Cancelling Cruises because of the C word

[daiB]

How about some balance to the discussion.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/07/coronavirus-reasons-to-be-reassured

[Denarius]

5 hours ago, jeanlyon said:

Janny, no and now the same information is available on the P&O website, so no longer a secret.

Along with an advert exorting you to "book a last minute cruise deal" superimposed on a picture of Florence. You could not make it up!

[AndyMichelle]

28 minutes ago, jeanlyon said:

Yes I can understand doctors not issuing letters when there is no reason but you wanting to cancel, but if the patient has medical issues, then they must be able to declare them unfit at the present time.  Surely?

Quite right Jean and our Doctor was very supportive. 

He advised Michelle not to travel as because of her lung condition she would be very high risk, both of catching it and the effects. 

Andy 

 

[jeanlyon]

Michelle really does have a good reason Andy, but my husband would be borderline I would think.  He is pretty fit (81) but with Atrial Fib.  We will sit tight for a few weeks and see what happens.

[majortom10]

It isnt just P&O but Cunard are sticking to exactly the same policy.

[Bedruthen]

17 minutes ago, majortom10 said:

It isnt just P&O but Cunard are sticking to exactly the same policy.

Yep, must be just about the only two companies sticking to their guns. It seems they are taking advantage of the unwillingness of the mainly British passengers to complain or kick up a fuss. Royal Caribbean, Celebrity and others are allowing cancellation up to 48 hours beforehand, yet Cunard absolutely no change and P&O prepared to change with a medical certificate- something which for most people would be covered by insurance anyway. I really hope that one of the newspapers picks up on this inequality and produces an article comparing the different approaches being taken. 

[Eglesbrech]

37 minutes ago, daiB said:

How about some balance to the discussion.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/07/coronavirus-reasons-to-be-reassured

An interesting article and if everyone took a rational approach then things would probably be fine. They are not however doing so, perfectly healthy people have been confined on ships for 2 weeks (unlike in the hotel in Tenerife where they were allowed out in just days if tested negative) and ports are refusing entry to ships.

 

Malta refused to allow the MSC Opera to dock when no one onboard was ill. You may wish to read the Malta Times article and the comments section about that situation. The islanders really don’t want ship loads of potential virus carriers landing and they are being quite vociferous about it. Oceana goes there as a home port in just a few weeks. I doubt pax will be made to feel very welcome given the attitude of some there. That could also make return flights extremely difficult as well if the ship is refused docking if someone falls ill.

 

Like most folks I would not be happy to catch the virus and if I am healthy then being confined for 2 weeks in an environment which seems to actually spread the illness to the healthy, if the Diamond Princess reports are accurate, is even worse. 

 

Add to that the fact that P&O are doing nothing for customers who have paid their balance, unlike other Carnival lines and most other cruise lines in general. They won’t even confirm a refund if they refuse you embarkation based on a risk assessment which could be completely wrong. 
 

The only Carnival line for mainly British passenger appears to be treating those customers less well than their other pax and won’t answer questions as to why this should be the case. 
 

I appreciate that P&O have to protect their profits and share holders however I don’t feel that they are being fair in the circumstances, that’s just my opinion. I know you are generally a great supporter of P&O and so I would be interested to know if you think they are being fair to people in the UK at the moment?
 

 

 

 

[PRINCESSTHE BEST]

P&O and Cunard are the same company run by the same management team at Southampton. Depending on which phone on the table rings, they will answer either as P&O or Cunard.

[Bedruthen]

6 minutes ago, PRINCESSTHE BEST said:

P&O and Cunard are the same company run by the same management team at Southampton. Depending on which phone on the table rings, they will answer either as P&O or Cunard.

Err I rather think that’s the point, same headquarters, different cancellation policy.  And of course inconsistency across the Carnival brands themselves. 

[Bedruthen]

21 minutes ago, Eglesbrech said:

An interesting article and if everyone took a rational approach then things would probably be fine. They are not however doing so, perfectly healthy people have been confined on ships for 2 weeks (unlike in the hotel in Tenerife where they were allowed out in just days if tested negative) and ports are refusing entry to ships.

 

Malta refused to allow the MSC Opera to dock when no one onboard was ill. You may wish to read the Malta Times article and the comments section about that situation. The islanders really don’t want ship loads of potential virus carriers landing and they are being quite vociferous about it. Oceana goes there as a home port in just a few weeks. I doubt pax will be made to feel very welcome given the attitude of some there. That could also make return flights extremely difficult as well if the ship is refused docking if someone falls ill.

 

Like most folks I would not be happy to catch the virus and if I am healthy then being confined for 2 weeks in an environment which seems to actually spread the illness to the healthy, if the Diamond Princess reports are accurate, is even worse. 

 

Add to that the fact that P&O are doing nothing for customers who have paid their balance, unlike other Carnival lines and most other cruise lines in general. They won’t even confirm a refund if they refuse you embarkation based on a risk assessment which could be completely wrong. 
 

The only Carnival line for mainly British passenger appears to be treating those customers less well than their other pax and won’t answer questions as to why this should be the case. 
 

I appreciate that P&O have to protect their profits and share holders however I don’t feel that they are being fair in the circumstances, that’s just my opinion. I know you are generally a great supporter of P&O and so I would be interested to know if you think they are being fair to people in the UK at the moment?
 

 

 

 

No, they are taking advantage of the British nature not to complain or litigate. If the situation does not change, then my allegiance to P&O and Cunard will not continue. 

[staygulf]

23 minutes ago, Eglesbrech said:

An interesting article and if everyone took a rational approach then things would probably be fine. They are not however doing so, perfectly healthy people have been confined on ships for 2 weeks (unlike in the hotel in Tenerife where they were allowed out in just days if tested negative) and ports are refusing entry to ships.

 

Malta refused to allow the MSC Opera to dock when no one onboard was ill. You may wish to read the Malta Times article and the comments section about that situation. The islanders really don’t want ship loads of potential virus carriers landing and they are being quite vociferous about it. Oceana goes there as a home port in just a few weeks. I doubt pax will be made to feel very welcome given the attitude of some there. That could also make return flights extremely difficult as well if the ship is refused docking if someone falls ill.

 

Like most folks I would not be happy to catch the virus and if I am healthy then being confined for 2 weeks in an environment which seems to actually spread the illness to the healthy, if the Diamond Princess reports are accurate, is even worse. 

 

Add to that the fact that P&O are doing nothing for customers who have paid their balance, unlike other Carnival lines and most other cruise lines in general. They won’t even confirm a refund if they refuse you embarkation based on a risk assessment which could be completely wrong. 
 

The only Carnival line for mainly British passenger appears to be treating those customers less well than their other pax and won’t answer questions as to why this should be the case. 
 

I appreciate that P&O have to protect their profits and share holders however I don’t feel that they are being fair in the circumstances, that’s just my opinion. I know you are generally a great supporter of P&O and so I would be interested to know if you think they are being fair to people in the UK at the moment?
 

 

 

 

What shareholders? It’s a division of Carnival. 

[Eglesbrech]

2 minutes ago, staygulf said:

What shareholders? It’s a division of Carnival. 

Yes I am aware of that.

[staygulf]

Just now, Eglesbrech said:

Yes I am aware of that.

So then why would P and O be protecting the interests of Carnival when Carnival themselves are taking a much more generous approach along with its other trading  divisions?

[Eglesbrech]

4 minutes ago, Bedruthen said:

No, they are taking advantage of the British nature not to complain or litigate. If the situation does not change, then my allegiance to P&O and Cunard will not continue. 

I must admit that I am personally making a direct comparison with how P&O are dealing with this and the other cruise lines that I am currently booked with who are being much more flexible.

 

I won’t say that I would never book with them again but they will be way down the list and probably only a last minute booking.

[Eglesbrech]

1 minute ago, staygulf said:

So then why would P and O be protecting the interests of Carnival when Carnival themselves are taking a much more generous approach along with its other trading  divisions?

I assume (and it can only be an assumption) that each CEO is responsible for their divisions revenue generation and in the case of P&O they feel they can act this way and protect their margin for that division.

 

I actually don’t understand why they are offering less flexibility than other divisions but presume it will have something to do with money. I will stand corrected if anyone has any better insights.

[kalos]

.

1 hour ago, AndyMichelle said:

Quite right Jean and our Doctor was very supportive. 

He advised Michelle not to travel as because of her lung condition she would be very high risk, both of catching it and the effects 

Andy 

 

That's a fair risk Andy ,cruises or money can be replaced .😊

 

[kruzseeka]

The general advice makes interesting reading  but of course it has not been written in the context of being on a cruise ship.

 

There is a distinct difference in overview of the risks to the general population whilst a) there is a low incidence rate in the UK at present (but of course that will change, and numbers are likely to increase exponentially in the next few weeks), 

b) if taken ill you can at least be in the comfort of your own home and

c) hopefully receive appropriate health care if necessary.

 

The situation if on board ship makes keeping 2m distance from others and for no longer than 15 minutes is impossible unless confined to your cabin.  The prospect of being denied landing and hospital care is another worry.  How many critically ill patients can the onbord medical facilities cope with?  We all know serious illness on board can mean an unscheduled return to port or a med-vac.

 

Of course we should keep a sense of proportion - but on board ship is a whole different ball game!  And represents a very different risk assessment.

[Bazrat]

Just out of interest those people who want to see there doctor to get a note for there cruise is that not taking a slot from someone who could be generally ill, i know at my doctors it normally a two week wait.

[AndyMichelle]

52 minutes ago, kalos said:

.

That's a fair risk Andy ,cruises or money can be replaced .😊

 

Yes, that swayed our decision, but we wouldn't give up our cruises lightly... 

Andy 

[ann141]

1 hour ago, Bedruthen said:

Err I rather think that’s the point, same headquarters, different cancellation policy.  And of course inconsistency across the Carnival brands themselves. 

I think i read somewhere that Carnival is allowing each 'Brand' to make its own decision regarding the policies in place for the Coronavirus.I can understand why Princess are offering more as it is their cruise ships that have been affected.Hopefully P and O will offer similar but they are probably waiting for as long as they feel they need to- not helping those of us cruising next week!

[Bazrat]

 if i had a pound for every time i read on here i might not cruise with p&o again or not cruising with them again i think it might pay for my next p&o cruise.but who knows if they will go through with it.

[staygulf]

5 minutes ago, Bazrat said:

Just out of interest those people who want to see there doctor to get a note for there cruise is that not taking a slot from someone who could be generally ill, i know at my doctors it normally a two week wait.

If people need to see their doctor to get a letter it’s only because the insurance company or PANDO require it. What else do you suggest?

[Bazrat]

3 minutes ago, staygulf said:

If people need to see their doctor to get a letter it’s only because the insurance company or PANDO require it. What else do you suggest?

so in your view it's a valid medical reason not a financial decision to see the doctor

[PRINCESSTHE BEST]

1 hour ago, staygulf said:

What shareholders? It’s a division of Carnival. 

Poor performance by P&O drives down the price of Carnival Shares, so the poster is right.

[staygulf]

2 minutes ago, Bazrat said:

so in your view it's a valid medical reason not a financial decision to see the doctor

Absolutely. We are in precisely that situation. Due to sail in 42 days fully paid up. But my wife is seriously compromised from only having one lung and a low immune system from chemotherapy. So she is seriously at risk. Is it your view that I should not cancel and seek a refund but instead let her go on a risky cruise. I know what I’m going to do.