Feeling a bit screwed over by RC, Irma safety/risk issue and no-refund, greed?

[CI66774]

 

Sorry doesn't work.

Per the contract point 6i. "Passengers shall have a right to a full refund of the cruise fare if the cruise is cancelled, or a partial refund if the cruise is terminated early."

 

If you are quoting from the contract - great - then cruise line has to reimburse you if it terminates early. Send it to RCL, highlight the pertinent area, and you're good to go.

[bUU]

If you want to sound like a 10 year old "I told you so" then go ahead. Hopefully the rest of us will act like mature adults and just move forward.

Did you get some petty thrill from typing that? It's a shame you didn't actually read what I wrote and instead decided to post a rude and petty attack that had nothing to do with the points I made.

 

People who followed Royal's advise in Harvey flew into Houston with no chance to get to Galveston and apparently Royal is refusing to reimburse those people for their expenses. And there you were, cheering Royal Caribbean on.

Again you post a vapid attack instead of having the integrity to be honest about what I actually wrote. When you start lying about what I was saying it is clear that you're just posting because you want to attack and you really don't care about having as mature conversation with people who disagree with you.

 

I don't cheer any cruise line. I post the reality about what service we actually purchased, the terms and conditions, and the obligations that each side had agreed to. It is a shame that you see fit solely to post caustic and vigorous defense for ignoring the division of risk that passengers and cruise line agree to.

 

No one is forcing you to cruise. If you don't like the contract, don't cruise. It's that simple.

Precisely.

 

 

 

This post may have been entered by voice recognition. Please excuse any typographical errors.

[Ourusualbeach]

Maybe they do have that insurance, but are concerned their premiums will be raised if they make a claim.

 

Bob, from what I have read in Royal's SEC filings they do not carry business interruption insurance. The only insurance they carry is that on the gull of the ship itself...basic catostrophic loss.

[Ourusualbeach]

 

If you are quoting from the contract - great - then cruise line has to reimburse you if it terminates early. Send it to RCL, highlight the pertinent area, and you're good to go.

Royal is giving a refund for those cruises that are shortened. It is in the form of REFUNDABLE OBC. If you don't spend anything on board it will be refunded to your credit card.

[WeLuvVacation]

So, with the current track of the storm, are you still sticking to your opinion that Miami Ft Lauderdale won't be able to accept tourists for a month?:')

 

The sky may be falling in northern Cuba.... but people who believe what they see on tv without questioning the "facts" tend to get suckered into the hysteria.... then some of them try to suck everyone else in. :evilsmile:

 

 

So it will be Tampa/St. Pete instead of Miami/Ft Lauderdale. I'm glad you take such childish joy in that the track has changed so I could be shown to be wrong in my original comment.

[Clarea]

Bob, from what I have read in Royal's SEC filings they do not carry business interruption insurance. The only insurance they carry is that on the gull of the ship itself...basic catostrophic loss.

Thanks Ken.

[jgallagh1944]

I feel for you; just came off shortened cruise aboard NCL Escape. Cruise insurance is so inexpensive and absolutely necessary for obvious reasons, cancellations or illnesses especially if you need medical evacuation. NCL was very fair with us when Irma cut our cruise short. They are pro-rating the cost of our cruise and offered 25% on future cruise. Also offered up to $300 for increased airline fees to get home. MSC offered their passengers a similar deal for their shortened cruise. There is a reason people buy insurance; if you have $3-4000 invested in a one week cruise, spending a few hundred more on insurance makes sense. RCL is a good cruise line. They're in business to make money and provide a great service. If insurance wasn't available as an option, I would expect them to include it in their price which would be increased to reflect that coverage, but insurance is available to individuals and if you shop around, it is inexpensive. Buy it or risk the consequences.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[lbjen]

The gas shortage was short lived, because of everyone wanting gas at the same time. Plenty of gas was delivered, and there's no problem.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

Not what I've been hearing all weekend from my many Florida based friends. No, technically it's not a shortage, we keep hearing that, but the fact is that many gas stations are out, you may need to wait 1-2 hours in line IF you can find somewhere with gas, and when you're crawling at 20-30mph on the highway in bumper to bumper traffic and burning it twice as fast, there's no guarantee you'll find more. But no, there's not a shortage. There isn't one here in Texas either but that doesn't mean any of my local gas stations suddenly have any, because trust me, they don't.

[Ocean Dancer]

Cruiser2, you have a reputation as never attacking anyone and most of your posts are quite humorous and you are enjoyed immensely on these boards . This woman, I believe is an attorney who finds loop holes in most posters comments. She recently changed her signature from " Ignoring juvenile behavior since 2004" which I thought was very funny, hope I don't get in trouble for defending a friend. :halo::halo:

[Cuizer2]

With all the talk of insurance, why don't the cruise lines have business interruption insurance so they can refund people's fare when they can't deliver the product they sold us?

 

Why should the cruise lines provide insurance for the passengers? If the passengers want the insurance, they can buy it. Besides, there is more to travel insurance than just cruise fare reimbursement.

[DaniDanielle]

Cruiser2, you have a reputation as never attacking anyone and most of your posts are quite humorous and you are enjoyed immensely on these boards . This woman, I believe is an attorney who finds loop holes in most posters comments. She recently changed her signature from " Ignoring juvenile behavior since 2004" which I thought was very funny, hope I don't get in trouble for defending a friend. :halo::halo:

 

 

 

Agree. You both have always been great!

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[mek]

I still feel strongly that they should have cancelled the cruise days ago and at very latest now. It seem like they a hoping people won't be able to get alternative travel plans or people with insurance will cancel. With either senerio there's no loss of revenue on Royals bottom line. There's no need to subject passengers to travel to a hurricane devastated area for a 4 day cruise. Possible impassable roads looting has already begin in the middle of the hurricane. Royal wants to cut it's losses and pass on as much loss to the passengers for them to absorb. Everyone has stated it's a risk we take to sail in hurricane well it's a risk Royal takes losing money in hurricane season.

 

So generally cruise lines don't know if a hurricane is going to affect the departure port until a few days before or even the day of departure. This year has been unusual and it's really not the norm. We sailed out of Charleston when Sandy was just east of the port. Charleston is one of the few ports we can reasonably drive to, so we did have a car. We had no idea if we were going to make it out or not, but the ship sailed full and we had a wonderful altered itinerary cruise. Should Carnival have canceled this cruise because the hurricane was right out there? I don't think so.

 

If a hurricane is brewing out in the Atlantic at what point do you consider it to be acceptable for the cruise line to cancel a cruise and offer refunds? Then if they cancel and the hurricane goes off in a totally different direction what happens? What about all of the hotels that lose revenue. restaurants, people who work at the pier, airlines and airports, etc.? What a mess that would be.

[Cuizer2]

So generally cruise lines don't know if a hurricane is going to affect the departure port until a few days before. This year has been unusual and it's really not the norm. We sailed out of Charleston when Sandy was just east of the port. Charleston is one of the few ports we can reasonably drive to, so we did have a car. We had no idea if we were going to make it out or not, but the ship sailed full and we had a wonderful altered itinerary cruise. Should Carnival have canceled this cruise because the hurricane was right out there? I don't think so.

 

If a hurricane is brewing out in the Atlantic at what point do you consider it to be acceptable for the cruise line to cancel a cruise and offer refunds? Then if they cancel and the hurricane goes off in a totally different direction what happens? What about all of the hotels that lose revenue. restaurants, people who work at the pier, airlines and airports, etc.? What a mess that would be.

 

Nobody said these decisions are easy. But for someone who drives to the port, it is not too much of a issue, as long as the roads remain drivable. For someone flying in, it means buying a new last minute airline ticket which is expensive and hard to get, since the flights may not have many open seats. Anyone flying in, who understands that things don't always go smoothly, will fly in the day before. However, people flying in from Europe or other counties not in North American or the northern end of South America are likely flying in two days early. Wait too long and some of these people are going to be flying into a mess, which is what happened when Royal Caribbean delayed its final decision for the Liberty OTS / Harvey cruise. A corporation does have an obligation to its shareholders, but it also has an obligation to its customers. Negative PR can hurt or kill a business. For example, how many people are looking to purchase a diesel VW this year?

 

That said, when you have a cat 5 hurricane head for the ports, you might want to just take the safe route and cancel the cruise.

[bUU]

I can't truthfully tell you what I thing about politicians without getting a time out.

If you have nothing more to contribute to the thread other than exercising your fixation with me you clearly don't have anything useful to contribute. It is time to agree to disagree and stop with the petty nonsense. We disagree. Live with it and stop deflecting the thread away from the topic and onto your petty personal attacks on me.

 

If a hurricane is brewing out in the Atlantic at what point do you consider it to be acceptable for the cruise line to cancel a cruise and offer refunds? Then if they cancel and the hurricane goes off in a totally different direction what happens? What about all of the hotels that lose revenue. restaurants, people who work at the pier, airlines and airports, etc.? What a mess that would be.

Well said. It isn't just about one cruise passenger. There are many different kinds of people affected and all their concerns must be considered and respected.

 

 

This post may have been entered by voice recognition. Please excuse any typographical errors.

[Steelers0854]

There's no need to subject passengers to travel to a hurricane devastated area for a 4 day cruise. Possible impassable roads

 

You make a fair amount of assumptions in your posts. The reality is that we just don't know what conditions will be like. Also, you are taking the side of the person that is taking the cruise. What about the people that live in these areas that rely on visitors to make a living and recover from the storm? What about the crew on these ships that depend on paying customers to get paid? No one is suggesting people go to unsafe areas, but in all likelihood 24 hours after the storm it will be safe to travel and the rebuilding will start. Royal Caribbean has an obligation to get back to normal operations to its shareholders and employees.

 

In addition, you realize that New Orleans was devastated for YEARS after Katrina, should no one have visited that city until recently?

 

looting has already begin in the middle of the hurricane.

 

I have yet to see a single report of this on the news?

 

Royal wants to cut it's losses and pass on as much loss to the passengers for them to absorb. Everyone has stated it's a risk we take to sail in hurricane well it's a risk Royal takes losing money in hurricane season.

 

 

Yes, as they should. They are a business, not a charity. They should start operating as soon as it's safe to do so. If passengers don't want to insure their potential for loss then it shouldn't be their responsibility to do so and passengers shouldn't be upset to take a shorter trip at a prorated cost because they chose not to buy insurance.

 

But it may prove to be challenging for those that have to fly in and negotiate a ride to port could be a consern with all the price gouging that will take place.

 

If they have ship transfers their costs are already covered. Taxis are regulated and they cannot charge more than the meter states, its the law. Uber and Lyft all give you the cost upfront, is not determined by the driver and is agreed to before the ride by the rider, no concern there for price gouging which is illegal during a state of emergency and will be prosecuted by the States Attorney General when it's identified.

 

Thx

 

they haven't updated website or changed alternative sailing dates.

 

 

 

Not only did they post an update 4 hours ago, and have posted regular updates the last few days they even state when to expect the next update, 6pm EDT tonight.

[xpcdoojk]

So it will be Tampa/St. Pete instead of Miami/Ft Lauderdale. I'm glad you take such childish joy in that the track has changed so I could be shown to be wrong in my original comment.

 

You posted it as if it was a fact. As long as you now concede it was just an opinion, and a wrong one, then at least we have been able to agree on something. Since, it was originally supposed to prove your point, and to end the discussion. It is childish to accept "facts" when we all know they are just opinions.

 

I think I said somewhere back in one of my first posts on this thread, that nobody, including the talking heads on TV, RCI, or you actually know where the storm will strike and what will be damaged. I am merely opineing that we all take specific storm track warnings with a great leap of faith, and that believing said predictions we are likely to be wrong more times than we are right.

 

Yours is no disgrace.... quoting Yes.

 

JC

[xpcdoojk]

Thank you, but there have been at least two others who have mentioned her condescending posts. She knows more than anybody (just ask her) and she is not shy about pointing that out to anyone who disagrees with her. Basically she is entitled her opinion, and so is everyone else entitled to her opinion.

 

In my opinion she would make a good politician. I'm not saying that she would be good at any job she was elected to (to be fair, maybe she would), but she sure would make a very good politician. I can't truthfully tell you what I thing about politicians without getting a time out.

 

I always thought Bicker was a he....

 

JC

[Luckybee]

Thank you, but there have been at least two others who have mentioned her condescending posts. She knows more than anybody (just ask her) and she is not shy about pointing that out to anyone who disagrees with her. Basically she is entitled her opinion, and so is everyone else entitled to her opinion.

 

In my opinion she would make a good politician. I'm not saying that she would be good at any job she was elected to (to be fair, maybe she would), but she sure would make a very good politician. I can't truthfully tell you what I thing about politicians without getting a time out.

 

I don't spend much time generally on these boards since we do many more land based holidays than cruises, but I recently had the pleasure ;p of dealing with this poster as well. I quickly came to the realization that it is far better to ignore as it is abundantly clear that most of this appears to be for the sole purpose of self entertainment. Honestly, having now seen her/him ? in action in a few threads it seems that the reason for posting is only to be controversial because some of their posts are just so argumentative that they border on irrational. We all know people who for one reason or another will automatically say black when you say white, or sunny when you say cloudy even though it is pouring rain. Imho for me anyway, my professional life is such that I deal with that on a regular basis so Im ignoring during an activity that I don't get paid for :)

Life is too short to do otherwise !

[Ocean Dancer]

Agree. You both have always been great!

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Thank You :D:D

Thank you, but there have been at least two others who have mentioned her condescending posts. She knows more than anybody (just ask her) and she is not shy about pointing that out to anyone who disagrees with her. Basically she is entitled her opinion, and so is everyone else entitled to her opinion.

 

In my opinion she would make a good politician. I'm not saying that she would be good at any job she was elected to (to be fair, maybe she would), but she sure would make a very good politician. I can't truthfully tell you what I thing about politicians without getting a time out.

I've also thought that............great minds think alike!!:*

[Sue1260]

I stand corrected and humbled Steelers0854 I may have typed in haste and many comments were unfair assumptions. I have seen reports with videos of looting taking place. And flooded streets that maybe clear and passable by Wednesday.

[marci22]

I always thought Bicker was a he....

 

JC

Me too. I even pictured how he looked in my mind. (I didn't think it was him in the picture for some reason) ha

[Luckybee]

You posted it as if it was a fact. As long as you now concede it was just an opinion, and a wrong one, then at least we have been able to agree on something. Since, it was originally supposed to prove your point, and to end the discussion. It is childish to accept "facts" when we all know they are just opinions.

 

I think I said somewhere back in one of my first posts on this thread, that nobody, including the talking heads on TV, RCI, or you actually know where the storm will strike and what will be damaged. I am merely opineing that we all take specific storm track warnings with a great leap of faith, and that believing said predictions we are likely to be wrong more times than we are right.

 

Yours is no disgrace.... quoting Yes.

 

JC

 

Everyone is entitled of course to an opinion. Having watched some of the coverage on tv today mine certainly hasn't changed. To invite passengers to travel into a hurricane area in order to make a cruise imho was not appropriate. The eastern coast may have missed the brunt of the storm(cept one wouldn't know that by looking at the flooding coverage of downtown Miami)....but Royal certainly couldn't have known the direction the storm was going to take (esp since their weather guy hasn't exactly been dead on accurate to say the least).

 

In no other industry does a company get away with not providing a service/product contracted for and not having to refund. A 4 day cruise is not pure and simple the same product as a 7 day one....and that is a fact not an opinion.....and in my opinion they should have to refund when they change the product that dramatically and the purchaser does not want the new product.

[xpcdoojk]

Everyone is entitled of course to an opinion. Having watched some of the coverage on tv today mine certainly hasn't changed. To invite passengers to travel into a hurricane area in order to make a cruise imho was not appropriate. The eastern coast may have missed the brunt of the storm(cept one wouldn't know that by looking at the flooding coverage of downtown Miami)....but Royal certainly couldn't have known the direction the storm was going to take (esp since their weather guy hasn't exactly been dead on accurate to say the least).

 

In no other industry does a company get away with not providing a service/product contracted for and not having to refund. A 4 day cruise is not pure and simple the same product as a 7 day one....and that is a fact not an opinion.....and in my opinion they should have to refund when they change the product that dramatically and the purchaser does not want the new product.

 

 

Ok, but sometime the ship will be sailing and a lot of people will want to be on board, and I bet the sooner the better for most of them.

 

I don't really know of any similar industry to a giant cruise ship, but ok.... O, I tthought of one. The dirigible industry which pretty much died with the Hindenburg.

 

You might want to check out the river cruise forum. It might give you a different opinion of RCI and the ocean cruise industry in general. Look for cruises with low water, and in particular Viking cruises, where instead of a lovely river cruise you get a bus trip in Europe and get to sleep on stationary river cruise boats... Happens routinely.... when the water is low or high....

 

JC

[Sue1260]

Just posted on another thread they are sailing on Harmony on Sept 16 from FLL. They just got a call that their precruise hotel will not be open for at least a week after their sailing date. I hope this isn't going to be a recurrent theme for all sailing on Sept 10th cruise that fly in and stay night before.

[lbjen]

Anyone who sincerely believes there is no looting happening in Florida right now needs to talk to me about buying a bridge. Just because you aren't seeing it doesn't mean it isn't happening!