Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

docco

Members
  • Content Count

    668
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by docco

  1. Can't see the problem. P&O say it's not a major change, ABTA are backing them up because they're funded by P&O and don't want to upset them, so clearly people are making a fuss about nothing.
  2. Thanks for that. Much appreciated.
  3. Given a 1230 check in, but I'm sure we checked in an hour or so before that last time. Is 1130 the earliest feasible time to turn up, and does that go for Parking4cruises too? Thanks.
  4. Sorry, but yesterday's issues were wholly because P&O decided to change the destination port from the advertised Amsterdam to Ijmuiden to save themselves money and continue their feud with the City of Amsterdam.
  5. Thanks - that's disappointing. I'll follow your advice.
  6. Remind me, please............ Steak still an 'always on' choice, regardless of the menu? Salads? Ice cream? What else is there - I seem to recall there are other options too. My dear wife has a sensitive tummy, and sometimes it has to be a much lighter meal than the standard menu options - good though they are.
  7. Trustpilot reviews of P&O are looking pretty sick: https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/pocruises.com And I doubt most of us have added our views yet!
  8. Thanks for the update. I'm sure P&O will improve on this, but as things stand now: As booked: walk off ship whenever you like, and a 20 minute walk, or a frequent tram, to Centraal station. After modification by P&O: 3.5 hours to get to Centraal Station, and maybe another 3.5 hours to get back. And this isn't a 'significant alteration' (meaning 'major changes') to your Package? Cloud cuckoo land, P&O, and I wonder how many non-disclosure agreements this is going to give rise to so that it's kept out of court.
  9. Are you there now? Some accurate information on this situation would be very useful. How does one access all the Facebook posts? P&O seem to be doing a good job of hiding them.
  10. Thanks. I can recall having one, but wasn’t sure whether we’d asked the butler to find it. Wouldn’t dream of asking him to do the ironing though. To be honest we make very little use of him - it’s the other things that keep us going back to suites, notably the space, the position and breakfast in the Epicurean.
  11. The £12.50 daily 'package' for 24 hours looks to be about the best value for occasional email use whilst not in port (I see there's a discount to be had if you book 3 days in advance too). Does anyone know how far this reaches from the main areas (cabins?) and the likely speed of connection please? Still only one device at a time?
  12. I'm assuming then that the answer is that there's no iron in the cabins/suites.
  13. Anyone know if they're still provided in suites? I seem to recall the butler bringing one, but I think he had to 'borrow' it.
  14. It's the Observer piece referred to above - but it's now attracting even more bad publicity for P&O with an even wider audience. They didn't get anywhere with the Observer/Guardian, partly because P&O refused to comment, and also refused to tell even The Observer what the 'operational reasons' are that they're using as an excuse. Some pretty positive comments, though, about the prospects of winning against P&O in the courts if they ever allow it to go that far.
  15. Parking Eye, perhaps - or some such outfit? I'd be very concerned at leaving a car in a hotel car park that doesn't have the sort of security that CPS etc operate.
  16. That’s the approach we’ve followed. It’s rarely any more expensive, often cheaper, and avoids the risks involved in leaving a car in what can be a relatively insecure hotel car park.
  17. What's the position regarding packs of bottled water? I seem to recall that they can be taken to your cabin along with the suitcases?
  18. That's an excellent idea! Even more so if they're happy to do it!
  19. It's an interesting article, but I'd say it was very positive, with some very negative comments about P&O, such as "Disgracefully, P&O was still advertising the package as a cruise to Amsterdam this month." P&O refused to comment on that, and also refused to tell even The Observer what the 'operational reasons' are that they're using as an excuse. We all know what they are (the tourist tax) but P&O is still concealing that for its own purposes. The Observer writer doesn't accept the 'significant alteration' argument that P&O are using to try to wriggle out of their responsibilities, saying that as Amsterdam is the only port of call on the trip, it's pretty significant. As they also say, a court would have to decide what counts as “significant”. Those of us planning to take this to the county court will be encouraged by the piece (but not surprised, because P&O are very clearly on shaky legal ground) - though what's going to count is the proportion of days in Amsterdam (Ijmuiden now) as against the total number of port days. Bear in mind that under the P&O terms and conditions “a significant alteration” means major changes to your Package - and if a court decides that your holiday has had major changes P&O will lose the case. If Amsterdam was a major part of the total package, the chances of success must be very good indeed, and I'd be surprised if P&O allow things to go that far. So far as ABTA is concerned, anyone who's had the recent brushoff (and bear in mind that P&O/Carnival is a major funder of ABTA) might want to go back to them as I have to ask them to look again at the facts, and the actual terms and conditions, rather than just pushing out the P&O line - the paragraph above is the point they're choosing to ignore. Ask them too what the further route is within ABTA to pursue the complaint. This is not going to go away. Only a few of us, probably, will pursue P&O on this, but the bad publicity in the Observer isn't going to gain them any customers, and that's only the start.
  20. docco

    P&Owe

    So being discreet, quiet, amicable and pleasant hasn’t helped much then, has it?
  21. Likewise - and I'd have no problem with that, provided that P&O clearly show the port visited as Trieste and not Venice. The post above suggests that they might be planning something different, though: Just had a survey in from P&O with the usual stuff but also questions about ports. One of the questions was about visiting Venice however the berth was Trieste which they state is “Venice” but is 1 hour 50 minutes away!
  22. docco

    P&Owe

    Are we suggesting, then, that the OP has been fairly treated? Or that he's acted in any way unreasonably?
  23. docco

    P&Owe

    I would be surprised, because the evidence suggests otherwise. Some people will certainly be taking them on, and winning, quite possibly with NDAs, but the typical P&O customer just moans about it and does nothing.
×
×
  • Create New...