NCL- WORST Guest Services

[All-ready2cruise]

 

If any reasonable adult were complaining about one of these items onboard and the response was "You have to call shoreside once you are at home for that issue" the immediate question would be "What on earth can shoreside people do AFTER the vacation is over that you can't possibly take care of right here, right now?"

 

 

"address this on land"? Sorry...doesn't pass the smell test.

 

So true, can only imagine if GS had said to me, "you'll have address your issue with the key card on land after the cruise". :eek:

[SeaShark]

Speculative post alert!

 

If the customer was demanding a refund or some remedy of that type then that could be a legitimate reason to refer the complaint shore-side, notwithstanding the nature of the complaint. The customer may have made it clear that chocolate-covered strawberries or a small OBC was insufficient to resolve the complaint.

Sure...but speculation is all you have...unless those with information are willing to share it in a complete and honest manner. Since the OP has only shared limited information, the balace has to be speculation. But that is THEIR choice.

[Loonbeam]

Yep. And this is how you do it..

 

Via the correct channel. "Thank you for your recent inquiry. After reviewing your case we have determined that our prior response was correct. Unless you can provide additional information, our decision stands. We understand you may be disappointed with our response, but we feel we are operating within the terms and conditions you agreed to. If you feel that is not correct, please feel free to have your legal representative contact our legal team."

 

You ALWAYS respond even if it's the 1000th time they have complained. Your response may be a cease and desist suit, but you always do.

 

And BTW, there is NO evidence of any of that here, posters are just claiming that to justify a potential lack of response on NCLs part...

 

Sure, but what if the customer already complained...and you already apologized...and you already compensated them, yet now they are complaining about the same thing again? If the issue was addressed already, is it OK to not waste time addressing it again?

[sparks1093]

Sure...but speculation is all you have...unless those with information are willing to share it in a complete and honest manner. Since the OP has only shared limited information, the balace has to be speculation. But that is THEIR choice.

 

She deserved a response from NCL. I don't need to speculate about that.

[SeaShark]

She deserved a response from NCL. I don't need to speculate about that.

Yes, she deserves a response. But not another, and another, and another, and another until she gets her way.

 

Life doesn't guarantee a response that you'll be happy with. Sometimes "no" IS the answer.

[sparks1093]

Yes, she deserves a response. But not another, and another, and another, and another until she gets her way.

 

Life doesn't guarantee a response that you'll be happy with. Sometimes "no" IS the answer.

 

Now who is speculating? She said she has not received a response from shoreside CS. (And I agree, sometimes "no" is the answer as unpleasant as that might be, but at least it is a response.)

[janpo]

Yes, she deserves a response. But not another, and another, and another, and another until she gets her way.

 

Life doesn't guarantee a response that you'll be happy with. Sometimes "no" IS the answer.

 

Talk about making assumptions. Where did she say shes had multiple responses?

 

I must have also missed her saying she was going to contact them until she got her way.

Edited December 28, 2015 by janpo

[SeaShark]

Now who is speculating? She said she has not received a response from shoreside CS. (And I agree, sometimes "no" is the answer as unpleasant as that might be, but at least it is a response.)

 

Well...we're ALL speculating, but that is only because the OP has chosen to not share information. It is a situation over which we have no control. Sure...she said she hadn't received a response, but have you even considered that she DID receive a response onboard and as a result, no further response is needed?

 

Could just be that the matter is considered closed.

 

 

You can knock when no one is home, but you can't blame people who aren't there because they aren't answering. :rolleyes:

 

Talk about making assumptions. Where did she say shes had multiple responses?

 

I must have also missed her saying zhe was going to contact them until she got her way.

 

Where did I say that she said she had multiple responses?? I'm only pointing out that she, like all of us, only deserves ONE response... No need to be so literal.

[janpo]

Yes, she deserves a response. But not another, and another, and another, and another until she gets her way.

 

Life doesn't guarantee a response that you'll be happy with. Sometimes "no" IS the answer.

 

 

 

There....

[sparks1093]

Well...we're ALL speculating, but that is only because the OP has chosen to not share information. It is a situation over which we have no control. Sure...she said she hadn't received a response, but have you even considered that she DID receive a response onboard and as a result, no further response is needed?

 

Could just be that the matter is considered closed.

 

 

You can knock when no one is home, but you can't blame people who aren't there because they aren't answering. :rolleyes:

 

 

 

Where did I say that she said she had multiple responses?? I'm only pointing out that she, like all of us, only deserves ONE response... No need to be so literal.

 

If she received a response onboard (and it appears she did "take it up with corporate") if she elevates it to corporate anyway (which it appears she did) then she absolutely, undeniably deserves a response from corporate also- even if it's only to back up the shipboard customer service team.

 

In short she deserves a response from corporate even if she received a response onboard.

[SeaShark]

There....

 

Threre what? Again...I never said that the OP claimed she had multiple responses. Never. I simply said she doesn't deserve multiple responses. HUGE difference.

[SeaShark]

If she received a response onboard (and it appears she did "take it up with corporate") if she elevates it to corporate anyway (which it appears she did) then she absolutely, undeniably deserves a response from corporate also- even if it's only to back up the shipboard customer service team.

 

In short she deserves a response from corporate even if she received a response onboard.

 

Yes...because as everyone here knows, if you go to guest services onboard and report that your toilet isn't working, the response is "take it up with corporate". Then you wait until you get home, send an written complaint to Miami, and wait for them to get back to you to let you know that the toilet has been fixed.

 

Yeah.

 

 

Sure.

 

 

Whatever.

 

 

Seriously....you don't feel like there is simply something missing here? Since when does "corporate" take care of broken toilets?:confused:

[janpo]

Threre what? Again...I never said that the OP claimed she had multiple responses. Never. I simply said she doesn't deserve multiple responses. HUGE difference.

 

Your posts here have more speculation than all others combined. HUGE fact.

[Blazen]

I think the OP has given up on this thread. But let keep the convo going...

 

Greg

[sparks1093]

Yes...because as everyone here knows, if you go to guest services onboard and report that your toilet isn't working, the response is "take it up with corporate". Then you wait until you get home, send an written complaint to Miami, and wait for them to get back to you to let you know that the toilet has been fixed.

 

Yeah.

 

 

Sure.

 

 

Whatever.

 

 

Seriously....you don't feel like there is simply something missing here? Since when does "corporate" take care of broken toilets?:confused:

 

I don't care what the issue is, corporate needs to respond even if it is only to say they regret the issue but there is nothing they can do. (And from what I gathered it was the cabin move that was referred to corporate, the toilet was fixed after the second day as I recall.) (I am not looking at the merit or non-merit of OP's underlying issue, only that corporate needs to provide a response.)

 

Again, to keep it simple and on point- corporate owes the OP a response.

Edited December 28, 2015 by sparks1093

[ducklite]

Yes...because as everyone here knows, if you go to guest services onboard and report that your toilet isn't working, the response is "take it up with corporate". Then you wait until you get home, send an written complaint to Miami, and wait for them to get back to you to let you know that the toilet has been fixed.

 

 

 

Yeah.

 

 

 

 

 

Sure.

 

 

 

 

 

Whatever.

 

 

 

 

 

Seriously....you don't feel like there is simply something missing here? Since when does "corporate" take care of broken toilets?:confused:

 

 

Yes, something is missing. An adequate response from the ship board team. Suggesting OP take it up with corporate is not adequate. If the ship team isn't empowered to offer equitable solutions to "un fixable" problems--a very noisy cabin on a sold out ship for example--then the corporation as a whole needs to reevaluate it's customer service model.

 

As to the toilet, if it had been me I would have bee looking for a check to compensate me for not being able to use an essential part of my cabin for four days. A credit is salt in the wound as it requires one to either spend additional funds or to take part in activities or make purchases they don't desire to use it. IMHO a consistently broken toilet is the equivalent to a missing bed. Neither is acceptable and there is no acceptable solution from the cruise line other than a prorated cash refund.

[eroller]

I do think it is sad that NCL doesn't post on here any longer, but I certainly understand why they don't.

 

 

Social media is here to stay. Smart companies use it to their advantage and it can be a great PR tool. Ignorant companies choose to ignore it with hopes it will just go away. That isn't happening.

 

Azamara Cruises has an official "Chief Blogging Officer". This person posts frequently on Cruise Critic (and other social media) and is highly regarded. They can answer questions, research issues, and promote new initiatives. I haven't seen any abuse and Azamara has had this position for years. This being said the Azamara board on CC is very civilized. I don't see the hostility that I see with NCL.

 

Another example is a major US airline that has promised to respond to all questions, gripes, complaints, compliments, etc. within the hour of posting on Twitter. Talk about great customer service. Who wouldn't like to have a direct connection to a major airline when something goes wrong? It takes a lot of man power and training to live up to such a customer commitment, but in the end this airline feels it's worth it and so do I.

 

Since even people without issues watch how these companies respond to issues in a timely and professional manner, it does wonders for building brand integrity and consumer trust in those brands. Transparency goes a long way. Who doesn't want to do business with the company that has fantastic service recovery?

 

Unfortunately NCL has just the opposite reputation for service recovery. Their shoreside operation leaves much to be desired and doesn't seem to be getting any better with major job cuts over the past year. They have eliminated their Cruise Norwegian mobile phone app and have no more presence on social media forums such as this. In essence they are retreating instead of embracing the benefits of a great social media presence, and they are failing miserably in this regard. It's unfortunate but that seems to be the direction that the new CEO wants.

Edited December 28, 2015 by eroller

[SeaShark]

I don't care what the issue is, corporate needs to respond even if it is only to say they regret the issue but there is nothing they can do. (And from what I gathered it was the cabin move that was referred to corporate, the toilet was fixed after the second day as I recall.) (I am not looking at the merit or non-merit of OP's underlying issue, only that corporate needs to provide a response.)

 

Again, to keep it simple and on point- corporate owes the OP a response, unless an appropriate response has already been given.

 

There. I added the missing part of the sentence back in. Makes more sense that way.

 

 

BTW...the OP claimed the toilet did not function on 4 out of the 7 days, so it really couldn't have been fixed on day 2. But then again, as you pointed out, we're trying to disparage NCL without any consideration as to the merit or non-merit of the underlying issue.

[sparks1093]

There. I added the missing part of the sentence back in. Makes more sense that way.

 

 

BTW...the OP claimed the toilet did not function on 4 out of the 7 days, so it really couldn't have been fixed on day 2. But then again, as you pointed out, we're trying to disparage NCL without any consideration as to the merit or non-merit of the underlying issue.

 

My quote was fine, it didn't need editing:rolleyes:.

 

Corporate owes the OP a response, even if it is only to say that "your issue was resolved onboard and there is nothing further that can be done". They owe this for two reasons- one, a customer communicated with them requesting them to do something and two, they need to back the shipboard personnel up. Toilet not working for 4 days? That deserves some sort of refund and the shipboard personnel cannot do that, so of course it's a corporate issue (if of course that was the case).

 

And I will say again- this isn't about the merit or non-merit of the OP's issue this is about NCL not providing her a response. She elevated the issue to corporate so yes, that means they are obligated to respond.

 

I am disparaging NCL for a woeful lack of customer service. The merit or non-merit of the complaint is not at issue.

[SeaShark]

My quote was fine, it didn't need editing:rolleyes:.

 

Corporate owes the OP a response, even if it is only to say that "your issue was resolved onboard and there is nothing further that can be done". They owe this for two reasons- one, a customer communicated with them requesting them to do something and two, they need to back the shipboard personnel up. Toilet not working for 4 days? That deserves some sort of refund and the shipboard personnel cannot do that, so of course it's a corporate issue (if of course that was the case).

 

And I will say again- this isn't about the merit or non-merit of the OP's issue this is about NCL not providing her a response. She elevated the issue to corporate so yes, that means they are obligated to respond.

 

I am disparaging NCL for a woeful lack of customer service. The merit or non-merit of the complaint is not at issue.

 

Obligated is such an extreme word. Certainly, they may want to. Any number of people probably might even think it is a good idea, or a "best practice" if you will, however, an attempt by Party A to communicate with Party B does not, in and of itself, create an OBLIGATION on the part of Party B to accept, or respond to that communication.

[Pugzila1022]

If the ship team isn't empowered to offer equitable solutions to "un fixable" problems--a very noisy cabin on a sold out ship for example--then the corporation as a whole needs to reevaluate it's customer service model.

 

The ship IS empowered to offer solutions and they do it on each and every cruise. If this passenger went to the customer services desk multiple times, they were more than likely offered some sort of compensation on board.

 

I don't for one minute believe that the ship intentionally left this customer hanging and didn't offer some sort of compensation on board. That's what they are trained to do.

 

If the customer wasn't satisfied with the solution/compensation offered on board then it's certainly their option to continue pursuing the problem once they return. Expecting an immediate response is not reasonable.

 

IMO if NCL is at fault for anything it is promising specific response time (15 days) and not meeting that deadline. If they are doing a serious evaluation of a complaint, they have to access records from the ship....and that takes time. It's also a holiday time period and that understandably delays things.

 

In many cases, the customer believes they are always right. Maybe so, but there are limits to how right they are and what compensation should be given to them to acknowledge they are right.

 

One of the reasons that prices are rising (for ALL of us) is that people complain and expect that will mean they are given something. I would rather see NCL just say "sorry" and be done with it. Giving credit, champagne, etc is a cost that has to be passed on to all of us at some point.

[sparks1093]

Obligated is such an extreme word. Certainly, they may want to. Any number of people probably might even think it is a good idea, or a "best practice" if you will, however, an attempt by Party A to communicate with Party B does not, in and of itself, create an OBLIGATION on the part of Party B to accept, or respond to that communication.

 

Depends on how you want your customer service perceived by your customers I guess. Good customer service dictates a response, whether you call it an obligation, a best practice or a vermicious knid.

Edited December 28, 2015 by sparks1093

[LMaxwell]

If this passenger went to the customer services desk multiple times, they were more than likely offered some sort of compensation on board.

 

 

That's just speculation.

 

Hey, I had a post back on page 1 or 2 on a different cruise line and GS gave me a brick wall. getting to the Hotel Director took a lot of persistence and wasted time. I got NOWHERE with my having my issue resolved onboard. No compensation offered. Not even a genuine apology.

 

When I came to CC and got advice of the BEST department to address I had a resolution and response within 2 days. In fact, the company offered me a much more substantial resolution than I had even tried to ask the Hotel Director for. If he did not have the 1000 yard stare perhaps he could have resolved the issue onboard. I certainly gave them every opportunity to do so.

Edited December 28, 2015 by LMaxwell

[Pugzila1022]

That's just speculation.

 

No, it's not speculation. It's an informed opinion based on 25 plus years of taking cruises. No cruise line, not NCL or any other, wants an unhappy customer. They will bend over backwards to try to make a customer happy. Sometimes it just isn't possible. If a serious complaint (and the toilet issue sounds serious) is made, a cruise line will go well out of their way to be accommodating.

 

Do you really believe that NCL totally ignored multiple complaints on board about a broken toilet? Sadly, they get that kind of complaint often (toilets at sea are a bit complicated) and they know how to handle those kind of complaints.

[LMaxwell]

No, it's not speculation. It's an informed opinion based on 25 plus years of taking cruises. No cruise line, not NCL or any other, wants an unhappy customer. They will bend over backwards to try to make a customer happy. Sometimes it just isn't possible. If a serious complaint (and the toilet issue sounds serious) is made, a cruise line will go well out of their way to be accommodating.

 

Do you really believe that NCL totally ignored multiple complaints on board about a broken toilet? Sadly, they get that kind of complaint often (toilets at sea are a bit complicated) and they know how to handle those kind of complaints.

 

You said "If this passenger went to the customer services desk multiple times, they were more than likely offered some sort of compensation on board." We just don't know. Maybe they were, maybe they weren't. I don't know if you've had a good taste of the new NCL, but they sure ain't the old NCL.

 

Do I believe NCL totally ignored multiple complaints on board about a broken toilet? NO. I don't believe they ignored the multiple complaints. I believe they tried to fix/resolve that issue but were unable to do so adequately, as they had to return multiple times. Maybe OP *DID* ask for compensation and guest services wasn't empowered to offer anything more than a dinner or a bottle of wine, etc., and at that point said you need to handle it shore side. Sometimes they are just not that empowered to resolve issues, and unfortunately even when earnest attempts are made to repair a problem they sometimes fail.

 

In my case, on another line, when I raised an issue (at the time it occurred) I was blown off by GS and had to be VERY persistent to speak to the useless hotel director (on a different day no less). The HD had no interest in resolving the issue or compensating, although if anyone was empowered it would have been him. Ours was a safety issue and when address to the proper shoreside department the cruise line in question responded fast and excelled in their response.

Edited December 28, 2015 by LMaxwell