One less day on with change on Jewel - Not Fair!

[xriva]

I can't imagine a scenario where they're going to take a bunch of grumpy / upset / disappointed people back early, and then have them stay on the ship for > 24 hours. They've scheduled us to arrive in Seattle at 8am on Friday. Telling people you can't leave the boat till tomorrow would be the kind of epic stupidity that only NCL could pull off. I believe they truly would have a mutiny on their hands at that point.

 

Everyone always blames the cruise line, but there are a lot of moving parts involved in a cruise, and not all of them are under the cruise line's control.

 

Processing passengers into the US is not up to the cruise line - it's up to the US government. If CBP doesn't have their people there to process passengers and let them legally re-enter the country, nobody is going to re-enter the country.

 

NCL has time to let Customs & Immigration know the ship will be arriving early, and it's an international port, so we know all the physical facilities are in place, but I doubt that CBP are going to show up early just for the few that want to disembark before the cruise officially ends.

[jm485]

@Xriva -- even though only a few people may want to disembark, without CBP clearance, people couldn't even leave the ship to see things in Seattle, could they?

 

If NCL is really planning to keep everyone on board until Saturday morning, that would really be something with no shops or casino and charging tax on drinks! Yikes!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[xriva]

@Xriva -- even though only a few people may want to disembark, without CBP clearance, people couldn't even leave the ship to see things in Seattle, could they?

 

If NCL is really planning to keep everyone on board until Saturday morning, that would really be something with no shops or casino and charging tax on drinks! Yikes!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I was wondering about that. I think the answer is you can't leave the ship for any reason without going through customs and immigration - although ships do leave one US port, stop at others for a port call, and continue on, so I'm not sure (I'm thinking about Key West, for example - or Port Canaveral on the New York Bahamas cruises.)

[S.S.Oceanlover]

That sounds like a fantastic approach to customer service. Personally, I'm not asking for anything even comparative to that, I just want 1/7th of the money I paid reimbursed for the day that we simply will not be cruising. NCL is insulting their customers, and I hope all who read this thread consider this before they book their next cruise with NCL.

 

It's clear that stuff happens, and sometimes its out of the cruise lines control. It's how the company responds to make it right by the customer that sets them apart. Here NCL is not just setting itself apart from companies that do a great job, they're setting themselves apart from companies that just do an OK job. They're creating an approach to customer service where the motto is fleece the customer. #FleeceStyleCruising #NCLRipoff

 

I agree with you. Just give the pax the one day cruise fare back. That's the fair thing to do.

 

My example was just showing that some cruise lines know how to treat their paying customers and don't treat them like a captive audience.

 

Bill

[NHL Philly Fan]

We are being told that our cruise out of Seattle is being cut a day short and they are giving us $100 per room for this inconvenience. We just paid for an up sell yesterday and now all we will see is the port of Seattle. Has anyone else dealt with this kind of difficulty.

 

 

6. Vessel and Voyage:

© Itinerary Deviation: The Guest agrees that the Carrier has the sole discretion and liberty to direct the movements of the vessel, including the rights to: proceed without pilots and tow, and assist other vessels in all situations; deviate from the purchased voyage or the normal course for any purpose, including, without limitation, in the interest of Guests or of the vessel, or to save life or property; put in at any unscheduled or unadvertised port; cancel any scheduled call at any port for any reason and at any time before, during or after sailing of the vessel; omit, advance or delay landing at any scheduled or advertised port; return to port of embarkation or to any port previously visited if the Carrier deems it prudent to do so; substitute another vessel or port(s) of call without prior notice and without incurring any liability to the Guest on account thereof for any loss, damage or delay whatsoever, whether consequential or otherwise.

 

 

You obviously failed to read the contract you agreed to.

[NHL Philly Fan]

They can't refuse to arbitrate under their contract. If you file an arbitration claim, they have to respond. I've been pretty successful in arbitrations, and find arbitrators are often pretty consumer friendly, although NCL surely makes it hard by forcing you to file in Florida.

 

This is an obvious contract of adhesion, and Florida is law is pretty favorable in interpreting contracts of adhesion in favor of the adhered party.

 

There is nothing to arbitrate. NCL is doing more than is required by the contract that all passengers agree to.

[S.S.Oceanlover]

6. Vessel and Voyage:

© Itinerary Deviation: The Guest agrees that the Carrier has the sole discretion and liberty to direct the movements of the vessel, including the rights to: proceed without pilots and tow, and assist other vessels in all situations; deviate from the purchased voyage or the normal course for any purpose, including, without limitation, in the interest of Guests or of the vessel, or to save life or property; put in at any unscheduled or unadvertised port; cancel any scheduled call at any port for any reason and at any time before, during or after sailing of the vessel; omit, advance or delay landing at any scheduled or advertised port; return to port of embarkation or to any port previously visited if the Carrier deems it prudent to do so; substitute another vessel or port(s) of call without prior notice and without incurring any liability to the Guest on account thereof for any loss, damage or delay whatsoever, whether consequential or otherwise.

 

 

You obviously failed to read the contract you agreed to.

 

Just because it's in the contract doesn't mean it will hold up in a court of law.

 

Of course they know that by the time you pay for a lawyer and all the aggravation it's not worth it to contest it.

 

Bill

[KarlChilders]

There is nothing to arbitrate. NCL is doing more than is required by the contract that all passengers agree to.

 

You are seriously using that defense? While it is obviously true from a contractual sense, it is horrible business practice. Many times what you can get away with legally is still a bad move from a PR/customer satisfaction standpoint. If you booked a 7 day with 4 ports of call and they went and did loops 30 miles off shore all week, would you ever give them any more business or feel they had treated their passengers well? But it would be ok per the contract.

[AK Dreaming]

For the record I have not said they were not within their rights. If you read my OP it asked if anyone had dealt with this difficulty. I do understand that they are not "required" to give us anything extra legally. I just find this to be a very bad PR move on their part. An quite possibly sneaky if they knew about this in advance and still sold me an upsell 2 days ago, so that I could spend a day on my balcony looking at construction in the Port of Seattle. This will be my third trip with NCL in the last year and quite possible my last and I personally have found the treatment and attitude of the service rude and uncaring. I am terribly sad, but mostly for my mother who was so looking forward to the train trip.

[janpo]

You are seriously using that defense? While it is obviously true from a contractual sense, it is horrible business practice. Many times what you can get away with legally is still a bad move from a PR/customer satisfaction standpoint. If you booked a 7 day with 4 ports of call and they went and did loops 30 miles off shore all week, would you ever give them any more business or feel they had treated their passengers well? But it would be ok per the contract.

 

Of course they would. NCL can do no wrong.

 

Again, NCL sails on water, not walks on water.

Edited August 4, 2016 by janpo

[xriva]

You are seriously using that defense? While it is obviously true from a contractual sense, it is horrible business practice. Many times what you can get away with legally is still a bad move from a PR/customer satisfaction standpoint. If you booked a 7 day with 4 ports of call and they went and did loops 30 miles off shore all week, would you ever give them any more business or feel they had treated their passengers well? But it would be ok per the contract.

 

I think as the Great Water Debacle of 2016 showed, it is a "horrible business practice" to a few who are on CC and complain about it. To others, it's "That's it, I'm not sailing NCL any more", but they're not posting here. To many others, it's "Whatever. I'm on a cruise!"

 

For example, it may not be a huge deal to people who have missed Great Stirrup Cay every time they've sailed near it. Some people know you miss ports from time to time.

 

It depends on how determined you are to ruin a vacation before it starts.

 

We booked two trips to visit Harvest Caye in the past year. Both were changed to Belize City because Harvest Caye wasn't ready yet. In fact, we booked the second one specifically because we didn't get to go the first time, only to find out we weren't going. Again. There were people screaming about breach of contract and suing NCL (sound familiar?)

 

I was disappointed, but we went to Belize City and had a Belikin beer or three, and you know what? It was better than a day at the office. My Mom was with us the second time, and she wasn't sure she was up to the tender ride, so we stayed onboard. You know what? It was still better than a day at the office.

 

If I want to see a place, I'm going to book a trip to that place. If I want to go on vacation, I'm going to take a cruise.

Edited August 4, 2016 by xriva

[bonvoyagie]

Captain Obvious here -

 

The ship has a problem with its propulsion system - the repairs must be addressed - at some point in time a cruise will feel the effects of this either through cancellation or shortening.

 

2400 passengers will be affected either way.

 

NCL feels that they only need a little over 24hrs to repair the problem Therefore no need to cancel an entire cruise. Most logical answer - cut a cruise short.

 

They also feel the problem is bad enough that it can't wait until later in the season like when the Jewel is doing a 10 day trip that ends in Vancouver BC - they could delay the start of that one by a day and then skip Sitka or ISP - probably less people would be angered by it then missing Skagway.

 

 

Based on the itinerary Skagway is the most logical port to cut - even though it is also my favorite port and there is a lot to do there. They can't cut Victoria due to PVSA rules - although they are going to be in a mad scramble to align their shore ex vendors to be ready a day early :eek: or maybe they will just do a pass through to satisfy the PVSA and therefore make it two skipped ports.

 

The ship really can't stay in Juneau due to the Pearl sharing it's berth - however I suppose they could anchor out and tender folks.

 

I think that everybody is in agreement that the $100.00 stateroom is almost like a slap in the face compared to missing Skagway. Especially when similar incidents have had much better rewards for the pax being inconvenienced. Perhaps the power of the social media will come to bear - someone already posted this to the NCL Facebook page - plus all of the action here on CC. maybe someone at NCL will wake up and quell the uprising before the backwash gets them even worse.

 

To the NCL rep who said the orders came from FDR - that is a nice one - but probably a lie - at least I hope that the CEO of NCL Holdings is not making decisions this tiny. :D

 

CO out

[gusbourg]

It depends on how determined you are to ruin a vacation before it starts.

 

Nobody is trying to ruin their vacation - and nobody is saying that NCL is horrible due to the situation. What people have said, consistently, is that the compensation being offered is a slap in the face. There is no other way to put it. It's not that we're hanging out on a cruise in some other location than was intended. They are cutting the cruise early by a day. If they bring us back to Seattle, and start performing repairs, the boat is inoperable. An inoperable boat by definition is not cruising.

 

I get it, they have to do what they have to do, and I'm willing to deal with it. What is unacceptable is the slap in the face offer to make it right. They're taking 1/7 of my vacation from me, they should return me 1/7 of my money. It's that simple.

[txbuffetslayer]

I can't imagine a scenario where they're going to take a bunch of grumpy / upset / disappointed people back early, and then have them stay on the ship for > 24 hours. They've scheduled us to arrive in Seattle at 8am on Friday. Telling people you can't leave the boat till tomorrow would be the kind of epic stupidity that only NCL could pull off. I believe they truly would have a mutiny on their hands at that point.

 

Lol can you imagine? Oh man...it would be awful

[txbuffetslayer]

I think as the Great Water Debacle of 2016 showed, it is a "horrible business practice" to a few who are on CC and complain about it. To others, it's "That's it, I'm not sailing NCL any more", but they're not posting here. To many others, it's "Whatever. I'm on a cruise!"

 

For example, it may not be a huge deal to people who have missed Great Stirrup Cay every time they've sailed near it. Some people know you miss ports from time to time.

 

It depends on how determined you are to ruin a vacation before it starts.

 

We booked two trips to visit Harvest Caye in the past year. Both were changed to Belize City because Harvest Caye wasn't ready yet. In fact, we booked the second one specifically because we didn't get to go the first time, only to find out we weren't going. Again. There were people screaming about breach of contract and suing NCL (sound familiar?)

 

I was disappointed, but we went to Belize City and had a Belikin beer or three, and you know what? It was better than a day at the office. My Mom was with us the second time, and she wasn't sure she was up to the tender ride, so we stayed onboard. You know what? It was still better than a day at the office.

 

If I want to see a place, I'm going to book a trip to that place. If I want to go on vacation, I'm going to take a cruise.

 

Did you arrive back at port a full 24 hrs in advance? If not then this is not the same situation. This is more than missing a port.

[How much longer?]

I can't imagine a scenario where they're going to take a bunch of grumpy / upset / disappointed people back early, and then have them stay on the ship for > 24 hours. They've scheduled us to arrive in Seattle at 8am on Friday. Telling people you can't leave the boat till tomorrow would be the kind of epic stupidity that only NCL could pull off. I believe they truly would have a mutiny on their hands at that point.

 

Wow, you haven't even stepped on the ship and have decided you will be grumpy, upset and disappointed on the last day. You plan on having a bad time on vacation over this? I agree the compensation seems inappropriate, however, it is still your vacation and I think you should try to make the best of it. You know, when life gives you lemons....

 

Even though it is not your first choice, since you paid for it, why not stay on board and enjoy the time and one final dinner? Do you live downtown? If not, take time to explore and enjoy the waterfront vantage point. We were just there and recommend the Chihuly gardens below the space needle, if you haven't seen it before. If you go home, you will have to do laundry, make dinner etc and that is sure to make you even more grumpy! (post cruise is always a sad time).

[fshagan]

They can't refuse to arbitrate under their contract. If you file an arbitration claim, they have to respond. I've been pretty successful in arbitrations, and find arbitrators are often pretty consumer friendly, although NCL surely makes it hard by forcing you to file in Florida.

 

This is an obvious contract of adhesion, and Florida is law is pretty favorable in interpreting contracts of adhesion in favor of the adhered party.

 

Let us know how it works out. 1/7th or whatever you think your "fair" compensation is probably more than the filing fee of $235.

 

I look forward to the results of arbitration from everyone who has said the contract will not hold up.

Edited August 4, 2016 by fshagan

[xriva]

Nobody is trying to ruin their vacation - and nobody is saying that NCL is horrible due to the situation. What people have said, consistently, is that the compensation being offered is a slap in the face. There is no other way to put it. It's not that we're hanging out on a cruise in some other location than was intended. They are cutting the cruise early by a day. If they bring us back to Seattle, and start performing repairs, the boat is inoperable. An inoperable boat by definition is not cruising.

 

I get it, they have to do what they have to do, and I'm willing to deal with it. What is unacceptable is the slap in the face offer to make it right. They're taking 1/7 of my vacation from me, they should return me 1/7 of my money. It's that simple.

 

If you read the thread, people are saying NCL has "horrible business practices".

 

I would say that based on the contract (as others have said), $100 OBC is more than they agreed to deliver. You do not want to see it that way, and that is your prerogative.

 

I have been on a ship that was berthed in port overnight after a mad dash home from the Caribbean, and it was still a night on a ship. We were not sailing, but I still had someone to make up my room, someone to bring me ice, a bunch of places I could have dinner (free or at my expense), shows to watch and bars to visit (while paying Texas taxes). We just weren't moving.

 

I prefer sea days to port days, so I was disappointed we were berthed in port. However, it never occurred to me that I was owed anything just because we came in early.

[DougH]

 

 

 

By compressing the end of this cruise, it allows them to prevent any impact to the beginning of the cruise that will happen afterwords. Why is this important?

 

Because in many causes NCL or Travel Agencies working with NCL have booked flights for people to Seattle to take the cruise. They'd have to either change those flights (read: costs NCL money), or possibly put those folks up in a hotel in Seattle for the first day (read: costs money) since they can't leave that day.

 

This is about NCL maximizing their bottom line at our expense. It's not about our safety. It's not about circumstances beyond their control. It is about the bottom line, and their lack of respect for us, the customer.

 

#NCLRipoff

 

You have answered you own question. Why should they impact the following cruise when it is easier to just adjust yours? Why are the people on your cruise due more respect than those on the following one? You just had some bad luck to pick this week.

 

I'm sorry you trip was impacted but one day isn't the end of the world. Just treat it as a sea day. I'm also wondering how mad you are going to be when the ship doesn't visit Sawyer Glacier in Tracy Arm. Few if any ships are getting in there this year because of excessive ice, are you going to want compensation for that also?

 

I've missed ports on several cruises and still had a good time. Once I even missed the first 10 days on a South American cruise because of a big earthquake and nobody was able to get on or off the ship. Yes I was mad but ultimately the cruise line offered very fair compensation.

[gusbourg]

You have answered you own question. Why should they impact the following cruise when it is easier to just adjust yours? Why are the people on your cruise due more respect than those on the following one? You just had some bad luck to pick this week.

 

I'm sorry you trip was impacted but one day isn't the end of the world. Just treat it as a sea day. I'm also wondering how mad you are going to be when the ship doesn't visit Sawyer Glacier in Tracy Arm. Few if any ships are getting in there this year because of excessive ice, are you going to want compensation for that also?

 

I've missed ports on several cruises and still had a good time. Once I even missed the first 10 days on a South American cruise because of a big earthquake and nobody was able to get on or off the ship. Yes I was mad but ultimately the cruise line offered very fair compensation.

 

 

And if you read what I've written, I've said consistently that I understand that they have choices to make. They're going to impact one cruise or another either way. and I assume they're looking a multitude of factors in deciding which to affect. Ultimately they'll pick which cruise to impact based on what makes sense for them and I'm ok with that.

 

However, as has been said over and over again is that they are not simply missing a point of interest or a port of call. They are returning us early one day. It is not a 7 day cruise it's a 6 day cruise. There's not way to treat it otherwise, as well, because as others have noted aspects of the ship are unavailable (e.g. casino) or otherwise impacted (e.g. drink tax) when they're back in Seattle. So no, it's not the same thing as being at sea.

 

Further, their offer of compensation is insulting and not on par with what they've taken away. Take away a day, compensate me the value of that day.

[xriva]

Did you arrive back at port a full 24 hrs in advance? If not then this is not the same situation. This is more than missing a port.

 

No, we arrived probably fifteen hours early (arrived about 5pm Friday, due in at 8am Saturday - I think. You always arrive somewhat earlier than the arrival time posted. The question is when they start disembarkation.)

 

So, technically, it is not the same situation. However, we spent the evening and night on a ship docked in port, and amazingly, everyone onboard lived to see morning. We had to drink only the Texas-legal booze which limited some drinks and the casino and shops were closed, but everyone survived the ordeal.

 

Missing a port is an inconvenience, I give you that. However, staying on a ship that is not moving is not much different than staying on a ship that is - and you paid to stay on the ship in the first place.

[xriva]

However, as has been said over and over again is that they are not simply missing a point of interest or a port of call. They are returning us early one day. It is not a 7 day cruise it's a 6 day cruise.

 

If you get back to Seattle a day early, and the Captain says, "Get off my ship. Now.", then it is a six-day cruise.

 

Otherwise, you will receive your seven nights on the ship, which is what you booked.

[gusbourg]

Our local television station (KIRO-7) has resolved this situation for us. Everyone look for a letter from NCL. I got mine in email about 5 minutes after talking to the KIRO producer.

[triptolemus]

If you get back to Seattle a day early, and the Captain says, "Get off my ship. Now.", then it is a six-day cruise.

 

Otherwise, you will receive your seven nights on the ship, which is what you booked.

 

By that senseless logic, if the ship never leaves the dock for seven days, its a seven day cruise with seven days/nights on the ship which is exactly what was paid for. Do I have that right?

Edited August 4, 2016 by triptolemus

[triptolemus]

Our local television station (KIRO-7) has resolved this situation for us. Everyone look for a letter from NCL. I got mine in email about 5 minutes after talking to the KIRO producer.

 

And?