Deceptive Advertising by Royal Carribean

[sfaaa]

 

You require us to sign an unfair contract and we will move on. Customer service matters.

 

Then I suggest you give up cruising. All cruise line contracts are heavily in favor of the seller.

[Domino D]

I’m a new cruiser and sympathetic to the OP. It does make me rethink cruising as a vacation option given how often I read about these type of issues, how RC handled last year’s hurricane season compared to other lines, their horrible IT and general disorganization when it comes to booking dining and entertainment.

 

Completely my personal opinion, but I think the younger and next generation of cruisers won’t be beholden to any one cruise line. We certainly aren’t beholden to any one corporation for the duration of our careers like my parent’s generation and that approach spreads to other aspects of our life. You require us to sign an unfair contract and we will move on. Customer service matters.

 

I admire your sentiment, but this isn't a case of signing a contract like an employment contract. It is terms and conditions. You won't be asked to sign them. They won't show them to you. When you pay the deposit you are agreeing to them. Like the ones on a smart phone or website. It is fine print on the back of a receipt. Just make sure you know where and what thee terms are, so that you can make that decision. You will find differences, but the majority of the terms will be the same at all cruise lines.

 

It's not the contract you sign that get's you. It's the one that says "By clicking here, you agree to the terms and conditions" that gets people, because they don't read them, and can't negotiate them.

 

If you feel strongly about it, I suggest you read all the terms you accept. Airline tickets, Rental Car's, etc. They can all be unfair. Wait until you show up for our flight and find out its over sold, or show up at your hotel and fin out they have your reservation, but no rooms left.

[Expat Cruise]

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

 

 

A credit card dispute is the best way to handle this, because the buyer did not get what they believed they purchased, regardless of the cruise contract. The credit card agreement has first standing.

 

If they take retaliation against a card holder for filing a credit card dispute, they are subject to losing the ability to accept credit cards. While Royals business is worth millions the good will and reputation of Master Card and Visa is worth more. Plus Fair Credit Billing Act, which regulates how credit card companies and merchants handle these disputes. Even if it did not result in total loss it at least would change the rate they are paying.

 

 

No cruise line will risk the US Government coming in over a violation of the Fair Credit Card Act, becasue of a charge back. Even if nothing happen to them the legal bill would be several hundred thousand dollars.

[Domino D]

A credit card dispute is the best way to handle this, because the buyer did not get what they believed they purchased, regardless of the cruise contract. The credit card agreement has first standing.

 

If they take retaliation against a card holder for filing a credit card dispute, they are subject to losing the ability to accept credit cards. While Royals business is worth millions the good will and reputation of Master Card and Visa is worth more. Plus Fair Credit Billing Act, which regulates how credit card companies and merchants handle these disputes. Even if it did not result in total loss it at least would change the rate they are paying.

 

 

No cruise line will risk the US Government coming in over a violation of the Fair Credit Card Act, becasue of a charge back. Even if nothing happen to them the legal bill would be several hundred thousand dollars.

 

I agree this is the best avenue to pursue, and is the only thing to try. I'm not sure when everything is said and done the bank will find for the OP. Disputing a charge, in instances like this, does not always stand up. I don't think they would put them on the no sail list, but I do know rental car companies are notorious for putting people on the "Don't Rent To" list for disputing charges.

[Goodtime Cruizin]

I haven't read this entire thread, SIAP, but I have a feeling that if a lawyer was hired, Royal would eventually settle this. This is a customer service issue and poor customer service at that. Most large corporations do not wish to deal with law suits of this nature. It may take awhile to reach a plateau of someone w/ common sense to settle it, but IMO, eventually RCCL would.

[sfaaa]

Feel free to sue. Now please pay $5k upfront retainer fee before your next lawyer appointment. We accept Amex, VISA & MC if you prefer.

[Domino D]

I haven't read this entire thread, SIAP, but I have a feeling that if a lawyer was hired, Royal would eventually settle this. This is a customer service issue and poor customer service at that. Most large corporations do not wish to deal with law suits of this nature. It may take awhile to reach a plateau of someone w/ common sense to settle it, but IMO, eventually RCCL would.

 

This an $800 loss. Royal offered to give them a $300 credit, bringing the loss to $500. What lawyer do you envision is taking on a case to recover $500. There is no class action here. There are no damages. The situation is directly addressed in the terms and conditions. You would pay more in legal fees, than you would get back if you won. Royal would absolutely fight this, because they will very likely win.

 

I get this sucks for the OP, but this is not something a good lawyer would take on. The lawyer who does, is doing it to take your money.

[awestover89]

I agree this is the best avenue to pursue, and is the only thing to try. I'm not sure when everything is said and done the bank will find for the OP. Disputing a charge, in instances like this, does not always stand up. I don't think they would put them on the no sail list, but I do know rental car companies are notorious for putting people on the "Don't Rent To" list for disputing charges.

A dispute would almost definitely end in favor of Royal Caribbean. All that Royal has to do is show the credit card company a copy of the cruise contact. The change in itinerary and fees for changing/cancelling a non refundable deposit booking are clearly spelled out and agreed to at time of booking.

 

It is a petty way to get revenge on the cruise line, since it takes significant time for them to craft the necessary response with evidence, but it likely won't result in any refund

 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Forums mobile app

[Domino D]

A dispute would almost definitely end in favor of Royal Caribbean. All that Royal has to do is show the credit card company a copy of the cruise contact. The change in itinerary and fees for changing/cancelling a non refundable deposit booking are clearly spelled out and agreed to at time of booking.

 

It is a petty way to get revenge on the cruise line, since it takes significant time for them to craft the necessary response with evidence, but it likely won't result in any refund

 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Forums mobile app

 

Yeah, I tend to agree. You could do it, but you have to submit in writing, and that doesn't mean you'll get relief.

[CruiseGal999]

To the rest of us, yes. But OP is so mad he refuses to cruise with RCCL again. Hopefully he will reconsider once he calms down a bit.

 

 

Isn't the saying 'cut off your nose to spite your face' ??

[Expat Cruise]

A dispute would almost definitely end in favor of Royal Caribbean. All that Royal has to do is show the credit card company a copy of the cruise contact. The change in itinerary and fees for changing/cancelling a non refundable deposit booking are clearly spelled out and agreed to at time of booking.

 

It is a petty way to get revenge on the cruise line, since it takes significant time for them to craft the necessary response with evidence, but it likely won't result in any refund

 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Forums mobile app

 

That is not always the case. The credit card company looks at the dispute first, the merchant agreement second, and then the cruise contract. The customer must get what has been represented to them. The advertising needs to match what is given.

 

For example a merchant sells shirts, on a web site. The customer orders a white shirt, the terms of use on the site say the merchant can substitute with a like or similar shirt if the ordered shirt is not available. The merchant sends a light blue shirt. A credit card dispute can be done even with the terms of use being agreed to by the customer. Because the credit card company will look at the whole case, did the customer get what they wanted, was the shirt as advertised, was the substitution fair, reasonable and of the same value? After reviewing everything they (credit card company) are free to make any ruling they want. Even if it goes against the cruise contract, if they believe it is the correct thing to do.

 

Doing a credit card dispute is the best option for the guest, the cruise line may even settle it before it is heard. It is called customer good will. I know in my business dealings with credit card disputes as a merchant I have just refund several times, because it closed the claim and it made a unhappy customer into a happy one.

[nelblu]

I haven't read this entire thread, SIAP, but I have a feeling that if a lawyer was hired, Royal would eventually settle this. This is a customer service issue and poor customer service at that. Most large corporations do not wish to deal with law suits of this nature. It may take awhile to reach a plateau of someone w/ common sense to settle it, but IMO, eventually RCCL would.

 

How about a class action suit.;p

[Expat Cruise]

How about a class action suit.;p

 

Read the thread, already answered and addressed by several posters here.

[Cel_cruise]

I feel like I have read about past incidents with credit cards being blocked after a dispute, but if it’s not too late for the OP given they already cancelled their cruise, the credit card dispute might be a good idea.

 

I have to say - I am surprised at both Royal and the OP...I’m surprised Royal wouldn’t allow them to apply the funds to another cruise without price protection and I’m surprised the OP couldn’t talk to his future bride about still sailing even without the stop in Coco Key - it’s hardly ‘the Bahamas’ and $800 is a lot to throw away just for that!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rufflesmom]

I think we are missing some information from the OP. At some point he must have mentioned "lawyer" and "lawsuit" or "sue." Once you do that, they are done with you. And rightly so. What I would like to know is what he was offered prior to being transferred to the legal department. Was that offer reasonable but he just didn't like it? As others have pointed out, once you get the legal department, everything is going to be by the book. Without more details, it sounds like he got mad and let it get the better of him.

 

 

To his credit, it is admirable that he wants to make his new wife happy.

 

 

BTW, I am not an RC cheerleader. I have never sailed with RC before. We are leaving in a few days for our first RC cruise.

[RocketMan275]

That is not always the case. The credit card company looks at the dispute first, the merchant agreement second, and then the cruise contract. The customer must get what has been represented to them. The advertising needs to match what is given.

 

For example a merchant sells shirts, on a web site. The customer orders a white shirt, the terms of use on the site say the merchant can substitute with a like or similar shirt if the ordered shirt is not available. The merchant sends a light blue shirt. A credit card dispute can be done even with the terms of use being agreed to by the customer. Because the credit card company will look at the whole case, did the customer get what they wanted, was the shirt as advertised, was the substitution fair, reasonable and of the same value? After reviewing everything they (credit card company) are free to make any ruling they want. Even if it goes against the cruise contract, if they believe it is the correct thing to do.

 

Doing a credit card dispute is the best option for the guest, the cruise line may even settle it before it is heard. It is called customer good will. I know in my business dealings with credit card disputes as a merchant I have just refund several times, because it closed the claim and it made a unhappy customer into a happy one.

 

You're making the mistake of assuming that you buy a cruise to a specific location. You do not. You buy a cruise to locations at the cruise lines discretion.

 

The white shirt is a bad example because the merchant advertised a white shirt. The cruise contract defines the item purchased and it is very clear that customer is buying a cruise, not an itinerary. It's as if the merchant advertised a not a 'white shirt' but a 'shirt'. The merchant showed a white shirt in the advertisement but the fine print said it could be a blue shirt at the merchants discretion.

[A&L_Ont]

You're making the mistake of assuming that you buy a cruise to a specific location. You do not. You buy a cruise to locations at the cruise lines discretion.

 

The white shirt is a bad example because the merchant advertised a white shirt. The cruise contract defines the item purchased and it is very clear that customer is buying a cruise, not an itinerary. It's as if the merchant advertised a not a 'white shirt' but a 'shirt'. The merchant showed a white shirt in the advertisement but the fine print said it could be a blue shirt at the merchants discretion.

 

This exactly.

[sparks1093]

You're making the mistake of assuming that you buy a cruise to a specific location. You do not. You buy a cruise to locations at the cruise lines discretion.

 

The white shirt is a bad example because the merchant advertised a white shirt. The cruise contract defines the item purchased and it is very clear that customer is buying a cruise, not an itinerary. It's as if the merchant advertised a not a 'white shirt' but a 'shirt'. The merchant showed a white shirt in the advertisement but the fine print said it could be a blue shirt at the merchants discretion.

 

So you'd be fine if you booked a cruise to Aruba but 4 months before the cruise they changed the port to Nassau:confused:? Yes, I get that they can change the ports and that sometimes it has to happen. All I'm saying is it would be nice if they offered anyone who wanted to cancel because of the change to do so without penalty, including receiving a full refund. The sticking point is the non-refundable deposit, because if it were not for that the OP could cancel and receive his deposit back. The cruise has changed from what he booked and because of that Royal should waive the non-refundable deposit, which was made for a different itinerary. Can Royal be forced to do this? I have my doubts. But I still think it's the right thing for them to do from a customer service standpoint.

[waterbug123]

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.

 

I'm not arguing that from a customer service standpoint, maybe they should refund. I'm just saying that from a legal standpoint, there is about zero chance they would lose a class action lawsuit over it.

 

 

It would cost nothing for Royal to make anyone whole who wanted to cancel because of the itinerary change

Well no, it would cost them whatever the total refunds add up to. Once could argue that that would be made up in future cruise bookings, but since many would still book with them in the future anyway (because they understand that these things happen and they roll with the punches) that particular gesture of goodwill might not be as valuable as it may seem.

[waterbug123]

Customer good will is still a thing, even if many people do overrate it. Evidently Royal doesn't give it any weight.

 

Based on the fact that most ships seem to sail full, it would appear that Royal doesn't have to worry too much. Doesn't mean they don't give it any weight, just means that whatever they do/have done in the past has created enough goodwill to more than make up for any bad goodwill.

 

 

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.

 

And it may be that Carnival NEEDS to do this to counter the many, many negative incidents they've had in recent years. ;)

p.s. I'm building a house at the moment and the timetable for completion is very much affected by weather. I'll have to let my builder know that you seem to think weather is controlled by Royal, LOL

[waterbug123]

If they want to cancel they should be allowed to and get their full deposit back.

 

Actually, what they should do is read the cruise contract before booking, and if they don't like the terms they should either not book, or do something to mitigate the consequences of the terms they don't like. In this case, that would be buying "cancel for any reason" trip insurance.

 

 

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.

 

 

Yes, it would be nice. It also isn't required. See above regarding reading the contract and buying insurance.

[nelblu]

I feel like I have read about past incidents with credit cards being blocked after a dispute, but if it’s not too late for the OP given they already cancelled their cruise, the credit card dispute might be a good idea.

 

I have to say - I am surprised at both Royal and the OP...I’m surprised Royal wouldn’t allow them to apply the funds to another cruise without price protection and I’m surprised the OP couldn’t talk to his future bride about still sailing even without the stop in Coco Key - it’s hardly ‘the Bahamas’ and $800 is a lot to throw away just for that!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Remember, it's $1k that the Op is throwing away. The Op cancelled in a fit of pique over a lousy port change that he & his wife hold sacred.

 

Unless the Op is in a different jurisdiction, the Op should have gotten a $800 towards a future cruise to be used within a year, I believe. So instead he's going to RCL's sister company--Celebrity.

 

As some on this board have pointed, he should have opted for a fully refundable fare and he would have avoided any angst and this thread.:D

[waterbug123]

I It does make me rethink cruising as a vacation option given how often I read about these type of issues

 

In the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't happen all that often. I've been on nearly 40 cruises and honestly can't recall more than 1 or 2 port substitutions. One eastern Caribbean cruise was substituted and we did western ports instead, due to heavy hurricane damage at the previously scheduled ports. I have vague recollections of a single port being swapped another time, although I can't recall the specifics. That's it. The vast majority of the time things go as planned.

 

 

A credit card dispute is the best way to handle this, because the buyer did not get what they believed they purchased, regardless of the cruise contract.

Then it's the buyer's fault for not reading the cruise contract. If you don't think others have tried this route before, think again. I'm sure plenty have and it obviously has been settled in Royal's favor or they would have changed their policy.

[nelblu]

Read the thread, already answered and addressed by several posters here.

 

 

Lighten up, it was in jest.

[sparks1093]

I'm not arguing that from a customer service standpoint, maybe they should refund. I'm just saying that from a legal standpoint, there is about zero chance they would lose a class action lawsuit over it.

 

 

 

Well no, it would cost them whatever the total refunds add up to. Once could argue that that would be made up in future cruise bookings, but since many would still book with them in the future anyway (because they understand that these things happen and they roll with the punches) that particular gesture of goodwill might not be as valuable as it may seem.

 

I don't think that many people would want to cancel their cruise because of this, but the deposit isn't their money until they've earned it. It's not like they can cancel a cruise and keep everyone's money just because they booked a non-refundable deposit (but from reading these posts there are probably those who would see no problem with that).