Mutany on the Mary

[smeyer418]

Perhaps it is time to get rid of this regulation so ships can stop at American ports and make money for the ports of call as well as the ship.

 

Maybe passengers should write to our legislators perhaps to avoid another disaster where people are stuck onboard a ship because of this law.

 

Personally I don't think it should change. Those cruiselines that want to stop only in the US are very few. Ships can and do stop at any US post they want to. All they have to do is go somewhere foreign and retirn to the same port they initially left. People get off all the time in an emergency. I don't think that the Jones Act had anything to do with this. It was just an easy excuse. If you want ships to do shore wise travel, you'll need to pay US rates for it. Too many jobs and professions have left our shores. We need a merchant fleet in case of emergency(The Brits had to use some of our support ships in the Faukland war)

[dtwtraveler]

I think Cunard realized that they will have to give a 100% refund since the passengers will lose their one full day in Rio. It is no longer a "cruise" but rather a very expensive "Pacific Ocean Crossing", and many passengers are scheduled to immediately fly home!

[Bollinge]

No-one (unless they made special arrangements to leave the ship the moment she landed in Rio) was scheduled to leave the ship until today.

 

She was due in Rio yesterday and the cruise included and overnight stay on board, with everyone due to disembark today.

 

So people disembarking today, although one day late and having missed their overnight in port, will be able to proceed with their post-cruise arrangements as planned.

 

That's why I thought the Daily Telegraph was disingenuous about missed flights.

 

Anyway, I couldn't be more pleased that Cunard have made a more generous offer, but what a shame it wasn't made in the first instance. The courts in England would surely have awarded a 70-80% refund to those booked via UK travel agents, and Cunard must finally have twigged that.

 

As for the lawyers organising the "class action" I guess they are the losers. LOL

 

And yes, which cruise will have to be cancelled for the sea trials / drydock? Think upcoming departures from California.

[Kiwi Kruzer]

I think Cunard realized that they will have to give a 100% refund since the passengers will lose their one full day in Rio. It is no longer a "cruise" but rather a very expensive "Pacific Ocean Crossing", and many passengers are scheduled to immediately fly home!

 

 

Pacific Ocean??????????

 

The world is waiting to see if see even makes it there!!!!!!

[mufi]

Were you the only one who found it too loud? Did others complain?

 

Sea-hawk

 

Yes, one lady who was connected with an amateur theatrical group heard the conversation and had a go after we had finished. You will often see people walk out as soon as they realise they can't stand the noise. Never makes any difference.

 

David.

[English Voyager]

Bollinge,

some passengers with early morning flights might have made arrangements to leave the ship on the evening of the 26th and stay at a convenient airport hotel.

Given the toughness of consumer protection legislation in the UK,and the EU,as evidenced by the recent flight delay/cancellation legislation,Cunard probably did realise an improved offer was neccessary.

As for the threatened UK class action,the lawyers are apparently saying the improved offer does not negate it.

[Nancyquilts]

It seems to be louder on all cruise ships - some of the entertainment was hardly enjoyable, then -- we got sound suppressors -- they're used for shooting, and are pretty ugly (but then you probably won't tell on us), and take 23 decibels right off the top. Now we look strange, but can enjoy the entertainment. Nancy

[travel-to-go]

Just got through reading Jack's Blog:

http://www.jackatsea.com/rio-de-janeiro-brazil.htm

 

He has moved the old "bad Karma" stuff to another site, and is starting fresh out of Rio to Valparaiso.

Be sure to stop by there! Seems Carol Marlow sought him out at lunch! Well, I prefer to think she especially targetted him! 'cause he's one of us! Of course, in Jack's inimitable way, he gave her his best advice!

Now if *I* was running the world...<G>

You go, guy!

 

Make sure you keep up on the REAL stuff now that the serial drama is over! Hopefully there will be no more problems or slowdowns, but I am still concerned over how they intend to fix the pod problem! (and when!)

 

Karie

who wishes she had been on there being tortured day and night, five or six meals a day, only to receive the horribly inadequate compensation of having it all for free! <G>

[BEAV]

I wonder if the Rio disembarkers will be rushing to re-instate their cancelled gratuities?

 

 

I would hope that Cunard would compensate service employees as they have their passengers. When it comes to gratuities, we all know a segment of the passengers will take out their aggressions on the hard working, innocent service employees . Cunard might as well make everyone whole, not just the passengers....

[guernseyguy]

After nearly a week of unremitting 'Cruise from Hell' the BBC is finally waking up to alternative interpretations:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4656562.stm

 

Cunard will be paying for this for some time to come.......Has Marlow ever had to deal with toddlers?

 

Peter

[joeinsb]

Bollinge and Kiwicruiser,

 

Oh ye of little faith! Bet she does make it and go to Hawaii. And won't you be the sorry lot for not being on her?!

 

As for drydock, MHO is after she returns to the East Coast and on the east end of one of her Atlantic crossings.

[Kiwi Kruzer]

Bollinge and Kiwicruiser,

 

Oh ye of little faith! Bet she does make it and go to Hawaii.

 

 

 

Agreed.

She will make it over there,

but when,

how many more ports will be missed,

and how much more compensation will Carnival be paying out?

The precedent has been set!!!!!!!!!!!

[ocngypz]

The UK passage contract is very specific amount damages which can be collected. Even more so than the US passage contract.

 

When "damages" have been mitigated before entering the courtroom, what do you think could be gained in addition to a class action suit?

 

The only winners in class action suits not involving personal injury.. are the lawyers.

 

All in all.... it's a bad precedent to set.. and I see it negatively affecting future voyagers/cruisers. It would not surprise me in the least to see new passage contracts promulgated which are even more skewed in favor of the cruiselines.

[chasetf]

Agreed. She will make it over there, but when, how many more ports will be missed, and how much more compensation will Carnival be paying out? The precedent has been set!!!!!!!!!!!

I agree. It will be interesting to see the next case. Maybe that cruise line will not be as ready to cave in.

 

The book on this one is not closed. Still need to repair the ship which means cancelled trips for more people.

[arabrab]

I agree one will have to wait for the final report.

 

I have never ever seen a pilot with his hand on the ship's joystick control. The captain always "captains" the ship. I doubt there was some "unknown" obstacle under water. There may have been a built up sandbar created by the storms you referenced. But those ships have sonar. I think it will come down to someone was not paying attention or misjudged the clearance.

 

I would believe the pilots are not private employees but public port employees. I would really doubt there is an insurance company will to indemnify someone of the cost this will finally turn out to be. (Drydock repairs / missed cruise revenue just to start the list)

 

I'd be very surprised if the pilots were public employees at all. They aren't in other areas (Columbia River, mouth of the Mississippi,...) They are very highly paid (well over $100K/year) specialists in their particular waterway. In some areas shipping companies (who are the biggest users of pilots) would like to see a larger number of pilots so that the delays entering harbors are reduced, but the existing pilots may not want to dilute the workload and resulting pay.

 

Maritime law is sufficiently different than our everyday law that I'd hesitate to make any sort of a prediction as to the outcome.

 

Cheers,

Barb K.

[Ldybrnwyn]

I'd be very surprised if the pilots were public employees at all. They aren't in other areas (Columbia River, mouth of the Mississippi,...) They are very highly paid (well over $100K/year) specialists in their particular waterway. In some areas shipping companies (who are the biggest users of pilots) would like to see a larger number of pilots so that the delays entering harbors are reduced, but the existing pilots may not want to dilute the workload and resulting pay.

 

Maritime law is sufficiently different than our everyday law that I'd hesitate to make any sort of a prediction as to the outcome.

 

Cheers,

Barb K.

 

Agreed Barb,

 

With as much as I've learned about the differences between Maritime and civil law the more impressed I am at exactly how different it is. I knew the passage contract was binding but didn't realize how binding until I learned from the research of a lot of posters on these boards (we've got a lot of trivia toting ship nuts here, I've noticed :) ) My impression was that the Coast Guard report will find the pilot at fault but exactly how that will play out in terms of liability is beyond my sparse knowledge. :confused:

[guernseyguy]

From the BBC.....

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4654062.stm

 

Peter

[highcbob]

Interesting and glad to hear they've dropped it.

Perhaps the press can move onto other headlines

and stop flogging this one to death.

 

Good update - thank you Peter!

[ejbmorr]

GuernseyGuy-

Thank you Peter for the link to the BBC item. That is good news. I cannot believe that any reputable law firm would have even dignified such a class action suit by representing that group. Well, now those folks can move on and find some new victim to sue for some other reason. I think what makes me the maddest is the fact that it represents a mindset that is typical of a really large segment of our present population. It is really sad.