Shabby treatment of Grandeur's 4/23 passengers

[1corona4u]

[quote name='alcman']Ignoring for a moment the plantation slaves that jump whenever the massah Royal Caribbean snaps a finger, the issue here is not that sh*t happens, it does and I think everyone realizes it. The question is what is the appropriate response by the vendor. One typically expects that the primary way of looking at this is the contract. While that sounds simple, it often is not.

Here the contract for which there was consideration is customer pays RCCL an agreed upon price in return for a seven day cruise (at least in this case). RCCL, for reasons related to their own inability to dock the ship under conditions that were unusual, but able to be anticipated, could not deliver on the contract for which they received consideration. Therefore, go back to the contract and look at the penalty clauses to see the appropriate response. This is where it gets fun. On its face, the contract states that they don't have to be pay you for changes to the cruise, including cutting out days. However, if applied literally, the contract breaks down to you pay us and we don't have to provide you with a cruise if we don't feel like it (i.e., any reason whatsoever even if we stay in port for seven days). In short, there is no consideration for the promise to pay and hence there is no contract. Therefore, all the terms, including the adhesion terms(the one sided we wrote the contract terms), fail.

In order to avoid this type of logical loop those terms are applied by courts realistically rather than strictly as written. In short, the price term in htis contract, if it was going from a 7 day to a 5 day cruise, should have been adjusted by 2/7 to reflect the new contract. The cruisel ines know this and that is why you get good customer service. Becasue one day, its going to be worth some customers time or the time of a State Attorney General to litigate the cruise lines contract of adhesion and its going to be thrown out.

Bottom line, the 3/25 customers took a beating and they were legally entitled to a price reduction of the cruise. RCCL funded their customer service to the previous cruise on the next cruise's tariffs. The only thing protecting RCCL's bacon are the practical difficulties that come with litigating the issue.

By the way, to those complaining of "whineing", no one was asking for something becasue they couldn't deal with life's problems. They had real cash consequences arising from Royal Caribbean's operational screwup. While they might not have been entitled to pain and suffering, they were entitled to a refund of the consideration paid for 2 days cruising that were not provided which would have gone a long way to at least covering the out of pocket consequences of Royal's breach for food and hotel services that Royal was supposed to have provided on those 2 days.[/QUOTE]

Are you related to Bicker?

[1corona4u]

[quote name='KamloopsCruisers']Good grief! I learned from reading these boards to arrive a day early for a cruise. Now, if I decide to add an extra day or two (as travel from Vancouver is long and expensive) I've made a big mistake? Give me a break!! There are many, many cruisers who do not frequent these boards. If checking these boards is where I should go to get information about my upcoming cruise, then perhaps the cruise companies should include this information with my tickets and contract.

I too am usually extremely busy just prior to my cruise with added last minute work obligations, packing, bill paying, arranging pet sitters, etc. Logging on to Cruise Critic isn't always an option for me.

Even though these boards are busy, the majority of cruisers have never been on Cruise Critic.[/QUOTE]

Good Grief!?! Apparently, it pays to be PRUDENT when traveling. If that includes a stop, to a message board, that you have been on for months PRIOR, then, yes, you should make the time for it. I intend to be on this board up until the limo picks me up. If something were to go wrong on my sailing, I *THINK* I would have a better chance finding out here, than anywhere else.

I am not saying that these people do not have a right to be upset, or that they may not be due anymore compensation, just the way it's being presented.

HOWEVER, who they really need to be addressing is RCI, on an individual basis. MAYBE too, RCI wanted people to cancel. Seems to me that they were more generous with that, then they were for compensation. Maybe they could only get compensation from their insurance carrier if they lost money due to this. If so, then it would have been in their best interest to have people cancel......just thinking/wondering out loud here....

[aprilfool]

I don't believe it would be my responsability to check these boards to see if my cruise was ok. It would be rccl's responsability to contact me. If you remember ,rccl had not given out any info for 4/23 cruisers by the time anyone who had plans of going to NO on Thursday had to leave.

[flagger]

The fact remains that RCCL is solely responsible for this, the blame does not lie with the passengers.

Imagine if this were the airlines who also have conditions of carriage that heavily favour them. Let's say you bought a flight from LAX to London. However, they only took you as far as Greenland. I guess some of you people would say "read the contract and quite your whining". Enjoy your time on vacation.

There are people in this world who BID their vacation time a year in advance according to seniority. You cannot just change your vacation time on a whim in those circumstances. Cruising IS paid for by disposable income and while whatever paid for a seven day cruise on an older ship may be drops in the buckets for some, it represents long months and even years of saving for others. So for pete's sake, have just a smidgen of compassion and stop defending the line who so clearly is in the wrong here.

It may be an accident and not some captain deciding to run into the dock on purpose, but the fault still lies with the captain and RCCL not on the passengers who lost two days of their cruise. It looks even worse for them if they have to rely on a message board to get their info. So what about the other 98% of passengers who never visit Cruise Critic?

[tazmancruiser]

Why is it 50% of the time when a person posts a message on these boards they seem to be ridiculed by some members who insist on picking the posting apart?
Can't this cruise message board treat one another with respect.
You certainly don't see this on several on the other cruise message boards at the other web sites.

[Bribrittmom]

I don't for a minute believe that the people saying "Get over it,stuff happens" would be saying it had they been booked on the 4/23 cruise. At the least the 4/23 cruisers deserve a prorated refund for the two missed days and a pecentage off a future cruise as well as the $300 onboard credit. It seems to me some posters must get a stipend from rccl for always absolving them of any blame. Come on folks, there is legal responsibility and moral responsibility. IMO RCCL did not live up to its moral responsibility to the 4/23 cruisers.

[Michelle!]

Now I have had a long day, maybe I am not thinking clearly enough...

A) Didn't RCL have to come up with some quick planning

B) Logistically, have any of you ever tried to figure out how to get 2000 pax to 2000 homes on different schedules than originally planned during Jazz Fest when there is limited room inventory and flight inventory?

C) Is there a slight possibility that we don't know the final answer on how these folks will be compensated and maybe that part of the problem is we are jumping the gun - I say wait a month - blow you steam somewhere else.

Wait - I only hope the best for all involved - and I bet those who stuck with it will have a great time in Key West tomorrow.

I need some sleep - TTFN

[beachchick]

My 2 cents (and no, I'm not on the 4/23(5) sailing).

I don't wonder that the 4/23 pax are upset over this. Last year during hurricane season, RCI offered refunds or 50% off cruise certificates [I]and[/I] substantial onboard credit for cruisers who missed only 1 day of their cruise. (I tell you, if we'd been able to we would have jumped all over that abbreviated Mariner cruise!)

Technically speaking, RCI has no control over the weather and could just has easily have said "refund or shortened sailing, your choice," with no other compensation. Here we have a situation where the RCI ship's captain is clearly at fault (don't give me any excuses--a ship's captain is responsible for the safe sailing, manuevering, and docking of the ship. period.). In this case, where RCI does bear responsibility, they are treating the pax poorly in comparison. Even the 4/16 pax got better treatment. If it were me, you bet I'd be ticked over it.

As for the contract as written, courts generally interpret contract clauses that have any ambiguity or are one-sided (you give me $100 for an item, but I don't actually have to give you anything) in favor of the complaining party. For example, I sign a contract to buy a Mercedes for $XX. When the car arrives, it is a Kia worth $X. Nothing wrong with it, but it is not what I paid for. Do you think this would hold up in court if the car dealer says, "well, we put a clause in that we could substitute another car or not even give the buyer a car at all," that the contract would be upheld? I don't. Nowhere in the RCI contract as I read it does it say, "we can give you a 5 day cruise instead of the 7 day one you paid for." Yes, it says "cancel, advance, postpone, and deviate." It [I]does not[/I] say "shorten." So, even sticking strictly to this contract, RCI is obligated to provide a cruise of the length the pax contracted to take. (No, I am [I]not[/I] a lawyer, so for Heaven's sake don't take what I've written here as "gospel"--so to speak--I have limited experience with a contract that had ambiguous clauses that were settled in my favor. This is how it was explained to me.)

Anyway, for all of you Granduer pax, please don't let this diminish your love of cruising. I, at least, continue to hope that RCI comes through for you with an appropriate compensation. (I don't think this should be free cruises for life; I do think it should be either the existing option to cancel with a full refund or 2/7 refund of the cruise as an onboard credit and a certificate for some percentage off on a future cruise.)

For all posters writing only to tell other posters to stop whining or to shut up or to move on, don't read this thread if it bugs you that much.

beachchick

[xpcdoojk]

[quote name='1corona4u']

Moral of the story, check the boards daily.[/QUOTE]

Did you get paid by CC for this post? :D I am sorry, that was funny! :D (I only quoted you because of this above statement not the below opinion of mine, fyi)

I always fly early, so this could have happened to me. Mine and my wife's vacation time is limited and we plan way, way in advance. For example I am scheduled for HAL' Rotterdam VI for November this year in South America. I booked this cruise February of 2004. I have purchased my plane tickets not thru the cruiseline, but with my credit card a few months ago. I am flying to the port Rio de Janeiro 5 days before the cruise leaves. I have booked pre and post cruise flights and excursions. I do not have my trip insured, and am therefore self-insured (ie it is my responsibility). If things go to sh*t, I am going to be very screwed. Let's say a rogue wave hits the ship before I get on it and it is severely damaged and requires immediate dry dock for the entire cruise (might as well go with a worst case scenario), will I think that HAL has screwed me? NO! Will I be happy? NO! It is called personal responsibility. Do I expect that the cruiseline will treat me fairly in such a situation? YES! BUT... I don't expect them to handle the situation in the press or in a silly internet forum full of do gooders and wishy washy posters. That is not how the real world works Pollyanna people. If you think that a public corporation is going to make a press release assuming full responsibility and admitting all wrong doing in todays litigious society you are either foolish or smoking crack. Another responsibility that you have if you were harmed in this experience, which almost none of us were in this forum, is to follow up directly with your TA and or RCI to make sure that they are aware of specifically your circumstances. That being said this matter is not going to be resolved in this forum. :p :D

jc

[xpcdoojk]

[quote name='starrynites']This has been very interesting. I'm on the OP's side.

How come no one mentioned how obnoxious XPCDOOJK is. He gets my vote as one of the more caustic posters.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for noticing. Logic is what I like to deal with and try to keep the emotions in control. Thanks for sharing.

jc:D

[Hondu]

[quote name='leighuf']Sh*t happens, folks. Cancel cruise. Book another. It's as simple as pie.

The day before my 4 day Carnival cruise, my TA called to say that the engines of the Fascination were having trouble and the ship would only be stopping in the Bahamas & not the Western Caribbean. No compensation was bring offered, but I could cancel and receive a full refund . . . which I did. A big disappointment and a big hassle. But, I booked a new 7 day cruise for the following week and got a great price for a great room. I obviously didn't cry about it. :D[/QUOTE]

This comment makes no sense. Did Carnival state that you would be getting a 2 day cruise or a 4 day cruise as booked? I bet it was still a 4 day cruise but not all of the ports. As a result, you would still have spent a 4 day vacation on the Fascination.

[Desertbelle]

jc, normally I would never, ever disagree with you on a forum, for two reasons.....1) you are usually correct and I almost always agree with you, and 2) you are a friend :), but I need to say this.

A rogue wave is an act of God, a ship's captian plowing into a dock and ripping a hole in a ship isn't. The captain is a RCI employee and RCI is responsible for his actions while on duty. If you employed a driver to deliver supplies from your business and your driver backs into your customers loading dock and destroys both the dock and the truck, you would be responsible, not only for repairing the damage, but you would need to get the supplies to your other customers while the truck is being repaired, even if it costs you a lot of extra money. Why? Because you are responsible for the actions of your employees AND it's good business to make your customers happy.

So in your example, God's hand was at play, and no one should be held responsible and it would suck to be you. :) But, with the Grandeur, the Captain's hand was at play and RCI is responsible. If nothing else, as a stock holder in RCI, I hate to see the bad customer service which can only lead to poor sales in the future....they need to do the right thing and make these people happy.

[dewayneg]

I am sailing on the Grandeur in December. While it is not likely that this will happen again, if RC offers me a $300 credit for losing 30% of a vacation that cost me $4000 for the cabin alone, I would find another cruise line to sail with.

Contract or no contract.

[xpcdoojk]

Hi Margie, feel free to disagree with me everyone else does! :D ;)

If we discover that the captain is guilty of bad driving then yes you have a strong point. However, I don't think a board of inquiry has found that at this time. I prefer not to judge the captain in absentia since I was not there, and I am not qualified to judge him from a purely technical point of view. Therefore, I think until the facts are known, that it was a freak wind or current that nobody could predict or prevent that caused the ship to collide with the pier. Therefore, I will stick with my original statement. In the meantime, I agree with someone's theory that RCI wanted the passengers to cancel. Hence the very generous offer of cancelling the cruise and the less generous offer to take the cruise. I still think that when the dust settles the odds that RCI will have done the right thing are greater than they will screw the passengers out of money. JMHO, and I could be wrong. :D I know several here know I am!:D

jc

[celtic selke]

[quote name='tazmancruiser']Why is it 50% of the time when a person posts a message on these boards they seem to be ridiculed by some members who insist on picking the posting apart?
Can't this cruise message board treat one another with respect.
You certainly don't see this on several on the other cruise message boards at the other web sites.[/QUOTE]

Well if 50% agree, and 50% disagree with the OP, we have a happy medium with some interesting give and take.
But if 100% agree, we have a boring thread that no one will read.
And not all the people that disagree are ridiculing or disrespecting the OP. They are just stating opinions which they have every right to state.
This is the way this board has always been and I certainly hope it stays this way.

celtic

[wingnutphl]

I have to diagree a little with you Margie. Yes, it completely was the Captains decision to try to dock in rough sea and strong winds. The rough sea and strong winds are not under the Captain's control. If he wouldn't have tried then we would all be posting on a thread entitled "Didn't make it to Costa Maya, Can I sue??" It's just one of those things.

I agree that RCI should give more compensation but the cruisers on the 4/23 sailing will have to make the best of it. If not you will ruin what is left of their hard earned vacation. Take what they have to offer, have a good cruise then call RCI and lodge a complaint about more compensation.

[Desertbelle]

Well, jc, whether or not your driver in my scenerio was driving poorly or not isn't the issue. A person can have an "accident" and have a perfectly good reason for it, but it doesn't take responsibility away. What if the driver hit the loading dock to avoid running over a child running after a ball? The child is saved, the loading dock and truck are still damaged, customers still need their supplies. Wind shear, strange current, whatever the case, the Captain was attempting to dock the ship, knowing that this is a particularly hard to approach dock, and something went wrong. The ultimate responsibility is RCI who employes the Captain.

After my experience with Princess and our screwed up cruise on the Dawn Princess last year, I was left with a very bad taste in my mouth for Princess and how they handled the engine problem that they knew about for 9 months. I can't see myself ever cruising on Princess again and because of the rotten way they treated their customers I will take every opportunity to tell people my story and all about the poor customer service I received from Princess.

From a business point of view RCI needs to do some "damage control" and make things right, whether they like it or not.

[JTJ]

I'm not an expert on shipping insurance but ships are insured against crashes and hurricane business disruptions. This insurance probably also includes some compensation to customers (pax). If so that would explain why RCCL treated the 4/16 pax well and last years hurricane changes well as compared to the 4/23 pax.

[Desertbelle]

[quote name='wingnutphl']I have to diagree a little with you Margie. Yes, it completely was the Captains decision to try to dock in rough sea and strong winds. The rough sea and strong winds are not under the Captain's control. If he wouldn't have tried then we would all be posting on a thread entitled "Didn't make it to Costa Maya, Can I sue??" It's just one of those things.

I agree that RCI should give more compensation but the cruisers on the 4/23 sailing will have to make the best of it. If not you will ruin what is left of their hard earned vacation. Take what they have to offer, have a good cruise then call RCI and lodge a complaint about more compensation.[/QUOTE]

I appreciate your viewpoint wingnutphl. I am sure the 4/23 cruisers had wished that he hadn't attempted to dock that day.

The cruise lines are very stubborn about giving up anything. Our Dawn Princess cruise, due to engine trouble that had been well talked about for months on these boards, we missed 2 ports completely and 2 of the remaining 4 ports were shortened appreciably. We were not given any choices but to cruise and take a $150 shipboard credit. No opportunity to cancel and rebook. We were also told to go, have the best time possible and take care of it afterwards.

We were in the post-dry dock cruise, months earlier we had been assured by Princess that the engine would be fixed and the itinerary would be as posted. A few days AFTER final payment we are told the new engine will need a "breaking in period" and our itinerary would reflect this.

Our letters afterward got our party an additional $72 towards a future cruise. I can imagine you know where I think Princess can put their $72!! :D

[emmapeel05]

I was supposed to be on the 4/23 cruise. I was told to get over it and stop complaining in the other thread. All I can state is the way I feel. And I don't feel that RCI was fair. I chose to cancel the cruise and I will eat the 500.00 change fee that the airline will charge me to reuse my tickets.

The accident happened Wed. morning. an email was sent to me Thursday at 5:00 pm. I did not see the email until 7:00pm. We called RCI and they said we would be compensated 125 per person and 25% off our next cruise and we would be leaving either late Sat. or early Sunday. Than I checked the RC website around 10:00pm and the story had changed, leaving Monday, sometime. Called RC Friday morning to check, They told me we were to leave Monday late (hopefully) and we would receive a 300.00 per cabin ship board credit, no hotel credit, no help in finding accomadations, no discount on a future cruise. Couldn't switch airline tickets from Saturday to Monday, couldn't switch vacation to anywhere else on such short notice (I feel RC could have let us know sooner). So our family bowed out. I have been on cruises before with missed ports or non-working hot tubs ..... never asked for anything because it did not affect my pocketbook. This situation would have, and 300.00 would not fully compensate me, so if they are not going to than I will cruise elsewhere. I am scheduled on Carnival today to leave out of NYC.

[caitlyn20]

[quote name='ERsecurity']I would have a tough time spending $300 in cruise credits on one cruise...

Good luck[/QUOTE]

Actually, as with us, if you didn't spend it by the end, they gave you cash back.

[Cruising89143]

I think that RCI did a good of taking care of the ones on board the ship when she hit the dock but I feel the offer per person for the ones on the 4/23 cruise was not up to what it should have been. RCI was giving better deals to the passengers that were affected by the hurricanes last year. This problem last week was caused by RCI and not the weather. RCI needs to step up to the plate and do the right thing with their customers.

[Nliedel]

I am so grateful this did not happen to me because I would have LOST it. Vacations around these parts are set up 6 months to a year ahead of time. I cannot change them at will. If my vacation was shorted 2 days and I got so little compensation it would have been bad! Those passengers paid for 7 days and while I get the "act of God" thing I do not get "well the ship crashed". Yes there were currents but the crash was not really an act of God. The passengers deserve a prorated rate for the days actually sailed in this circumstance as a good will gesture from RCI if nothing else.

I am the first one to say "if you travel in hurricane season get insurance and plan on things happening" so it is not that I believe people deserve compensation in all situations.

[caitlyn20]

[quote name='xpcdoojk']The folks on the Dawn were probably scared to death.

The people on the Grandeur were probably inconvenienced.

jc[/QUOTE]

I'm going to agree with you on that one.

Most people on the Grandeur just heard a loud noise that sounded like a squeaky cart being wheeled down the hallway, and were surprised the ship had a hole in it when we were allowed out on the dock. At no time did I feel my life was in danger.

However, had a 70ft wave hit my ship, knocking windows out, etc....I'm sure panic would have set in.

[terri23]

[quote name='emmapeel05']I was supposed to be on the 4/23 cruise. I was told to get over it and stop complaining in the other thread. All I can state is the way I feel. And I don't feel that RCI was fair. I chose to cancel the cruise and I will eat the 500.00 change fee that the airline will charge me to reuse my tickets.

The accident happened Wed. morning. an email was sent to me Thursday at 5:00 pm. I did not see the email until 7:00pm. We called RCI and they said we would be compensated 125 per person and 25% off our next cruise and we would be leaving either late Sat. or early Sunday. Than I checked the RC website around 10:00pm and the story had changed, leaving Monday, sometime. Called RC Friday morning to check, They told me we were to leave Monday late (hopefully) and we would receive a 300.00 per cabin ship board credit, no hotel credit, no help in finding accomadations, no discount on a future cruise. Couldn't switch airline tickets from Saturday to Monday, couldn't switch vacation to anywhere else on such short notice (I feel RC could have let us know sooner). So our family bowed out. I have been on cruises before with missed ports or non-working hot tubs ..... never asked for anything because it did not affect my pocketbook. This situation would have, and 300.00 would not fully compensate me, so if they are not going to than I will cruise elsewhere. I am scheduled on Carnival today to leave out of NYC.[/QUOTE]

emmapeel, have a great cruise!! Let us know how much fun you had!