Deceptive Advertising by Royal Carribean

[Marie51]

My wife and I booked the Visions of the Sea for a Jan 2019 cruise to the Bahamas. Specifical to see the highly advertised Coco Cay by RC. We paid for the whole trip and then a month later RC substituted Miami for our beach day at Coco Cay. We tried to change dates and they refused. The RC agents kept telling us about the great day we would have in Miami. I didn't pay for a cruise to Miami. I feel like it is false advertising and deceptive too. I have been on cruises where they can't stop somewhere due to weather of other problems but we are 4 months away from this cruise and they change itineraries after the boat is almost full. We cancelled the cuise and they are keeping $800 dollars. They say they will give us back $300 on our next booking. That will never happen! And I hear they cancelled on several other boats. Some smart lawyer is going to look at deceptive trade practises and get a class action suit going on this one. Someone at Royal Carribean was aware of the changes to Coco Cay. I hope RC feels the same pain my wife and I are feeling. This was supose to be our honeymoom cruise.

The highly advertised Coco Cay as you call it is nothing more than a beach and water park with hamburgers and hotdogs for lunch. I was just there last Tuesday and the beach was full of jellyfish and seaweed. You’re better off in Miami. Besides it sounds like you booked a nonrefundable rate and paid for it ahead of time. If you had booked a refundable rate instead and not paid for it ahead of time you would not be out any money. You could have gotten your deposit back with no loss of money and then just booked something else.

[John&LaLa]

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.

Well let's just go back to original plan and have two ships there during the makeover construction. That's going to be top notch.

 

Trust me, this change is being pro active.

 

And BTW, I'm on a revised itinerary as well. We're going to Nassau. Would prefer SB. Oh, and I also had 4 Easterns become Westerns last fall.

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Mikew0805]

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.

 

Hard for you to see a difference between months before a sailing, and during a sailing?

[Mikew0805]

OP - This would probably drive me to another cruise line as well. CCL, which is extremely similar to RCI has a different, more realistic port change policy. They happen to understand that the reason why one books a cruise may very well be due to the ports, and that all ports are not equal.

[Mikew0805]

The highly advertised Coco Cay as you call it is nothing more than a beach and water park with hamburgers and hotdogs for lunch. I was just there last Tuesday and the beach was full of jellyfish and seaweed. You’re better off in Miami. Besides it sounds like you booked a nonrefundable rate and paid for it ahead of time. If you had booked a refundable rate instead and not paid for it ahead of time you would not be out any money. You could have gotten your deposit back with no loss of money and then just booked something else.

 

This can change on a weekly, even daily basis. I have never encountered this... at Coco, but I am sure I will sometime. The choice for a private island is a beach day, so I would NOT be better off in Miami.

 

As far as hamburgers and hot dogs only for lunch.. hmm I have never had a hamburger or hot dog for lunch on the island, and I have eaten lunch there every single time I have went. Exaggerate much?

[John&LaLa]

OP - This would probably drive me to another cruise line as well. CCL, which is extremely similar to RCI has a different, more realistic port change policy. They happen to understand that the reason why one books a cruise may very well be due to the ports, and that all ports are not equal.

 

I'm looking into SilverSea for a cruise in 2020. Alaska to Japan or reverse. Stops in Dutch Harbor. This is about the only reason I'm considering it. It gets missed on occasion, but nothing you can do about it

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Mikew0805]

Well let's just go back to original plan and have two ships there during the makeover construction. That's going to be top notch.

 

Trust me, this change is being pro active.

 

And BTW, I'm on a revised itinerary as well. We're going to Nassau. Would prefer SB. Oh, and I also had 4 Easterns become Westerns last fall.

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

I agree, but I don't think RCI should force their guests to pay for RCI's planning.

 

If I remember correctly... and I do, because my my Aunt was affected, and was offered the opportunity to cancel with a refund last September. The difference is all about RCI's pocketbook. Had they not offered this during these storms, it would have hit the media, and they would have paid dearly. This issue we are all discussing is different, and will not likely hit the media, so RCI can do as they please, and not be reasonable about the advanced notice of the itinerary change.

 

Also, I would never advocate for someone who complained about an itinerary change due to weather, or other unforeseeable events, sans mechanical issues.

[Mikew0805]

I'm looking into SilverSea for a cruise in 2020. Alaska to Japan or reverse. Stops in Dutch Harbor. This is about the only reason I'm considering it. It gets missed on occasion, but nothing you can do about it

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

That would be an amazing trip.

[gerif]

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.

Exactly how do you figure something like construction is ever 100% within anyone’s control? Have you never had any experience with construction? Not even had a new house built? As one who camped out in a hotel for a couple of months, let me tell you it’s not always 100% in control. I have a close friend who is a construction manager for several properties in NYC. Some of her stories would send chills up your spine.

[gaylemh]

Your cruise is going to the Bahamas. Where do you think Nassau is? You want to see the real Bahamas, it's not a Coco Cay, which is a private beach island in the Bahamas. Nassau is the real Bahamas.

[sparks1093]

Well let's just go back to original plan and have two ships there during the makeover construction. That's going to be top notch.

 

Trust me, this change is being pro active.

 

And BTW, I'm on a revised itinerary as well. We're going to Nassau. Would prefer SB. Oh, and I also had 4 Easterns become Westerns last fall.

 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

I get that it's proactive, and I get that many will just go and make the best of the changes (which is what I would do), but I also get that there will be some who will want to cancel because of the changes and they should be allowed to cancel without penalty.

[sparks1093]

That's exactly what you did say:

 

 

 

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.

 

My second post (which you quoted first) clarified my previous post.

[sparks1093]

Exactly how do you figure something like construction is ever 100% within anyone’s control? Have you never had any experience with construction? Not even had a new house built? As one who camped out in a hotel for a couple of months, let me tell you it’s not always 100% in control. I have a close friend who is a construction manager for several properties in NYC. Some of her stories would send chills up your spine.

 

Who else is in control, Holland America;)? The change in itinerary is being driven by changes Royal is making to Royal's private island using Royal's contractors. Yes, delays can happen, but the passengers who object to the changes shouldn't have to pay for that.

[Mikew0805]

Exactly how do you figure something like construction is ever 100% within anyone’s control? Have you never had any experience with construction? Not even had a new house built? As one who camped out in a hotel for a couple of months, let me tell you it’s not always 100% in control. I have a close friend who is a construction manager for several properties in NYC. Some of her stories would send chills up your spine.

 

I don't think anyone is saying that construction timing is perfect, as we all know they are estimates. I think you should not take it so literal. What is being said, is that this is something that RCI chose to do, so the delays or complications that are as a result of that decision are 100% their fault, and their own customers should not have to pay for that decision.

[RocketMan275]

I get that it's proactive, and I get that many will just go and make the best of the changes (which is what I would do), but I also get that there will be some who will want to cancel because of the changes and they should be allowed to cancel without penalty.

 

Don't book non-refundable fares if you want the privilege of cancelling without penalty,

[Domino D]

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.

 

Isn't Non-Refundable an option at the time of booking, that someone chooses? Am I missing something? No one makes a person take that option.

 

From a corporate standpoint, it is a vehicle to sell cabins further out and for a lower cost, by reducing the likelihood that someone will change their mind. I will agree that they are trying to eliminate (or seriously reduce) the number of people changing or cancelling, which results in them having to sell the same cabin twice. That's not a lack of Good Will, it is doing exactly what the booking screen says they'll do.

 

Changing itineraries is annoying, and can be upsetting, but honestly it is just part of cruising. Kind of like paying the deposit, in July, on a ski resort for Christmas and then there is no snow. That is part of booking a ski trip. They don't give you anything back either.

 

Finally, to be completely honest, they can find a way to make any reason "Not 100%" their fault. That will just lead to us debating what is true and what is under their control.

 

Roll with the waves.

[Mikew0805]

Isn't Non-Refundable an option at the time of booking, that someone chooses? Am I missing something? No one makes a person take that option.

 

From a corporate standpoint, it is a vehicle to sell cabins further out and for a lower cost, by reducing the likelihood that someone will change their mind. I will agree that they are trying to eliminate (or seriously reduce) the number of people changing or cancelling, which results in them having to sell the same cabin twice. That's not a lack of Good Will, it is doing exactly what the booking screen says they'll do.

 

Changing itineraries is annoying, and can be upsetting, but honestly it is just part of cruising. Kind of like paying the deposit, in July, on a ski resort for Christmas and then there is no snow. That is part of booking a ski trip. They don't give you anything back either.

 

Finally, to be completely honest, they can find a way to make any reason "Not 100%" their fault. That will just lead to us debating what is true and what is under their control.

 

Roll with the waves.

 

These are not the same things. If you want to compare apple to apples... this is you booking The Inn at Keystone for Christmas, and due to renovations, they are putting you up at Beaver Run in Breckinridge for Christmas. This is not the same thing you purchased, and they would refund your money.

 

I think the example you are looking for is the ski resort not having snow, is equivalent to ships not calling on ports due to bad weather or a safety concern. This thread.. is not about that.

[sparks1093]

Don't book non-refundable fares if you want the privilege of cancelling without penalty,

 

It's not a privilege to cancel without penalty if the itinerary is cancelled prior to sailing.

[sparks1093]

Isn't Non-Refundable an option at the time of booking, that someone chooses? Am I missing something? No one makes a person take that option.

 

From a corporate standpoint, it is a vehicle to sell cabins further out and for a lower cost, by reducing the likelihood that someone will change their mind. I will agree that they are trying to eliminate (or seriously reduce) the number of people changing or cancelling, which results in them having to sell the same cabin twice. That's not a lack of Good Will, it is doing exactly what the booking screen says they'll do.

 

Changing itineraries is annoying, and can be upsetting, but honestly it is just part of cruising. Kind of like paying the deposit, in July, on a ski resort for Christmas and then there is no snow. That is part of booking a ski trip. They don't give you anything back either.

 

Finally, to be completely honest, they can find a way to make any reason "Not 100%" their fault. That will just lead to us debating what is true and what is under their control.

 

Roll with the waves.

 

Having an itinerary change at the last minute is unavoidable, changing the itinerary months prior to the sailing is a different matter entirely. That no one makes anyone choose the option of non-refundable is also irrelevant- from the passenger's point of view what they reserved is no longer what they are getting. If they want to cancel they should be allowed to and get their full deposit back.

[gaylemh]

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

 

But he is going to the Bahamas. The ship goes to Nassau.

[Domino D]

These are not the same things. If you want to compare apple to apples... this is you booking The Inn at Keystone for Christmas, and due to renovations, they are putting you up at Beaver Run in Breckinridge for Christmas. This is not the same thing you purchased, and they would refund your money.

 

I think the example you are looking for is the ski resort not having snow, is equivalent to ships not calling on ports due to bad weather or a safety concern. This thread.. is not about that.

Should have been clearer. I was trying to say lots of vacations have specific things that can cause issues. Ski trips can be impacted by lack of snow and you go or forfeit the deposit. Cruises are subject to itinerary changes. Not the best comparison for sure.

 

Sent from my SM-G920P using Forums mobile app

[Domino D]

Having an itinerary change at the last minute is unavoidable, changing the itinerary months prior to the sailing is a different matter entirely. That no one makes anyone choose the option of non-refundable is also irrelevant- from the passenger's point of view what they reserved is no longer what they are getting. If they want to cancel they should be allowed to and get their full deposit back.

I think this is just an agree to disagree thing. I would say, everything is irrelevant from the passengers point of view, if they feel unhappy.

 

Contract says itinerary can change, fare says non-refundable.

 

But, I know you have different point of view. Enjoyed the conversation. Happy cruising.

 

Sent from my SM-G920P using Forums mobile app

[Domino D]

Having an itinerary change at the last minute is unavoidable, changing the itinerary months prior to the sailing is a different matter entirely. That no one makes anyone choose the option of non-refundable is also irrelevant- from the passenger's point of view what they reserved is no longer what they are getting. If they want to cancel they should be allowed to and get their full deposit back.

Oops, last thing. I don't disagree it would be nice to offer what you suggest. I just don't think there is deception or something unfair given the term we agree to when booking. The first time I read the cruise contract I was shocked how one sided it was. Now it's just party of the cost of cruising. I have clients who own and operate hotels, if they could get people to sign something like it, they would.

 

Sent from my SM-G920P using Forums mobile app

[nelblu]

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

Hopefully it's the same in the US.

 

Don't know if it's the govt. or credit card company that you are referring to. If it's the CC, I've had investigated charges as low as $15 and they open up a case and follow up with me until resolution.

 

I' tell you a funny story. Lat August, we cruised on the Brilliance 12 nite Mediterranean. Saw a charge on my Visa a charge for Sept. 7, 2017 for $20+ incurred at "Nathan's 4NY05, NY. The charge seemed familiar but not at Nathan's nor the date. On the 7th we were in Montenegro and lunch was included.

 

Called Chase CS and asked them to identify the charge or better yet get a copy of the tab. I further explained to them that we did incur a charge for a pizza and sodas in Ravenna while taking a beach tour on Sept. 6th. No they

said, the specific charge is for Nathan's in NYC. Asked them further if the date was accurate. They replied Yes. Ok, I instructed them to investigate.

 

Bottom line, they came back 3 weeks later and told me that the charge was legit and they would pay the merchant. The funny thing was that they could not identify the proper merchant.

 

Since I was missing the charge from Ravenna, I knew that it was a right charge. Told them, that I could not be in 2 places at once and many miles in between, but got nowhere.;p:confused:

[sparks1093]

Oops, last thing. I don't disagree it would be nice to offer what you suggest. I just don't think there is deception or something unfair given the term we agree to when booking. The first time I read the cruise contract I was shocked how one sided it was. Now it's just party of the cost of cruising. I have clients who own and operate hotels, if they could get people to sign something like it, they would.

 

Sent from my SM-G920P using Forums mobile app

 

I also don't think there was any deception and I fully agree that the contract is on their side to prevent any sort of legal action (including a credit card charge back).

My only point is it would be nice for Royal to fully refund any deposits for passengers who wished to cancel because of the itinerary change.