$7.95 Room Service Charge

[ONECRUISER]

Now that you mention, did they have trays some years ago. You can always use the tray that the ice bucket rests. lol

Yes, Windjammer used trays when I started sailing in 1986 until at least 2002. Was more cafeteria style back then, not sure when ended after that. Nice to make one trip with couple plates and drinks & I'd bring my wife breakfast in bed as she slept in...

[nelblu]

Yes, Windjammer used trays when I started sailing in 1986 until at least 2002. Was more cafeteria style back then, not sure when ended after that. Nice to make one trip with couple plates and drinks & I'd bring my wife breakfast in bed as she slept in...

 

Now, I have to make multiple trips between the food & drinks.

[Biker19]

^ As someone has already mentioned, simply "save" one of the trays from the hallway from a previous room service order.

[mollyeilis]

I'm waiting for something much more forceful than that and I was talking about the drink package change which is being woven into this thread.

 

 

It was a joke. See below.

 

Um, I thought it was obvious that my post was a tongue-in-cheek reply to Punchy...

 

 

 

It's only on cruises departing Chicago and Denver.

 

 

Ha!

 

I must have missed the news about a "sit in" on the Quantum (we were on the Bayonne to Barcelona leg of the Quantum Global Odyssey. We had a great time!) What was the sit in about and where did it take place?

 

 

http://www.lonelyplanet.com/news/2015/09/01/shanghai-cruise-ship-passengers-protest-change-of-route-by-refusing-to-leave-ship/

 

Might be the one.

 

 

I see no reason to believe that. The next change announced was announced with over six months notice. Let's see if people take it more amenably.

 

 

The drink package one? It was a joke.

 

A highly believable one, so thank goodness the author of it explained.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[jalpert]

$8 gratuity included... if the menu is as legit as they imply, for food cooked for you, this is an improvement.

 

I'd rather pay $8 for a great product than $4 for a lousy one. (we'd usually tip about $4)

 

They shouldn't have had a lousy product before, but they did. What's done is done.

 

The new convenience fee will be charged per order and will include any food items selected at the time of placing the order. Gratuity is included in the service fee.

[Yorkiegirl3]

Their response is well written and professional. They know what their contract states and they are well within their rights. I understand people being upset but if no longer having free room service is what's going to ruin your vacation perhaps it's time to rethink priorities. With the exception of those who are disabled. I 100% think they should not be charged the fee. Has anyone who is disabled emailed the special needs department about this? Sorry but I haven't read through the entire thread so I apologize if this has already been discussed.

[0utpost]

Their response is well written and professional. They know what their contract states and they are well within their rights. I understand people being upset but if no longer having free room service is what's going to ruin your vacation perhaps it's time to rethink priorities. With the exception of those who are disabled. I 100% think they should not be charged the fee. Has anyone who is disabled emailed the special needs department about this? Sorry but I haven't read through the entire thread so I apologize if this has already been discussed.

Do you understand what false advertising is? You can't sign away the right not to be scammed by a business regardless of what their contract states. I paid for a cruise with room service included.

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Forums mobile app

[0utpost]

$8 gratuity included... if the menu is as legit as they imply, for food cooked for you, this is an improvement.

 

I'd rather pay $8 for a great product than $4 for a lousy one. (we'd usually tip about $4)

 

They shouldn't have had a lousy product before, but they did. What's done is done.

It might be fine. But it isn't what I signed up for. I have no problem if they want to change it for new bookings, but for already paid customers it is false advertising plain and simple.

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Forums mobile app

[Yorkiegirl3]

Do you understand what false advertising is? You can't sign away the right not to be scammed by a business regardless of what their contract states. I paid for a cruise with room service included.

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Forums mobile app

I'm well aware of what false advertising is. Presuming you live within the US you might want to review the laws regarding it. Of course you're welcome to file a lawsuit but I imagine it's going to be a lot more expensive than the new room service charge.

[0utpost]

I'm well aware of what false advertising is. Presuming you live within the US you might want to review the laws regarding it. Of course you're welcome to file a lawsuit but I imagine it's going to be a lot more expensive than the new room service charge.

Why are you even posting here...it is clearly false advertising, do you deny that? Why are you so insistent on insulting those that think this is unfair and brown nosing rci?

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Forums mobile app

[Ocean Boy]

Their response is well written and professional. They know what their contract states and they are well within their rights. I understand people being upset but if no longer having free room service is what's going to ruin your vacation perhaps it's time to rethink priorities. With the exception of those who are disabled. I 100% think they should not be charged the fee. Has anyone who is disabled emailed the special needs department about this? Sorry but I haven't read through the entire thread so I apologize if this has already been discussed.

Why should anyone rethink their priorities? People cruise for many different reasons. What is important to one person means nothing to another. No one is telling you what your priorities should be and maybe you should offer the same courtesy to others.

[Hamitchell]

So it includes tip. That makes it a bit better. At least I don't have to scurry around the rum to find my small bills when R.S. comes.

[Yorkiegirl3]

Why are you even posting here...it is clearly false advertising, do you deny that? Why are you so insistent on insulting those that think this is unfair and brown nosing rci?

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Forums mobile app

My original post was in no way insulting. You chose to respond rudely. The simple fact is they are not breaking any laws. I agree that it could have been implemented better but it is what it is.

[nelblu]

Why are you even posting here...it is clearly false advertising, do you deny that? Why are you so insistent on insulting those that think this is unfair and brown nosing rci?

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Forums mobile app

 

Maybe, we should get that ambulance chaser form Miami to take up the cause. lol

[0utpost]

My original post was in no way insulting. You chose to respond rudely. The simple fact is they are not breaking any laws. I agree that it could have been implemented better but it is what it is.

Yes they are breaking laws. If you'll look up the laws and regs regarding false advertising (as you told me to do in a condescending fashion), this whole room service debacle ticks every box.

 

 

And telling me my priorities are wrong certainly is rude as hell.

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Forums mobile app

Edited March 21, 2017 by 0utpost

[grandmarnnurse]

I repeat. It's only $7.95. I am far from wealthy, living on my retirement of social security and meager savings, but it is what it is. It is not worth getting all riled up. You need to go on your cruise and enjoy yourself, because if you keep dwelling on something you have no control over, you will have a terrible time. The $7.95 is for a whole order, so order extra items and stick in your cabin frig. I was surprised in January when I cruised NCL that they charged $7.95 surcharge for room service, but it seems this is what is going to happen more and more. Next up will be Carnival Cruise line trying this. Mark my words. But if it remains just this, I can deal with it. My fear is that someday, there will be nothing complimentary. We can only hope that does not happen.

[Yorkiegirl3]

Yes they are breaking laws. If you'll look up the laws and regs regarding false advertising (as you told me to do in a condescending fashion), this whole room service debacle ticks every box.

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Forums mobile app

You're entitled to your opinion and you have the right to be upset. At this point RCI has made it clear they aren't changing their decision nor are they going to offer any compensation. I'm simply saying I think it's time to move on but to each their own.

[Ocean Boy]

So it includes tip. That makes it a bit better. At least I don't have to scurry around the rum to find my small bills when R.S. comes.

And my bet is that many people will continue to tip on top of the price included gratuity. The same thing happens with the auto gratuities either charged by the ship or prepaid before the cruise. The charge for the specialty restaurants also supposedly includes the tip but people tip extra. It seems to be ingrained in American custom that tipping involves direct exchange of money from the customer to server.

[Ocean Boy]

I repeat. It's only $7.95. I am far from wealthy, living on my retirement of social security and meager savings, but it is what it is. It is not worth getting all riled up. You need to go on your cruise and enjoy yourself, because if you keep dwelling on something you have no control over, you will have a terrible time. The $7.95 is for a whole order, so order extra items and stick in your cabin frig. I was surprised in January when I cruised NCL that they charged $7.95 surcharge for room service, but it seems this is what is going to happen more and more. Next up will be Carnival Cruise line trying this. Mark my words. But if it remains just this, I can deal with it. My fear is that someday, there will be nothing complimentary. We can only hope that does not happen.

OK, so what is the tipping point going to be for you when you can no longer deal with it? When it does happen I am sure someone will most assuredly post that "it is not worth getting all riled up" about.

[John&LaLa]

^ As someone has already mentioned, simply "save" one of the trays from the hallway from a previous room service order.

I'd like to use a tray to pick up drinks. 😉

 

Real drinks, that is. 😁

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Forums mobile app

[GadgetGod]

My original post was in no way insulting. You chose to respond rudely. The simple fact is they are not breaking any laws. I agree that it could have been implemented better but it is what it is.

 

I think this is more correctly stated that they are not in violation of the contract. They likely are in violation of various consumer protection laws, depending on the location of the PAX. For example, in Massachusetts, this would likely be a violation of Section 93a. While the claim would be small (a refund of any room service fee) it is still likely a violation. The statute does not allow you to waive the right (of a 93a claim) under a contract. There is an issue of jurisdiction, but the Mass SJC has stated that both arbitration clauses and choice of venue clauses have no effect on a 93a claim. I am sure there are other states that have similar statutes, with similar provisions. If I were to make this claim, I would make it against the travel agent. The provisions allows you to make the claim against the agent, my guess is the settlement would be faster, since a local agent would want to avoid the claimant's legal fees and the double or treble damages non compliance carries and the repayment of RS charges would be less then paying their attorney. Most of these consumer protection statutes are easy to file without legal help.

[bUU]

So here is the email I received back. Kinda rude.

Would you have been satisfied with anything they wrote that didn't give you either capitulation to your request or substantial compensation? I read the letter as someone with nothing to gain or lose I didn't see any rudeness whatsoever, not even a hint, especially in the context of the fact that you came at them with a false accusation of a felony. They understood your concern; they made clear that they understood it, even granting that the roll out was abrupt; they valued you as a person expressing it despite your throwing of an legal accusation at them initially; they outlined what they consider a number of good things about their offerings; they clearly explanation why they aren't going to summarily change things back. I cannot imagine a better reply, given that they weren't going to hand over operational control of their corporation and its decision-making to you.

 

Basically said they can do what they want regardless of what they advertise.

No, that's not true, but they can do this.

 

I'm well aware of what false advertising is. Presuming you live within the US you might want to review the laws regarding it. Of course you're welcome to file a lawsuit but I imagine it's going to be a lot more expensive than the new room service charge.

That's really where we are now. I think enough people have received replies from the cruise line that the next step for those who really think that the cruise line is in the wrong is to do something legally.

 

My original post was in no way insulting. You chose to respond rudely. The simple fact is they are not breaking any laws. I agree that it could have been implemented better but it is what it is.

And it is important to note that the probability of being offered guest recovery (such as a $50 OBC) that might be offered could be negatively affected by such rudeness.

 

Let's be clear: I bet everyone in this thread, me most especially, would prefer it if this was actually false advertising, and therefore the FTC and state attorneys general would do something about it. Unfortunately, it isn't.

Edited March 21, 2017 by bUU

[0utpost]

Would you have been satisfied with anything they wrote that didn't give you either capitulation to your request or substantial compensation? I read the letter as someone with nothing to gain or lose I didn't see any rudeness whatsoever, not even a hint, especially in the context of the fact that you came at them with a false accusation of a felony. They understood your concern; they made clear that they understood it, even granting that the roll out was abrupt; they valued you as a person expressing it despite your throwing of an legal accusation at them initially; they outlined what they consider a number of good things about their offerings; they clearly explanation why they aren't going to summarily change things back. I cannot imagine a better reply, given that they weren't going to hand over operational control of their corporation and its decision-making to you.

 

No, that's not true, but they can do this.

 

That's really where we are now. At what point does repeatedly accusing a company of a felony go too far? I think enough people have received replies from the cruise line that the next step for those who really think that the cruise line is in the wrong is to do something legally.

 

And it is important to note that the probability of being offered guest recovery (such as a $50 OBC) that might be offered could be negatively affected by such rudeness.

Ummm.. it isn't a false accusation. It IS false advertising in every sense. Check it out if you don't believe me. Nolo.com has a pretty good writeup on it, and it isn't a felony lol.

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Forums mobile app

[0utpost]

Would you have been satisfied with anything they wrote that didn't give you either capitulation to your request or substantial compensation? I read the letter as someone with nothing to gain or lose I didn't see any rudeness whatsoever, not even a hint, especially in the context of the fact that you came at them with a false accusation of a felony. They understood your concern; they made clear that they understood it, even granting that the roll out was abrupt; they valued you as a person expressing it despite your throwing of an legal accusation at them initially; they outlined what they consider a number of good things about their offerings; they clearly explanation why they aren't going to summarily change things back. I cannot imagine a better reply, given that they weren't going to hand over operational control of their corporation and its decision-making to you.

 

No, that's not true, but they can do this.

 

That's really where we are now. I think enough people have received replies from the cruise line that the next step for those who really think that the cruise line is in the wrong is to do something legally.

 

And it is important to note that the probability of being offered guest recovery (such as a $50 OBC) that might be offered could be negatively affected by such rudeness.

 

Let's be clear: I bet everyone in this thread, me most especially, would prefer it if this was actually false advertising, and therefore the FTC and state attorneys general would do something about it. Unfortunately, it isn't.

If you can't Google here is one of the top results. Rci's behavior fits perfectly.

 

False Advertising

"Any advertising or promotion that misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities or geographic origin of goods, services or commercial activities" (Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1125(a)).

Proof Requirement

To establish that an advertisement is false, a plaintiff must prove five things: (1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity; (2) the statement either deceives or has the potential to deceive a substantial portion of its targeted audience; (3) the deception is also likely to affect the purchasing decisions of its audience; (4) the advertising involves goods or services in interstate commerce; and (5) the deception has either resulted in or is likely to result in injury to the plaintiff. The most heavily weighed factor is the advertisement's potential to injure a customer. The injury is usually attributed to money the consumer lost through a purchase that would not have been made had the advertisement not been misleading. False statements can be defined in two ways: those that are false on their face and those that are implicitly false.

 

Sent from my SM-G928V using Forums mobile app

[bUU]

Ummm.. it isn't a false accusation.

We'll have to agree to disagree about that. I know quite a lot about laws affecting commercial transactions between companies and consumers, and I think your interpretations aren't consistent with the way those laws are actually interpreted in courts of law. However, I'm willing to be corrected: If you really believe what you wrote, then as was suggested by another poster, establish that legally.

 

If you Rci's behavior fits perfectly.

No it doesn't. That's the point - not the way these laws are interpreted in the United States today. It just is not the case, no matter how much either of us wish you were correct. But again, I'm willing to be corrected: Get the attorney general on the phone and have him or her do what you want him or her to do.