is it hard to substitute a cruiser?

[pmacher61]

Nothing wrong with that. 100 % damages is Justified especially when you agree to it in the cruise contract. That is why you have the option to buy insurance that has cancel for any reason provisions or cancel for work provisions.

The general rule in US (and GB) common law is that there can be no penalty damages for simple breach of a commercial contract. Do you disagree with that statement of the law? The measure of damages for a breach of contract is the actual loss suffered by the non-breaching party. Only if the cruise line suffered a loss should it be able to charge for the actual damage it sustained.

 

That one can buy insurance to avoid a penalty he should not be subjected to in the first place is not a valid reason to violate the general rule of law. It's tantamount to buying insurance you won't punch me in the nose or steal my car. That I have insurance for your bad act doesn't give you the right to violate the law by punching my nose or stealing my car.

[happy cruzer]

They lose the option of selling that cabin at the prevailing price each day it is out of inventory. They should not have to sell it at a bargain price if you decide to cancel at the last minute. It's the cruise line business model probably based on have cabins tied up for very long periods of time compared to other industries. Having a hotel room go empty for two night on average is different than a cabin going empty on 10 on average.

 

Just for the record, I too feel if they could come up with a better model of deposits and refunds it would help their image and make people more likely to cruise. So it they could, I think the would.

[Benita]

They lose the option of selling that cabin at the prevailing price each day it is out of inventory. They should not have to sell it at a bargain price if you decide to cancel at the last minute. It's the cruise line business model probably based on have cabins tied up for very long periods of time compared to other industries. Having a hotel room go empty for two night on average is different than a cabin going empty on 10 on average.

 

Just for the record, I too feel if they could come up with a better model of deposits and refunds it would help their image and make people more likely to cruise. So it they could, I think the would.

 

If you substitute another person and keep the cabin, the cruise line is not losing out on anything. I think they should charge a nominal fee for the time and effort it takes to update the information, but 100% penalty and then full price for the substitute person is quite steep. That said, we know what we are getting into when we sign up for a cruise and have the choice of either accepting the terms or not booking the cruise in the first place.

[PaulMCO]

The general rule in US (and GB) common law is that there can be no penalty damages for simple breach of a commercial contract. Do you disagree with that statement of the law? The measure of damages for a breach of contract is the actual loss suffered by the non-breaching party. Only if the cruise line suffered a loss should it be able to charge for the actual damage it sustained.

 

That one can buy insurance to avoid a penalty he should not be subjected to in the first place is not a valid reason to violate the general rule of law. It's tantamount to buying insurance you won't punch me in the nose or steal my car. That I have insurance for your bad act doesn't give you the right to violate the law by punching my nose or stealing my car.

 

Give me a break... This is no different than you buying a non refundable air ticket or a non refundable room in a hotel.

[potterhill]

Im pretty sure that's what happened with the people we met in 2011. I understood the charges were pretty nominal to change the names. Maybe not.

 

Mo

[hypercafe]

When I booked a trip on the Rivera in March the agent said they had updated their refund policy to make it more expensive to cancel/change a trip. Maybe this is new? It really does seem like a lot just to change a name, would make me a little uneasy to use Oceania again, in fact it has really got me thinking prior to final payment.

[pacheco18]

Give me a break... This is no different than you buying a non refundable air ticket or a non refundable room in a hotel.

 

Agree. And I too am an attorney. The terms are clear. Anyone notice which law governs? If it's Marshall Islands it's probably legal there. Lol

[pmacher61]

Agree. And I too am an attorney. The terms are clear. Anyone notice which law governs? If it's Marshall Islands it's probably legal there. Lol

Are you serious?

Are you saying just because a term, no matter how contrary to the law it may be (e.g. a penalty), is clearly stated in a contract, it will be enforced?

Are you serious that Marshall Is law applies? I would have guessed the forum selection clause (usually FL) also provides for application of FL law.

LOL? At what or who?

[pmacher61]

Give me a break... This is no different than you buying a non refundable air ticket or a non refundable room in a hotel.

I asked you a question about the law. You have not answered.

There is a difference as I pointed out. There is no option for non-refundability in a cruise ticket. Not all air is non-refundable. Hotels are a different animal entirely.

[pacheco18]

I asked you a question about the law. You have not answered.

There is a difference as I pointed out. There is no option for non-refundability in a cruise ticket. Not all air is non-refundable. Hotels are a different animal entirely.

 

I suspect you are way too litigious (and im a litigator) for most of us here On cc. This is not a legal forum and we are not litigating the matter here. I suspect Paul will not respond

 

 

Let us know what sen schumer has to say

[tallship]

Actually, I am not surprised that a company would take a hard stance on this. Think of the chaos it would cause if everyone changed or substituted a guest especially after final payment. That is why insurance is purchased and we always pay a bit more to ensure we have full coverage and the ability to cancel for any reason.

 

I am happy it will work out for the OP but would not bash nor expect O to cover this.

[pmacher61]

I suspect you are way too litigious (and im a litigator) for most of us here On cc. This is not a legal forum and we are not litigating the matter here. I suspect Paul will not respond.

You have absolutely no way of knowing if I am or am not "way too litigious." What you do know is that on a thread dealing with the hardship of having to cancel and lose 100% of the contract price, I have raised the issue of whether the cancellation policies of all cruise lines constitute an unlawful penalty under applicable law.

 

Actually, I am not surprised that a company would take a hard stance on this. Think of the chaos it would cause if everyone changed or substituted a guest especially after final payment. That is why insurance is purchased and we always pay a bit more to ensure we have full coverage and the ability to cancel for any reason.

 

I am happy it will work out for the OP but would not bash nor expect O to cover this.

Why would chaos be caused if the cruise line were required to return a portion of the contract price for customers who cancelled at any time before the cruise departs? According to a ship hotel manager that regularly posts here, a cabin is turned over 7 times before it is finally booked. That indicates the cruise lines are equipped to deal with turnover, even turnover coming within weeks, if not days, of a cruise.

 

If the cruise line is not able to resell the cabin, then the original purchaser would remain on the hook. If the cruise line opted to cut the price, then the original cancelling purchaser would be obliged to pay the difference plus some reasonable expenses incurred in effecting the resale. The decision to cut the price would rest with the cruise line. I could understand the argument that it would create a negative marketing strategy if cabins were always discounted in the last few days or weeks before a cruise were to sail. The cruise lines would not have to change their pricing although it would probably be in their interest to do so since most lines rely on onboard spending rather than the cost of passage for profit. The fact of the matter is that cruise lines almost never sail with an empty cabin for that reason.

 

Again, the existence of insurance to reimburse those who cancel does not cure the unfair (and arguably unlawful) conduct of the cruise lines in charging the full price for those who break the cruise contract without regard to whether the cruise line actually sustains any damage as a result of the cancellation. That you have a fire ins policy on your home doesn't make it right for your neighbor to light it on fire. And how much of those insurance policy premiums line the pockets of the cruise companies? I would bet they get a healthy commission (assuming they don't own the ins co outright).

[nana541]

Savy cruisers purchase their Travel Insurance policies from "Third Party" vendors and NOT thru the cruise line so that they can insure they have the coverage that meets their needs(pre- existing medical issues, medical evac to hospital and home country, business, etc). These types of policies are NOT sold by the cruise lines nor are the companies owned by the cruise lines.

 

Travel insurance offered by the cruise line needs to be examined closely to see what it covers and if it meets your needs. Usually this coverage is basic and the premiums are fairly low but do not usually cover special situations.

 

This board is for travel advice and not legal advice, but I think that was covered elsewhere. IMHO

[tallship]

I always purchase a cancel for "any reason" policy from a third party. However, O and Regent both pro-rate the amount of penalty depending on how close it is to the departure date.

[Caroldoll]

I had something happen years ago and DH developed an ear infection. I didn't have "for pre-existing or for any reason" and I was just sick. Fortunately he got well and released by the doctor 4 days before the cruise. Boy was I nervous as it was Crystal Penthouse when I was cruising with them. We would have lost a huge amount of money.