Shows passinger climbing over the cruise ships rail....idiot!

[Ex techie]

He broke the rules and a major one....letting him and his family off lightly only downplays the significance of his actions and encourages future rule breaking.

If a drunk driver crosses the centerline and rolls up on a sidewalk yet is able to drive himself back in his proper lane and make it home, under your analogy he hurt no one, damaged nothing so therefore you are not sure a fine or charge is warranted????

 

Rolloman,

 

I completely agree what he did was reckless, dangerous, and beyond stupid.

 

What I was trying to say is that how can a fine be imposed unless a law has been broken? Even if the ship had been damaged, say for example he stood on a light to get back up and either damaged it or even moved it, requiring work to be undertaken to fix or reposition it, it is a civil matter between the cruise line and the Guest, and for the cruise line to recover any costs incurred.

 

Driving under the influence is illegal, and therefore a criminal act punishable by law.

 

I'm not sure of any legal maritime laws he has broken, or any contractual agreement as part of the cruise contract has been breeched as he did not endanger the vessel, but I am happy to be corrected!

 

What the kid did was inexcusable.

 

ex techie

[Ex techie]

I think Techie's point is that the ship has no legal authority to fine him or the filmer as this is not spelled out in advance. Driving under the influence is a legal offense with a specified range of penalties.

 

If a guest causes damage to the ship or otherwise costs money to the ship for extra crew time' date=' repairs, or otherwise, those charges can be passed on to a guest--not as a fine, but as a means of reparations. I am well aware of a family being charged for damages to the cabin done by their teen and adult children. This individual did not cost the ship money with his antics, did not damage the ship, etc. I got the impression that Techie believes he should be punished, but isn't sure that the ship is able to penalize him beyond not allowing him to cruise again. And based on his years as a CM, he probably has more insight than we do.[/quote']

 

Much more eloquently put than my post!

 

ex techie

[Ex techie]

IMO the cruise industry needs industry wide bands not just individual line bands.

 

Would we want these antics happening on one of our cruises?

 

Couldn't agree more Arthur!

 

ex techie

[Ex techie]

True--I don't know if the entire industry has a mechanism in place for doing this. But Carnival Corporation includes far more than Carnival Cruise Line--they also own Princess' date=' Costa, Holland America, Seabourn, Cunard, etc. I would think they have (or should have) a mechanism to ban a guest on every line they own.[/quote']

 

I agree.

I think the only way would be if the CLIA had a procedure to inform each of the members of a Guest or Guests that had caused damage or mischief aboard their vessels.

 

ex techie

[Ex techie]

The real rules of international waters are the Captain of each vessel makes his own. You can look at each ship as being its own country governed by the Captain/Master of the vessel. Fact.

 

Now if the kid made it back to port in the USA....Carnival Corp. will handle it according to their protocols.

 

Yes, but the cruise contract still stands legally. The Master has the right to detain anyone who interrupts the operation of or endangers their vessel, and prosecute them in court shoreside, but they cannot "fine" people for offences.

They can charge you a fee for cleaning a Stateroom if the room has been used to smoke in as per the cruise contract, but that is just a recovery of costs incurred.

 

ex techie

[rolloman]

Rolloman,

 

 

What I was trying to say is that how can a fine be imposed unless a law has been broken? Even if the ship had been damaged, say for example he stood on a light to get back up and either damaged it or even moved it, requiring work to be undertaken to fix or reposition it, it is a civil matter between the cruise line and the Guest, and for the cruise line to recover any costs incurred.

 

 

ex techie

 

Gotcha, so here is my example: the passenger climbing over the side of the ship in broad daylight should have alerted the bridge via alarm, personnel on watch or the like, this would have caused a deviation of course for the ship, or at a minimum a slow down of the ship. This deviation of course costs the ship at a minimum fuel charges which per the Carnival contract below would need to be paid by the passenger:

 

10. GUEST’S REIMBURSEMENT FOR FINES, EXPENSES, DEBTS AND DAMAGES

 

(b) The Guest or Guest’s estate shall be liable to and shall reimburse Carnival for all deviation expenses (including loss of revenue), damages to the Vessel, its furnishings, operations or equipment, or any property of Carnival caused directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, by any misconduct, willful or negligent act or omission on the part of the Guest or any minors traveling with Guest. The Guest or Guest’s estate shall defend and indemnify Carnival and the Vessel, their servants and agents against liability which Carnival or the Vessel or such servants or agents may incur towards any person, company or Government for any damage to property, personal injury or death caused directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, by any misconduct, willful or negligent act or omission on the part of the Guest or minors traveling with Guest.

[rolloman]

The Master has the right to detain anyone who interrupts the operation of or endangers their vessel, and prosecute them in court shoreside, but they cannot "fine" people for offences.

 

ex techie

 

Rolloman,

 

I'm not sure of any legal maritime laws he has broken, or any contractual agreement as part of the cruise contract has been breeched as he did not endanger the vessel, but I am happy to be corrected!

.

 

ex techie

 

Disagree...read my post above.....I work in the legal hospitality field. We can get hung up on the word "fine" versus "damages" but bottom line, in the end, if one exhibits this type of behavior.....you have the potential to pay.....

Edited December 2, 2016 by rolloman
added information for clarity

[Ex techie]

Gotcha, so here is my example: the passenger climbing over the side of the ship in broad daylight should have alerted the bridge via alarm, personnel on watch or the like, this would have caused a deviation of course for the ship, or at a minimum a slow down of the ship. This deviation of course costs the ship at a minimum fuel charges which per the Carnival contract below would need to be paid by the passenger:

 

10. GUEST’S REIMBURSEMENT FOR FINES, EXPENSES, DEBTS AND DAMAGES

 

(b) The Guest or Guest’s estate shall be liable to and shall reimburse Carnival for all deviation expenses (including loss of revenue), damages to the Vessel, its furnishings, operations or equipment, or any property of Carnival caused directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, by any misconduct, willful or negligent act or omission on the part of the Guest or any minors traveling with Guest. The Guest or Guest’s estate shall defend and indemnify Carnival and the Vessel, their servants and agents against liability which Carnival or the Vessel or such servants or agents may incur towards any person, company or Government for any damage to property, personal injury or death caused directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, by any misconduct, willful or negligent act or omission on the part of the Guest or minors traveling with Guest.

 

Firstly, Carnival Corp have fought and refused to install MOB alarms on their ships along with RCI and a few others. So unless they had someone watching the camera covering the side of the hull at the precise moment he did this, they wouldn't know.

There are no alarms on Carnival ships, only security cameras for monitoring and playback after a reported event has taken place. (they *might* have them on the Vista class, but I have no proof)

 

Secondly, the part of the cruise contract you quoted does not allow Carnival to fine the passenger, only to recover costs incurred.

As it appears Carnival were not aware of this misbehavior, they did not deviate off course, and no additional fuel, labor or other costs were incurred that we know of.

If a Guest deliberately damages a piece of furniture for example, and it costs $500 to repair, they cannot "fine" them $1000, only require payment of the cost incurred.

 

ex techie

[rolloman]

Firstly, Carnival Corp have fought and refused to install MOB alarms on their ships along with RCI and a few others. So unless they had someone watching the camera covering the side of the hull at the precise moment he did this, they wouldn't know.

There are no alarms on Carnival ships, only security cameras for monitoring and playback after a reported event has taken place. (they *might* have them on the Vista class, but I have no proof)

 

Secondly, the part of the cruise contract you quoted does not allow Carnival to fine the passenger, only to recover costs incurred.

As it appears Carnival were not aware of this misbehavior, they did not deviate off course, and no additional fuel, labor or other costs were incurred that we know of.

If a Guest deliberately damages a piece of furniture for example, and it costs $500 to repair, they cannot "fine" them $1000, only require payment of the cost incurred.

 

ex techie

 

You are right, you know nothing about what took place on this voyage. I also am aware my scenario may not have played out. However, whether you agree or not is of minor importance, what is of major importance is my example clearly shows a valid scenario where passenger misconduct, with no damage to self or ship can result in a large financial loss to said passenger. This is the lesson and takeaway for parents who have unsupervised children onboard a cruise.

[mrs and mrs]

Maybe a few days of this might have the desired affect.

[Ex techie]

You are right, you know nothing about what took place on this voyage. I also am aware my scenario may not have played out. However, whether you agree or not is of minor importance, what is of major importance is my example clearly shows a valid scenario where passenger misconduct, with no damage to self or ship can result in a large financial loss to said passenger. This is the lesson and takeaway for parents who have unsupervised children onboard a cruise.

 

Yes, I was only referring to this incident, and not every other possible scenario one could imagine, where the cruise line could seek recompense for costs incurred and not a "fine".

 

I agree that any parent or guardian allowing their child free access to the ship unmonitored, should firstly be sure their child is mature enough to not allow peer pressure to influence their decision making, and also that they are financially responsible for any costs incurred as a result of the child's misjudgement or bad behavior.

 

ex techie

[Ex techie]

Maybe a few days of this might have the desired affect.

 

Haha! I agree!

A few days eating only in the crew mess and working for the pot washers during MDR meal times should do the trick!

 

ex techie

[e2011]

or is it natures way of natural selection? If these idiots fall overboard and perish then they cannot reproduce which over time weeds out low IQ humans. Darwin would agree......