P&O, Cunard +all Carnival brands changing Amsterdam to Ijmuiden: how to win your case

[majortom10]

11 hours ago, Underwatr said:

 

Refundable OBC or nonrefundable?

Was never mentioned but I have never had refundable OBC from P&O it has all been a case of use it onboard or lose it. I have received refundable OBC from Princess which was returned to me by cheque after the cruise. 

With reference to P&O I told them that my contract with them was for the cruise to be paid in cash so any refund on cruise fare should be returned in cash. After lengthy phone calls and threats they finally wrote to me and said if I go to the Pursers Desk whilst onboard they would repay me the 1night cost in cash. When I went to Pursers Desk asking for the money it virtually took the whole of the cruise to sort out. They initially refused and said I would have to sort it out when I got back home with Southampton. Next they said we would not be told by P&O at head office that we would be paid in cash onboard because they dont carry a lot of cash onboard. When I produced the letter sent to me by P&O saying such there was deathily silence and red faces. Ended up speaking to Chief Finance Officer onboard on the last afternoon of the cruise before our arrival into Southampton. He did a lot of waffling so I said that if I had not received my money in cash by the time of departure I would padlock myself to the stairs by Pursers Desk. He said he would have to get in touch with Southampton because he couldnt authorise payment in cash and there wasnt a lot of time because the offices in Southampton closed at 5pm. So I told him he had better hurry up then, he finally came to me at my dinner table in MDR at 6-30 and gave me an envelope with the cash in. They also tried to charge my wife full price for a handbag that was in the sale at 50% off even though the receipt was right. P&O tried to blame Harding Bros and Harding Bros said we were right and it was P&Os fault that was another long episode which carried on for most of the cruise until it was sorted. 

[kruzseeka]

No, our experience too would highlight their determination to stick to a non-refundable obc.

We were on a cruise and due to mechanical problems ports were missed and timings significantly reduced.  Although this happened half way through the cruise, it was only after we had left on the Transatlantic return leg that we were notified of £200p.p. obc.  (Timing signficant?)  We were told categorically that it had to be spent before we disembarked and could not be credited as cash (didn't expect that) but moreover couldn't be transferred to another cruise which you had either booked or might book in the future.  

OK. it was a welcome acknowledgement of the disruption we had experienced as a result of the alterations but can you imagine everyone on board trying to spend £200 each in five days?   Sounds like a nice problem to have but we had quite a lot of obc anyway associated with the cruise so no outstanding account to pay off, there were no more ports of call to buy excursions and the spa, speciality restaurants, shops, duty free etc were buckling under demand! And short of drinking ourselves into oblivion choices of how to get rid of £400 were a bit problematic - ended up buying stuff we really weren't that bothered about.    £400,000 unexpected obc swilling around is quite a sum!  It would have been very welcome had they offered to at least transfer half to another cruise or keep as credit for the future.  

Edited February 26, 2019 by kruzseeka

[Lizzie53]

We are on a cruise that leaves on 22nd March, the only stop is two days in Amsterdam so the entire cruise is affected. We have already paid the balance in full. We have spoken to P & O on several occasions and taken advice from ABTA but time is too short to go down any legal routes before we sail. We have been advised to go on the cruise and try and claim compensation on our return is anyone else in this position?

[BrianI]

5 hours ago, nomadgirluk said:

.....  Travel agent says that the change is because of the €8 per person berthing fee which the city has imposed. ............

If you are staying overnight, then the charge (or tax) is €16 as it is levied per day.

 

In some respect its not too dissimilar to the 10% VAT levied in Spain when the ship is in Spanish waters. In this case the charge is put directly on the passengers account. 

 

Brian

[Harry Peterson]

26 minutes ago, Lizzie53 said:

We are on a cruise that leaves on 22nd March, the only stop is two days in Amsterdam so the entire cruise is affected. We have already paid the balance in full. We have spoken to P & O on several occasions and taken advice from ABTA but time is too short to go down any legal routes before we sail. We have been advised to go on the cruise and try and claim compensation on our return is anyone else in this position?

Not quite in that position, but a similar one.  The advice you've received is, I'd say, sound.  You could cancel, but that would be a very big risk.

 

If the only port call is the two days your case seems impossible to defend, from P&O's point of view.  Post 138 above sets out a few thoughts that might be of use to you - the arguments against P&O are strong, and even if court proceedings were required I can assure you that it's a cheap and simple process, most of it online.

[daiB]

5 hours ago, kruzseeka said:

No, our experience too would highlight their determination to stick to a non-refundable obc.

We were on a cruise and due to mechanical problems ports were missed and timings significantly reduced.  Although this happened half way through the cruise, it was only after we had left on the Transatlantic return leg that we were notified of £200p.p. obc.  (Timing signficant?)  We were told categorically that it had to be spent before we disembarked and could not be credited as cash (didn't expect that) but moreover couldn't be transferred to another cruise which you had either booked or might book in the future.  

OK. it was a welcome acknowledgement of the disruption we had experienced as a result of the alterations but can you imagine everyone on board trying to spend £200 each in five days?   Sounds like a nice problem to have but we had quite a lot of obc anyway associated with the cruise so no outstanding account to pay off, there were no more ports of call to buy excursions and the spa, speciality restaurants, shops, duty free etc were buckling under demand! And short of drinking ourselves into oblivion choices of how to get rid of £400 were a bit problematic - ended up buying stuff we really weren't that bothered about.    £400,000 unexpected obc swilling around is quite a sum!  It would have been very welcome had they offered to at least transfer half to another cruise or keep as credit for the future.  

Interesting as when we got our compensation it was at a level we could not spend it all on that cruise so we were able to spread it over 3. I assumed that it would be the same for all.

[kruzseeka]

20 minutes ago, daiB said:

Interesting as when we got our compensation it was at a level we could not spend it all on that cruise so we were able to spread it over 3. I assumed that it would be the same for all.

 

Perhaps they were more accommodating because it was only you who was affected.  On our cruise, 2,000 passengers received £200 obc.  It would have been better for us and, I expect, many others had we been able to carry it forward.  It wasn't for the lack of asking - it was quite a topic of conversation as you might imagine (although it wasn't an unpleasant atmosphere - passengers weren't being difficult, or moaning as we appreciated the gesture but would have found it more helpful if we were given options).  Perhaps they were hoping we couldn't spend it all! 

[daiB]

39 minutes ago, kruzseeka said:

 

Perhaps they were more accommodating because it was only you who was affected.  On our cruise, 2,000 passengers received £200 obc.  It would have been better for us and, I expect, many others had we been able to carry it forward.  It wasn't for the lack of asking - it was quite a topic of conversation as you might imagine (although it wasn't an unpleasant atmosphere - passengers weren't being difficult, or moaning as we appreciated the gesture but would have found it more helpful if we were given options).  Perhaps they were hoping we couldn't spend it all! 

Correct far more difficult dealing with a ship full. 

[Selbourne]

1 hour ago, daiB said:

Interesting as when we got our compensation it was at a level we could not spend it all on that cruise so we were able to spread it over 3. I assumed that it would be the same for all.

 

Same here. With the two examples I gave earlier, the changed ports issue was a cash settlement (cheque) in advance of the cruise and the suite issue (which we dealt with on board) was resolved with a sum of money that we could use for OBC on that, or any future cruises, or use against the balance due on future cruises. As it was a significant sum (which, as with the missed port issue was a battle, as I rejected the first two offers) I used some to clear our on board account on that cruise, some to take a chunk off a balance due for an expensive future cruise and some as additional OBC for the same. We couldn’t have spent it all as OBC on any one cruise, so I guess it was reasonable to give us that option, whereas if it’s just a few hundred pounds (for example) then they probably expect you to use it as OBC on one cruise. 

 

Have to say say that I don’t agree with the advice to try to get a resolution after the cruise. I would think that the chances are pretty slim indeed after the event. I would say that you should get resolution in advance (if it’s an issue that materialises pre sailing) or on board (if it’s an issue that occurs during the cruise). 

Edited February 26, 2019 by Selbourne

[Harry Peterson]

24 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

Have to say say that I don’t agree with the advice to try to get a resolution after the cruise. I would think that the chances are pretty slim indeed after the event. I would say that you should get resolution in advance (if it’s an issue that materialises pre sailing) or on board (if it’s an issue that occurs during the cruise). 

I'd agree wholeheartedly that it's better to get resolution before the cruise than after it's happened, and that should always be the aim.

 

We have a situation here, though, in which P&O are apparently refusing to budge, but the cruises will be taking place fairly soon.

 

That leaves very few options, though one is just to cancel altogether - a risky strategy unless you're feeling very confident about your chances of reclaiming the lost monies through the courts.  In practical terms, if P&O continue to refuse to allow cancellations, or offer compensation, there isn't really any option (if you've exhausted the ABTA or similar options) other than pursuing them after the event - though that will almost certainly have to be through the County Court.  No big deal, though - simple and cheap.

[pete14]

30 minutes ago, docco said:

In practical terms, if P&O continue to refuse to allow cancellations, or offer compensation, there isn't really any option (if you've exhausted the ABTA or similar options) other than pursuing them after the event - though that will almost certainly have to be through the County Court.  No big deal, though - simple and cheap.

 

I have experience of a case in ‘small claims court’, and it neither simple nor cheap, although the judgement of the cost is of course all relative. The details of the claim have to be presented in writing, written evidence collated to support the case. I would suggest that evidence in this possible instance may be difficult to gather as there appear to be so many suppositions and unknowns. Can you prove that the change is due to the imposition of the new tax? Do you have irrefutable evidence that when you booked, you had every reason to expect that you would be docking in the centre of Amsterdam? Are you confident that you can present your case in front of the ‘judge’ in such a way that any representative from P&O cannot cast doubt upon? Of course, they may choose not to defend which will simplify matters greatly.

 

As I have no legal training or experience, I wouldn’t dream of trying to offer legal advice, just observations from a case I brought in a matter totally unconnected to this one. Docco will not inform us whether he has legal training or experience and in my layman’s view, his advice that the small claims process is no big deal - simple and cheap is a bit wide of the mark. 

[emam]

9 hours ago, docco said:

Petitions rarely have an impact, but another complaint to ABTA might get you somewhere.  County Court action (old small claims procedure) is very, very simple and easy - done mainly online.  Not expensive, unlikely to be drawn out, totally within your own control, and I think the grounds (see post 138 above) are easily strong enough for success - depending, though, on the number of Amsterdam port days as against the total number of port days.

 

 

Which route are you going down?

[Harry Peterson]

7 minutes ago, emam said:

Which route are you going down?

ABTA + county court if necessary. But I suspect that P&O will come up with a mutually satisfactory offer before we reach that stage.

[Harry Peterson]

12 minutes ago, pete14 said:

 

I have experience of a case in ‘small claims court’, and it neither simple nor cheap, although the judgement of the cost is of course all relative. The details of the claim have to be presented in writing, written evidence collated to support the case. I would suggest that evidence in this possible instance may be difficult to gather as there appear to be so many suppositions and unknowns. Can you prove that the change is due to the imposition of the new tax? Do you have irrefutable evidence that when you booked, you had every reason to expect that you would be docking in the centre of Amsterdam? Are you confident that you can present your case in front of the ‘judge’ in such a way that any representative from P&O cannot cast doubt upon? Of course, they may choose not to defend which will simplify matters greatly.

It’s all relative, isn’t it. Most of it’s now done online, which simplifies the process considerably.

 

The evidence points very strongly to the imposition of the tax, and unless P&O can come up with something else then on a balance of probabilities that’s going to succeed. P&O will really struggle to show that they’ve met the terms of their own conditions. Take another look at post 138 for further details.

 

As to evidence of what was booked, that’s very straightforward and very easy to establish.

 

Presenting the case, in the unlikely event that they don’t settle in advance? Very easy, even for a layman, and the court has an obligation to make it as simple as possible.

[pete14]

1 minute ago, docco said:

It’s all relative, isn’t it. Most of it’s now done online, which simplifies the process considerably.

 

The evidence points very strongly to the imposition of the tax, and unless P&O can come up with something else then on a balance of probabilities that’s going to succeed. P&O will really struggle to show that they’ve met the terms of their own conditions. Take another look at post 138 for further details.

 

As to evidence of what was booked, that’s very straightforward and very easy to establish.

 

Presenting the case, in the unlikely event that they don’t settle in advance? Very easy, even for a layman, and the court has an obligation to make it as simple as possible.

 

The preparation is done online but it is time consuming. If either side refuses mediation and the case reaches court, as I am sure you know, this cannot be done online but in person. 

 

There is a tax and docking has been changed, but you do not appear to be able to show evidence that the two are connected (which they may be). I am quite sure P&O will be able to come up with something else. They have all the information, you have little and your bid to garner information from those affected seems to have produced insufficient hard evidence because P&O are not forthcoming. Of course it is easy to produce evidence of when people booked but you don’t appear to know when exactly the change was made and communicated to those affected and others considering booking. 

 

Presenting the case can be quite daunting. It is only very easy if the defendant is poorly prepared or does not have a defence. I would suggest that if any case comes to court, P&O will defend it strongly, using their legal expertise, and will probably win because they know the law and can pick holes in the case presented against them and exploit them ruthlessly. Details of the arguments and supporting documentary evidence have to be exchanged prior to the case being heard.

 

Once again  docco has passed over an opportunity to assure those who trust he knows what he is talking about, of his legal credentials. 

[AlisonB1978]

42 minutes ago, pete14 said:

 

I have experience of a case in ‘small claims court’, and it neither simple nor cheap, although the judgement of the cost is of course all relative. The details of the claim have to be presented in writing, written evidence collated to support the case. I would suggest that evidence in this possible instance may be difficult to gather as there appear to be so many suppositions and unknowns. Can you prove that the change is due to the imposition of the new tax? Do you have irrefutable evidence that when you booked, you had every reason to expect that you would be docking in the centre of Amsterdam? Are you confident that you can present your case in front of the ‘judge’ in such a way that any representative from P&O cannot cast doubt upon? Of course, they may choose not to defend which will simplify matters greatly.

 

As I have no legal training or experience, I wouldn’t dream of trying to offer legal advice, just observations from a case I brought in a matter totally unconnected to this one. Docco will not inform us whether he has legal training or experience and in my layman’s view, his advice that the small claims process is no big deal - simple and cheap is a bit wide of the mark. 

When we booked our itinerary was “Amsterdam”. It’s now “Ijmuiden for Amsterdam” and P&O sent us a formal itinerary change to that effect. If that’s not proof of a change I don’t know what is!!  P&O won’t tell us the reason and we all know that’s one of our main issues that aggravates is all in how they’re handling the whole thing. Even the call centre staff agree with us informally when they talk to us, but they have to take the corporate line of “the T&C’s allow for this and you’re still going to visit Amsterdam”. We all know it’s not what we booked and have to keep protesting. Of course we’ll all make the best we can out of the situation and our cruises, given we can’t cancel without significant financial penalty, but it doesn’t stop us making our complaints and feelings known to try to stop P&O behaving like this. The biggest issue is their customer service - or lack of it!!

[Harry Peterson]

5 minutes ago, pete14 said:

 

The preparation is done online but it is time consuming. If either side refuses mediation and the case reaches court, as I am sure you know, this cannot be done online but in person. 

 

There is a tax and docking has been changed, but you do not appear to be able to show evidence that the two are connected (which they may be). I am quite sure P&O will be able to come up with something else. They have all the information, you have little and your bid to garner information from those affected seems to have produced insufficient hard evidence because P&O are not forthcoming. Of course it is easy to produce evidence of when people booked but you don’t appear to know when exactly the change was made and communicated to those affected and others considering booking. 

 

Presenting the case can be quite daunting. It is only very easy if the defendant is poorly prepared or does not have a defence. I would suggest that if any case comes to court, P&O will defend it strongly, using their legal expertise, and will probably win because they know the law and can pick holes in the case presented against them and exploit them ruthlessly. Details of the arguments and supporting documentary evidence have to be exchanged prior to the case being heard.

 

Once again  docco has passed over an opportunity to assure those who trust he knows what he is talking about, of his legal credentials. 

You have your view and I mine. What we say doesn’t much matter. Others can form their own judgments as to how they wish to proceed.

 

Hopefully, though, some might gain some information from the people feeding into this thread.

[pete14]

7 minutes ago, docco said:

You have your view and I mine. What we say doesn’t much matter. Others can form their own judgments as to how they wish to proceed.

 

Hopefully, though, some might gain some information from the people feeding into this thread.

 

I agree docco. As ‘what we say doesn’t much matter’, I am happy to make this my last posting on this thread, provided your previous post is also your last. Anything else and we would only be wasting more of our precious time.

[Harry Peterson]

14 minutes ago, pete14 said:

 

I agree docco. As ‘what we say doesn’t much matter’, I am happy to make this my last posting on this thread, provided your previous post is also your last. Anything else and we would only be wasting more of our precious time.

Your choice entirely. Feel free to contribute or not. If you feel you can add something useful to the pool of knowledge on this issue I’m sure it will be welcomed by those of us who are directly affected by it.  🙂

[janny444]

Hi...UPDATE....I emailed P&O with 2 direct questions which required an answer.

 

Yesterday I received a phone call from P&O in response to the questions. Unfortunately at this point in time she could not give me definite answers to my questions but she gave me her name and her contact phone number so that I could phone her anytime. She fully understood the reasons why I needed the questions answered and told me that each case would be looked at and individual needs taken into account . When she has the answers then the way forward will be decided.

[ts2004]

On 2/20/2019 at 5:13 PM, docco said:

Wanting to tackle P&O, Cunard etc on this change (they're currently saying no compensation and no cancellation rights) effectively, and win?

 

There is no way you are changing their minds unless you want everyone on a cruise to Amsterdam to pay for their fees that they will cost the cruise line, for a 2000 passenger ship (excluding crew) alone is €12,000 and I would not want to pay extra for my holiday to Amsterdam

[Harry Peterson]

3 minutes ago, ts2004 said:

There is no way you are changing their minds unless you want everyone on a cruise to Amsterdam to pay for their fees that they will cost the cruise line, for a 2000 passenger ship (excluding crew) alone is €12,000 and I would not want to pay extra for my holiday to Amsterdam

Don’t you believe it! You’re missing the crucial point that many of us booked on the basis of a contractual obligation that we’d be docking in Amsterdam. Not Ijmuiden.

 

 It’s a very simple contractual issue which they’ll either settle with those of us who refuse to allow them to get away with it, probably on a confidential individual basis, or lose with considerable adverse publicity in county courts.

[BrianI]

12 minutes ago, ts2004 said:

There is no way you are changing their minds unless you want everyone on a cruise to Amsterdam to pay for their fees that they will cost the cruise line, for a 2000 passenger ship (excluding crew) alone is €12,000 and I would not want to pay extra for my holiday to Amsterdam

It's actually €8 per day so the actual cost is 2000 x 8 x2 = €32,000

 

Brian

[Underwatr]

It's a port charge isn't it? They're already passed on to passengers.

[the english lady]

I had a thought about this. If anyone does go down the legal route, is it possible that at the end, whatever the outcome,  if they try and book any future cruises with ANY Carnival brand , that their booking will not be accepted.

The company would not wish to go down the court route anytime they need to change a port for whatever reason. Would they not find it easier to say sorry we cannot accept you booking. Just a thought that popped into my head.