things stolen - what would you do?

[mjkacmom]

48 minutes ago, George C said:

sounds like you had no idea if safes in room back then. I reported ring missing after searching small cabin, security with officer searched cabin. Officer said they thoroughly searched cabin, sounds like you deserve ncl. been on over 60 cruises on many lines never had anything missing before or since.

So, you lose a ring. You (I assume) thoroughly search your cabin (because you lost it, and have all the time in the world), but fail to find it. You then have two crew members (who have a million things to do) search your cabin to find the ring, and they fail. You search the cabin and find not only your ring, but another. So, you are not to blame for not finding it during your first search, but NCL is to blame for not finding it when they searched? As for there being safes on NCL back in the dark ages, I have no idea, my first NCL Cruise was almost 15 years ago.

[kerryincork]

I don't think they will be able to claim from their insurance, as there is usually a 'reasonably care' clause in most insurance policies. Where if a valuable item was stolen from a locked room this would be covered, but as your mother and friend left it in an unsecured room it is unlikely they will be able to claim.

 

It sounds to me that maybe your mother and friend got off at the wrong floor, all the decks and corridors look the same. They are no doubt emotional, if they try to be calm and retrace their steps they might find they left the coats in a different cabin.

 

Also just because someone leaves their property unguarded does not mean they deserve to have it stolen. If person finds something of value and decides to keep it, this is still stealing if they did nothing to return it to rightful owners.

 

It's not sensible to leave items of value on view and within access, but I don't think it is unreasonable to have an expectation that your property won't be stolen unless you cart everything around you 24/7.

[Joebucks]

4 hours ago, LDVinNC said:

So what is wrong with being "budget minded"?  To me it means getting good value for my money, not meaning getting things "on the cheap" as another poster said.  Have been budget-minded all my life and am now enjoying a comfortable retirement, which includes cruises (sometimes in suites).

 

There's a misconception that people who sail on more affordable lines all have less money than those who sail on premium lines. Sure you're probably more likely to see a higher percentage of wealthier cruisers on a luxury line. There are also people who saved up for years to go on that same cruise, and don't have very much money. There are also millionaires on the cheapest cruises because the product offered to them is sufficient. Not everyone spends more just because they have it to show off (or in this case, wear a $2000 fur coat).

 

People judge me all of the time because I choose Carnival. I enjoy the product, and can go on multiple vacations per year comfortably. Meanwhile those same people who judge my choices, can afford 1 "superior" vacation every 1-3 years. 

 

I would expect the cruise line makes a legitimate effort to help me find my stuff, but that only goes so far. The world doesn't stop because you make a claim. Look at it from a different, unbiased view. People lie, exaggerate, don't remember, etc. The rights and privacy of others aren't thrown out the window for you. Imagine if someone stormed through your stuff because they lost something. You probably wouldn't like that either.

 

People come in these threads looking for advice, but never like the advice. 

[CruiseGal999]

21 minutes ago, kerryincork said:

I don't think they will be able to claim from their insurance, as there is usually a 'reasonably care' clause in most insurance policies. Where if a valuable item was stolen from a locked room this would be covered, but as your mother and friend left it in an unsecured room it is unlikely they will be able to claim.

 

It sounds to me that maybe your mother and friend got off at the wrong floor, all the decks and corridors look the same. They are no doubt emotional, if they try to be calm and retrace their steps they might find they left the coats in a different cabin.

 

Also just because someone leaves their property unguarded does not mean they deserve to have it stolen. If person finds something of value and decides to keep it, this is still stealing if they did nothing to return it to rightful owners.

 

It's not sensible to leave items of value on view and within access, but I don't think it is unreasonable to have an expectation that your property won't be stolen unless you cart everything around you 24/7.

 

No one deserves to have anything stolen.   When you park your car ... and you have an alarm. You have done what you can to prevent it. But many cars are stolen daily. 

 

BUT when you deliberately leave very expensive items in a cabin that does NOT belong to you ... in today's world ... having them stolen is the most likely and probable outcome.   My stepmom ... mid-70s ... left her purse on the front lawn of a friend's new home.  Everyone went into backyard ... when we came out front ... her purse was gone. OF COURSE it was gone.  She left her purse on a lawn completely  unattended.  She was flabbergasted that it was stolen.  SMH  to all of this ... 

Edited December 17, 2018 by CruiseGal999

[Essiesmom]

Nowhere in the post did the OP say that the coats were fur.  Just that they cost $2000 each.  I also maintain that they were on the wrong deck when they left the coats in a cabin with an open door.  I propose that it was open because the steward was still servicing it.  When he came back, he saw the coats and assumed the new occupants had left them there and gone off.  He locked the door and left them there.  But when the new occupants did arrive, they found the coats and turned them in to the steward.  EM

[mjkacmom]

3 hours ago, George C said:

Was that true for really old ships like Norway and seaward ? Again ncl blew it , they told us they searched cabin and then we found jewelry left by cruisers from a previous cruise. These were older ships that were pre balcony. 

If I found someone’s coats in my closet when I entered my cabin, I’d assume the previous passengers left them behind. I’d hand them off to a crew member. I really doubt anyone wants to start their vacation by stealing 2 huge coats that they’ll have to get off of the ship. There is not a big resell market for coats (especially fur), and who wants to have coats on a Caribbean cruise? I’d start at lost and found.

[dogs4fun]

I am assuming that the $2000 coat is a fur. Insurance rarely covers stolen fur coats unless you have the proper insurance rider attached to your policy. My furs have such a rider on my homeowners policy as one of my coats is valued at $7000.

For the record, I choose european cruises based on the itinerary. I have cruised NCL, Princess, RCL, Oceania, Viking ocean and Viking river & just completed a river cruise with Gate 1. I have enjoyed all of the itineraries and have met some great people.  I have never considered taking a fur coat on a cruise or on one of my frequent DIY trips to europe. Even for colder climates (returned recently from Hungary where it was quite chilly), I only pack what I consider sensible items - i.e., a light-weight down jacket that is easily packed.

If the $2000 coats are truly missing, I fear that the owners are "out of luck" even if the coats were not fur.

 

 

Edited December 17, 2018 by dogs4fun

[CruiseGal999]

40 minutes ago, Essiesmom said:

Nowhere in the post did the OP say that the coats were fur.  Just that they cost $2000 each.  I also maintain that they were on the wrong deck when they left the coats in a cabin with an open door.  I propose that it was open because the steward was still servicing it.  When he came back, he saw the coats and assumed the new occupants had left them there and gone off.  He locked the door and left them there.  But when the new occupants did arrive, they found the coats and turned them in to the steward.  EM

 

I was one person, maybe the first to say ... "I am guessing these are fur coats because of the price for each" .... 

 

It's all so combobulated ... 

[Toofarfromthesea]

In my experience, on embarkation day the halls are full of stewards, so if the door to their cabin was locked a steward would have been easily found to open it.

The 'clarification' of the original confused and disjointed post was even more confused and disjointed, and nothing therein seems to support her credibility.

Two guys, with a little help, Hamletized the thread by creating a thread within a thread about whether NCL was a cheap cruise line. 

 

It's a helluva day at sea.

[ldubs]

2 hours ago, sloopsailor said:

 

If we only had Stewart's last name, we might be able to resolve this situation in short order. 

 

His name is Stewart D. Baker.  Get it - - - Stu D Baker.  (Yikes )

 

Anyway, it there is anything to all of this, the previous comments about them being possibly being on the wrong deck seems like good detective work.  Hopefully they checked lost & found and have their coats back.  

[sparks1093]

24 minutes ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

In my experience, on embarkation day the halls are full of stewards, so if the door to their cabin was locked a steward would have been easily found to open it.

The 'clarification' of the original confused and disjointed post was even more confused and disjointed, and nothing therein seems to support her credibility.

Two guys, with a little help, Hamletized the thread by creating a thread within a thread about whether NCL was a cheap cruise line. 

 

It's a helluva day at sea.

You are welcome. (And it wasn't whether NCL is a cheap cruise line, but rather a budget minded cruise line or more accurately at the low end of the price spectrum.)

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, CruiseGal999 said:

 

I was one person, maybe the first to say ... "I am guessing these are fur coats because of the price for each" .... 

 

It's all so combobulated ... 

 

At $2000 each, they would not have been great fur coats.

 

While the “wrong deck” theory would explain both their being unable to open the door to what they thought was their cabin, and then (once they were on the right deck) the fact that the folks in the adjoining cabin had no idea about the coats;    their decision to leave what they thought were valuable items in someone else’s vacant cabin indicates to me that they are not fit to travel alone. 

[chengkp75]

Not knowing too much about ladies' fashion, I googled, and found that even blazers can go for $2000.  The other problem is that the cruise ticket contract sets limits on valuables, and states that if you have anything of value above this limit, you must report it when boarding.

[mom says]

4 hours ago, kerryincork said:

I don't think they will be able to claim from their insurance, as there is usually a 'reasonably care' clause in most insurance policies. Where if a valuable item was stolen from a locked room this would be covered, but as your mother and friend left it in an unsecured room it is unlikely they will be able to claim.

 

It sounds to me that maybe your mother and friend got off at the wrong floor, all the decks and corridors look the same.

 

Also known as the Pre existing Massive Stupidity Exclusion clause.

 

3 hours ago, Essiesmom said:

But when the new occupants did arrive, they found the coats and turned them in to the steward.  EM

 

Hopefully this was the case, and the coats are now in the Lost and Found closet on the ship. Although one would think that this would be one of the first places Security would have checked.  It's also possible that the cabin is unoccupied on this cruise. I can't see Security searching every cabin on the ship for a pair of stupidly misplaced coats.

[navybankerteacher]

“things stolen - what would you do”

 

Probably I would start with English lessons.   If I left something in someone’s empty stateroom - which may or may not have been even on the same deck and then could not find it - I would use another word than “stolen”.

[LA_CA_GAL]

>>>>
I would use another word than “stolen”.
<<<<<

 

And that word would be?

[Essiesmom]

Misplaced.  EM

[John Bull]

8 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

I would use another word than “stolen”.

 

5 hours ago, LA_CA_GAL said:

 

And that word would be?

 

4 hours ago, Essiesmom said:

Misplaced.  EM

 

Or "gone missing".

Yes, the OPs mom jumping to conclusions.

Like a number of posters on this thread.

 

I don't see any lies or fraud in the story, but I do see a very foolish mom and an OP confused by what she's been told.

And a story which if told would almost certainly result in a declined insurance claim.

 

I think it's a lesson learned and time to move on. 

 

JB 

 

 

[sparks1093]

8 hours ago, Essiesmom said:

Misplaced.  EM

 

3 hours ago, John Bull said:

 

 

 

Or "gone missing".

Yes, the OPs mom jumping to conclusions.

Like a number of posters on this thread.

 

I don't see any lies or fraud in the story, but I do see a very foolish mom and an OP confused by what she's been told.

And a story which if told would almost certainly result in a declined insurance claim.

 

I think it's a lesson learned and time to move on. 

 

JB 

 

 

Just because someone misplaces something doesn't give someone else the right to take it. The law isn't "finders keepers". So while the passengers weren't being as smart as they could be, their mistake isn't a windfall for whoever found the coats. I hope that whoever found turned them in to lost and found, which would have been the right thing to do.

[DirtyDawg]

But this occurred on NCL, the folks who found the coats probable thought it was just another "Free at Sea" freebie.

 

'Free drinks', 'Free Specially Diners', 'Free Wi-Fi' and now 'Free Furs'! 

 

(Please note the use of the term 'Furs' is used as an alliteration  for the purposes of humour and in no way suggests that all $2,000 coats are fur coats or that NCL and its parent companies would, in any way, support the killing of any cute little fury creatures for the purposes of their 'free' promotions.)

 

 

[sparks1093]

8 minutes ago, DirtyDawg said:

But this occurred on NCL, the folks who found the coats probable thought it was just another "Free at Sea" freebie.

 

'Free drinks', 'Free Specially Diners', 'Free Wi-Fi' and now 'Free Furs'! 

 

(Please note the use of the term 'Furs' is used as an alliteration  for the purposes of humour and in no way suggests that all $2,000 coats are fur coats or that NCL and its parent companies would, in any way, support the killing of any cute little fury creatures for the purposes of their 'free' promotions.)

 

 

ROFLMAO!!!

[NLH Arizona]

10 hours ago, Essiesmom said:

Misplaced.  EM

Gifted.

[babs135]

As the OP hasn't been back since Sunday evening I suspect we will never know the outcome of this sorry tale.  Great shame as I would love to know if the coats ever reappear.

[John Bull]

2 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

 

Just because someone misplaces something doesn't give someone else the right to take it. The law isn't "finders keepers". So while the passengers weren't being as smart as they could be, their mistake isn't a windfall for whoever found the coats. I hope that whoever found turned them in to lost and found, which would have been the right thing to do.

 

 

Agreed, Sparks.

But the point  is that we don't actually know that they were stolen. Who knows whether they're just lost & will end up in lost-and-found, or got thrown out by some lazy steward, or half-a-dozen other scenarios - of which just one is stealing by finding..

That's why Essiesmom said "misplaced" and I said "gone missing".

 

JB 

 

[sparks1093]

26 minutes ago, John Bull said:

 

 

Agreed, Sparks.

But the point  is that we don't actually know that they were stolen. Who knows whether they're just lost & will end up in lost-and-found, or got thrown out by some lazy steward, or half-a-dozen other scenarios - of which just one is stealing by finding..

That's why Essiesmom said "misplaced" and I said "gone missing".

 

JB 

 

No, we don't know for sure but if the passengers did talk to security onboard then my presumption is that security would have checked lost and found and since the coats were still missing/misplaced that tells me that they likely were taken. I think that someone mentioned there not being a big market for coats but eBay seems to have a lot of used clothing for sale, including coats. Whoever took them might not be able to get the full value of $2000 (if that is really what they are worth) but they would get more than nothing, probably at least several hundred per coat if they really are of any quality.