Updated terms covering positive test on ships

[Interestedcruisefan]

1 hour ago, molecrochip said:

I think one of the most contentious points is that the Cunard text does not explicitly say that the traveller will be liable for the costs if the insurer won’t pay. Thus implying the cruise line will pay.

 

Exactly what annoys me is not only is it unclear but IMO it's deliberately unclear

 

Definitely misleading 

 

Cruise lines need to start being far more honest and transparent 

 

So passengers can actually trust them enough to travel with them

 

The current lack of transparency is making me depressed about the entire cruise line industry

 

 

Edited January 8, 2022 by Interestedcruisefan

[molecrochip]

32 minutes ago, Interestedcruisefan said:

Exactly what annoys me is not only is it unclear but IMO it's deliberately unclear

 

Definitely misleading 

 

Cruise lines need to start being far more honest and transparent 

 

So passengers can actually trust them enough to travel with them

 

The current lack of transparency is making me depressed about the entire cruise line industry

 

 

The point that Cunard/P&O say explicitly that its your responsibility for quarantine costs, any side deals with they may or may not currently do will stop. So I would argue that deliberately unclear is actually customer advantageous.

 

27 minutes ago, kohl1957 said:

Well since the issue seems to be Spain which apparently runs a tidy little quarantine industry (and certainly has sufficient dire and dreary hotels to accommodate it), I suppose lines will simply avoid Spanish ports. That's the one advantage of a cruise ship, no?  

 

I note that VENTURA, now en route to the West Indies from Southampton, on a similar but even longer cruise than ours in QM2 next week (!), is routed out via the Azores and back via Madeira.  We are calling at Madeira out and Santa Cruz de Tenerife back. Having spent more than my share of time there, happily missed unless they put you up at the delightful Mencey Hotel.  I've never actually called at the Azores, having steamed past it at 26 knots aboard RAFFAELLO, so here's hoping they do a VENTURA on the return and end this tedious worry altogether. 

QM2 was routed back via the Azores too this past week. Very specifically. I would imagine that QM2 will stick to its planned route but there will be a covid test required ahead of calling at Madeira. Any positive cases may likely to cause QM2 to miss Tenerife.

 

That said, whether there is a different negotiation position when you're homeward bound, I'm not sure. On other cruises, Tenerife has been the first of a number of Spanish territories visited, not the last.

[molecrochip]

1 hour ago, exlondoner said:

If you are fully vaccinated and go to Spain from the UK by ferry or plane, there are no pre-entry Covid tests that I can see. So Mr. X would be spared those. It is odd that the procedure is so different if you arrive by cruise ship. What is the difference between Southampton to Vigo by Cunard and Portsmouth to Bilbao by ferry?

1) The fact that on arrival at Bilbao, you leave the ferry whereas you continue on beyond Vigo.

2) Its also operator choice. The ferry operator could require pre-departure testing.

3) There are different government protocols both in the UK and Spain for Cruise operators when compared to Ferry operators.

[molecrochip]

1 hour ago, Megabear2 said:

My problem is still where it lay in the first place: the insurance companies and without going "nationwide" in the press or whatever we aren't going to get it sorted without pressure from the cruise lines and travel industry. The same problem exists about quarantine worldwide for holidaymakers just not so far up the scale of risk.

Fundamentally this is an 'evolution of insurance' issue.

 

When someone falls ill in the Caribbean and is hospitalised, with say a heart attack. The Insurance will put up the spouse of that person and then fly them both home when appropriate. But these situations are rare. Covid is so common, the insurance companies don't want to adopt the same approach for partners.

 

Cruise Lines and customers, believe that insurance companies should adopt the same approach. I may even go as far as to say, that in my opinion, when cruise lines wrote their insurance requirements last summer, they were led to believe that insurance companies would treat both scenarios the same as history had always shown this. 

[Megabear2]

1 hour ago, exlondoner said:

If you are fully vaccinated and go to Spain from the UK by ferry or plane, there are no pre-entry Covid tests that I can see. So Mr. X would be spared those. It is odd that the procedure is so different if you arrive by cruise ship. What is the difference between Southampton to Vigo by Cunard and Portsmouth to Bilbao by ferry?

Mr X actually sailed via Spain but next stop was Lisbon.  Portugal require a compulsory entry test and so him and his wife were tested in preparation for this.  Once Mrs X tested positive the Spanish authorities insisted on offloading.  

 

I hasten to add these offloading rules are European, they are not exclusive to Spain. I am aware of cases in Portugal, Greece, Cyprus.  The volume in Spain is because the UK sailings currently under way are predominantly visiting Spanish and Canary Islands destinations.  Once full European Spring sailings start we will see the other countries insisting on quarantine ashore as well under present EU sailing regulations/protocols.

[Megabear2]

54 minutes ago, molecrochip said:

The point that Cunard/P&O say explicitly that its your responsibility for quarantine costs, any side deals with they may or may not currently do will stop. So I would argue that deliberately unclear is actually customer advantageous.

I'd guess legally in a court action the knowledge of an uninsurable risk would be very much against a cruise line as they simply indicate at booking that you can buy a policy for full Covid cover which protects thereby giving a false sense of security to the passenger.

 

Leaving it fluid is a reasonable option in the short term but long term out of pocket payments would be very bad financially for the cruise line.  As is being seen with Royal Caribbean the numbers can multiply into hundreds very quickly.

Edited January 8, 2022 by Megabear2

[cruising.mark.uk]

Thanks so much Megabear and Molecrochip for your ongoing informed contributions on this and for all of the time and effort you are putting into educating the rest of us on here.  I’ve learnt so much that I didn’t know I didn’t know over the last few weeks about insurance.  Hopefully this issue will become somewhat moot before too long as Covid becomes endemic and its effects become less serious for most people, especially if the EU is prepared to relax its strictures and those states that enforce compulsory debarking decide that is no longer necessary.  

 

With the latter in mind, it would be useful to hear about the situation vis-à-vis insurance coverage from cruisers from other EU countries.  Are their models closer to that of the UK / Australia or that of the US?  Knowing that might provide an indication as to the likely level of public / cruise line pressure that might be put on the EU to relax its constraints, something on which I sense UK public views (and possible those of CCL as a US-based company?) may have little, if any, impact.  And plenty of EU passengers have been faced with the same situation already, e.g. from the Aida ship in Lisbon and the MSC Grandiosa in Italy.

 

Once the disease is endemic and the numbers of debarked passengers and non-infected partners / families has reduced, hopefully insurers will ‘evolve’ to offer cover either as they do for other medical evacuations or, perhaps more likely in the short- to medium-term, for more palatable Covid-specific supplements.  But, this seems a little chicken-and-egg – insurers probably won’t provide the cover until the likely costs to them have been reduced to a level which is an acceptable risk for the underwriters.  In which case, evolution will likely not happen quickly enough to help those who are cruising, especially in Europe, in the interim period this Spring and Summer.   Are we likely to hear next time cruise companies report to the markets how successful they are being in their negotiations with insurance companies about the costs of all this, i.e. what level of costs are being met by them versus those that are being met by insurance companies?  That might provide an early indication as to how sustainable it will be for the industry for cruise lines to continue acting quietly as the last-resort as they seem to be doing now.  Finally, do either of you know roughly how big a chunk of the UK travel insurance market is associated with cruising, and thus the likely level of influence that CCL in particular are able to exert over providers to persuade them to evolve their policies? 
 

[Interestedcruisefan]

1 hour ago, molecrochip said:

Fundamentally this is an 'evolution of insurance' issue.

 

When someone falls ill in the Caribbean and is hospitalised, with say a heart attack. The Insurance will put up the spouse of that person and then fly them both home when appropriate. But these situations are rare. Covid is so common, the insurance companies don't want to adopt the same approach for partners.

 

Cruise Lines and customers, believe that insurance companies should adopt the same approach. I may even go as far as to say, that in my opinion, when cruise lines wrote their insurance requirements last summer, they were led to believe that insurance companies would treat both scenarios the same as history had always shown this. 

That makes sense

 

However, even before omicron it didn't need a rocket scientist at either the insurance companies or the cruise lines planning ahead to realise Covid was going to force far far more offloading than ever before on cruises 

 

[Interestedcruisefan]

9 minutes ago, cruising.mark.uk said:

Thanks so much Megabear and Molecrochip for your ongoing informed contributions on this and for all of the time and effort you are putting into educating the rest of us on here.  I’ve learnt so much that I didn’t know I didn’t know over the last few weeks about insurance.  Hopefully this issue will become somewhat moot before too long as Covid becomes endemic and its effects become less serious for most people, especially if the EU is prepared to relax its strictures and those states that enforce compulsory debarking decide that is no longer necessary.  

 

With the latter in mind, it would be useful to hear about the situation vis-à-vis insurance coverage from cruisers from other EU countries.  Are their models closer to that of the UK / Australia or that of the US?  Knowing that might provide an indication as to the likely level of public / cruise line pressure that might be put on the EU to relax its constraints, something on which I sense UK public views (and possible those of CCL as a US-based company?) may have little, if any, impact.  And plenty of EU passengers have been faced with the same situation already, e.g. from the Aida ship in Lisbon and the MSC Grandiosa in Italy.

 

Once the disease is endemic and the numbers of debarked passengers and non-infected partners / families has reduced, hopefully insurers will ‘evolve’ to offer cover either as they do for other medical evacuations or, perhaps more likely in the short- to medium-term, for more palatable Covid-specific supplements.  But, this seems a little chicken-and-egg – insurers probably won’t provide the cover until the likely costs to them have been reduced to a level which is an acceptable risk for the underwriters.  In which case, evolution will likely not happen quickly enough to help those who are cruising, especially in Europe, in the interim period this Spring and Summer.   Are we likely to hear next time cruise companies report to the markets how successful they are being in their negotiations with insurance companies about the costs of all this, i.e. what level of costs are being met by them versus those that are being met by insurance companies?  That might provide an early indication as to how sustainable it will be for the industry for cruise lines to continue acting quietly as the last-resort as they seem to be doing now.  Finally, do either of you know roughly how big a chunk of the UK travel insurance market is associated with cruising, and thus the likely level of influence that CCL in particular are able to exert over providers to persuade them to evolve their policies? 
 

Can't see why insurance companies will be prepared to help cover the losses of the cruise lines tbh?

 

If cruiselines or their passengers aren't paying  for the full insurance they need then that's a cruise problem not an insurance problem

 

The insurance companies should be like me be telling the cruise companies to be more transparent to their customers

 

Also evolving a policy to cover what isn't covered now is not going to be cheap

 

 

 

 

Edited January 8, 2022 by Interestedcruisefan

[cruising.mark.uk]

6 minutes ago, Interestedcruisefan said:

Can't see why insurance companies will be prepared to help cover the losses of the cruise lines tbh?

 

If cruiselines or their passengers aren't paying  for the full insurance they need then that's a cruise problem not an insurance problem

 

The insurance companies should be like me be telling the cruise companies to be more transparent to their customers

 

 

I think you're slightly missing the point that, however transparent cruise companies are, passengers can't pay for the full insurance they need if insurance companies don't offer the insurance at any price, which seems to be the case for many in the UK at present.

[Interestedcruisefan]

1 hour ago, Megabear2 said:

I'd guess legally in a court action the knowledge of an uninsurable risk would be very much against a cruise line as they simply indicate at booking that you can buy a policy for full Covid cover which protects thereby giving a false sense of security to the passenger.

 

Leaving it fluid is a reasonable option in the short term but long term out of pocket payments would be very bad financially for the cruise line.  As is being seen with Royal Caribbean the numbers can multiply into hundreds very quickly.

Unless I'm missing something here being clear and transparent would not stop a cruise line from still making gestures should they wish to

 

However, with passengers fully aware of the risks and signed up to them in advance those gestures should not be needed 

 

There's no way I could support a less transparent message to passengers based on the possibility a cruise line might choose to do more for them or not

 

Stuff like this is so important it really does need to be far more black and white

 

I also genuinely think right now that trading standards etc would not be impressed with the lack of transparency of the now fully known and understood risks and costs of quarantine to passengers 

 

There's such strict selling rules on everything right now

 

Cruise lines should aim to be whiter than white in their communications 

[Interestedcruisefan]

7 minutes ago, cruising.mark.uk said:

I think you're slightly missing the point that, however transparent cruise companies are, passengers can't pay for the full insurance they need if insurance companies don't offer the insurance at any price, which seems to be the case for many in the UK at present.

Sorry the cruise lines pointed me to specific Covid insurance with links last summer. That wasn't fit for purpose. Simple as that 

 

They've known for 6 months plus now it wasn't fit for purpose. They are getting found out badly now as people in real life  realise it's not fit for purpose on a daily basis

 

You can insure anything pretty much if you are prepared to pay for it

 

Cruise lines should be responsible for making sure we can be pointed to something fit for purpose 

 

And yes it's clearly going to be expensive

 

At which stage passengers will be able to make informed choices 

 

You can't palm this off as an insurance issue. Its a cruise issue that needs sorting very quickly

 

Ps insurance companies aren't to blame for many many cruise passengers still assuming if they test positive they will just quarantine on the ship

 

The whole lack of transparency is so so poor right now

 

 

 

 

Edited January 8, 2022 by Interestedcruisefan

[Megabear2]

Travel insurance in the UK is a very small, restricted market. Do not be fooled by dozens of names coming up on price comparison sites or through packages bank accounts.  There are about seven underwriting companies covering the lot, mostly foreign.

 

The UK travel insurance market was seen as a cash cow by these underwriters, masses of travellers, low risk, big money.  Cruising came along often with big ticket products and an opportunity to sell add ons, even bigger money.  Claims are rare and in most cases relatively small, major health problems and accidents not making much inroads into the profit.

 

And then along comes Covid, literally thousands claiming, an illness no one understands, hundreds seriously sick and dying on cruise ships. Underwriters need to shut up shop, they simply can't cope.  To compound this the biggest two UK underwriters TIF and AXA announce they're leaving the market.

 

The cruise lines, desperate to get sailing, see Covid insurance arrive on the market and jump on it as their salvation. They did not carry out due diligence on the product and insisted all prospective passengers should have it, except unfortunately it's a dud because the cruise lines who signed up to the EU protocol never thought it meant regular disembarkation of negative testing guests.

 

A whole catalogue of errors they are now finding are being added to daily as they scrabble to put it right.

 

I'm really not sure what can be done now, it should have been sorted swiftly when cruising restarted before the numbers affected increased to the extent they have in recent weeks.  It will be nigh on impossible to negotiate with hundreds worldwide being disembarked. An opportunity missed by the cruise lines I'm afraid.  The best they can do now is reach out to their passengers and keep making the gestures.

 

 

[Megabear2]

Just a bit of a light relief. In July last year my seacation comfort letter had the wrong date and I had problems getting it sorted.  I've just received an email from AXA 10 minutes ago apologising for the delay and giving me £125.00 compensation. I sailed on 12 July!

 

Hopefully our offloaders get quicker payouts!!

 

 

 

[BestGuessed]

My husband and I were booked on QE for the 18th January Atlantic Coast Adventure cruise but due to threat of being offloaded when the balance became due for payment in December we cancelled and moved the deposit to another cruise much later this year.  
Our thoughts were that should the offloading situation change we would be able rebook at the last minute.  

It was through these boards (I apologise for mostly being a lurker rather than a regular poster!) I had gleaned enough information to realise that the possibility of being offloaded was very real and in any case the “what if” worry would spoil our cruise.    

We all appreciate that current situation is a nightmare for the cruise lines but would it not be an option to resume sun seeking cruises without docking anywhere so people who are willing to just enjoy the onboard experience will book a cruise holiday?  
It isn’t ideal for those who only cruise for the ports and itinerary but there are some of us who would be satisfied with a little winter sun and the luxury of being on a ship again.  

Could this not be the answer for the cruise lines at the moment?  

If we were assured that the worst we could expect to happen (emergencies excluded obviously) would be to isolate in our own cabin as would be the case during an outbreak of norovirus, we would find that acceptable.  The prospect of being offloaded at a foreign port is not.

 

Sadly we have now resigned ourselves to the fact that we will not be cruising for a while.

 

 

[Megabear2]

Wasn't the offloading of QM2 passengers in New York on the Christmas cruise following a straight transatlantic though?  The disease came on board after testing at Southampton and was it not a US requirement to test before landing which identified the Covid onboard?

 

Maybe Cunard should consider a return to having ships with one nationality in the same way as they did for the seacations last year, maybe have Queen Mary 2 sailing from the US to Caribbean regions and Queen Elizabeth or Queen Victoria sailing from Southampton to Mediterranean regions but with only residents of the US on their departures and UK residents on the Southampton ones.  Not ideal and maybe a little unfair on other Cunard fans but a way to keep earning cash without risking too much ex gratia payments.

 

Much as it is distasteful to consider it we, the passengers, should probably not be flying to foreign countries and transferring through cities and regions to board these ships with a virus that spreads so easily and cannot be picked up easily by LFT.

[Megabear2]

It's not the flying that's the problem.  It's the airports and transfer through cities on trains, taxis etc which are likely to spread it.  I've just flown in and out of Barbados in a sealed "bubble" on to a ship with no mixed nationalities.  One asympthomatic Covid case on board dealt with swiftly.  By contrast RC sent passengers into Barbados the following day with mixing at the airport and all sorts of difficulties, big outbreak occurred onboard in a couple of days.

 

You are right people spread it but their actions are frequently selfish and only so they can do what they want.  It's unpalatable but true.

 

Enjoy your cruise. I bailed on it myself, call me a coward but I wasnt comfortable of being stranded thousands of miles from home on my own.

Edited January 8, 2022 by Megabear2

[lissie]

10 hours ago, Megabear2 said:

She is still in quarantine, not hospital but with some sniffles etc. but positive test leaves her there for the foreseeable. Mr X returns home because he now has a credit card debt and needs to work to keep his income.  Unexpectedly Mrs X takes a sudden turn for the worse and is hospitalised. 

Mr X urgently needs to return to Spain be with her and he now has to book covid tests, a flight, ground transportation, accommodation and organise kennels for their dog.  He still has to use his credit card for these things ...

 

Should he have taken the risk of going home?

 

[You thought the same as me on support person but according to all the insurance companies in the UK by it being covid his wife is in isolation and he cannot help her or assist and would himself be in quarantine so the clause would not apply.  On your own in the cold insurance world of covid literally does mean o your own.]

 

.....<snip> 

 

Mr X is not made up. He's someone in the English Midlands who my travel agent had to deal with in September, not on Cunard or the sister companies but a well regarded UK mid range cruise line.

 

 

I wondered if it was a real example!  

 

I've not done much cruising but I've done lots and lots of travel - mostly uninsured in my younger days. I might have looked like a broke backpacker. But I always had in my money belt an Amex charge card later credit card - ie unlimited credit. I managed to get it when I was making tons of money in the Ozzie mining industry. And once you have it so long as you pay it off they didn't check my (lack of ) income again. That was always my insurance. 

 

Now I'm much older and more financial and Amex is long-gone. Instead  we have a mortgage free house which has a line of credit it on it. I can log onto that account from anywhere in the world and access around the equivalent of US$200k. Its our emergency fund. We have other investments - but this is the one I can liquidate immediately. 

 

I find it quaint that some people seem to think that insurance companies will "help" you.  My partner collapsed in China and  insurance covered the claim which included 2 Chinee hospital stays an airlift within China and business class home commercially with oxygen. Those are the facts. 

 

The reality is that I paid cash to get him admitted to a Chinese hospital (around US$700 deposit). This was a Friday night - the claim was not accepted until Monday midday China time (they wanted to talk to his family dr at home  before accepting).  By then the local hospital wanted him airlifted to Shanghai or Beijing and we were looking at around US$40k-$50k for that  .  The insurance started looking at the logistics of this but there was a real chance we'd have had to find the cash up front  for the flight to take off to us They accepted the claim - he was airlifted on the Wed - but the flight crew was delayed because the insurer hadn't paid their bill. In the end I went down and paid the bill and got a receipt (around US$2000).  Fortunately they found a way to accept a foreign credit card. 

 

We arrived in Beijing - got to the hospital they admit him and tell me to find a hotel.  I didn't even know where I was in Beijing - I had the hotels' name and address in Chinese but only  because the medivac people gave it to me.   I was almost incoherent with exhaustion and fear for my partner anyways.  I call the insurance - and they start with - where would you like to stay  which area ....  I hang up on them - call my brother who is familiar with the situation - he finds and books me into a nearby 5 -star  chain that speaks English (rare in China)  and sends me the details within 5 mins  The  hospital staff find me a taxi and put me in it (I"m carrying all our luggage too ).  

 

The insurer paid he Beijing hospital and both flights up front plus the transfer to the airport when we left which must have cost them around US$80k . Personally I had a credit card bill of around  US$8k.  I claimed all of this in September - and they finally paid it out around December - they weren't arguing about paying it - that's just how long it took. 

 

TL:DR 

- the insurer is not your friend - they will cause you stress as well 

- have access to cards or cash that you can use immediately and argue about later including how to pay for it 

- know how to use your CC smartly - -I found a deal where I transferred an existing balance and got free credit for 6 months 

- try and have a trusted friend/family member who knows you well, has some resources preferably money and understands travel.  

 

[seasickphil]

1 hour ago, kohl1957 said:

Sadly, you have far more chance of catching... well whatever this is now... in your local supermarket in any country than flying domestically or internationally. Or indeed on a cruise ship.  Nationality and national policy regarding all this has become moot.  People get and spread viruses not citizens or residents. 

 

A no landing cruising of 14-28 days surely takes care of all contingencies.

 

Oh well, hopefully disease and germ free, I look forward to arriving in Southampton on 14 January and embarking on a Cunarder for... well someplace that is delightfully neither nation, country or province, but a great liner at sea.  We will take the batteries out of the tv control to ensure we never accidentally switch on "the news". Don't know, don't care! Leave us alone!

 

 

I think you will find that "well whatever this is now " is still called Covid 19 and there was 313 recorded deaths from it yesterday in the UK. When i am at home i eat with my wife only, we have our groceries delivered and we go out where we consider it to be as safe as it can be. Now when we were holiday on the Queen Elizabeth Dec 1st/13th there was just over 1300 passengers and unless you stayed in your cabin all the time (then what is the point in going) you have to mix in all venues. Because of the weather, on most sea days you could barely find a seat anywhere on the ship as nearly everywhere was full.

You only have to read other boards on here to see there has been a number of positive cases on practically every ship sailing at the moment. Everyone obviously has to make their own minds up if it is right for them to cruise at the moment, for me right now i'm very unsure. I also have no idea what you mean by people get and spread viruses not citizens or residents,  i thought people where both citizens and residents. 

[Victoria2]

8 hours ago, seasickphil said:

...I also have no idea what you mean by people get and spread viruses not citizens or residents,  i thought people where both citizens and residents. 

I think Kohl was making the point people of all nationalities can spread illnesses, hence his 'not citizens or residents' and he is right although perversely, I would be much  happier sailing on a ship with just vaccinated UK residents at the moment,  preferably, in an ideal world , after witnessed pre embarkation PCR tests, but that will never happen so when we board, we will have kept ourselves to ourselves in order to remain as virus free as possible in the hopes we have nothing to spread to anyone else.

 

I am hoping this virus will be downgraded to endemic and will also be downgraded on a ship to something nearing the reaction a dose of norovirus would engender. eg,  own cabin quarantine.

Edited January 9, 2022 by Victoria2