Denied boarding

[KnowTheScore]

22 minutes ago, mom says said:

Missed port= increased fuel costs  -  no it doesn't, the ship doesn't have to travel to land and continues onto the next port in the itinerary.  In addition whilst in port it is forced to switch to less polluting fuel but out at sea it can use the ordinary kind.

 

loss of revenue from shore excursions - In many (most?) ports people just walk off themselves anyway.

 

increased costs for food and other consumables - disagree.  Lots of people have breakfast on board then go out and make a point of coming back on board for lunch which they've already paid for.   Not me personally but loads do. 

 

Berthing fees vary but can be huge in popular ports maybe shaving $100,000 or more off their costs.

 

 

[Essiesmom]

26 minutes ago, ducklite said:

I'm not seeing where you were denied boarding.  Just a revised itinerary.

End of the 4th paragraph: 'any guests who has transited through mainland China or Hong Kong, 15 days prior to embarkation, will be denied boarding and issued a full refund.'  

[Toofarfromthesea]

2 hours ago, erllje said:

What I meant about being booted from our hotel was our flight out was not till 6:30PM we asked for a late check out but didn’t receive. We will get a refund from Celebrity for the cruise but we will not be reimbursed for airfare which was $2498.13. I feel since they waited to the last minute to deny us boarding they should reimburse us for flights.

 

Just curious.  Given that almost all flights are non-refundable, if they had told you a week earlier wouldn't you still have been on the hook for the airfare?  Just trying to figure out why it would be X's problem.

[erllje]

44 minutes ago, Essiesmom said:

End of the 4th paragraph: 'any guests who has transited through mainland China or Hong Kong, 15 days prior to embarkation, will be denied boarding and issued a full refund.'  

We were in Singapore when they decided to deny us boarding and our flight was though Hong Kong. 

[erllje]

6 minutes ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

 

Just curious.  Given that almost all flights are non-refundable, if they had told you a week earlier wouldn't you still have been on the hook for the airfare?  Just trying to figure out why it would be X's problem.

Then insurance kicks in, they say since we use the flights we are entitled to no compensation 

[Cruiser_1977]

This is not normally my take but in this case I think a FCC of some sort would be in order. These passengers were boarding a ship in Singapore but were traveling from the US. To be on board in a timely manner they would have to leave the US by Thursday. X not making the call until Friday, while quite understandable given the circumstances, is still awfully short notice for the passengers. While yes they took the flights and stayed in the hotel, they had to scramble to change their flights (I assume) and missed out on the trip due to a decision by X. It would be an insignificant hit to them, as I imagine this situation(denied boarding) only applied to a handful of passengers.

[erllje]

Just now, erllje said:

Then insurance kicks in, they say since we use the flights we are entitled to no compensation 

Plus we would have change flights not going to Hong Kong

[erllje]

1 hour ago, RocketMan275 said:

Did you book your air through celebrity?

 

No

[RocketMan275]

16 minutes ago, erllje said:

No

Your only recourse is to sue Celebrity for damages.  There is no reason they would reimburse you for something you didn't purchase from them.  Had you bought the air through Celebrity, it would have been covered.  You purchased insurance but that insurance doesn't cover thing purchased elsewhere.

[ducklite]

1 hour ago, Essiesmom said:

End of the 4th paragraph: 'any guests who has transited through mainland China or Hong Kong, 15 days prior to embarkation, will be denied boarding and issued a full refund.'  

Ah, sorry I missed that.

 

In that case I do think that X owes those they deny passage to a refund of all costs.  The passenger did everything they were asked to do.  When they booked there was no fine print about not flying through Hong Kong, and this has been in the news for over a month now, it's not something that popped up a day before they were due to set sail.  

 

The goodwill alone is worth more than the cost of the airfare, because the negative publicity they are getting on social media is going to hurt them, particularly when compared to the way other lines are handling similar situations.

[Toofarfromthesea]

2 hours ago, erllje said:

Then insurance kicks in, they say since we use the flights we are entitled to no compensation 

 

OK, I see.  Unfortunately I think you are going to have tough sledding getting compensation because it will likely fall to a 'force majeure' clause in all of the travel contracts involved in your trip.  It sucks, but it really is difficult to establish any basis for liability because of the nature of the causative factor.

[klfrodo]

Curious, are you now going to be denied re-entry or held in quarantine when you come back home to the states?

[erllje]

19 hours ago, klfrodo said:

Curious, are you now going to be denied re-entry or held in quarantine when you come back home to the states?

No, we left Singapore Saturday 2/1 at 6:30 PM and got home at 11:00 AM Sunday after 4 flights and 36 of flying and sitting in airports. Our fight that our TA arranged for us home was back though Hong Kong where we didn’t change planes but required us to exit the plane and go though security which was the same way coming but this time going home they took our temperature. When we arrived in SFO it was same as normal, just went though customs and on to our next gate. I don’t know what would have happened if 1 of us would of had a temperature in Hong Kong. We keep thinking that Celebrity will step up and cover the cost of our flights like Princesses has.

[Cruiser_1977]

@erllje While I understand where you are coming from. You would have to have taken those flights either way. The best you can hope for (in addition to the refunds) is FCC. While this is not normally my stance, I think you did everything"right". There was no way to foresee them denying you the ability to board after you had already begun your journey. If phone and e-mail don't get you anywhere, I would then escalate to HQ, Social Media and then the Elliott Advocacy Group.

[RocketMan275]

Why is this any different from the passenger who is denied boarding in FLL for being sick or failing to have proper documentation?  The cruise lines do not compensate those passengers either for the cruise fare or the air fare.

[CPT Trips]

To start with, the passenger was not sick and was asymptomatic. 
 

[ducklite]

17 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

Why is this any different from the passenger who is denied boarding in FLL for being sick or failing to have proper documentation?  The cruise lines do not compensate those passengers either for the cruise fare or the air fare.

Because the OP wasn't sick and did have proper documentation.  She wasn't told in a timely manner that she couldn't transit through Hong Kong or she'd be denied boarding.  In her case it was like the cruise line suddenly and arbitrarily deciding that people needed to have at least three years left on their valid passport as they arrived at the pier.

[ilikeanswers]

9 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

Why is this any different from the passenger who is denied boarding in FLL for being sick or failing to have proper documentation?  The cruise lines do not compensate those passengers either for the cruise fare or the air fare.

 

The big difference is you are told beforehand that those things will mean denial of boarding. The rule to deny boarding to those who transit through Hong Kong was clearly implemented the day before the OP was due to board. The OP was not given the opportunity to comply with this new rule and the cruise line should have been aware that the timing of implementing this new rule would affect those who were one step away from boarding. Those people should be compensated since they could not have reasonably anticipated the rule change. 

[erllje]

2 hours ago, JennyB1977 said:

@erllje While I understand where you are coming from. You would have to have taken those flights either way. The best you can hope for (in addition to the refunds) is FCC. While this is not normally my stance, I think you did everything"right". There was no way to foresee them denying you the ability to board after you had already begun your journey. If phone and e-mail don't get you anywhere, I would then escalate to HQ, Social Media and then the Elliott Advocacy Group.

I don’t get where your coming from on I would have to have taken those flights either way. If we would of had two days notice we could have switched to flights not going to Hong Kong. Can you tell me what the Elliott Advocacy Group is.

[erllje]

2 hours ago, JennyB1977 said:

@erllje While I understand where you are coming from. You would have to have taken those flights either way. The best you can hope for (in addition to the refunds) is FCC. While this is not normally my stance, I think you did everything"right". There was no way to foresee them denying you the ability to board after you had already begun your journey. If phone and e-mail don't get you anywhere, I would then escalate to HQ, Social Media and then the Elliott Advocacy Group.

I goggled Elliott Advocacy Group. Thanks for the info, I may need it.

[sanger727]

On 2/5/2020 at 4:06 PM, JennyB1977 said:

@erllje While I understand where you are coming from. You would have to have taken those flights either way. 

How do you figure that? If you had a cruise out of Fort Lauderdale and there was a hurricane in the forecast causing the ship to instead sail out of New Orleans; would you still fly to Fort Lauderdale? Of course not. Assuming you found this out you would have changed your flights to re-route to New Orleans or tried to file for trip insurance. I am sure that if the OP had found out that a lay-over in Hong Kong would have caused them to be denied boarding they would have done anything they could to change their flights and no layover in Hong Kong. This is entirely on celebrity for making this call too close to sailing for travelers to change their arrangements. Even if their flights had been through celebrity they would be in the same boat.

[Jeff&Mel]

On 2/3/2020 at 3:55 PM, erllje said:

4 of us were denied boarding the Celebrity Millennium February 1st because celebrity decided to deny anyone who transited though Hong Kong. We arrived in Singapore Thursday afternoon and received an email Friday from Celebrity saying we were not allow to board Saturday. We were booted out of our hotel and headed back to the airport for our 36 hour trip home. Everything was booked though our TA, so when we contacted them today they said we would receive only what the cruise cost. We have over $8000 tied up in this trip including airfare and hotel, they said since we took the flight and the stay in the hotel we would not get that money back. We have insurance so my thinking is they would pay but I don’t know.

So my question is if anyone else has experienced this can you let me know how it came out.

I'm so sorry this happened to you!!

[Cruiser_1977]

@sanger727 First the flights weren't purchased through the cruise line. So refunds would need to have come from the airlines. Second, at best with enough notice they could have rerouted which would incur change fees etc. At best they could provide proof and attempt to get FCC. But they still would have had to have flown somewhere, was my point. At this point they flew to Singapore for two nights and then back to US. I think the cruise line should give them FCC.

[ducklite]

47 minutes ago, JennyB1977 said:

@sanger727 First the flights weren't purchased through the cruise line. So refunds would need to have come from the airlines. Second, at best with enough notice they could have rerouted which would incur change fees etc. At best they could provide proof and attempt to get FCC. But they still would have had to have flown somewhere, was my point. At this point they flew to Singapore for two nights and then back to US. I think the cruise line should give them FCC.

My cruise itinerary was changed and the cruise line fully paid my change fees in the form of a check, even though I booked my airfare with the airline.  No FCC, cash.

[Cruiser_1977]

@ducklite That is a fantastic result. I hope it works out that well for the OP. However, according the original post their TA told them they would only receive refund of the cruise fare. I was simply hoping that if escalated at a minimum the line would offer FCC. It would be nice if they would give cash, I just don't see that happening based on the response thus far.