S.S.Oceanlover Posted September 1, 2009 #1 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Seems they were banned for life on CCL if this is true???????? Banned for life?? Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halos Posted September 1, 2009 #2 Share Posted September 1, 2009 That is freaking bizarre! Did you see the pic of the 'damage'?? Even if they did do that, it's so small!!!! This is an odd story.....not sure I'm buying it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.S.Oceanlover Posted September 1, 2009 Author #3 Share Posted September 1, 2009 That's why I said, "if it's true". Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salty dingo Posted September 1, 2009 #4 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Seems sort of credible to me. Only barely. The only part that made no sense was the part where they were "forced to sign a document" I cannot see any possible way a cruise line could force someone to sign a document they did not agree with. If you sign the document, you do so under your own free will. Also, detained for 2 hours after the other passengers had disembarked.? Umm, I think that is bunk. They are not going to delay the boarding of new passengers over that. They a lot more interested in clearing the ship and getting ready for the next load of passengers, than they are in a damage claim. The marks on the dresser in the photo seem very minor, but there is no way to know if those are the same marks in question. Maybe there are some other, worse marks out of the picture. If it all went down as the guy says, it is very unfortunate for him. However, people in stressful situations have a tendency to twist the facts until the make the situation favorable to them. So, I'd take this with a lot of grains of salt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cruisin' Ron VA Posted September 1, 2009 #5 Share Posted September 1, 2009 How odd. It seems that the "damage" is quite small and normal wear and tear that I have seen before on ships. It seems a little paint would cover it up and all would be well. There is a copy of the letter signed by the captain and two other ship employees telling them that they are not permitted to sail Carnival again. This is insane. If this is true, and it looks like it is, I would have to side with the family on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs.C05 Posted September 1, 2009 #6 Share Posted September 1, 2009 This just sounds odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joebat1 Posted September 1, 2009 #7 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Seems they were banned for life on CCL if this is true???????? Banned for life?? Bill They tried to ban me for life if I removed ALL the auto-tips... Lucky me, we were able to work out a comprimise... I would only reduce the auto-tip by 1/2, and CCL allows me to sail Carnival's sister ships..... Princess and Hal are great lines ~~!!~~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salty dingo Posted September 1, 2009 #8 Share Posted September 1, 2009 There is a copy of the letter signed by the captain and two other ship employees Wrong. If you look closely, the captain signed in two places. The other was presumably the cheif security officer. Apparently, the guest did not sign. So, I stand corrected on that. But he says repeatedly in the article and press release that he did sign. Maybe he signed the copy they kept? I still say he did not have to sign. And they would not have held up the ship's departure for the next cruise. Period. The marks in the first picture could not have been caused by bottle opening, in my opinion because they were vertical. The other mark definitely could have been the result of a beer bottle, or any number of other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JessicaRN Posted September 1, 2009 #9 Share Posted September 1, 2009 This doesn't make any sense... it's so tiny. And they said it was from popping the top off a beer but the beer bottle they found had a twist top? There has to be more to the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donnask8pro Posted September 1, 2009 #10 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Luggage hitting the desks? That seems more plausible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.S.Oceanlover Posted September 1, 2009 Author #11 Share Posted September 1, 2009 This doesn't make any sense... it's so tiny. And they said it was from popping the top off a beer but the beer bottle they found had a twist top? There has to be more to the story. I still say they removed the autotips and the cabin steward got even.:eek: Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hill6 Posted September 1, 2009 #12 Share Posted September 1, 2009 How much was the repair bill? I think I would have paid it. Lifetime ban? I wonder. I have been in cabins with damage. I would have argued that it was there when I arrived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salty dingo Posted September 1, 2009 #13 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Ok, look closely at the banning letter. The word MASTER is crossed out and the initials HD written in. So, the captain did not sign, it was the Hotel Director? Well, he is the #2 man on the ship, and the captain can, but never does, question his authority on hotel matters, so the buck stops there. The letter is a form-type, which does not address the specific act for which the man is being banned. So, it is reasonable to suspect he was banned for something else than the scuffed furniture. Maybe he punched someone? We'll probably never know unless Carnival comes on here and rebuts the claim. Since the guy is going so public, issuing press releases, etc., what is normally a private matter between Carnival and a guest may become everyone's business. I can't wait to hear their side of the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nunu Posted September 1, 2009 #14 Share Posted September 1, 2009 That little kid in those pics looks like trouble, just sayin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cruisin' Ron VA Posted September 1, 2009 #15 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Wrong. If you look closely, the captain signed in two places. The other was presumably the cheif security officer. Apparently, the guest did not sign. So, I stand corrected on that. But he says repeatedly in the article and press release that he did sign. Maybe he signed the copy they kept? I still say he did not have to sign. And they would not have held up the ship's departure for the next cruise. Period. The marks in the first picture could not have been caused by bottle opening, in my opinion because they were vertical. The other mark definitely could have been the result of a beer bottle, or any number of other things. Ok fine. It doesnt make much difference how many people signed it. Two Carnival employees signed the letter, the accused did not. I guess the color ink threw me off. At any rate it didnt change the outcome. Thanks for the correction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salty dingo Posted September 1, 2009 #16 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Thanks for the correction. I got it wrong too. Apparently the captain did not sign, since his title is crossed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snorkel2Much Posted September 1, 2009 #17 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Steward accidentally slam it with the vacuum cleaner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jessemon Posted September 1, 2009 #18 Share Posted September 1, 2009 I just think it is so "cute" how pix were taken with the kid in it...... There is more to this than the author is telling us..... I smell a rat..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Essiesmom Posted September 1, 2009 #19 Share Posted September 1, 2009 They are trying to use this as an excuse...Look at what the letter says: This...Is based on your actions on the current cruise, which were a violation of the ship rules, interfered with the safety and/or enjoyment of other guests on the ship or caused harm to Carnival. They are grasping at the last phrase, but I would bet there is a lot more that happened outside of the cabin...EM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharecruises Posted September 1, 2009 #20 Share Posted September 1, 2009 The wording is odd...does not sound like just damaged furniture "based on your actions on the current cruise, which were a violation of the ship rules, interfered with the safety and/or enjoyment of other guests on the ship, or caused harm to Carnival" somehow some scuff marks on a dresser hardly fit that?? I wonder if other incidents had occurred....it would be good to hear Carnival's side, but we usually don't get that option Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nunu Posted September 1, 2009 #21 Share Posted September 1, 2009 I just think it is so "cute" how pix were taken with the kid in it......There is more to this than the author is telling us..... I smell a rat..... :eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwannacruznow Posted September 1, 2009 #22 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Well at least they can honestly say "I will never cruise Carnival again". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gargoyle999 Posted September 1, 2009 #23 Share Posted September 1, 2009 That little kid in those pics looks like trouble, just sayin'. Kid looks like he was drinking that wine sitting there... :eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cruisin' Ron VA Posted September 1, 2009 #24 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Hehe. I was looking at the pics again and the kid standing up looks like he has been hitting the bottle. Perhaps he was the one opening the beer on the dresser? LOL Seriously though, something is bothering me about this now that I think more about it. Perhaps its a coincidence, perhaps not, but this guy just happened to take pics of this kids sitting/standing right next to the damage? Can time stamps be changed on cameras? Hmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swscruiser Posted September 1, 2009 #25 Share Posted September 1, 2009 After enlarging the photo the scratches look new. If they had been there awhile I think they would not be so white. That being said I can't believe that this warrants a life time ban. Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.