.

There is absolutely 0 chance cruises will be sailing by end of May.

2 minutes ago, brovol said:

In a few months it will be like saved money.

Or, it'll be gone because the company no longer exists.

Amex gave 6-8 week estimate for investigation to complete, and provisional credits until then.

50 minutes ago, BirdTravels said:

Unfortunately you signed a contract and agreed to abide its terms. And the "goods or services not received" are being reimbursed in accordance with the contract you signed. Which makes your dispute frivolous and it would not be upheld. Based on the dollar amount of your fraudulent dispute, it could be a criminal act. And NCL has, in the past, blacklisted people for frivolous disputes,,, which may sound o.k. today, but not so much over time as you get older. 

Literally the only thing you got right is that NCL might blacklist you. Which, honestly, I'm fine with at this point. 

23 minutes ago, beerman2 said:

Go back and read your first rant, it was you that mentioned taxes and bailout!

You... you do realize I’m not the same person that you initially replied to... right?

Go back and read my posts. You’ll notice I never once mentioned either topics. 
 

I even said in my last comment that I’m not the person you’re replying to so I can’t possibly know why they’d think that. Maybe pay closer attention to who you’re replying to from now on before you continue to dig your hole.

2 hours ago, SeaShark said:

 

How about these folks

 

https://www.elliott.org/the-troubleshooter/never-report-credit-card-charge-fraudulent/

 

they handle disputes with companies for a living. Do you think they have basic knowledge and know what they are talking about?

Did you read the article you posted? It talks about marking charges as fraudulent, not disputing valid charges for reasons relating to cancellations and refunds not being issued in a tiny matter. They're two completely different things, and you conflating them does nothing but harm others who are trying to receive the money they deserve.

In the article, the person claimed the charge is fraudulent (as in, they were not the ones purchasing it) right after returning from their vacation, essentially buyer's remorse. Buyer's remorse isn't, in any way shape or form the same thing as the company cancelling the service they promised to provide and then fail to refund the money in a timely manner.

Especially since the article even mentions various reasons for valid disputes:

The Fair Credit Billing Act (FCBA) was created to protect consumers against credit card billing errors and fraud. The following are examples of the types of charges that consumers can ask their credit card company to reverse and investigate:

1. If the merchant never sent the product.
2. Items that the merchant delivered, but were not as described.
3. Charges for which the consumer asked for an explanation, but the merchant refused.
4. Errors that involve the cost of the item. For instance, your receipt shows one price, and your credit card invoice shows another.
5. Fraudulent or unauthorized charges.

At this point, the merchant is very much not going to send the purchased product (in this case, the cruise).

5 hours ago, BirdTravels said:

Poor advise. 

 

A dispute is a accusation of a criminal act. And that you, as the disputer are willing to support the law enforcement in the criminal investigation (in this case an international criminal act). And should the criminal investigation find that it was a false report, the disputer could be charged by law enforcement. Just because you want a faster refund does NOT make it a criminal act. 

What? No. This is so wholly wrong I can't even. In what world do you live?

A dispute is an internal mechanism the interbank network (Visa, MC, Amex, etc) provides customers to dispute transactions. That's literally it. It's a system between you and your bank and your merchant and their bank, mediated by your network. Opening a dispute does not "make it a criminal act", "an international criminal act", open a criminal investigation, etc. You're going to be kicked off the network by your bank far earlier than a criminal investigation opening up for false disputes (which I highly doubt can even be prosecuted but IANAL).

Furthermore, "goods or services not received" is a fully valid dispute code that very much applies in these times. Per Amex's Dispute Reference Guide, refunds should be issued within 24-48 hours to avoid a C08 (goods not received) or immediately upon processing the cancellation to prevent a C05 (goods cancelled) dispute. 

It's not like these systems are built to protect consumers from predatory behavior from merchants like taking 90+ days to refund several thousands of dollars. 🙄

1 hour ago, z4oslo said:

 

Nothing dishonest about it. Its not like they hide it. Credit card chargeback will not work. They dont deny the claim, they just says it will take some time.

 

They dont do this to piss you or anyone else off. They do because they have running expenses. If you lost your income for several months, wouldn't you  also try to delay payments, so you have food on your table for you and your family?

 

I posted it in another thread and I'll reiterate it here for those that still believe that chargebacks will do nothing:

As per Amex's Dispute Reference Guide, to respond to a C08 (goods not received or only partially received), the merchant must provide:

• Proof that a credit which directly offsets the disputed charge has already been processed

Additionally, under "How do I Avoid this Dispute in the Future?", it lists:

• Issue refunds within 24-28 hours of being notified that goods/services were not received.

I don't think a promise of an eventual refund in the future will qualify for a credit that's processed, and it certainly is not in line with the avoidance guidance. This obviously may differ for Visa and Mastercard, which have their own rules and might be more lenient with merchants.

8 minutes ago, vince_g said:

You can try to do a chargeback.  Your credit card may give you a provisional credit while they investigate, but in the end you will lose the chargeback as soon as NCL acknowledges that they have a refund mechanism.  You have to settle the matter with the merchant first.

As per Amex's Dispute Reference Guide, to respond to a C08 (goods not received or only partially received), the merchant must provide:

• Proof that a credit which directly offsets the disputed charge has already been processed

Additionally, under "How do I Avoid this Dispute in the Future?", it lists:

• Issue refunds within 24-28 hours of being notified that goods/services were not received.

I don't think a promise of an eventual refund in the future will qualify. This obviously may differ for Visa and Mastercard, which have their own rules and might be more lenient with merchants.

33 minutes ago, hamrag said:

That is a similar timeframe to what we had when our 22 March cruise was cancelled. We were notified on 13th or 14th March, and could not apply for a refund before 23rd March....in the end it was the 24th, I understand, before the system was accepting such applications.

Yeah, but I could understand it then because it takes time to create the processes. I mean, creating a web form doesn't take 10 days but it was a semi-believable excuse at least.

Now they don't even have an excuse to go with. They just don't want to give the money back, which I totally understand from a business perspective but is absolute crap in terms of long-term customer retention. Being burned while already in a foul mood from the world getting destroyed around you is not going to make anyone want to sail NCL in the future.

At this point, I'm honestly just considering a chargeback (in this case, they 100% cannot provide the services paid for and have said so themselves) and just never sailing with them again.

5 minutes ago, boatseller said:

And the alternative?  Getting stuck in an airport?

It's better then crew quarters and frankly better than most people's homes.  Stop trying justify this mis-guided bashing.

Do you understand how limiting 150 sq. ft. is over a long period of time? Especially living in a period of fear and uncertainty?

You got to experience that same 150 sq. ft. for a few hours at a time, surrounded by luxuries and delights that positively affected you overall experience. Now try even imagining what it's like to experience it day in day out, barely able to move around (because, let's be honest, there isn't that much room in any stateroom that isn't a suite), not able to do anything.

Even the passengers who were in quarantine hated it. Now imagine living it for the foreseeable future.

Stop making it seem like it's peachy and fantastic and have some empathy.

1 minute ago, hamrag said:

Please note that if your suspended sailing was scheduled to embark between April 12 - May 10, 2020, you will not be able to request your refund through this form until April 13, 2020.

Great, so 2 weeks and 90 days for anyone booked in the second period. They're really trying to space out those refunds.

15 minutes ago, boatseller said:

Ok, they can't leave.  And that's not NCL's fault.  Even if mobility aboard is limited, that's little different than any high-rise residential building.  It's not bad just because it's a ship.

150 sq. ft. of completely unpersonalized space isn't anywhere near even a 500 sq. ft. studio in a high-rise residential building.

It's not NCL's fault, nobody said it was, and the situation sucks. So, for their own benefit, let's not pretend they're living a life of luxury on a brand new beautiful cruise ship.

2 minutes ago, anyman said:

 

And the option is?

What option? The other commenter was making it seem like they're living a life of luxury enjoying the beauty of a brand new cruise ship, when in reality they're likely stuck in a 150sq. ft. metal box.

6 minutes ago, boatseller said:

🙄 "Crew members stand outside their balconies on the Norwegian Encore at the Port of Miami on Thursday, March 26, 2020"

 

There's even a picture of it.

That's not the point. Replace "crew quarters" with "a guest cabin" and it's still there. Most cruise ships have enacted very strict protocols in which non-essential personnel are confined to their room. This means that you are stuck in a metal box for the majority of your day. Kind of hard to experience all the beauty of the ship regardless if you're in crew quarters or a guest cabin.

There, happy now?  🙄

2 minutes ago, boatseller said:

Sheltering aboard a brand new cruise ship (she's beautiful, I've been) isn't exactly the Amistad.

Uh, it's not like the crew are going to enjoy her beauty stuck in crew quarters.