Cruise Lines Should Reimburse You 100%, Not To Cruise

[leaveitallbehind]

31 minutes ago, gerryuk said:

I get it, from the US viewpoint at least. Before you're Homeland Security came into force, could Americans turn up and purchase tickets at the port on the day of the ships departure, or was there similar rules then, as well?

I don't see why people travelling by cruise ships are not treated the same as those travelling by air. In this day and age with so many millions of people travelling, all these checks are automatically done by computer, when you upload your passport number. No doubt a red flag will be raised by the computer if you are known to the authorities. Due to the numbers involved,  there can be very little human involvement outside the Airports and Cruise Terminals in checking passports, so all travellers should be treated the same.

 

Traveling by air (and rail, or bus) is typically a one way, short time frame experience where the sole purpose is transportation.  Cruising is a multi-day vacation visiting a number of different (and typically foreign) locations where by the cruise ship is part of the experience but secondary in purpose as a mode of transportation,  and it also is typically round trip.  Not at all apples to apples.  

 

And in the pre-911 days, yes, short notice hop-on cruises were more feasible.  But that was then and this is now.  And the rules are the rules are the rules, whether or not you understand or agree with them.  And again, by submitting the manifests in advance allows them to be checked prior to boarding.

 

Take it up with the US Dept. of Immigration for the correct explanation and interpretation and sell your case to them if you don't agree.  

Edited February 24, 2020 by leaveitallbehind

[Toofarfromthesea]

7 hours ago, gerryuk said:

It seems to me that any cruise passenger who has viruses like influenza should be able to contact the cruise line, even if its on the day of boarding, and cancel their cruise, and the cruise line should reimburse them their total ticket cost, no questions asked.

Is it not better for the cruise lines in the short term to loose money on a few empty cabins, than have viruses spread because many passengers will not cancel their cruises due to the huge financial implications of doing so, no matter what they are going to bring and spread on board? Also all cruise passengers must and be able to prove that they have travel insurance when buying their tickets so that they are insured for things like flights etc, so they have even more incentive to cancel.

Now you can say that this is unfair on the cruise lines, and it is, but at the moment we are living in dangerous times, and all bets are off. How much will it cost the cruise line if one of their ships is quarantined?

Loosing thousands of pounds / dollars does not give anyone the incentive to cancel their travel plans if they are ill, getting their money back will.

Cruise lines in major ports in America and Europe should adopt a turn up and go wait list. So many cruises out of these ports are always sold out. If you can turn up on cruise day with all relevant travel documents and the cruise you are interested in, has cabins available due to last minute cancellations, you should be able purchase the cabin, there and then. If you are the only turn up and goer for that particular cruise, the cruise line should tell you how much the cabin cost the person who cancelled, then you should be allowed to make a reasonable offer to purchase said cabin, its then down to the cruise line to accept your offer and make some money back, or decline and make a loss on that cabin. If there are more turn up and goers than cabins available, then the cruise lines should auction off the cabin with sealed bids, then and there, who knows the cruise line could actually make more money for that cabin, than they originally sold it for. Just a thought.

 

 

OR, just a different thought, people should make their own decisions and face their own consequences.

[Shmoo here]

7 hours ago, gerryuk said:

It seems to me that any cruise passenger who has viruses like influenza should be able to contact the cruise line, even if its on the day of boarding, and cancel their cruise, and the cruise line should reimburse them their total ticket cost, no questions asked.

So someone can book a cruise, and with just a phone call he/she gets their money back?  With no evidence that they are indeed too ill to travel?

 

 

That's what travel insurance is for.  If you're sick enough to cancel, you can get you money back.  Yes, you may need to jump through some hoops (like actually see a doctor and get a statement that you're too sick to travel).

[Nebr.cruiser]

While I understand where you are coming from, knowing people, anyone who wanted to cancel for any reason would probably use the 'illness' clause to cancel.  Perhaps even some would book multiple cruises and then just cancel all but one at the last minute. 

 

Of course insurance is the answer (although doubtful if most policies would cover the current Corona virus) and personal responsibility comes in to play as well in whether or not a person chooses to get insurance.

[bbwex]

6 hours ago, leaveitallbehind said:

 

To your first comment, the simple solution is travel insurance.  That is one of the primary purposes for which it exists.  And also as others have suggested, this should be part of the initial budget planning in purchasing a cruise IMO.

 

To your second point, cruises are not like other forms of one way or destination travel.  As others have mentioned, US Department of Immigration requires a final manifest typically 24 hours (possibly more) prior to sailing to be submitted for review.  Much of this is post 911 and as a result the scenario your suggest would not be possible.

We always have travel insurance, and get it immediately when we book a cruise.  However, we normally do not get "cancel for any reason" insurance since it essentially doubles the cost.  My personal guess is that most people do not buy that option.  So you cannot cancel because you are afraid you might get sick or be quarantined.  So most people will be at the point of having to cancel and lose their money if this turns into a real pandemic.  I agree that the cruise lines cannot insure this element on their own, and will have to enforce their penalty provisions, but I have to disagree with a bunch of posters that you should simply have insurance.  I have to admit, though, that I have absolutely no idea how many people buy the "cancel for any reason" option.

[leaveitallbehind]

27 minutes ago, bbwex said:

We always have travel insurance, and get it immediately when we book a cruise.  However, we normally do not get "cancel for any reason" insurance since it essentially doubles the cost.  My personal guess is that most people do not buy that option.  So you cannot cancel because you are afraid you might get sick or be quarantined.  So most people will be at the point of having to cancel and lose their money if this turns into a real pandemic.  I agree that the cruise lines cannot insure this element on their own, and will have to enforce their penalty provisions, but I have to disagree with a bunch of posters that you should simply have insurance.  I have to admit, though, that I have absolutely no idea how many people buy the "cancel for any reason" option.

 

While the OP did mention flu, they were not specific as to including coronavirus in their post.  It seemed as though they were referring more simply to those who arrive to the cruise sick and are denied boarding.  So I don't think they were including the scenario of a passenger cancelling because they were afraid of becoming sick or being quarantined, which is their option and not a cruise line denial of boarding

 

But in any case, if you are denied boarding due to an illness, I would believe that would be a covered cancellation with most travel insurance.  And if the cruise lines cancel the cruise because of corona I would believe you would be reimbursed by them directly.

Edited February 24, 2020 by leaveitallbehind

[Donald]

17 hours ago, gerryuk said:

I don't get this argument that nobody can purchase a cruise ticket and board on the day of sailing. Surely the facilities, other than the money transactions are available at most, if not all major ports in the USA / Europe?

All major ports have immigration and police officers on duty 24 hours a day, Will they care if people are buying their tickets for immediate travel, as long as they have the correct travel documents and are not intending to brake any laws. To be blunt is it any of their business when customers purchase their tickets?

As for the cruise lines themselves, at many ports if you miss the ship after a day doing your own excursion, cant you fly off to the next port and board the ship there after going through immigration? So technically speaking, it already happens.

 

 

 

 

 

Gerry,

You need to do more research.

Most major ports DO NOT have Immigration Officers on duty 24 hours a day.

They are only on duty for hours when ships are arriving and departing.

Most North American ports have no permanent Immigration Officers at all. They are pulled from the nearest International Airport (thereby slowing traffic at the airport) only when absolutely needed.

The USA has a dozen or so larger ports where crew and pax cannot join or depart the ship, as there are no Customs or Immigration officers available.

 

Cruise Passengers and Airline Passengers are treated differently by most government authorities. The cruise lines do not have a voice in this. International flights are cleared to land - but each passenger is personally responsible for any visas or other paperwork. International Cruise ships are usually granted a blanket visa for ship, passengers, and crew. The cruise line is legally and financially responsible to ensure that everyone onboard has proper paperwork.

 

In major ports, manifests for arriving and departing ships could total 20,000 to 50,000 names in one day (remember that crew names are also required). Most governments (USA is a prime example) do not have the manpower or computer capacity to do background checks on that many people in one day. That is why they require manifests submitted a day or more in advance. Ships arriving at a US port are required to submit manifests 72 hours in advance of arrival.

[chengkp75]

18 hours ago, leaveitallbehind said:

Whether you get it or not, the fact remains that in the US (at least) final manifests are submitted 24 hours or more by regulation for their review and confirmation and "walk on's" are not possible

This is not correct.  The eNOAD (electronic notice of Arrival/Departure) sent to the USCG, and the electronic crew and passenger manifests submitted to CBP are only submitted 60 minutes prior to departure, and amended manifests are allowed after this time frame.  Anything to do with the manifest prior to this is a cruise line decision and operation.  Cruise lines don't allow "walk ups" because they do not have company customer service agents at the port to sell those cabins or handle the payments, and the software to handle financial transactions is not present.  The agents at the port are port employees, and are only cleared for data entry of check-in information.

 

The very reason that US citizens are allowed to cruise without a passport is that CBP does the vetting of the passengers over the length of the cruise, unlike the few hours that an airline flight takes.

Edited February 25, 2020 by chengkp75

[ldubs]

18 hours ago, leaveitallbehind said:

Whether you get it or not, the fact remains that in the US (at least) final manifests are submitted 24 hours or more by regulation for their review and confirmation and "walk on's" are not possible.  It has nothing to do with them caring about when you purchase a ticket.

 

And with your example the final manifest would have already been submitted and you have already been on the ship in transit, so flying to the next port is fine.

 

Oops.  Never mind.  I see my comment regarding the manifest was answered by a later post.  

Edited February 25, 2020 by ldubs

[ldubs]

47 minutes ago, Donald said:

 

 

Ships arriving at a US port are required to submit manifests 72 hours in advance of arrival.

 

 

Must be tough for those three day cruises.   

[gerryuk]

51 minutes ago, Donald said:

Gerry,

You need to do more research.

Most major ports DO NOT have Immigration Officers on duty 24 hours a day.

They are only on duty for hours when ships are arriving and departing.

If they are only on duty when ships are arriving and departing then they will be on duty when people turn up and go to buy a ticket. As I have learned that Homeland Security wont allow people to turn up and go and buy a ticket, its moot. But they are there.

 

57 minutes ago, Donald said:

Gerry,
Ships arriving at a US port are required to submit manifests 72 hours in advance of arrival.

This cannot be right, there is a HAL ship leaving at 1700hrs in either Fort La or Miami today, I tried to book a cabin for this ship on the worlds largest booking site, last night, (I live in Europe),  I did take into account the time difference and yet I could book a cabin 23 hours before departure. When I said I tried to book,  it took me all the way through to my credit card details then I pulled out. There seems to be some confusion as to the cut off time when you can book a cruise in the US, but it seems to me that it cannot be 72 hours. "Let yourself go" and check what you can book for tomorrow, you will be surprised.

 

[chengkp75]

39 minutes ago, ldubs said:

 

 

Must be tough for those three day cruises.   

They just submit the eNOA (arrival notice) at the same time as the eNOD (departure notice), and there are waivers for voyages less than 72 hours.

[gerryuk]

17 hours ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

 

OR, just a different thought, people should make their own decisions and face their own consequences.

Totally agree, however it does not work like that, in this age of me, me, me. What about the consequences of everybody else on the ship if people board the ship with viruses?, and that's my whole point. We need to get them, not to board in the first place. If that means giving them back their money so they have an incentive not to board, or even give them a voucher to cruise at a later date, then so be it. I really do get the insurance thing, but in the real world until travel insurance is mandatory, not everyone is going to play ball.

[navybankerteacher]

21 hours ago, gerryuk said:

Totally agree, however for many people travel insurance is a cost to much. I keep reading on these boards that if you can afford to cruise, you can afford this, that and the other. ...

 

For many young families buying a cruise ticket is a hardship, but they will save and go without for months just to get their dream holiday. Travel insurance, medical insurance and the like wont come into it for many of them, whether we like it or not. As they get older, wiser and have more disposable income, then insurance will become part of their plans.

...

Well, perhaps they cannot really afford to cruise. Yes, it is possible to sail without insurance — but then it is a gamble they have chosen to make:   like any other wager, they put up a stake in hopes of winning.  If they win, they have saved the cost of insurance - if they lose, they have lost what they paid in fare.

 

If “...buying a cruise ticket is a hardship...” , it is self-inflicted and unnecessary -hardly rationale for imposing massive possible losses on the cruise lines.

Edited February 25, 2020 by navybankerteacher

[John Bull]

2 hours ago, Donald said:

. International flights are cleared to land - but each passenger is personally responsible for any visas or other paperwork. International Cruise ships are usually granted a blanket visa for ship, passengers, and crew. The cruise line is legally and financially responsible to ensure that everyone onboard has proper paperwork.

 

 

 

A couple of flaws here, Donald................

 

Airlines do have responsibility for ensuring that passengers have correct paperwork.

If they board a passenger who doesn't have the correct paperwork for the destination (for instance if the passenger is required to have a visa and one is not available to buy on arrival), the airline is liable, including returning the passenger to the city where they boarded.

That's why check-in staff always need to see my passport and any necessary visas.

 

At some ports, yes the ship will arrange visas (or landing cards - not the same thing as a visa but does broadly the same thing).

But that's not "usually", it's at some ports

And where a personal advance-purchase visa is required, eg India, the cruise line will want to see that visa before the passenger is permitted to board, because  the cruise line is liable.

There has been much confusion over transit visas for cruise passengers visiting Chinese ports like Shanghai. At one time some cruise lines permitted boarding on the grounds that passengers could enter China on a transit visa purchased on arrival, but some - certainly Celebrity - made it clear that passengers whose cruise ended in Shanghai would be denied boarding if they did not have a full Chinese tourist visa. I don't know if Celebrity is still out-of-line on that.

And a passenger on a Baltic cruise who had only a single-entry Schengen visa was required to leave the ship at Tallinn, Estonia (a Schengen country), and skip the ship's visit to St Petersburg (in Russia, not a Schengen country), instead taking a ferry to Helsinki (Finland, a Schengen country) where they re-boarded a few days later.

 

Rights and responsibilities regarding passengers' travel documents is a minefield - it's always dangerous for us laymen (and even travel professionals) to be specific cos there's to many ifs and buts

 

JB 

 

 

 

Edited February 25, 2020 by John Bull

[Donald]

30 minutes ago, John Bull said:

 

A couple of flaws here, Donald................

 

Airlines do have responsibility for ensuring that passengers have correct paperwork.

If they board a passenger who doesn't have the correct paperwork for the destination (for instance if the passenger is required to have a visa and one is not available to buy on arrival), the airline is liable, including returning the passenger to the city where they boarded.

That's why check-in staff always need to see my passport and any necessary visas.

 

At some ports, yes the ship will arrange visas (or landing cards - not the same thing as a visa but does broadly the same thing).

But that's not "usually", it's at some ports

And where a personal advance-purchase visa is required, eg India, the cruise line will want to see that visa before the passenger is permitted to board, because  the cruise line is liable.

There has been much confusion over transit visas for cruise passengers visiting Chinese ports like Shanghai. At one time some cruise lines permitted boarding on the grounds that passengers could enter China on a transit visa purchased on arrival, but some - certainly Celebrity - made it clear that passengers whose cruise ended in Shanghai would be denied boarding if they did not have a full Chinese tourist visa. I don't know if Celebrity is still out-of-line on that.

And a passenger on a Baltic cruise who had only a single-entry Schengen visa was required to leave the ship at Tallinn, Estonia (a Schengen country), and skip the ship's visit to St Petersburg (in Russia, not a Schengen country), instead taking a ferry to Helsinki (Finland, a Schengen country) where they re-boarded a few days later.

 

Rights and responsibilities regarding passengers' travel documents is a minefield - it's always dangerous for us laymen (and even travel professionals) to be specific cos there's to many ifs and buts

 

JB 

 

 

 

Not exactly flaws.

Airlines do check to ensure that we have the proper visas - but in nearly every case where it is missed (which happens quite often) the only liability the airline faces is having to fly the passenger back home if the immigration officials are not happy. It is very rare that an airline is fined for flying illegal passengers.

Cruise ships, on the other hand, are regularly fined by immigration officials for not ensuring that their passengers had the proper paperwork. Your China example is a very good one.

If an airline mistakenly flies a foreigner with improper paperwork into China, the passenger is turned around at the airport and placed on the next flight out.

If a cruise ship brings a passenger with improper credentials into China, there is a large fine for the cruise line.

[JMorris271]

On 2/24/2020 at 7:37 AM, Joebucks said:

For every "great idea" some customer has, a business has 10 proven reasons why it's not a good idea. What you're advocating basically nullifies travel insurance, early saver rates, current pricing model, etc.

 

For as noble as this sounds, there are many other people who will still go on their cruise with a virus, because they don't want to miss out.

If someone has enough energy to go through the boarding process, they don't have the flu. If they want to hang around in there cabin puking and sitting on the toilet to get their moneys worth, so be it. They won't be walking around much.

[leaveitallbehind]

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

This is not correct.  The eNOAD (electronic notice of Arrival/Departure) sent to the USCG, and the electronic crew and passenger manifests submitted to CBP are only submitted 60 minutes prior to departure, and amended manifests are allowed after this time frame.  Anything to do with the manifest prior to this is a cruise line decision and operation.  Cruise lines don't allow "walk ups" because they do not have company customer service agents at the port to sell those cabins or handle the payments, and the software to handle financial transactions is not present.  The agents at the port are port employees, and are only cleared for data entry of check-in information.

 

The very reason that US citizens are allowed to cruise without a passport is that CBP does the vetting of the passengers over the length of the cruise, unlike the few hours that an airline flight takes.

 Thank you for correcting what has been a misconception I have had for quite some time.  I always appreciate your responses and learn something valuable from each.

[DarrenM]

I thought this was site was for people that love cruising. 

 

Ove the last couple of weeks, it seems I am wrong.

 

Its infected with people that seem to hate cruising. Really hate cruising.

[mjkacmom]

46 minutes ago, JMorris271 said:

If someone has enough energy to go through the boarding process, they don't have the flu. If they want to hang around in there cabin puking and sitting on the toilet to get their moneys worth, so be it. They won't be walking around much.

Those are symptoms of the stomach flu, which usually clear up in 24 - 48 hours. The actual flu hits the upper respiratory tract, and last longer.

[SRF]

Why this won't work.

 

1)  People will cruise anyway, as they want their vacation.

 

2)  People will lie to get out of paying for the cruise that they want to cancel at the last minute. 

 

So you accomplish nothing in preventing illness.  And you drive up costs (which drives up the cruise fares) for everyone else.

 

Lose, lose.

[ldubs]

8 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

They just submit the eNOA (arrival notice) at the same time as the eNOD (departure notice), and there are waivers for voyages less than 72 hours.

 

Thanks.  So if I understand what I'm reading here about submitting passenger manifests, it is one hour for departures and 72 hours for arrivals (waivers for short voyages excepted).  

[ed01106]

How about this......rather than promos of

 

"if you book now we will pay your gratuities, plus you will get a drink package and wifi"

 

cruises running the following promo....

 

"if you book today we will include travel insurance" 

 

Such a promotion might temp people otherwise be reluctant to book a cruise months out. 

[chengkp75]

3 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

Thanks.  So if I understand what I'm reading here about submitting passenger manifests, it is one hour for departures and 72 hours for arrivals (waivers for short voyages excepted).  

Yes.  But, the arrival manifest cannot be submitted until after departure from the last foreign port, which in the case of cruise ships is almost never 72 hours or more.  However, if the cruise line notified CBP that they were going on a closed loop cruise, the arrival manifest is merely a formality, as all of the passengers have been vetted during the cruise, which is why the CBP interview at disembarkation is far less than a similar one if you had arrived by airline.  Only if the manifest has changed during the cruise (someone joined or left between the embarkation port and the disembarkation port), will CBP treat the arrival manifest as a totally new voyage from the one that left the US, and this can trigger a more intensive CBP interview upon departure, depending on how much of a threat that CBP sees with the new manifest.

[RocketMan275]

46 minutes ago, ed01106 said:

How about this......rather than promos of

 

"if you book now we will pay your gratuities, plus you will get a drink package and wifi"

 

cruises running the following promo....

 

"if you book today we will include travel insurance" 

 

Such a promotion might temp people otherwise be reluctant to book a cruise months out. 

I doubt many, if any, would be tempted.   Passengers would consider included gratuities, drink packages, and wifi to be more valuable than included insurance.    They would choose the cruise line with those instead of the insurance.  BTW, insurance is cheap for younger passengers.