Solvency of Cruise Lines

[bajakiter]

So, they are looking for 7 billion.

We are just looking to get our $15,000 back, thank you very much. It is in the form of FCC because we blinked first.

We are not holding out much hope of ever realizing the value of the FCC.

Oh, and we just turned 70 so it appears that we are no longer in the desirable guest/client demographic.

 

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, npcl said:

Its even higher impact if one considers couples or families where 1 member is over 70 while others are below since the cut off might result in those under 70 not cruising as well.

Actually we are one of those couples. I am 70+, while DW is 60+.

[thyme2go]

3 hours ago, bajakiter said:

So, they are looking for 7 billion.

We are just looking to get our $15,000 back, thank you very much. It is in the form of FCC because we blinked first.

We are not holding out much hope of ever realizing the value of the FCC.

Oh, and we just turned 70 so it appears that we are no longer in the desirable guest/client demographic.

 

We feel your pain and are in the same blinking boat.   To us it seems that a cancellation on a cruise that is later cancelled by HAL is basically a change in the contract since they did not sail.   Our cancellation was based on them actually sailing......which they chose not to do.   I know they take great joy in blaming the 'guest' but this is my POV and reflects poorly on HAL's business practices.    

[iancal]

I doubt whether we will  consider a HAL cruise in the future.  We have read about more than enough of their business practices and head office decisions over the past month to convince us that there are better alternatives.  Our sympathies go out to their operational folks....they are the ones on the pointy end.  Their operational folks are suffering through poor decisions and their admin folks must be buckling under customer complaints.  The customer appears to be Seattle's last consideration.

 

In the background I can only assume that their corporate legal team and outside counsel  are scrambling to prepare for what is on the horizon.

Edited March 29, 2020 by iancal

[ontheweb]

12 hours ago, thyme2go said:

We feel your pain and are in the same blinking boat.   To us it seems that a cancellation on a cruise that is later cancelled by HAL is basically a change in the contract since they did not sail.   Our cancellation was based on them actually sailing......which they chose not to do.   I know they take great joy in blaming the 'guest' but this is my POV and reflects poorly on HAL's business practices.    

These kinds of business practices are not limited to HAL or the cruise lines. DW and I were supposed to get a bus ride to NYC and play tickets to Ain't Too Proud to Beg yesterday. When it was announced that Broadway plays were being shut down, I called the provider. He told me that their policy was no refunds. I replied that that could not possibly apply when they could no longer provide the services plus I was sure they were being refunded for the play tickets. He stood his ground until I said fine I would take it up with the credit card company with which he was paid. I soon received an e-mail that I was getting a refund. It did not show up on my account for a little over a week, but it did show up.

[funintehsun]

2 hours ago, iancal said:

I doubt whether we will  consider a HAL cruise in the future.  We have read about more than enough of their business practices and head office decisions over the past month to convince us that there are better alternatives.  Our sympathies go out to their operational folks....they are the ones on the pointy end.  Their operational folks are suffering through poor decisions and their admin folks must be buckling under customer complaints.  The customer appears to be Seattle's last consideration.

 

In the background I can only assume that their corporate legal team and outside counsel  are scrambling to prepare for what is on the horizon.

Agreed with that.  While I have enjoyed cruising and cruising with HAL in particular, the way the refunds are being handled is enough for me to not ever trust them with my money again.

 

2 hours ago, ontheweb said:

These kinds of business practices are not limited to HAL or the cruise lines. DW and I were supposed to get a bus ride to NYC and play tickets to Ain't Too Proud to Beg yesterday. When it was announced that Broadway plays were being shut down, I called the provider. He told me that their policy was no refunds. I replied that that could not possibly apply when they could no longer provide the services plus I was sure they were being refunded for the play tickets. He stood his ground until I said fine I would take it up with the credit card company with which he was paid. I soon received an e-mail that I was getting a refund. It did not show up on my account for a little over a week, but it did show up.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that these kinds of tactics are exclusive to HAL or even the Cruise Industry.  While I feel for any business (big or small) that is losing income because of COVID-19, refusing to refund a customer's money when you didn't provide the service is wrong.   Although HAL isn't outright refusing to give the money back, their 60-day promise is scarcely better since I don't believe they have any intention of paying those refunds. In fact it might be worse since most credit card disputes ask you to consult with the merchant first.  The bank may require waiting the 60 days before a dispute can be filed, a process which itself may take a month or two.

 

[chisoxfan]

28 minutes ago, funintehsun said:

Agreed with that.  While I have enjoyed cruising and cruising with HAL in particular, the way the refunds are being handled is enough for me to not ever trust them with my money again.

 

I don't think anyone is suggesting that these kinds of tactics are exclusive to HAL or even the Cruise Industry.  While I feel for any business (big or small) that is losing income because of COVID-19, refusing to refund a customer's money when you didn't provide the service is wrong.   Although HAL isn't outright refusing to give the money back, their 60-day promise is scarcely better since I don't believe they have any intention of paying those refunds. In fact it might be worse since most credit card disputes ask you to consult with the merchant first.  The bank may require waiting the 60 days before a dispute can be filed, a process which itself may take a month or two.

 

I guess I do not share the outrage and angst with HAL's policies. which are seemingly shared with other cruise lines. These 'eventful' times will no doubt continue to bring many questioned and unpopular outcomes in many areas.

As frequent cruisers we were all aware of the unique nature of booking cruises. The understanding that funds could be lost if cancellations were made inside of certain periods was always clear, contractual, and accepted as a condition of cruising. In my mind it was always a cruise 'negative'  compared to other vacation options that could be readily cancelled.

If the unhappy cruisers had held on until the cruise was cancelled (as I understand it) they would have received a refund along with possible goodwill FCC's. They did not do this and it was ultimately unfortunate for them.  I share empathy and perhaps agree that they made a  'best informed' decision at the time that ultimately did not work optimally. It reminds me of the movie 'Lost in America' where the Albert Brooks character begs the casino manager to give back the money his wife lost gambling overnight by offering various excuses and 'logic'.

At the end of the day I am certain that the cruise lines will live up to the cruise contract.  It is unfortunate that this is not the  immediate desired outcome some preferred. Bashing HAL under the current conditions whether fair or not is certainly their prerogative along with denying future patronage.

I believe there is recourse through credit card companies etc. that will likely be successful . Within  a larger context, I am sure in these difficult times, that many persons (potentially facing more serious immediate financial challenges), will not stay awake at night worrying that some passengers will receive a FCC instead of a 15k cash refund. JMHO.

 

 

 

 

[funintehsun]

You're misrepresenting my comment.  I never mentioned anything about FCC or cancelling early.   I was replying to a comment that mentioned a broadway show being cancelled and them refusing to give the money back.  I was also addressing Hal holding the credit card refund (for those who qualify) for 60 days.

 

In my specific case, I used the standard cancellation plan on a cruise that was cancelled anyway.  I am not worried about the FCC and I am not mad about the 20% I lost by not waiting it out.  I just think that 60-days out is unreasonable to get my "cash" back. 

 

I also think your last line is below the belt.  There is always someone worse off.    Someone who is losing a family member isn't going to be worried about someone losing their job or someone whose retirement was decimated.  Why are we even discussing cruising when people are dying?  Let's just shut this message board down.

 

 

[ontheweb]

22 hours ago, funintehsun said:

Agreed with that.  While I have enjoyed cruising and cruising with HAL in particular, the way the refunds are being handled is enough for me to not ever trust them with my money again.

 

I don't think anyone is suggesting that these kinds of tactics are exclusive to HAL or even the Cruise Industry.  While I feel for any business (big or small) that is losing income because of COVID-19, refusing to refund a customer's money when you didn't provide the service is wrong.   Although HAL isn't outright refusing to give the money back, their 60-day promise is scarcely better since I don't believe they have any intention of paying those refunds. In fact it might be worse since most credit card disputes ask you to consult with the merchant first.  The bank may require waiting the 60 days before a dispute can be filed, a process which itself may take a month or two.

 

And get this, there is a page in our Sunday paper with bus trips. And basically they all start with cancelled, except for three of them from the provider that did not want to refund me for the cancelled show because their policy was no refunds. The three trips he is still selling are two to Broadway plays in April (they are not going to happen) and a Mets game in April despite the fact that MLB has said May is the earliest that the season will start.

 

The cruise lines selling cruises that they have to know will not happen and waiting until the last minute to cancel April cruises are not the only ones guilty of sleazy business practices.

[npcl]

48 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

And get this, there is a page in our Sunday paper with bus trips. And basically they all start with cancelled, except for three of them from the provider that did not want to refund me for the cancelled show because their policy was no refunds. The three trips he is still selling are two to Broadway plays in April (they are not going to happen) and a Mets game in April despite the fact that MLB has said May is the earliest that the season will start.

 

The cruise lines selling cruises that they have to know will not happen and waiting until the last minute to cancel April cruises are not the only ones guilty of sleazy business practices.

One way to cure things like the service provider you mentioned is to send a letter to the consumer department of your state attorney general.  I am quite sure they would like to have a talk with that vendor, with his no return policy, selling trips that people know will not happen.

Edited March 30, 2020 by npcl

[chisoxfan]

2 hours ago, funintehsun said:

You're misrepresenting my comment.  I never mentioned anything about FCC or cancelling early.   I was replying to a comment that mentioned a broadway show being cancelled and them refusing to give the money back.  I was also addressing Hal holding the credit card refund (for those who qualify) for 60 days.

 

In my specific case, I used the standard cancellation plan on a cruise that was cancelled anyway.  I am not worried about the FCC and I am not mad about the 20% I lost by not waiting it out.  I just think that 60-days out is unreasonable to get my "cash" back. 

 

I also think your last line is below the belt.  There is always someone worse off.    Someone who is losing a family member isn't going to be worried about someone losing their job or someone whose retirement was decimated.  Why are we even discussing cruising when people are dying?  Let's just shut this message board down.

 

 

I was not referring to you specifically although realize I quoted your post that was offered as a response to others. I was directing it to the cruisers that only received FCC when they cancelled their cruise before HAL did it  (the poster (s) you were responding to) that got FCC and not cash. My point being that cruise travel always has had very restrictive cancellation/ cruise contract policies and the current situation perhaps put a greater focus on these but that they remained contracts and were always a part of cruising.  When they do not work to our advantage/ preferences we want to disavow them.

 

I take your 'below the belt'  comment as fair. I was concerned it would be construed as a 'cheap shot' which it was not intended.to be You are  completely correct that CC  message boards are here to discuss cruising and not world problems. That said my point was that there was 'value received for the cancelled cruise ' so in the scheme of things, the issuance of FCC vs. return of $$$$, although not ideal,  was fair and conforming to the cruise contract irrespective of the grave situation unfolding.

 

We are all in the same boat and the last thing I want to do is to be mean spirited. However (at the risk of starting a new

argument) it seems there is much reliance on government and corporations to 'save us' from our actions which have not turned out to be ideal in the current state of affairs. I have much sympathy for those that have been tripped up by circumstances beyond their control or reasonable planning.

Peace and health.

[ontheweb]

5 hours ago, npcl said:

One way to cure things like the service provider you mentioned is to send a letter to the consumer department of your state attorney general.  I am quite sure they would like to have a talk with that vendor, with his no return policy, selling trips that people know will not happen.

The thing is we have always had good experiences prior to this with this vendor. (Our last trip with him was to Cooperstown for last year's Baseball Hall of Fame inductions.) Before he gave in, I was going to remind him of one time he had given refunds. It was just a bus trip to NYC and then you go off and do whatever you wanted. The weather was horrendous, and his bus line provider was not willing to make the trip.

 

I think he is just in a panic mode now since his entire business model looks like it is about to collapse.  I also know him outside of his business and we are friendly towards one another.