Cancelling Cruises because of the C word

[terrierjohn]

3 hours ago, ann141 said:

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!

I wonder why all the RCI cruise lines, and NCL as well are offering a similar deal to Princess then, so far none of their ships have been involved?

Edited March 7, 2020 by terrierjohn

[ann141]

6 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

I wonder why all the RCI cruise lines, and NCL as well are offering a similar deal to Princess then, so far none of their ships have been involved?

Because they seem to value loyal customers more than P and O do ??

[wowzz]

3 hours ago, Tommart said:

It could, of course, have something to do with protecting directors' bonuses,

But you are confusing the directors of Carnival,  who ultimately are responsible for the corporation, with the management at P&O.  

[glittergal1]

42 minutes ago, ann141 said:

Because they seem to value loyal customers more than P and O do ??

Yes this is my feeling and the impression they are giving, not a good impression. If we hadnt already got cruises booked with P&O their stance on this would not entice me into booking in the future with them 

[wowzz]

5 minutes ago, glittergal1 said:

Yes this is my feeling and the impression they are giving, not a good impression. If we hadnt already got cruises booked with P&O their stance on this would not entice me into booking in the future with them 

The public have a short attention span. In 12 months time, the vast majority of the UK cruisers will have forgotten all about this.

The 40 or 50 posters on this site are irrelevant in the scale of things.

[glittergal1]

2 minutes ago, wowzz said:

The public have a short attention span. In 12 months time, the vast majority of the UK cruisers will have forgotten all about this.

The 40 or 50 posters on this site are irrelevant in the scale of things.

Maybe so but I like to look after those who look after and value me .  And sadly so far P&O are falling short . And lets hope that in 12  months time this is a distant memory 

[kruzseeka]

3 hours ago, Bazrat said:

Your right I’m sorry just thinking about the staff who get abused for there being no appointments, I know money is far more important 

 

I'm sure no one is saying that - in fact it would be quite offensive to suggest that anyone would put their loved ones' health above money.   

 

Given the situation, however one can manage to achieve it, I don't think it's unreasonable to try to recover several thousands of pounds particularly in light of P&O's reluctance to vary it T&Cs in line with other companies.  Surely cancelling to protect you and your family if deemed necessary will be made regardless.  But why shouldn't people attempt to claim their outlay or at least transfer it to another booking?  

 

The concessions made thus far aren't very helpful especially to those who have paid in full.  There are two categories here: those who may be able to prove medical reasons not to travel (but how easy is it to jump through the hoops?) and those who do not fall into that group but being elderly, may still feel it inadvisable to travel.  Neither are being supported by P&O.  I realise its a mighty problem for cruise lines but by comparison with others, P&O are falling very short. 

Edited March 8, 2020 by kruzseeka

[mercury7289]

6 minutes ago, wowzz said:

The public have a short attention span. In 12 months time, the vast majority of the UK cruisers will have forgotten all about this.

The 40 or 50 posters on this site are irrelevant in the scale of things.

 I am happy to look out for me and mine.

However joining another 2500-3000-plus, with some of the people, having maybe disputable, but dubious sanitary and hygienic practices, as  has been reported numerous times on this and other places, could increase the risks to me and mine by 2500-3000 times. Why would I need to play Russian roulette?

Lot of people in the cemetery already, not happy to join them yet.

 

[Tommart]

7 hours ago, wowzz said:

But you are confusing the directors of Carnival,  who ultimately are responsible for the corporation, with the management at P&O.  

Not at all.  There's UK P&O representation on the main Carnival Corporation/Carnival plc board (it's a dual listed company) and it would be difficult to believe that remuneration isn't linked to performance.

 

Quite apart from that, though, the Carnival UK people (Josh Weinstein and Paul Ludlow, for example) will without any doubt at all have a performance element built into their salaries.

 

[kruzseeka]

7 hours ago, kruzseeka said:

 

I'm sure no one is saying that - in fact it would be quite offensive to suggest that anyone would put their loved ones' health above money.   

 

Given the situation, however one can manage to achieve it, I don't think it's unreasonable to try to recover several thousands of pounds particularly in light of P&O's reluctance to vary it T&Cs in line with other companies.  Surely cancelling to protect you and your family if deemed necessary will be made regardless.  But why shouldn't people attempt to claim their outlay or at least transfer it to another booking?  

 

The concessions made thus far aren't very helpful especially to those who have paid in full.  There are two categories here: those who may be able to prove medical reasons not to travel (but how easy is it to jump through the hoops?) and those who do not fall into that group but being elderly, may still feel it inadvisable to travel.  Neither are being supported by P&O.  I realise its a mighty problem for cruise lines but by comparison with others, P&O are falling very short. 

 

Sorry.... of course that should read 'anyone would put money before their loved one's health'

 

[terrierjohn]

8 hours ago, wowzz said:

The public have a short attention span. In 12 months time, the vast majority of the UK cruisers will have forgotten all about this.

The 40 or 50 posters on this site are irrelevant in the scale of things.

Irrelevant!!!  You mean Paul Ludlow is not quaking in his shoes as he reads all our posts about how badly he is treating we 40 or 50  passengers?

[davecttr]

19 minutes ago, Tommart said:

Which gives the lie completely to suggestions that the NHS can cope!

I see the Sunday times is reporting that Ministers are planning for up to 100,000 COVID-19 deaths as a 'central figure' With a reported 1% death rate amongst diagnosed cases that means about 10 million infected people, just over one sixth of the population.

 

the 9 week 95% infection rate suggests 22.5% of cases in each of weeks 1-3 and 7-9 plus 50% in weeks 4-6. With 80% of those infections mild with home isolation adequate it leaves 450,000 hospital admissions for weeks 1-3 and 7-9 with 1 million admissions for weeks 4-6. the figures for critically ill needing intensive care would be 112,500 - 250,000 - 112,500.

 

With 170,000 NHS beds and 4000 IC beds in England and occupancy rates already above 80%? what do you think will happen!

 

Truly horrific

[Hampshire Steve]

26 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Irrelevant!!!  You mean Paul Ludlow is not quaking in his shoes as he reads all our posts about how badly he is treating we 40 or 50  passengers?

I found myself looking at Carnival corporate website earlier, then at the media centre, then at the P&O brand, it mentions the soon arriving new to fleet Britannia. Perhaps that's how much Carnival cares about P&O

[davecttr]

27 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Irrelevant!!!  You mean Paul Ludlow is not quaking in his shoes as he reads all our posts about how badly he is treating we 40 or 50  passengers?

He should however be quaking in his shoes about keeping his job if it all goes belly up because he will get the blame from Carnival corporate HQ.

 

I think very few people have realized the enormous threat of this disease as it is disturbing how many never see or listen to serious news, it is 'boring' What news they consume is lurid headlines in the gutter press. What their mate said down 'spoons'. Celebrity news and sport etc. Truly the ignorant great unwashed.. I visited the social club last night, there were men not washing their hands after using the toilet. 

[janny444]

8 hours ago, wowzz said:

The public have a short attention span. In 12 months time, the vast majority of the UK cruisers will have forgotten all about this.

The 40 or 50 posters on this site are irrelevant in the scale of things.

Quite so   40/50 will not make any impression at all BUT if it became public knowledge via the press etc then there would be a considerable amount of people that became aware of P&O's lack of action and the unfair way of dealing with their paying " customers". They should at least apply a level playing field ...ok if before final payment date...after final payment date....zilch

[AndyMichelle]

4 minutes ago, davecttr said:

 

 

I think very few people have realized the enormous threat of this disease as it is disturbing how many never see or listen to serious news, it is 'boring' What news they consume is lurid headlines in the gutter press. What their mate said down 'spoons'. Celebrity news and sport etc. Truly the ignorant great unwashed.. I visited the social club last night, there were men not washing their hands after using the toilet. 

There is no excuse to be unclean at any time, but these people have got away with it for years without it affecting them, so it must be difficult to change the habit of a lifetime, but it MUST change. 

As for the news, same applies, we are trying to understand the complexity of it all but are not experienced enough to know what to believe. 

My attitude changes daily... 

Andy 

 

 

[crompton21]

14 minutes ago, janny444 said:

Quite so   40/50 will not make any impression at all BUT if it became public knowledge via the press etc then there would be a considerable amount of people that became aware of P&O's lack of action and the unfair way of dealing with their paying " customers". They should at least apply a level playing field ...ok if before final payment date...after final payment date....zilch

The world stands on the edge of a pandemic, thousands of people (especially in less developed countries) appear to be at risk of death.  Do you not think 40 or 50 people not happy about their luxury holiday plans may not be the most significant thing that the press should be reporting on?

[Bazrat]

31 minutes ago, davecttr said:

I see the Sunday times is reporting that Ministers are planning for up to 100,000 COVID-19 deaths as a 'central figure' With a reported 1% death rate amongst diagnosed cases that means about 10 million infected people, just over one sixth of the population.

 

the 9 week 95% infection rate suggests 22.5% of cases in each of weeks 1-3 and 7-9 plus 50% in weeks 4-6. With 80% of those infections mild with home isolation adequate it leaves 450,000 hospital admissions for weeks 1-3 and 7-9 with 1 million admissions for weeks 4-6. the figures for critically ill needing intensive care would be 112,500 - 250,000 - 112,500.

 

With 170,000 NHS beds and 4000 IC beds in England and occupancy rates already above 80%? what do you think will happen!

 

Truly horrific

600 plus people died so far this year from the flu and the nhs just about coped But unless it turns out as bad as your stats say then we will be in trouble

[jeanlyon]

Oh boy, just reading about Grand Princess.  Running out of food, can't even get a sandwich.  Got brought spaghetti with a bit of sauce which wasn't even cooked.  running out of drugs.

[janny444]

23 minutes ago, crompton21 said:

The world stands on the edge of a pandemic, thousands of people (especially in less developed countries) appear to be at risk of death.  Do you not think 40 or 50 people not happy about their luxury holiday plans may not be the most significant thing that the press should be reporting on?

My point wasn't just about 40/50 people ...that was in reference to an earlier comment...no ....I think there are considerably more people than that who are affected by P&O's " head in sand" approach.

And yes I do realise that the world is on a precipice...in more ways than one...I don't need reminding of that but as I said my reply was to an earlier comment made.

 

[Selbourne]

17 hours ago, daiB said:

How about some balance to the discussion.

 

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

Interesting, but I’m not sure that it addresses the main issues being debated here Dai.

 

Other than those with underlying health issues, particularly respiratory ones, I don’t think that contracting the virus is, in itself, the biggest concern of many posting on this thread. The issues as I see them are;

 

1) The potential to be refused boarding with an elevated temperature caused by something like a common cold (I believe that definitive results confirming that you don’t have Coronavirus take 48 hours, so there’s the worry of being refused boarding when you don’t have the virus).

 

2) In the above scenarios, the potential for a battle between P&O (who have a tendency to ‘interpret’ UK law how it suits them) and insurers (who have ‘get out’ clauses). 

 

3) P&O’s lack of clarity (at best) or intransigence (at worst) regarding cancellation or postponement, particularly for those who have paid in full. 
 

4) The fact that cruise ships appear to be Petri dishes for the spread of viruses, in a greater way than is the case on land - regular Norovirus outbreaks being a case in point.  
 

5) The fear of just one guest or crew member (out of thousands - many of whom are widely travelled) being confirmed as having the virus during the cruise, resulting in refusal to dock (e.g. the Princess ship off San Francisco) or cabin confinement followed by land based quarantine (over 4 weeks in total for Diamond Princess passengers), especially as it is now known that the virus spreads like wildfire on a quarantined cruise ship (as many of us said at the time) so you are trapped with (if you are elderly or vulnerable) a potential creeping death.

 

So, in summary, whilst the article is interesting for the general populous, I don’t believe that it really balances the above concerns that many are expressing regarding upcoming cruises with P&O. 

[PRINCESSTHE BEST]

Royal Princess cruise cancelled because a crew member from the Grand Princess transferred to the Royal Princess . He has shown no symptoms or known contact but authorities have insisted he is tested before the ship sails. Princess have decided to cancel the cruise. Another massive cost for the company. 

[Adawn47]

I would  think much safer too. How many infections can be picked up while sitting in a doctor's waiting room? Especially now!!!

Avril 

[terrierjohn]

35 minutes ago, jeanlyon said:

Don't agree.  My husband often has a telephone appt with his doc.  He knows his case very well and prescribes over the phone.  I am sure he would do the same with a letter.

Thank you Jean, good to see there are others on this forum with a modicum of common sense.

[Tablelamp]

Cruise starts on 17th May and fully paid.  
Q. Should I look into cancelling now with ‘not recommended to travel’ letter from the Doctor or wait and see if P and O are forced to cancel?