Never cruise with NCL

I don’t think it’s silly to voice concerns and expectations as a shareholder, even if it's just on a forum. After all, companies like NCL rely on feedback from all their customers and shareholders to improve their services and enhance their value. When I say 'as a shareholder, I’m not claiming to have the power to change corporate policy single handedly, but rather to highlight that I’m invested in this company in more ways than one. My point isn’t about 'doling out cash' it's about ensuring that NCL maintains a high standard of service that reflects well on the brand, builds customer loyalty, and ultimately, benefits everyone, including shareholders. While forums might not be where corporate decisions are made, they’re definitely where consumer sentiment is gauged. If enough people share similar experiences or concerns, it can lead to broader changes. Plus, discussing these issues openly helps fellow cruisers make informed decisions. At the end of the day, being a shareholder, no matter how small, means I care about how the company is perceived and how it treats its customers. That’s why I’m here, sharing my experience that could lead to positive change.

Yes, cruise itineraries can change last minute weather and other factors are unpredictable, and I completely understand that. However, my situation wasn’t about being unreasonable or ignoring common sense it was about trusting the information and approval I was given by the cruise line. Imagine this You're on a cruise, and the line offers you an excursion, encouraging you to explore on your own for a bit. You trust them and go ahead, expecting that if anything changes like the ship needing to depart early or skip the port you'd be informed so you can adjust your plans and not be left behind. That’s a reasonable expectation, right? It’s not about blaming the cruise line for the weather or even for the change in itinerary it’s about expecting them to communicate with you when you’re still part of the cruise. The notion that 'not a passenger' just because we trusted their approval feels a bit off. We’re still their customers, and they should have a duty to inform us of changes that affect our plans especially when they involve approved embarkations. I think most would agree that clear communication is key in any service industry, and a cruise should be no different. After all, no one wants to be in a situation where they’re left stranded due to a lack of information, whether they’re on an excursion, dealing with an emergency, or in my case, joining after an approved port. Isn’t it fair to expect a level of support and communication from the cruise line to avoid situations like these? Dude if you can't see some of those points it's nothing more to talk about. We just don't agree

While policies might be similar across cruise lines, the quality and effectiveness of communication can vary significantly between companies. NCL failed to provide timely and accurate information regarding itinerary changes, especially when they had approved us to embark in Akureyri, that reflects on their customer service and operational efficiency. The way a company responds to unexpected situations, including offering support, alternatives, or compensation, is a key aspect of customer service. Some cruise lines might handle such scenarios more proactively or empathetically than others. Each situation is unique, and personal experiences can significantly shape one's perception of a company. Our dissatisfaction stems from how NCL handled our specific case, including communication failures and the subsequent customer service experience. It's reasonable to base our future choices on this personal experience.

I’ve read through everyone’s responses and comments. I’ve certainly learned from this experience, and the first thing I’ve decided is that I won’t be traveling with NCL again, primarily due to the level of service. How a company handles its customers in difficult situations is crucial. As a shareholder of NCL, I believe in providing people with a great time, and for those who don’t have that experience, it’s important to find a middle ground and try to make things right. Unfortunately, that didn’t happen here they didn’t even offer Future Cruise Credit (FCC). One thing I can’t wrap my head around is how some of you think it’s unreasonable to expect an email notification about an itinerary change. When you pay for a cruise, you get all kinds of emails offers to upgrade, safety videos, and ads for future cruises. Yet, getting an automated email about something as important as a change in the itinerary is somehow too much? NCL is a big company, and it’s not just about the people on the ship they have the resources to manage this better. This could easily be automated the ship has a roll call, and if a certain number of passengers haven’t checked in, send them an email. It’s that simple. Let’s be honest, two couples can go to the same show one might think it’s the best show ever, while the other didn’t care for it. Both experiences are valid. For me, this experience with NCL has completely turned me off from their brand. From now on, I’ll be sticking with RCL and CCL brand ships because of what happened and how it was handled. Companies like NCL should be better at managing people, regardless of the reason whether it’s risky decisions, accidents, or anything else. The way they handled this was simply unacceptable. Even filing a claim with NCL is frustrating you’re writing to a chatbot, not even a real person. At the end of the day, communication is key. If we start accepting that it’s okay for a cruise line to leave passengers in the dark, where does that leave us? This isn’t just about my case it’s about holding companies accountable for managing their passengers, no matter the situation. I hope this resonates with some of you because I believe we all deserve better. I also understand that it could have been the same with other brands but that wasn't my experience. It's like having nasty food at a restaurant and you decided never to eat there again because of how it was handled. It could of happen anywhere but that restaurant isn't getting anymore of your money! NEVER CRUISE WITH NCL! parrot out 🙂

I appreciate your honesty, even if we don't see eye to eye. My intention here wasn't to garner sympathy but to see if anyone had success in getting a refund, and it turned into having a meaningful discussion about the responsibilities of cruise lines when it comes to keeping passengers informed, especially in unique situations. I fully understand that many of you might not agree with my perspective, and that's okay. That said, I still believe that when a cruise line approves a plan whether it's for an excursion or any other reason they should follow through with clear communication. This isn't about trying to shift blame or avoid responsibility; it's about advocating for a standard of care that I think benefits all cruisers. I get that not everyone will agree, but I wanted to share my experience and see if anyone had faced a similar situation or had success in resolving it. Thanks again for your feedback. I'll consider all of the points raised and decide on the next steps accordingly.

Can we agree that if you were on an excursion booked through the cruise line, you'd expect them to take care of you? Whether you're off the ship for an excursion or have an approved plan to reboard later, the cruise line still has a duty to keep passengers informed. Our situation isn't so different from those who disembark for excursions the only difference is the reason for our disembarkation. The core principle is that we trust the cruise line to ensure we can safely rejoin the ship, regardless of why we temporarily leave. Safety is a top priority for all of us, right? When we disembark with the cruise line's approval, we rely on them to ensure our safe return. If there's a change that affects our ability to reboard, like an itinerary change, the cruise line has a duty to notify us. This isn't just about my case it's about setting a standard that protects all passengers throughout their entire journey. If we start accepting that it's okay for a cruise line to leave passengers in the dark because they temporarily disembarked, it sets a dangerous precedent. Today it might be missing a port, but tomorrow it could be something more serious. We're all in this together, and we should hold the cruise line accountable for clear, consistent communication to keep us safe, no matter where we are.

I appreciate all the feedback and different perspectives shared here. However, I think it's important to consider how this situation could affect any of us who love cruising and have faced unexpected changes. Imagine this: You’re on a cruise, and due to a medical emergency or family situation, you have to leave the ship for a day or two. You’ve made arrangements with NCL, gotten the green light to rejoin the cruise at a specific port, and you’ve invested in the vacation. Now, what if something changes, like an itinerary update, and you’re not informed because you’re off the ship? How would that impact your experience? NCL's responsibility to communicate changes shouldn’t be based on whether you’re physically on the ship at that moment it should be about keeping all passengers informed, especially when they’ve prearranged to reboard later. This is not just about us or this specific case; it’s about ensuring that cruise lines have protocols to keep everyone in the loop, even in exceptional circumstances. Think about it any of us could find ourselves in a situation where we're off the ship temporarily, and wouldn’t we want to be notified of changes that could affect our return? It’s not about taking unnecessary risks it’s about expecting that the cruise line will fulfill its duty to keep us informed, no matter where we are. I hope this gives some context to my concerns and why I believe NCL should have made more effort to notify me of the changes, just as they would if I were still on board.

We wouldn't be asking for a refund If I wasn't charged. While it’s true that we weren’t on the ship, we were still paying customers for the entirety of our cruise. The fact that NCL regularly communicates last minute changes to all passengers by email or text shows that they have the capability to ensure passengers are informed, regardless of where they are. This isn't about asking NCL to go out of their way for one or two passengers it's about holding them accountable to the same standard of care they provide to all their customers. After all, customer care shouldn't stop just because we disembarked temporarily.

Thanks I will check these links out for help

I appreciate all of your opinions, and some were indeed helpful. However, none of them directly addressed my original question: has anyone ever successfully received a refund from NCL under similar circumstances? The discussion has largely shifted to whether I'm entitled to a refund or how travel insurance works, which wasn't my main concern. To answer some of the question in the discussion: NCL has a duty to inform all passengers of itinerary changes, regardless of their location. The fact that we were not on the ship should not absolve them of the responsibility to ensure we were aware of the changes, especially since we had an approved plan to reboard in Akureyri. NCL's failure to notify us, knowing we had these plans, is a lapse in their duty of care. Some of you argue that ships don't have to notify passengers. While this isn't the main topic, I'd like to share my perspective: this communication could be easily managed after the check-in process through an automatic text message, email, or, even better, a phone call. Suggesting that passengers shouldn't expect prompt notification about changes doesn't make sense it's in everyone's interest to hold them accountable for this! While we were off the ship, we were still paying customers with a legitimate expectation to be kept informed about changes that directly impacted our ability to rejoin the cruise. NCL approved our plan to reembark in Akureyri, and this approval carried an implicit responsibility on NCL's part to communicate any changes to the itinerary that would affect our ability to reboard. Again I'm just asking to be notify of changes so we can make the cruise. I will also point out the ship made changes to the 1st port in Iceland. They knew and this could have been avoid because we could have board then. As for the discussion on insurance, while it might have provided a safety net, the core issue here is not whether we had insurance but whether NCL fulfilled their obligation to keep us informed about the cruise's itinerary changes. I'll leave this point here, as it diverges from my main question has anyone had success on getting a refund. To answer another question we have taken over 10 cruises, including three with NCL, and this would have been our fourth. No onboard credit or remedy was offered either.

Interesting that so many cruisers wouldn't see the other side of things. It's not like me missed the cruise because we didn't show up. We could not board the ship because it did not arrive at the port. How many of you work for the cruise company? Let's review some things you might not be considering. 1. We made arrangements with the embarkation manager to disembark and re-embark in Akureyri, and these arrangements were confirmed and approved by NCL staff. This approval should imply that NCL acknowledged and accepted responsibility to ensure our re-embarkation. 2. A reasonable expectation since NCL staff agreed to our plan, we had a reasonable expectation that NCL would fulfill its part of the agreement and ensure the ship would dock as planned. At least contact us if there are going to be changes to the itinerary. 3. NCL failed to provide timely communication about the itinerary change. Even if you believe we took a chance, the responsibility to inform us of any itinerary changes promptly falls on them. If we had been notified in advance, we could have had the opportunity to board the ship. 4. As a passenger, we were under the assumption that NCL would exercise a duty of care. Their failure to communicate changes in a timely manner, which led to our missing the ship, breaches this duty. 5. Other ships, such as the Spirit of Adventure and Viking Mars, successfully docked at the same ports on the relevant dates, which further suggests that NCL's failure to dock was not entirely due to uncontrollable circumstances. 6. NCL has an obligation to ensure the safety and well-being of its passengers. By leaving us stranded without providing any assistance, they failed to uphold this obligation. It is unreasonable for the blame on us when NCL did not fulfill their duty to communicate and protect their passengers. It doesn't matter the number of passengers. They still shouldn't be given a pass. 7. It is ethically unjustifiable for NCL to blame a passenger for actions taken with their prior approval, particularly when the passenger was left in a vulnerable and dangerous situation due to the cruise line’s failure to communicate effectively. 8. Passengers have the right to rely on the professionalism and reliability of the cruise line. You shouldn’t need insurance to cover the cruise line’s failure to fulfill its duties, especially when the failure is due to factors within NCL’s control. 9. Travel insurance is an optional purchase, not a legal requirement. The decision not to purchase it does not diminish the cruise line's responsibility to provide the service that was paid for. Insurance is meant to cover unforeseen and unavoidable events, not to excuse a cruise line’s avoidable errors or failures to communicate. 10. Even if we had insurance, it might not have covered the full scope of our losses. Travel insurance policies often have exclusions, limitations, and deductibles, and they may not cover situations where the cruise line fails to fulfill its basic contractual obligations. I could continue these points but I guess you will either protect and back the cruise ship companies and service for all of us will get worse over time, or we stick together and demand simple reasonable services. Services such as a text message of an itinerary change ahead of time, a call or message if the ship knows they are going to leave a passenger in another country, or at minimum, a refund for the unused cruise if the ship doesn't come to port. Trust me, our expenses are much greater than a missed cruise at this point. We are all cruisers on this site. We should hold them accountable! As far as the weather, the links are just to the NCL report. That's not what the actual weather was per https://ocean.weather.gov/

Booked a back-to-back NCL cruise, starting in New York to Iceland, with a 2nd returning to New York. We received approval from NCL to disembark early during the first leg and reboard on the second leg in Akureyri, Iceland. However, we were never informed of any itinerary changes. NCL claimed they changed due to weather, but we couldn't find any records of storms and they won't provide any evidence. The ship never docked at the agreed port or the next port in Iceland, leaving us stranded and causing us to miss our entire second voyage. We even tried to reboard at a different port in Greenland but were denied. NCL is refusing to refund us, citing that we didn’t purchase their travel insurance and therefore have no obligation to compensate us. They have offered NO path of remedy, no future credits, no on board credits, nothing. Has anyone experienced something similar or have advice on how to get a refund or compensation? Is there a higher power to appeal to, like a court?