Fair to not receive Crown & Anchor points?

[RoyalC]

So what do you think?

 

You pay in full for a cruise and are unable to go on the cruise

due to illness or injury. You must pay the 100% penalty because you are in the narrow cancellation window, should you at least receive your Crown & Anchor points for he sailing?

 

Seems to me if you pay in full, and have to cancel, you could at least get credit. It is not like they have to expend to wash your towels or feed you!

[Clarea]

Royal makes the Crown & Anchor rules, and they say you have to go on the cruise to get the points.

[negc]

So what do you think?

 

You pay in full for a cruise and are unable to go on the cruise

due to illness or injury. You must pay the 100% penalty because you are in the narrow cancellation window, should you at least receive your Crown & Anchor points for he sailing?

 

Seems to me if you pay in full, and have to cancel, you could at least get credit. It is not like they have to expend to wash your towels or feed you!

 

Should the line have to determine that you didn't have travel insurance that reimbursed you for the missed cruise? Or should they have to determine that you missed the cruise due to illness or injury and not just because you decided not to go. Seems to be putting an unnecessary burden on the line over what is pretty much a minor issue of lost C&A points. Life isn't fair, but worrying about the loss of Crown and Anchor points because an illness or injury caused you to miss your cruise, seems to be a bit extreme.

Edited February 19, 2014 by negc

[jp30338]

You only get points for COMPLETED cruises.

[Retired LEO]

So what do you think?

 

You pay in full for a cruise and are unable to go on the cruise

due to illness or injury. You must pay the 100% penalty because you are in the narrow cancellation window, should you at least receive your Crown & Anchor points for he sailing?

 

Seems to me if you pay in full, and have to cancel, you could at least get credit. It is not like they have to expend to wash your towels or feed you!

 

No. The rules are clear.

[Aquahound]

Should the line have to determine that you didn't have travel insurance that reimbursed you for the missed cruise?

 

Great point. Also, my AMEX card reimbursed me 100% when I had to cancel a non refundable flight. The carrier would have no clue. So to answer the op's question, yes, I think it is fair.

[Langley Cruisers]

Yes, fair. Points for completed cruises you were physically present on.

[RoyalC]

The question one more time is- "should" RCI give you Crown & Anchor points if you pay in full?

 

I am not worried about a refund- I understand the policy and that is not the question. RCI has your money, why not get credit? I personally think it is bad policy and bad marketing to do this.

It is also bad policy to try to push another cruise on you less via phone and email less than 24 hours after cancelling your cruise while they act all cheery about it. People that cancel last minute have something serious going on in their life to miss a cruise!

 

side note- you only get points for a completed cruise IF you pay yourself. My parents booked with an agent once, who in turn used her free RC cruise credit, and my parents did not receive cruise credit. Go figure!

[bouhunter]

Should the line have to determine that you didn't have travel insurance that reimbursed you for the missed cruise? Or should they have to determine that you missed the cruise due to illness or injury and not just because you decided not to go. Seems to be putting an unnecessary burden on the line over what is pretty much a minor issue of lost C&A points. Life isn't fair, but worrying about the loss of Crown and Anchor points because an illness or injury caused you to miss your cruise, seems to be a bit extreme.

 

I don't see why it should be a "burden" at all for the cruise line, what a ridiculous thought. If you paid and they kept the money, why shouldn't you get the points whether or not you were on the ship, regardless of the reason? And why should it matter at all whether or not someone had trip insurance, RCCL got their money. All we're talking here is a few drinks, coupons and small discount perks. What seems extreme to me is how quickly people are to defend RCCL.

Edited February 19, 2014 by bouhunter

[RoyalC]

No. The rules are clear.

 

Do you think it is a good rule then? I can come up with many rules and laws in the United States and use your logic, but that may start a riot in here. But than again, according to you, rules are rules.

[RoyalC]

Do you think it is a good rule then? I can come up with many rules and laws in the United States and use your logic, but that may start a riot in here. But than again, according to you, rules are rules.

 

edit: then again

[Clarea]

...side note- you only get points for a completed cruise IF you pay yourself. My parents booked with an agent once, who in turn used her free RC cruise credit, and my parents did not receive cruise credit. Go figure!

Not exactly. Royal does not care who pays. Whoever cruises gets the points. However, they do have provisions in rules that specify which types of rates are eligible to earn points. Certain highly discounted rates don't quality for C&A points.

[Ourusualbeach]

As almost EVERYONE else has said absolutely not.

 

Doing this would open the C&A points system to abuse. People could book, cancel, get points and then get a full refund through insurance. Someone could theoretically be D or D+ without ever setting foot on a ship.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Ourusualbeach

[Langley Cruisers]

The question one more time is- "should" RCI give you Crown & Anchor points if you pay in full?

 

Yes, we know the question. :D People are answering it.

 

Doing this would open the C&A points system to abuse. People could book, cancel, get points and then get a full refund through insurance. Someone could theoretically be D or D+ without ever setting foot on a ship.

 

Scary thought, hey? You're absolutely right.

.

[At Sea 4Ever]

As almost EVERYONE else has said absolutely not.

 

Doing this would open the C&A points system to abuse. People could book, cancel, get points and then get a full refund through insurance. Someone could theoretically be D or D+ without ever setting foot on a ship.

 

 

Exactly! People would just buy themselves to whatever level they wanted.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

[ryansmith18]

Guys, the OP is not looking for clarification of the rules. Obviously the rules are the rules, but (s)he thinks the rule is a bit silly, and I tend to agree. It's unfortunate that you can't make the trip, but there's no real reason to not be awarded those points when you've just dropped $2000 or whatever for the trip. It's such a minor thing too - it's not like it costs RCI anything significant to give you 7 measely points.

[RoyalC]

I don't see why it should be a "burden" at all for the cruise line, what a ridiculous thought. If you paid and they kept the money, why shouldn't you get the points whether or not you were on the ship, regardless of the reason? And why should it matter at all whether or not someone had trip insurance, RCCL got their money. All we're talking here is a few drinks, coupons and small discount perks. What seems extreme to me is how quickly people are to defend RCCL.

 

I agree, I think it makes RCI look a little petty and greedy. Medical reasons can easily be verified by a doctor (to the other poster). I think it is bad relations. Heck, RCI already moved the cancel periods back from what they used to be. The whole point of the program is to build brand loyalty and achieve market share. Otherwise, you would receive nothing.

Maybe the next question should be, would you be upset if RCI made "new rules" and did away with C & A. After all, it is "the new rule."

I would guess people on here would vent and say they "earned" their point and are entitled to their benefits. Perhaps the same way that someone who paid in full earned their benefits and did not ask to be feed or served. Maybe they are up$et you did not go on the crui$e and drink your$elf into a $tupor.

[RoyalC]

As almost EVERYONE else has said absolutely not.

 

Doing this would open the C&A points system to abuse. People could book, cancel, get points and then get a full refund through insurance. Someone could theoretically be D or D+ without ever setting foot on a ship.

 

So you think people will book cruises and pay around $$$ for insurance only to lose that insurance money to get C & A points? The insurance will not pay off unless you can prove via hospital or doctor you cannot go on the cruise. You can try the cancel for any reason insurance policy but that costs more $$$ and for what? Paperwork, $$$ for around seven

C & A points? Seriously?

[LetsGetWet!]

The question one more time is- "should" RCI give you Crown & Anchor points if you pay in full?

 

Yes, we know the question. :D People are answering it.

 

Simple - he/she didn't like the answers they got, and hoped if they repeated the question they'd get different answers! :D

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

[CI66774]

OP - "fairness" has nothing to do with it. RCI promulgates the rules - period. It's like a rich person winning the lottery. Is that "fair?" "Fairness" has nothing to do with it.

Edited February 19, 2014 by CI66774

[RoyalC]

As almost EVERYONE else has said absolutely not.

 

Doing this would open the C&A points system to abuse. People could book, cancel, get points and then get a full refund through insurance. Someone could theoretically be D or D+ without ever setting foot on a ship.

 

If someone wants to spend a few thousand over the years on "cancel for any reason insurance" to get Diamond status then you lost your brain somewhere. Besides, cancel for any reason pays 75% back, so make that several thousand. Of course if you have a doctor that will forge notes for you, then you can save some money (if he does that for free), but that will catch on.

[RoyalC]

Simple - he/she didn't like the answers they got, and hoped if they repeated the question they'd get different answers! :D

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

 

The question was "should" they do this! Not "rules are "rules." I know what the rule is. Apparently you too never heard of the Mensa society.

There are people that agree with me too, but go on being a fanboy.

[nolesrule]

It's a loyalty program for going on cruises, not a loyalty program for paying for cruises.

[S.A.M.J.R.]

The question was "should" they do this! Not "rules are "rules." I know what the rule is. Apparently you too never heard of the Mensa society.

There are people that agree with me too, but go on being a fanboy.

To answer your question, YES, they "should" continue with the current rules. YES, I feel it is "fair" to say you have to complete the cruise before you get your points. How is it "unfair"? :confused:

[RoyalC]

OP - "fairness" has nothing to do with it. Princess promulgates the rules - period. It's like a rich person winning the lottery. Is that "fair?" "Fairness" has nothing to do with it.

 

If someone plays the lottery and wins it is fair. The ticket was purchased, and they get credit for whatever they win. Not sure who "Princess" is.

Again, the question is "should," as in "should" the rule be changed?