Csboughn

5 hours ago, irishwitchy said:

It will be very interesting to see what happens next year with New Zealand and the cruise lines.  They won’t be able to say,  we didn’t know, thought it was all good,  New Zealand is picking on us, etc. 

I can’t believe they’re saying it now. Regulations have been in place since 2018. 

17 minutes ago, Pcardad said:

That means you cannot do a compliant cleaning in NZ waters, not that "...the NZ government believes you’ve gotta haul it out of the water." You can be compliant with in-waters cleanings - you just need to have it cleaned before entering NZ m

17 minutes ago, Pcardad said:

That means you cannot do a compliant cleaning in NZ waters, not that "...the NZ government believes you’ve gotta haul it out of the water." You can be compliant with in-waters cleanings - you just need to have it cleaned before entering NZ waters.

 

My point is there are no “approved” cleaners for in-water cleanings. Maybe you can find someone to do it elsewhere. Hell Regent tried 7 times to do it.  The only approved cleaners that NZ recognizes on its website, do out of water cleanings. 

6 hours ago, Lonedaddy said:

From what I am reading it appears the NZ govt. put in a program (like many governments do) without clear procedures for approval.  The fact that there are no approved companies is a big red flag and allow the cleaning management to be done by the vessel and then subject to some other inspection is doomed to failure.    In US states that require car inspections, it is done by an inspection station approved by the state government many of these are done by repair shops and dealers bring the car to the standards for inspection.  Why hasn't the Govt of NZ set that up with certified companies?  Seems like the NZ process is a prime ground for corruption.  

I’ve read the NZ MPI website and it seems they have lots of advice and suggestions for how to comply. Issue is, once your hull is fouled, how do you come into compliance.  From what I read, the NZ government believes you’ve gotta haul it out of the water. Regent knew these requirements and thought they could become compliant with in water cleanings.  According to Explorers General Manager and confirmed by the Staff Captain, the knew they weren’t in compliance since the ship was in Phuket.  They actually tried in-water cleanings 7 times.  My issue is since Regent knew, why weren’t passengers informed before the boarded in Sydney and again in Auckland?  
 

from the NZ MPI website:  Currently, in-water cleaning of international vessels is not allowed in New Zealand. This means that there are no approved providers of in-water cleaning services for international vessels at this time.

On 2/18/2023 at 8:58 AM, papaflamingo said:

I guess I'm just tired of absurd conspiracy theories for everything that happens in the world.  The idea that Regent purposefully ignored NZ laws and acted in total bad faith to what.... grab some money... is ridiculous.  I'm not defending Regent, and personally I hope all the conspiracy theorists do leave for another company.  That way there'll be more cruises for me to book and likely better deals.  I'm not trying to talk anyone into sailing on Regent.  And truly couldn't care less who sails them.  What I don't want is the constant spreading false conspiracies without any evidence.   

I tend to believe what I see.  Regent DID clean the hulls on the first cruise. That's why it didn't do anything other than wander aimlessly at sea.  They had to hire a hull cleaning service that could do the cleaning at sea.  There was no dry dock in that part of the world available.  The company was advertised as approved by NZ which is why it took so many days until they could even get the hull cleaned.  I don't know for sure, but I imagine that they were certified as clean when they docked in Aukland.  Likely the NZ govt came out upon docking in Auckland and inspected the hull and found it insufficient, so they couldn't hit the highly sensitive ports.  Consistent with that, why would Regent pay what is likely a heavy cleaning fee knowing full well it won't help?  Why would Regent lie and risk pissing off nearly 2000 passengers?  They fully refunded the first cruise PLUS gave FCC, PLUS kept them on the ship using fuel, food, alcohol, etc. which is the majority of their cost of a cruise.  Why would they lose so much money when they simply could have pulled into Australia and disembarked everyone and tied up to a dock?  Nope, the conspiracies of purposeful lies doesn't seem to have any purpose or reason, so sorry, I don't buy it.  

As to a fair refund?  Well, we booked a cruise last summer specifically to see Greenland and Iceland.  Greenland was a no go for weather.  Since that was half the reason we booked it, do I get a 50% refund plus FCC?  Nope.  I got to see an extra Canadian port and and extra Icelandic port.  It was a great cruise even with the disappointment.  

Anyway, I do hope all the angry customers flee.  I would like the opportunity to book future cruises at a reduce rate to fill them up.  That actually works for me.  

One big item your missing is there are NO approved/recommended/certified companies to perform in-water cleanings.  This is very clear on the NZ MPI website.  Regent knew this and tried, unsuccessfully, to comply.  Regent also knew prior to boarding passengers in Sydney, and again in Auckland of this and boarded anyway.  I was told before I left home that the hull would be Clean prior to my cruise (call was while ship was in Adelaide).  I was also told when I boarded that “the ship is 100% cleared.”