Deceptive Advertising by Royal Carribean

[Expat Cruise]

It is hard to fight based upon the cruise contract. The claim must be filed in Federal Court in Southern Florida and the contract has a agreement not to go the class action route. Can these things be broken by a skilled lawyer? Yes sometimes but it is hard and will be costly. Far more than the amount of money lost. So the legal route through the courts is not the first choice.

 

You do have one very easy route and the cruise contract is not all powerful this way. You can file a credit card dispute with your card provider for the amount not return,. With the credit card company you can make the claim about the port change. You can claim false advertising and or the other issues you raise. The big difference is the credit card merchant agreement has first standing over the cruise contract. No need to involve a lawyer and if it does not work you can still go the lawyer route.

 

Royal does not hold all the power with credit card disputes. In fact if anything the card providers are pro consumer if the issues are close. Now I'm sure some members here will post information like Royal can ban you, etc. Which is absolutely false part of the merchant agreement is that the merchant (Royal) agrees to accept whatever ruling they make. And that the merchant will take no retaliation actions against the customer. Doing so is a direct violation of the use terms and is subject to the merchant being banned from processing credit card payments. If anything once you file a dispute the merchant will be extra nice as they do not want to cross the line.

[nelblu]

Yes, you are correct. But on a cash basis, you are out $500 since FCC is a use-it-or-lose-it time limit credit on account and won't be refunded in cash.

 

I believe it's a year. I think the Op is very dramatic and rash to possibly lose $1k over a port change.:confused:

[sparks1093]

I disagree. The right thing to do is what you have agreed in the contract.

 

The contract is for changes necessitated by things outside of the cruise line's control such as weather. This change was 100% within Royal's control and they should allow people the opportunity to cancel without penalty. People are talking about the OP being mad and making decisions based on that (which I agree doesn't always have a good result), but Royal is losing a potential loyal cruiser for what, $200? While it can be pointed out that both the OP and Royal are being shortsighted in their approach, Royal stands to lose more because there are undoubtedly more like the OP out there.

[nelblu]

The contract is for changes necessitated by things outside of the cruise line's control such as weather. This change was 100% within Royal's control and they should allow people the opportunity to cancel without penalty. People are talking about the OP being mad and making decisions based on that (which I agree doesn't always have a good result), but Royal is losing a potential loyal cruiser for what, $200? While it can be pointed out that both the OP and Royal are being shortsighted in their approach, Royal stands to lose more because there are undoubtedly more like the OP out there.

 

Not many out there that are willing to lose $1k from their hard earned money simply to a port change.

[nelblu]

It is hard to fight based upon the cruise contract. The claim must be filed in Federal Court in Southern Florida and the contract has a agreement not to go the class action route. Can these things be broken by a skilled lawyer? Yes sometimes but it is hard and will be costly. Far more than the amount of money lost. So the legal route through the courts is not the first choice.

 

You do have one very easy route and the cruise contract is not all powerful this way. You can file a credit card dispute with your card provider for the amount not return,. With the credit card company you can make the claim about the port change. You can claim false advertising and or the other issues you raise. The big difference is the credit card merchant agreement has first standing over the cruise contract. No need to involve a lawyer and if it does not work you can still go the lawyer route.

 

Royal does not hold all the power with credit card disputes. In fact if anything the card providers are pro consumer if the issues are close. Now I'm sure some members here will post information like Royal can ban you, etc. Which is absolutely false part of the merchant agreement is that the merchant (Royal) agrees to accept whatever ruling they make. And that the merchant will take no retaliation actions against the customer. Doing so is a direct violation of the use terms and is subject to the merchant being banned from processing credit card payments. If anything once you file a dispute the merchant will be extra nice as they do not want to cross the line.

 

So you think that Visa, Master Charge, etc. would ban processing transaction of RCL.:D

[grapau27]

Since you are long before final payment date, the most that they should have kept was $100 each, or $200, with $150 each, or $300 in FCC (future cruise credit) and the rest - $300 refunded to your credit card. (in order to add up to $800, which I assume is what you had paid them to date)

 

Your numbers are not making sense to me. Can you post again and explain?

 

(and the cruise still goes to Key West! Key West is an awesome place to spend the day.)

That's what I was thinking too unless they were booking from the UK.

[grapau27]

Wouldn't it make more financial sense to give up the $100 PP, book a different cruise using the FCC? Sounds better than losing $800.

Best idea IMO too.

[grapau27]

So you think that Visa, Master Charge, etc. would ban processing transaction of RCL.:D

Section 75 for a credit card amount over £100 in the UK would be investigated.

Hopefully it's the same in the US.

[creel5857]

We are on this same voyage and quite disappointed in the Miami stop as well but we know there is nothing we can really do regarding change in ports. I would say that in the past we have had some ports changed on other cruise lines and they made concessions and comps in other ways but RC does not indicate anything of this nature yet. With one such occasion we ended up having to substitute ports and we were docked a long walk from any shopping or activities and the cruise line provided free shuttle/trolley type services to shopping a short ways from port. In another situation they offered some OBC toward services and beverages on ship. You cant please everyone but anything RC could do to make the Miami stop a bit more attractive would be great......

[ray98]

LOL....'deceptive'.

[spookwife]

nothing deceptive or false about it. what would your response be if you were already ON the cruise and CCC was skipped due to hurricane damage or other issues such as the ship experiencing engine troubles? itineraries can be altered at any time for any reason.

[waterbug123]

Some smart lawyer is going to look at deceptive trade practises and get a class action suit going on this one.

 

No, they aren't. If you read the cruise contract, they can substitute ports. It's quite possible that while they knew at some point they would have to substitute Miami for Coco Cay, they didn't know exactly when until closer to sail date. That could be for any number of logistical reasons. Not to mention, for class action status I believe you would have to show actual damages and that would be tough to do....most probably aren't canceling the cruise so they aren't out any money, and you canceled but RC is within their rights to retain your nonrefundable deposit so in a sense, you don't have any damages to show either.

 

Also, visiting Coco Cay is just a beach day; I wouldn't consider it "visiting the Bahamas." If it is so important to your wife to "go to the Bahamas" then book a land-based trip to a resort there. This holds for anyone who books a particular cruise itinerary because one port or another is a "must see." Grand Cayman gets canceled a lot due to high winds that prevent tendering, and there is always someone crying about "we booked this cruise specifically because we wanted to go the the Cayman Islands."

[ssb]

No, they aren't. If you read the cruise contract, they can substitute ports. It's quite possible that while they knew at some point they would have to substitute Miami for Coco Cay, they didn't know exactly when until closer to sail date. That could be for any number of logistical reasons. Not to mention, for class action status I believe you would have to show actual damages and that would be tough to do....most probably aren't canceling the cruise so they aren't out any money, and you canceled but RC is within their rights to retain your nonrefundable deposit so in a sense, you don't have any damages to show either.

 

Also, visiting Coco Cay is just a beach day; I wouldn't consider it "visiting the Bahamas." If it is so important to your wife to "go to the Bahamas" then book a land-based trip to a resort there. This holds for anyone who books a particular cruise itinerary because one port or another is a "must see." Grand Cayman gets canceled a lot due to high winds that prevent tendering, and there is always someone crying about "we booked this cruise specifically because we wanted to go the the Cayman Islands."

 

Coca Cay is just a water park on a private island . I completely agree it is not The Bahamas. There are plenty of water parks in US . I would rather go to South Beach in Miami than Coca Cay . Enjoy the beach and Eat drink and be merry . . Besides it's a honeymoon . Enjoy who you are with not where you are at .....it seems to me . But it’s their honeymoon and have right to be disappointed. Life will go on .

[sparks1093]

No, they aren't. If you read the cruise contract, they can substitute ports. It's quite possible that while they knew at some point they would have to substitute Miami for Coco Cay, they didn't know exactly when until closer to sail date. That could be for any number of logistical reasons. Not to mention, for class action status I believe you would have to show actual damages and that would be tough to do....most probably aren't canceling the cruise so they aren't out any money, and you canceled but RC is within their rights to retain your nonrefundable deposit so in a sense, you don't have any damages to show either.

 

Also, visiting Coco Cay is just a beach day; I wouldn't consider it "visiting the Bahamas." If it is so important to your wife to "go to the Bahamas" then book a land-based trip to a resort there. This holds for anyone who books a particular cruise itinerary because one port or another is a "must see." Grand Cayman gets canceled a lot due to high winds that prevent tendering, and there is always someone crying about "we booked this cruise specifically because we wanted to go the the Cayman Islands."

 

Under the contract yes, Royal has the right to do what they are doing. But from a customer care perspective I believe it is very short sighted of them to do it.

[sparks1093]

Not many out there that are willing to lose $1k from their hard earned money simply to a port change.

 

I wouldn't lose almost $1k of my money for something like this, but I most certainly would remember this in my future bookings and in my recommendations for others. It would cost nothing for Royal to make anyone whole who wanted to cancel because of the itinerary change and would gain them much customer good will.

[RocketMan275]

I wouldn't lose almost $1k of my money for something like this, but I most certainly would remember this in my future bookings and in my recommendations for others. It would cost nothing for Royal to make anyone whole who wanted to cancel because of the itinerary change and would gain them much customer good will.

 

First, OP hasn't suffered any damages so there is nothing to make whole.

Second, it would cost Royal what they are owed under the non-refundable contract.

Third, customer good will is vastly over rated.

[Arzeena]

First, OP hasn't suffered any damages so there is nothing to make whole.

Second, it would cost Royal what they are owed under the non-refundable contract.

Third, customer good will is vastly over rated.

 

Of course he suffered damages....he made his wife unhappy as he did not fulfill her Bahamas wish on his honeymoon!!!:eek:

 

He is so doing the dishes for the rest of his life!!!!;p

[sparks1093]

First, OP hasn't suffered any damages so there is nothing to make whole.

Second, it would cost Royal what they are owed under the non-refundable contract.

Third, customer good will is vastly over rated.

 

The non-refundable contract is a Royal construct to prevent folks from cancelling after receiving a special rate during the booking process. Customer good will is still a thing, even if many people do overrate it. Evidently Royal doesn't give it any weight. That's fine, it's their business to run as they see fit. But it remains my opinion that they should allow passengers to cancel without penalty due to itinerary changes, especially if those changes are being made because of something that is 100% within their control.

[fredflint]

As has been said once you talk about bringing in lawyers and speaking to the legal department it changes the whole customer service dynamic.

 

Also a private island is not really a port, substituting Miami is going to cost the cruise lines a bit of money in port fees which they are eating.

 

I believe the poster wanted to vent and have people agree with him.

 

he should have contacted the company he purchased his insurance policy from and used the cancel for any reason part.

[RocketMan275]

The non-refundable contract is a Royal construct to prevent folks from cancelling after receiving a special rate during the booking process. Customer good will is still a thing, even if many people do overrate it. Evidently Royal doesn't give it any weight. That's fine, it's their business to run as they see fit. But it remains my opinion that they should allow passengers to cancel without penalty due to itinerary changes, especially if those changes are being made because of something that is 100% within their control.

 

Why are construction delays 100% within their control? It would appear that Royal did make a good faith effort to avoid these changes.

 

You're claiming that Royal should allow anyone on any cruise scheduled to stop at any port affected by an any itinerary change at anytime even into the future, to get their non-refundable deposit back. It's not just OP. It's anyone who would be affected and it would set a precedent for all future cruises. I can understand why Royal would think that's too much good will to give away.

 

I really do sympathize with OP. However, once OP got Royal's legal department (did he threaten a lawsuit?), this was transposed from a 'good will' issue to a legal issue and the lawyers will insist upon following the letter of the contract.

[sparks1093]

Why are construction delays 100% within their control? It would appear that Royal did make a good faith effort to avoid these changes.

 

You're claiming that Royal should allow anyone on any cruise scheduled to stop at any port affected by an any itinerary change at anytime even into the future, to get their non-refundable deposit back. It's not just OP. It's anyone who would be affected and it would set a precedent for all future cruises. I can understand why Royal would think that's too much good will to give away.

 

I really do sympathize with OP. However, once OP got Royal's legal department (did he threaten a lawsuit?), this was transposed from a 'good will' issue to a legal issue and the lawyers will insist upon following the letter of the contract.

 

No, I'm not saying that this would apply to all itinerary changes, but it should be carefully considered to any itinerary change that occurs prior to sailing and certainly to any changes made prior to final payment date. And even legal departments won't look at the letter of the contract if it will avoid spending unnecessary money in litigating the issue, that's why settlements occur. Carnival routinely makes this offer to its passengers affected by itinerary changes. I want Royal to be at least as good as Carnival, don't you? The construction is within their control and making a good faith effort to avoid changes is irrelevant, the change was made, the least they could do is offer folks the chance to cancel without penalty.

[ladylikes2cruise]

Just wondering if the OP, had any type of cruise insurance?

I have in the past, obtained insurance that covered intinerary changes and would have been covered, if I chose to cancel.

Disclaimer: I personally never had to use it :p

[RocketMan275]

No, I'm not saying that this would apply to all itinerary changes, but it should be carefully considered to any itinerary change that occurs prior to sailing and certainly to any changes made prior to final payment date. And even legal departments won't look at the letter of the contract if it will avoid spending unnecessary money in litigating the issue, that's why settlements occur. Carnival routinely makes this offer to its passengers affected by itinerary changes. I want Royal to be at least as good as Carnival, don't you? The construction is within their control and making a good faith effort to avoid changes is irrelevant, the change was made, the least they could do is offer folks the chance to cancel without penalty.

 

That's exactly what you did say:

 

The non-refundable contract is a Royal construct to prevent folks from cancelling after receiving a special rate during the booking process. Customer good will is still a thing, even if many people do overrate it. Evidently Royal doesn't give it any weight. That's fine, it's their business to run as they see fit. But it remains my opinion that they should allow passengers to cancel without penalty due to itinerary changes, especially if those changes are being made because of something that is 100% within their control.

 

Whether the construction delays were under Royal's control isn't in evidence. There are multiple reasons why that would not be the case. It wouldn't be difficult to make a case that Royal was acting in good faith.

[Mikeandliz]

Good luck with that CAS. Enjoy your $12.17 restitution. Go get em tiger [emoji197]. Just remember, you agreed to a contract.

 

What if you went on that cruise and the weather prevented you from going and you were subbed to MIAMI. [emoji90]happens.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[DaNana]

Just wondering if the OP, had any type of cruise insurance?

 

I have in the past, obtained insurance that covered intinerary changes and would have been covered, if I chose to cancel.

 

Disclaimer: I personally never had to use it :p

 

 

 

The OP hasn’t responded for a while. Possibly due to how it might feel he’s being attacked. Very admirable that he wants to do in starting his marriage off on the right road. I agree about the insurance, let’s hope he had it. I also love South Beach! So much to do. Coco Cay was canceled from our cruise next May. I was just at Labadee and thinking a cruise ship day might be awesome! Hope this works out and you let us hear from you.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums