With no start in site in North America, ncl should allow refunds on previous fcc

[drvmywifecrzy]

15 hours ago, seaman11 said:

They Can't give us a real date, the cdc has not given clear guidelines on how to restart.  if during normal times, i think thats fine to not refund fcc to cash.  But with holding money from us for months interest free, someone should step in and mandate they refund to original form of payment.  especially when they keep the expire date from the original fcc, and there is no telling when they can or will sail again.  The danger of them going under totally in a years time. 

 

It was not interest free.  They gave you 25% on your investment.  Not a bad return

[SouthLyonCruiser]

We took the fcc and, being half way intelligent, literate people, we knew that we were taking our chances. 

NCL could declare bankruptcy at any time and we would be out of luck. And, like many others we were willing to take that chance.

You can't have it both ways. As the old adage says, 'you pays your money, and you take your chances'.

[wolfie11]

Not sure if this helps, but the FMC is considering changes to cruise ship deposits 

https://www.fmc.gov/commissioner-sola-proposes-changes-to-fmc-regulations-on-cruise-line-performance-refunds/

 

https://www.fmc.gov/resources-services/cruise-passenger-assistance/
 

Or you could try to sic the Cruise Law News guy on them or contact your local legislators if a chargeback doesn't work.

[luv2kroooz]

1 hour ago, drvmywifecrzy said:

 

It was not interest free.  They gave you 25% on your investment.  Not a bad return

Say what? They increased the cost of cruises by 25%. There is no return.

 

Like getting a 5% raise from your employer as the cost of living increases by the same percentage.

[Fischmom]

17 hours ago, BirdTravels said:

Disagree. Everyone had a clear choice at the time of cancellation. And every knew that the restart date was unknown. 

 

If you go down the chargeback route, make sure that you fully disclose to your credit card company that you knowingly and willingly accepted a Future Cruise Credit plus bonus as a full refund for the cancelled cruise. And accepted the terms and conditions of those FCCs. And you now want to try and get cash back because you changed your mind.  

This isn’t true of everyone. We cancelled our March 15 cruise the afternoon before they shut everything down. We had to make a decision because we had flights booked. We had no cash refund option, no extra 25/50% FCC, no latitude points and now prices are inflated. 

[podgeandrodge]

Unfortunately the FCC deal was no different than a gamble, and if that gamble works out (and it still could) then you will be quids up.  It's hard to see any comeback unless they renege on the ability to spend that FCC altogether, or introduce another goodwill gesture.

[tallnthensome]

31 minutes ago, podgeandrodge said:

Unfortunately the FCC deal was no different than a gamble, and if that gamble works out (and it still could) then you will be quids up.  It's hard to see any comeback unless they renege on the ability to spend that FCC altogether, or introduce another goodwill gesture.

It’s a sure loss because 125% won’t cover similar  new cruises as they raised  prices 30% or more than the price of the cruise that was cancelled ..... NCL had a plan to dupe people out of more money with this plan all while holding onto the cash from the first booked cruise. Double win for NCL ....

Edited August 2, 2020 by tallnthensome

[jaja]

3 hours ago, SouthLyonCruiser said:

 

NCL could declare bankruptcy at any time and we would be out of luck. And, like many others we were willing to take that chance.

You can't have it both ways. As the old adage says, 'you pays your money, and you take your chances'.

 

So true....like many things, it was a gamble..  I was fortunate enough to just cut my losses...by getting my deposit refunded before final payment and now only loosing my third party insurance deposit.   

[SeaShark]

21 minutes ago, tallnthensome said:

It’s a sure loss because 125% won’t cover similar  new cruises as they raised  prices 30% or more than the price of the cruise that was cancelled ..... NCL had a plan to dupe people out of more money with this plan all while holding onto the cash from the first booked cruise. Double win for NCL ....

 

You're using bad math if you think that is a "sure loss".

 

Consider an example of a person who paid $1,000 for a cancelled cruise. And NCL has raised the price of the replacement cruise to $1,300. 

 

If the guest chooses the FCC:

NCL would give them an FCC equal to the original price paid: $1,000

NCL would give them a bonus FCC equal to 25% of the original price paid: $250

New cruise cost is $1,300, guest applies the $1,250 in FCC, and only has to come up with $50 difference.

 

In this case, the guest pays $1,050 (Original $1,000 and the $50) out of pocket for the new cruise.

 

If the guest takes the cash refund:

NCL refunds the guest the $1,000 originally paid

New cruise cost is $1,300, which guest has to fully pay out of pocket.

 

In this case, the guest pays the entire $1,300 out of pocket for the new cruise.

 

In one case the guest pays $1,300, in the other the guest pays $1,050.

 

How is paying $250 less a "sure loss"?

[tallnthensome]

2 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

 

You're using bad math if you think that is a "sure loss".

 

Consider an example of a person who paid $1,000 for a cancelled cruise. And NCL has raised the price of the replacement cruise to $1,300. 

 

If the guest chooses the FCC:

NCL would give them an FCC equal to the original price paid: $1,000

NCL would give them a bonus FCC equal to 25% of the original price paid: $250

New cruise cost is $1,300, guest applies the $1,250 in FCC, and only has to come up with $50 difference.

 

In this case, the guest pays $1,050 (Original $1,000 and the $50) out of pocket for the new cruise.

 

If the guest takes the cash refund:

NCL refunds the guest the $1,000 originally paid

New cruise cost is $1,300, which guest has to fully pay out of pocket.

 

In this case, the guest pays the entire $1,300 out of pocket for the new cruise.

 

In one case the guest pays $1,300, in the other the guest pays $1,050.

 

How is paying $250 less a "sure loss"?

My math is fine. I never said the person who took the cash was rebooking anything while the FCC holder does indeed take a loss on a cruise where even 125% doesn’t cover the new inflated price ...so in the end I am still correct. 

[luv2kroooz]

3 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

 

You're using bad math if you think that is a "sure loss".

 

Consider an example of a person who paid $1,000 for a cancelled cruise. And NCL has raised the price of the replacement cruise to $1,300. 

 

If the guest chooses the FCC:

NCL would give them an FCC equal to the original price paid: $1,000

NCL would give them a bonus FCC equal to 25% of the original price paid: $250

New cruise cost is $1,300, guest applies the $1,250 in FCC, and only has to come up with $50 difference.

 

In this case, the guest pays $1,050 (Original $1,000 and the $50) out of pocket for the new cruise.

 

If the guest takes the cash refund:

NCL refunds the guest the $1,000 originally paid

New cruise cost is $1,300, which guest has to fully pay out of pocket.

 

In this case, the guest pays the entire $1,300 out of pocket for the new cruise.

 

In one case the guest pays $1,300, in the other the guest pays $1,050.

 

How is paying $250 less a "sure loss"?

Your logic makes good sense to me, but you forgot to mention that cruising is shutdown for the foreseeable future. The FCC has an upcoming expiration date. While it can be redeemed on a cruise, the likelihood of it sailing is remote. Plus, once sailings begin, I would imagine passengers will be initially be stuck with short Bahamas runs. 

[SeaShark]

48 minutes ago, tallnthensome said:

My math is fine. I never said the person who took the cash was rebooking anything while the FCC holder does indeed take a loss on a cruise where even 125% doesn’t cover the new inflated price ...so in the end I am still correct. 

 

No, actually it is anything but fine. If you are going to make a comparison you have establish a common baseline. Both examples used the same initial cruise price and both examples rebooked at an identical new price.  You have to have an apples-to-apples comparison when discussing the math.

 

And, even in your skewed example, you are still wrong. 

 

The person who took the FCC would have had to pay their initial $1,000 plus the $50 increase on the new cruise. Given.

If you intent to claim a loss at the new inflated price, then you are conceding that the new cruise WILL be booked. The person who books the new cruise without the benefit of the FCC is still going to have to cough up the entire $1,300. They will pay $250 more than the FCC person...no way around that. In the end, your math is lacking.

[tallnthensome]

19 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

 

No, actually it is anything but fine. If you are going to make a comparison you have establish a common baseline. Both examples used the same initial cruise price and both examples rebooked at an identical new price.  You have to have an apples-to-apples comparison when discussing the math.

 

And, even in your skewed example, you are still wrong. 

 

The person who took the FCC would have had to pay their initial $1,000 plus the $50 increase on the new cruise. Given.

If you intent to claim a loss at the new inflated price, then you are conceding that the new cruise WILL be booked. The person who books the new cruise without the benefit of the FCC is still going to have to cough up the entire $1,300. They will pay $250 more than the FCC person...no way around that. In the end, your math is lacking.

You can ramble on and on until you are blue in the face .... My math is the same as yours ...... a person with cash in hand on a refund DOES NOT have to give it back to NCL .... A person stuck with a FCC DOES have to use it and  will pay a lot more on just about any new cruise booked versus those cancelled going forward and some are even 50% more. It’s a sham .... You lack comprehension skills .... You lose again so you might as well quit posting . You can’t win this argument ....  FCC are more or less worthless at this point to make matters worse .... if they don’t use it they lose everything but you go ahead and tell the rest of us that they are gold and worth so much more than cash in hand ....LOL!   pfffffff ......

Edited August 2, 2020 by tallnthensome

[Jobeth66]

 
You're using bad math if you think that is a "sure loss".
 
Consider an example of a person who paid $1,000 for a cancelled cruise. And NCL has raised the price of the replacement cruise to $1,300. 
 
If the guest chooses the FCC:
NCL would give them an FCC equal to the original price paid: $1,000
NCL would give them a bonus FCC equal to 25% of the original price paid: $250
New cruise cost is $1,300, guest applies the $1,250 in FCC, and only has to come up with $50 difference.
 
In this case, the guest pays $1,050 (Original $1,000 and the $50) out of pocket for the new cruise.
 
If the guest takes the cash refund:
NCL refunds the guest the $1,000 originally paid
New cruise cost is $1,300, which guest has to fully pay out of pocket.
 
In this case, the guest pays the entire $1,300 out of pocket for the new cruise.
 
In one case the guest pays $1,300, in the other the guest pays $1,050.
 
How is paying $250 less a "sure loss"?

How is paying more - even if it's just one penny - NOT a loss? It's less of a loss than what someone else who got a refund in cash without the FCC would sustain, but it is absolutely 100% a loss.

So the original comment was correct. Guaranteed loss.

[FredT]

Lordy.......    You all can argue this until the cows come home....  BUT, the reality is that there is not a snowballs chance in hell that NCL is going to give back anyone's FCC....    Right now, it's a race for survival, and as ANY first year business student will tell you rule # 1 is CONTROL  YOUR CASH.   (And in uncertain times, rule # 2,  3, 4, 5 and on and on are also CONTROL YOUR CASH.   Mark my words, all of the cruise lines will fight to the death to avoid swapping any FCC's for cash. 

[julig22]

1 hour ago, tallnthensome said:

 a person with cash in hand on a refund DOES NOT have to give it back to NCL .... A person stuck with a FCC DOES and will pay a lot more on just about any new cruise booked versus those cancelled going forward and some are even 50% more.

You are correct that if you take a cash refund you can use that cash for anything.  It's a matter of perspective.  

If you don't plan to ever sail again or at least in the near future, then cash is good.  I'm on the fence as to whether or not people should get a cash refund if their replacement cruise is ultimately cancelled.  At the very least, the expiration dates on fcc should be extended IMO.  Obviously nobody (especially the OP!) anticipated in March that this is where we would be in August, with no real remedy in sight - although reports of viable vaccines are looking good.

 

 I was willing to take the chance that cruises will eventually happen, and booked a new cruise with my 125% fcc, along with the 20% discount.  If I were to book the same cruise today, my additional cost would be $2,550.  It's a different cruise from what I had originally, so can't do an apples to apples comparison.  But in my way of thinking, should my cruise actually happen, taking the fcc was a pretty good return on my investment - especially since I might not have booked that particular cruise due to the current inflated prices.  I'm content with the price I paid, but if prices happen to go down, I'll request an upgrade.  If the cruise is cancelled, then back to square one.

 

And FYI - I took the fcc on 1st cancelled cruise, cash on the second- so playing the odds and not taking any sides.

[SeaShark]

1 hour ago, Jobeth66 said:

How is paying more - even if it's just one penny - NOT a loss? It's less of a loss than what someone else who got a refund in cash without the FCC would sustain, but it is absolutely 100% a loss.

So the original comment was correct. Guaranteed loss.

 

It isn't a loss because it is a financial transaction where things of equal value (you give cash, you get vacation) are exchanged. Each side has something that the other wants and they make an agreed-upon sale. You haven't "lost"...you have exchanged.

[tallnthensome]

30 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

 

It isn't a loss because it is a financial transaction where things of equal value (you give cash, you get vacation) are exchanged. Each side has something that the other wants and they make an agreed-upon sale. You haven't "lost"...you have exchanged.

Would you just give up already and just admit you are wrong like everyone else insists. So with your clueless mentality ...... Example ...If I buy a pair or shoes for $100 and return them for a store credit for $125. I change my mind and want them again but now the price is $200 for the same thing .... So I use my $125 store credit and now have to pay $75 more in your mind that is not a financial loss for me because that is what we both want? I could not laugh any harder at how foolish you are! Keep posting as your desperate replies get more and more ridiculous and comical with each reply ...... I can't stop laughing ..... You're trying so hard yet you make yourself look so foolish.  

Edited August 2, 2020 by tallnthensome

[zqvol]

My only comment is that once they start sailing again I fully expect them to extend the expiration date of all these certificates by as long as they were closed down. There is no point in doing it now because they have no idea how long they are going to be closed.

[luv2kroooz]

50 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

 

It isn't a loss because it is a financial transaction where things of equal value (you give cash, you get vacation) are exchanged. Each side has something that the other wants and they make an agreed-upon sale. You haven't "lost"...you have exchanged.

Always remember...cash is king and spends anywhere at anytime. 

[luv2kroooz]

3 minutes ago, zqvol said:

My only comment is that once they start sailing again I fully expect them to extend the expiration date of all these certificates by as long as they were closed down. There is no point in doing it now because they have no idea how long they are going to be closed.

So, you must think they will begin sailing before the expiration date. I'm not convinced of that. A vaccine is a way away still.

[zqvol]

1 minute ago, luv2kroooz said:

So, you must think they will begin sailing before the expiration date. I'm not convinced of that. A vaccine is a way away still.

I don't think that it matters when they start sailing they will extend the expiration dates to give enough time to use the certs, especially if they expire when they are not sailing.

[sanger727]

On 8/1/2020 at 6:30 PM, seaman11 said:

the situation now is much different then it was back then, when florida had just 200 cases a day., wouldn't you say?   I am more than willing to use it on a FC , however they can not provide that FC anytime soon.  Suppose they didn't pay you your refund on a "poor decision" to book one.  im sure you would be the first to call ncl out.  They cant provide the service,  service not rendered 

 

No, I don't think the situation now is much different than it was in March. The only thing that has changed is people who spent the spring/early summer with their heads stuck in the sand are finally pulling them out and seeing the reality of the situation. The cruising industry was in real trouble after they had the outbreaks and quarantined ships. That hasn't changed.  While Florida's spike is somewhat relevant, if they hadn't spiked we still wouldn't be cruising. What many people were concerned with in terms of an early re-start came to pass; states that re-opened too early spiked and cruise lines that opened to early are quarantining the crew, passengers, and cancelling sailings again. None of these things were unforeseeable in March. 

 

I thought the one year expiration was the book by date, not the use by. I absolutely agree that they can't let FCC's use by date expire prior to them restarting.  If that did come to pass I believe they should and would extend the date. But the 125% was always a gamble on whether or not it would hold much value. They could increase the prices to eat up the 25% bonus and then some, they could potentially go out of business. I also don't think that that has changed. All these factors were known when people accepted FCC instead of a refund. This is a case of buyers remorse, and that doesn't obligate the seller to change their policies. 

[tgloersen]

On 8/1/2020 at 5:19 PM, BirdTravels said:

Disagree. Everyone had a clear choice at the time of cancellation. And every knew that the restart date was unknown. 

 

If you go down the chargeback route, make sure that you fully disclose to your credit card company that you knowingly and willingly accepted a Future Cruise Credit plus bonus as a full refund for the cancelled cruise. And accepted the terms and conditions of those FCCs. And you now want to try and get cash back because you changed your mind.  

Bird is spot on here, you had your choice.  I took my cash back instead of FCC.  FCC is a useless piece of paper until its used.  100% of 100% cash back is allot better than 125% of nothing!

[cruisingbooboo]

Advice please.... my trip was also cancelled. I had booked with a travel agent, told her I wanted cash refund. She said she filed the claim and it takes up to 90 days. In the meantime I emailed her 3x asking about the refund. After the 90 days reached out to her again. She said she contacted her BCL rep but now sits too late for cash so I have a FCC👹. I told her how I didn’t want that, I trusted her.... she said she did her job,NCL messed up but I can try to call and fight with NCL.... gee thanks! Why did I use an agent?

before I call I want to know if anyone had this issue or luck with fixing it? Feel hopeless 💔