#CelebrityFail (Infinity Antarctica Cruise 1/21/18 - 2/4/18)

Thank-you for sharing your experience.

I am so glad we chose to go to Antarctica and the Falklands on the HAL Zaandam this year instead of the Infinity. We had considered the Infinity; but the HAL itinerary with 4 days in Antarctica, rather than the Infiity's 2 days won out. I can't imagine going through the changes you had with such an amazing cruise itinerary. Missing the Falklands is most upsetting; but not that unusual, unfortunately. Arriving in Ushuaia at 4:30 PM is unbelievable. You had no time to see anything in that gorgeous port.

Probably the most surprising thing to me was that they would take passengers to Antarctica without having adequate power. That is no place to be if the other engine fails; plus, crossing the Drake in an underpowered ship seems like someone didn't have the passengers safety as their first priority. I am very disappointed in Celebrity for how this cruise was handled.

In the 17+ years I've frequented the cruise critic boards, I've read many, many posts that complain about a cruise. As far as I can recall, I've never read one that I would have considered to be much more than whining or unreasonable expectations. (Except those ships caught in known hurricane waters.)

This is the post that is an exception. Unacceptable decision to send this ship out in the first place. REALLY unacceptable that any corporation would not generously compensate the passengers (I assume that Celebrity is blaming the weather?)

I'm not one who thinks class action suits are a good thing. In fact, I believe that most are set up by attorneys simply because they see a very big paycheck. Most of these class action suits are bogus BS. That said, I hope this one ends with Celebrity having to fork over big bucks, which SADLY will pad the pockets of the lawyers instead of the deserving passengers.

There are many assumptions in this thread. Does anyone think that the infinity is the first ship to go to the Antarctic on one engine? How many cruises were done in the past few years on a ship that had one engine partially or fully not operational? How much concern was/is there about two engine airplanes flying on one engine and flying across water? Finally, there is the contract. I'm sure lawyers will spend a great deal of time preparing an emotional prosecution, but I don't think they can prove that the ship was unsafe and it reckless to sail it...it's still sailing just fine BTW...we'll be on it in a couple of weeks and that engine will still not be working.

CC gives everyone a place to vent...but other than the late arrival at Ushuaia which was, of course, disappointing and missing Montevideo (which we also missed..and we had two engines)....and even with two engines, we didn't get close to any large sea ice or animals...we saw them from a distance away.

I understand the frustration, but IMHO, there just isn't a winnable legal case here. Everyone (passengers and Celebrity) would be well served by just agreeing on a bit more (reasonable) compensation and moving on to your next cruise on Celebrity or other ships. Life is too short to continue to dwell on this cruise....

Has Infinity been fixed? Does this propulsion problem impact present and future cruises ? I would not be happy to cruise on her until repairs have taken place. Particularly in dangerous waters around botton of South America.

Yes, very serious, and at least 500 passengers are trying to get their similar complaints onto social media. So far Celebrity’s response is that no more compensation will be forthcoming (beyond reimbursement for cancelled excursions).

Have you got all of Celebrity's international Facebook and Twitter accounts covered?

Have you bombarded both LLP and RCL's CEO via twitter with your dissatisfaction?

Things tend to happen as far as corporates are concerned when this happens.

Celebrity UK have been known to be arrogant enough to try and delete negative comments on Facebook by marking the comments as spam. But with Twitter they can't get away with it. Good luck.

Just as a bit of perspective. On all cruise lines, not just Celebrity, Port Stanley is missed about half of the time due to weather. Just as the crossing to Antarctica is often very rough.

Missing Stanley and having time shifts at the other ports do not even reach the stage of being a major deviation under the UK cruise contract (so a claim under the PTR would probably not succeed) and having a chance for a law suit to be successful under the US cruise contract is even far more of a reach. The lack of paper cups and some garnishments is so much minutia as far as a class action case.

Bottom line is even though it is a shame that the trip did not go as planned, that you missed Stanley and were late into Ushuaia the chances of a legal action to succeed to pretty much zero. Actually the fact that someone is taking legal action might work against you since a legal department might certainly argue against giving any kind of compensation and risk the appearance of wrong doing if a case might be pending.

There are many assumptions in this thread. Does anyone think that the infinity is the first ship to go to the Antarctic on one engine? How many cruises were done in the past few years on a ship that had one engine partially or fully not operational? How much concern was/is there about two engine airplanes flying on one engine and flying across water? Finally, there is the contract. I'm sure lawyers will spend a great deal of time preparing an emotional prosecution, but I don't think they can prove that the ship was unsafe and it reckless to sail it...it's still sailing just fine BTW...we'll be on it in a couple of weeks and that engine will still not be working.

 

CC gives everyone a place to vent...but other than the late arrival at Ushuaia which was, of course, disappointing and missing Montevideo (which we also missed..and we had two engines)....and even with two engines, we didn't get close to any large sea ice or animals...we saw them from a distance away.

 

I understand the frustration, but IMHO, there just isn't a winnable legal case here. Everyone (passengers and Celebrity) would be well served by just agreeing on a bit more (reasonable) compensation and moving on to your next cruise on Celebrity or other ships. Life is too short to continue to dwell on this cruise....

I for one, can not think of a passenger ship that crossed the Drake with a defective propulsion system. If you know differently, please cite instances and dates and ship. This is spoken from someone who experienced the exact same situation before attempting to cross the Tasman (almost as active as the Drake). And you know what happened? The single propulsion failed and we had to be tugged back to the previous port. The cruise ended up being the same number of days, just less ports. Compensation? Full refund on that cruise and a full 50% credit on a future cruise.

Also, it is ridiculous to equate dual engine aircraft operating over water with a single engine. If that happens, there is an immediate diversion to the nearest acceptable air field. They do not continue on the flight if there is an engine failure.

At the risk of prolonging this trial via CC :) I'd point out that you chose to take a fundamentally unsafe cruise to the Antarctic (as did we)...even with two working engines...the infinity does not have an ice hardened hull (remember the titanic). Now, I'll admit, the hull wasn't an issue in this case, but the lack of that reinforced hull is probably more dangerous than cruising on one engine. (note: the infinity is not the only cruise ship doing Antarctica without an ice hardened hull...but they are all unsafe in those waters)

Had celebrity cancelled the antarctic portion of the cruise, you (generic) would, undoubtedly, have the passengers also expect a full refund....but that type of deviation is clearly covered in the T&C's you agreed to. You just had a different cruise. Would you have felt better if they just cruised around for a few days instead of going to the Antarctic....or stayed an extra day in Ushuaia?

I don't think the legal action is going anywhere. OTOH, Celebrity should step up and "sweeten" the compensation.

There is precedence....You can go back and look at the experience when the century broke down one day into a cruise in VilleFranche...Celebrity offered a firm compensation package. (we were on that cruise). After two or three months of social pressure right here on CC, they increased the compensation. Hopefully that's how this will come out....but Celebrity had different management back then, and you have to work with Lisa.