Raise in beverage prices. Shouldn't we be grandfathered in?

You do realize that nobody and everybody are general terms and not absolutes, right?

 

That aside, you should also read the contract to determine what you were promised and when. You incorrectly assume that you are being promised today's prices tomorrow when it comes to incidentals.

 

If I sold a car to you for $5000 and you paid me and then you showed up to pick up the car, but I had removed all four wheel so--it would be in violation of the implicit contract that we had. Let's say I gave you a piece of paper, that you didn't sign at the time you paid me saying I can do what I want, at any time, for any reason, does not obsolve me from the original implicit contract. This is what NCL is doing except they are saying you can have the wheels for an extra $500.

 

This is what happens when NCL turned this week's Jewel cruise from a 7 day cruise into a 6 day cruise. They almost got away with it until the media pointed out they were teetering on the edge of Washington's consumer protection statues.

At this point I think you need to provide to all of us the point in the contract that says NCL has the right to thwart an implicit contract and that those who purchased UBP waive the right to consumer protection laws.

 

If you bought UBP package A that included X,Y and Z and then NCL switches it to package B that includes only X and Y, they have violated an implicit contact. Now they have the right to change things, but again, must provide the consumer with a product of EQUAL OR GREATER VALUE. Or the law states they could refund the difference in value.

 

Reminder, I don't have the UBP, I just hosed with some of the drinks costing 50% more than when I booked.

 

No...I don't need to provide proof or support of anything that I did not explicitly claim.

 

If you think NCL made a promise to you based on the price of a drink, then you should show where that promise was made. I believe that NCL did not make that promise...but you can't prove a negative. If you think the promise was made, I'd love to see the proof.

 

Thing is, if you have the proof, you have a case. However, if you dont, you are just going to have to deal with the fact that the change was made...whether you like it or not; whether you agree with it or not.

 

 

If you seriously think that Consumer Protection Laws were violated, then file a complaint with the appropriate authorities. I will wish you the best of luck with that even though I doubt you'll return to tell us of the successful prosecution of your complaint.

If I sold a car to you for $5000 and you paid me and then you showed up to pick up the car, but I had removed all four wheel so--it would be in violation of the implicit contract that we had. Let's say I gave you a piece of paper, that you didn't sign at the time you paid me saying I can do what I want, at any time, for any reason, does not obsolve me from the original implicit contract. This is what NCL is doing except they are saying you can have the wheels for an extra $500.

 

This is what happens when NCL turned this week's Jewel cruise from a 7 day cruise into a 6 day cruise. They almost got away with it until the media pointed out they were teetering on the edge of Washington's consumer protection statues.

 

Wrong and wrong.

 

First, the car example is flawed. NCL didn't remove the tires they changed the drink price. In your example it would be like agreeing on the car only to learn that the price of gas increased between the agreement and picking up the car. The agreement is for the car, not for associated costs.

 

Second, your Jewel information is also incorrect. The cruise was not shortened. Nobody had to leave the ship after 6 days. They only changed the itinerary (which they can do) to include an overnight stay in the final port. Everyone was permitted to spend the full 7 days on board.

No...I don't need to provide proof or support of anything that I did not explicitly claim.

 

 

 

 

If you seriously think that Consumer Protection Laws were violated, then file a complaint with the appropriate

 

You repeatedly claim in multiple posts that NCL has the right to do this. Providing proof of your claims would give you much needed credibility.

 

Why would I file a claim with a consumer protection agency? I never stated my rights were violated. In fact, I stated I don't have the UBP. The OP has the UBP. I merely mentioned that some of the drink prices had increased. Since I didn't pre purchase the beverage package, I have to abide by the new prices--I don't have to be happy about it though.

Wrong and wrong.

 

First, the car example is flawed. NCL didn't remove the tires they changed the drink price. In your example it would be like agreeing on the car only to learn that the price of gas increased between the agreement and picking up the car. The agreement is for the car, not for associated costs.

 

Second, your Jewel information is also incorrect. The cruise was not shortened. Nobody had to leave the ship after 6 days. They only changed the itinerary (which they can do) to include an overnight stay in the final port. Everyone was permitted to spend the full 7 days on board.

 

I'm not wrong. NCL moved some of the drinks outside of the beverage package. Those drinks are now not included in the price of the UBP--a violation of an implied contract between buyer and seller, period.

 

On the Jewel thing, counting one day in the shipyard for repairs is not considered a cruise day. NCL admitted this defacto, by refunding everybody one day's cruise fare, but I digress.

I'm not wrong. NCL moved some of the drinks outside of the beverage package. Those drinks are now not included in the price of the UBP--a violation of an implied contract between buyer and seller, period.

 

On the Jewel thing, counting one day in the shipyard for repairs is not considered a cruise day. NCL admitted this defacto, by refunding everybody one day's cruise fare, but I digress.

No...they did not move any drinks outside the package. Drinks $15 and under were, and are, included. Nothing was changed. The price of one or more drinks may have changed, but specific drink prices were never covered as part of the agreement.

No...they did not move any drinks outside the package. Drinks $15 and under were, and are, included. Nothing was changed. The price of one or more drinks may have changed, but specific drink prices were never covered as part of the agreement.

 

The effect of the latest drinks price rises has been, for example, to move all single malt scotches outside the range covered by the UBP - that is ALL of them. Before the rise there were some that were covered. That is a whole category of drinks that now only available at a surcharge.

You repeatedly claim in multiple posts that NCL has the right to do this. Providing proof of your claims would give you much needed credibility.

 

Why would I file a claim with a consumer protection agency? I never stated my rights were violated. In fact, I stated I don't have the UBP. The OP has the UBP. I merely mentioned that some of the drink prices had increased. Since I didn't pre purchase the beverage package, I have to abide by the new prices--I don't have to be happy about it though.

I don't need to prove that NCL has the right to make the change...the mere fact that they did so stands as proof that they can...unless it can be shown that they can't make the change. The credibility issue falls to those who somehow think that they can't do what they have already done.

The effect of the latest drinks price rises has been, for example, to move all single malt scotches outside the range covered by the UBP - that is ALL of them. Before the rise there were some that were covered. That is a whole category of drinks that now only available at a surcharge.

No doubt...I agree with you. However, the package only ever promised drinks $15 and under...they did not promise that there would be single malts priced below $15, and they did not promise that certain drinks would not ever have a price increase that would push them from one side of the $15 line to the other.

No doubt...I agree with you. However, the package only ever promised drinks $15 and under...they did not promise that there would be single malts priced below $15, and they did not promise that certain drinks would not ever have a price increase that would push them from one side of the $15 line to the other.

 

Ever since the UBP has been in existence, the included drinks (and excluded e.g. coffee and bottled water), has remained constant. Any reasonable person would regard that as a reliable indication of what is being provided, especially as the last time they hiked the prices, they also raised the limit to keep the covered drinks the same.

 

Now they have decimated the by-the-glass wine list and are now taking whole tranches of drinks out of the UBP. That is a fundamental change to the product on offer, whichever way you try to semantically slice and dice it.

Ever since the UBP has been in existence, the included drinks (and excluded e.g. coffee and bottled water), has remained constant. Any reasonable person would regard that as a reliable indication of what is being provided, especially as the last time they hiked the prices, they also raised the limit to keep the covered drinks the same.

 

Now they have decimated the by-the-glass wine list and are now taking whole tranches of drinks out of the UBP. That is a fundamental change to the product on offer, whichever way you try to semantically slice and dice it.

Well, I don't know what you expect me to say. I disagree with your premise, so I can't follow it to your conclusion. A conclusion, fwiw, that seems to be based more in supposition than in actual fact. Like it or not, it is what it is. You can accept it, prove that something illegal was done, or move on.

I have a question/thought. NCL doesn't list (as far as I know) their drink menu with prices anywhere off their ships, and we (the consumers) have feretted out that information on our own, from "unofficial" sources. Since that information isn't actually advertised, has NCL really "changed" anything, or should the consumer consider any information received from outside sources prior to boarding subject to change or be corrected with no expectations?

I have a question/thought. NCL doesn't list (as far as I know) their drink menu with prices anywhere off their ships, and we (the consumers) have feretted out that information on our own, from "unofficial" sources. Since that information isn't actually advertised, has NCL really "changed" anything, or should the consumer consider any information received from outside sources prior to boarding subject to change or be corrected with no expectations?

 

WOW, you just read my mind.

I have a question/thought. NCL doesn't list (as far as I know) their drink menu with prices anywhere off their ships, and we (the consumers) have feretted out that information on our own, from "unofficial" sources. Since that information isn't actually advertised, has NCL really "changed" anything, or should the consumer consider any information received from outside sources prior to boarding subject to change or be corrected with no expectations?

I think you hit the nail on the head. When Celebrity had an issue with it, they did publish a list of the drinks included in the beverage package and that is where I think they had their problem, but since NCL just says it is up to a certain price point, I can't see where NCL is in violation of any laws by changing the prices of some items. Since NCL doesn't give out a list stating that certain brands/drinks are included in the beverage package and only gives a maximum price of the drink that can be included, I don't see how they violated an implicit contact. Edited August 7, 2016 by NLH Arizona

I have a question/thought. NCL doesn't list (as far as I know) their drink menu with prices anywhere off their ships, and we (the consumers) have feretted out that information on our own, from "unofficial" sources. Since that information isn't actually advertised, has NCL really "changed" anything, or should the consumer consider any information received from outside sources prior to boarding subject to change or be corrected with no expectations?

 

 

 

If it were from one or two people saying "I think the price of X was $10.95 last month and now it might be $16.95", I could agree with you. But when we've seen photos of actual menus and when we have cruisers who have actually taken cruises in these time frames and have seen (and paid) the differences first hand, NO.

 

Again, my issue is them raising the prices of the beverage package and then raising the prices of whole "classes" of alcohol and to such an extent that none of them are included any longer. Do one or the other. Doing both seems underhanded and uncaring about your clientele.

 

Also, just because something is legal does not make it moral, ethical, fair or just.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited August 7, 2016 by Hopes4

I don't need to prove that NCL has the right to make the change...the mere fact that they did so stands as proof that they can...unless it can be shown that they can't make the change. The credibility issue falls to those who somehow think that they can't do what they have already done.

 

 

Hahahahaha..

No.

If it were from one or two people saying "I think the price of X was $10.95 last month and now it might be $16.95", I could agree with you. But when we've seen photos of actual menus and when we have cruisers who have actually taken cruises in these time frames and have seen (and paid) the differences first hand, NO.

 

Again, my issue is them raising the prices of the beverage package and then raising the prices of whole "classes" of alcohol and to such an extent that none of them are included any longer. Do one or the other. Doing both seems underhanded and uncaring about your clientele.

 

Also, just because something is legal does not make it moral, ethical, fair or just.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I am glad that someone else can see the bigger picture.

 

I personally do not care how much NCL charge for XYZ booze - I am not going to be on their ships paying their stupid prices whilst they regard their pasengers as cash cows and blatantly take the piss with their price increases.

 

Folks, remove your blinkers and research other lines - there are other (and IMHO) better options out there at the moment.

I have a question/thought. NCL doesn't list (as far as I know) their drink menu with prices anywhere off their ships, and we (the consumers) have feretted out that information on our own, from "unofficial" sources. Since that information isn't actually advertised, has NCL really "changed" anything, or should the consumer consider any information received from outside sources prior to boarding subject to change or be corrected with no expectations?

 

Agreed, they do not publish price lists (I wonder why?:rolleyes:)

 

However they do know that they have repeat passengers who know what prices used to be (clue is the Latitudes programme) and that this information gets public very quickly via social media.

Agreed, they do not publish price lists (I wonder why?:rolleyes:)

 

However they do know that they have repeat passengers who know what prices used to be (clue is the Latitudes programme) and that this information gets public very quickly via social media.

Why not publish a list, so they won't get into the pickle Celebrity did and they can change prices at will.

 

Word of mouth means nothing, the only thing that would mean anything is a published list by NCL which specifically lists only those items covered under the UBP.

Edited August 7, 2016 by NLH Arizona

Agreed, they do not publish price lists (I wonder why?:rolleyes:)

 

However they do know that they have repeat passengers who know what prices used to be (clue is the Latitudes programme) and that this information gets public very quickly via social media.

 

I agree the repeat passengers are a big problem. Last year DH cruised with his sister. They are cruising again this year. I asked if someone could order a Dark and Stormy made with Myers. Interestingly enough, a Dark and Stormy is actually trademarked in the US and uses Gosling Rum. I assume it can be ordered with Myers.

 

SIL drinks wine. I'm trying to find the current wine list. If DH and SIL are not forewarned they will order exactly what they did last year. I'm sure they would notice that they didn't sign last year but they have to this year - and there is a balance to what they are signing.

delete

Edited August 7, 2016 by Sissaaaaaa

Price lists would often have a standard disclaimer that reads 'Prices are subject to change without notice.' All sellers/retailers do this. It means nothing and gives you no protection if NCL posts it on the net. So why drill on this?

Edited August 7, 2016 by sfaaa

Why not publish a list, so they won't get into the pickle Celebrity did and they can change prices at will.

 

Word of mouth means nothing, the only thing that would mean anything is a published list by NCL which specifically lists only those items covered under the UBP.

 

So transparent, honest and above-board dealings mean nothing?

 

Crack on - fill Mr Del Rio's pockets with passengers' dollars extracted under less than transparent pretenses. I will not - I have more self respect than that.

 

NCL are acting like snake oil salesmen at the moment - anybody who cannot see this needs a serious reality check.

So transparent, honest and above-board dealings mean nothing?

 

Crack on - fill Mr Del Rio's pockets with passengers' dollars extracted under less than transparent pretenses. I will not - I have more self respect than that.

 

NCL are acting like snake oil salesmen at the moment - anybody who cannot see this needs a serious reality check.

Well NCL is not the only one. Celebrity tried it a few years ago, but unfortunately for them, they had a list of items in their package published.

 

I don't see that it is not transparent; being non transparent would be to raise the price, but not changing the price list and then when someone orders it, they are then told it is more expensive or just charged the extra if they have the UBP. They have a price list for their drinks and they raised the price. Raising prices is something all companies do and unfortunately this price raise affects a few who drink those certain beverages. All companies raise prices, I would have loved to pay last year's prices for the new car I purchase a week ago, but that didn't happen because prices go up.

 

I think anyone that can't see that it is business and other cruise lines do the same thing seriously needs a reality check.

 

Many complain about extra charges on NCL, here is a quote from another thread about Celebrity: If you want better food and service, why not move up to premium or luxury lines. When you do the "net daily rate" comparison (taking into consideration all the extras you will have to pay for on Celebrity), you may really be surprised about the better value of moving up. Just show that all cruise lines are more alike than different.

Edited August 7, 2016 by NLH Arizona