Currency for Croatia and port changes

[AnnieC]

1 hour ago, bbtablet said:

but the issue is that a full refund is never going to be offered for you to accept!

P&O doesn't make that decision. Consumer law does.

[bbtablet]

Posts 12 and the first part of #20 are the relevant ones here in practice.

[AnnieC]

39 minutes ago, bbtablet said:

Posts 12 and the first part of #20 are the relevant ones here in practice.

Respectfully, I disagree. You are, perhaps, confusing what P&O will try and get away with (and usually succeed) and actual consumer rights enshrined in law which P&O will have to observe, albeit after a struggle that many may not wish to embark upon. Tring's post, number 18, accurately reflects the picture.

[NauticalMiss]

Have just spoken with P&O. They flatly refuse to offer a full refund, or to permit me to transfer the cruise to another, free of charge. They say that if I do not wish to go on the cruise, then I must cancel it and lose 75% of the total paid. Very unhappy 😒 

[bbtablet]

1 minute ago, AnnieC said:

 You are, perhaps, confusing what P&O will try and get away with (and usually succeed)

I'm not confusing the two stances - just stating the current position as both posters, including the original one, confirm, and I believe it will not change even though I agree it is unfair.

De facto as opposed to de jure.

[bbtablet]

You also have to consider this:

 

P&O charge a price to provide you with a means of conveyance and all that it provides in the ship for x days - it's called a cruise, not a taxi. It also plans to let you off at certain places the ship intends to visit.

If those places have to be changed, you are still getting the on-board cruise experience for x days, i.e. the major part of the offering, from P&O's point of view, with, in this case, the same number of ports.

 

Unfortunately, and I've done it too, some of us tend to see the product being sold as a means to enjoy the intended ports as the fundamental purpose of the trip, but I suggest P&O would argue that this is not the prime mover of the cruise being offered, and their booking terms that we sign up to state that ports may have to be changed.

 

I am not an apologist for P&O, and have been affected, prior to sailing, by issues with St. Petersburg and Venice, the effects of changes in emission regulations, port berth availability, etc, but I don't think this entitles me to claim that the contract can be avoided, much as I would have liked to have had that option.

Edited August 17, 2022 by bbtablet

[terrierjohn]

1 hour ago, AnnieC said:

Respectfully, I disagree. You are, perhaps, confusing what P&O will try and get away with (and usually succeed) and actual consumer rights enshrined in law which P&O will have to observe, albeit after a struggle that many may not wish to embark upon. Tring's post, number 18, accurately reflects the picture.

I thought Moley had claimed that cruise lines were not covered by these package travel rules?

[Megabear2]

2 hours ago, terrierjohn said:

I thought Moley had claimed that cruise lines were not covered by these package travel rules?

Interestingly that's exactly the argument Princess are having with me about duty of care on offloading due to medical emergency.  I am very embroiled and have given them until 21 August to reply to my last email of 1/8 before I contact a solicitor.

[tring]

2 hours ago, terrierjohn said:

I thought Moley had claimed that cruise lines were not covered by these package travel rules?

 

No, he/she would certainly not have said that.  Although some aspects mentioned are putting forward P&O's slant, they are never clearly inaccurate. 

 

The package travel regs. most certainly do apply to cruise lines and P&O's T&C's in fact state that their cruises are packages.  I acknowledge there are other elements in a cruise and in this case flights are also included, so "other elements" would be considered a larger part of the overall package than for a cruise from Southampton. 

 

It also depends on the reason an individual had booked the cruise, so what is a major change for one person, would not necessarily be so for other people.  However, it must be born in mind that a change to Rovinj alone would not be a major change.  If a the case where to go to court, there is the possibility it may not succeed though, considering the flight element and the fact the ship is still visiting a similar area.

 

It is also unlikely that P&O would want to give way easily for one person,  just from a telephone call (especially if it appears they are posting here).   Putting something in writing, (e.g. email), mentioning the reasons and citing the specific part of the legislation which is being highlighted would give a clear impression that a complainant knows what they are doing though.

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by tring

[FangedRose]

This argument rears its head everytime a ship misses a port.

 

When you go on a cruise you purchase accommodation, food and entertainment. That is what is guaranteed. The itinerary is an aspiration. It is a holiday, not a ferry.

 

Purchase a bus ticket, or a train ticket or even a flight ticket. All will be for a specific destination.  Nowhere in the Ts & Cs will it guarantee to get you there.

[tring]

24 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Interestingly that's exactly the argument Princess are having with me about duty of care on offloading due to medical emergency.  I am very embroiled and have given them until 21 August to reply to my last email of 1/8 before I contact a solicitor.

 

That sounds just laughable.  If they are saying the package travel regs do not apply to them it sounds like the person does not have a grasp of English law - I wonder if you are dealing with someone who is considering the US T&C's.  If your cruise was booked in the UK, British law applies, of course.

 

You seem to be doing very well, but you really should not have had all that hassle.  I hope your aunt is doing well.

[tring]

22 minutes ago, FangedRose said:

This argument rears its head everytime a ship misses a port.

 

When you go on a cruise you purchase accommodation, food and entertainment. That is what is guaranteed. The itinerary is an aspiration. It is a holiday, not a ferry.

 

Purchase a bus ticket, or a train ticket or even a flight ticket. All will be for a specific destination.  Nowhere in the Ts & Cs will it guarantee to get you there.

 

You purchase a package, yes an odd port change here and there is something they can do, but the ports are an important part of the cruise for most people.  They cannot just make a large part of your holiday into something which had not been purchased.  It is the proportion of the holiday that matters, as I said earlier in this thread, two ports out of eight would not be a major change. 

 

If you cruise solely for the experience in the ship, then to you it would not matter where the cruise went, so it would seem they could take you anywhere and you would be just as happy.  That is entirely your choice.

 

On the other side of that, it would seem according to your assumption, they could equally take you to the ports, but not by cruise ship.  A package is what it says, all elements are a part of that package.

 

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by tring

[terrierjohn]

1 minute ago, tring said:

 

You purchase a package, yes an odd port change here and there is something they can do, but the ports are an important part of the cruise for most people.  They cannot just make a large part of your holiday into something which had not been purchased.  It is the proportion of the holiday that matters, as I said two ports out of four would not be a major change. 

 

If you cruise solely for the experience in the ship, then to you it would not matter where the cruise went, so it would seem they could take you anywhere and you would be just as happy.  That is entirely your choice.

 

 

I am sure you are quoting correctly your understanding of how the package travel rules should apply to cruises. However do you, or anyone else, have derails of any successful claims made agaist cruise companies in relation to missed ports. I doubt there very many passengers willing to take them to court and without some previous recorded successes, I dovt there ever will be.

 

[FangedRose]

4 minutes ago, tring said:

 

You purchase a package, yes an odd port change here and there is something they can do, but the ports are an important part of the cruise for most people.  They cannot just make a large part of your holiday into something which had not been purchased.  It is the proportion of the holiday that matters, as I said two ports out of four would not be a major change. 

 

If you cruise solely for the experience in the ship, then to you it would not matter where the cruise went, so it would seem they could take you anywhere and you would be just as happy.  That is entirely your choice.

 

 

The ports are NOT part of the package. That is the point. Do you honestly think they would still be getting away with it if it did contravene some regulations? After all it happens so often. 

[tring]

25 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

I am sure you are quoting correctly your understanding of how the package travel rules should apply to cruises. However do you, or anyone else, have derails of any successful claims made agaist cruise companies in relation to missed ports. I doubt there very many passengers willing to take them to court and without some previous recorded successes, I dovt there ever will be.

 

 

I must point out that there was a typing error in your quote and I had subsequently edited my post.  I had said two ports out of eight would not be considered a major change.

 

I am giving the opinion of someone who has worked in that field over a lifetime and, in fact, dealt with the legal side of things primarily. 

 

I do agree that someone with good knowledge of what they are doing will have a far better chance of getting a good result and, as I said, often it is not always totally clear cut.  They cannot, however just alter a package to what they fancy doing.  In practice, I suspect, like FangedRose, some people would not be too bothered about quite a lot of port changes.

 

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by tring

[tring]

15 minutes ago, FangedRose said:

The ports are NOT part of the package. That is the point. Do you honestly think they would still be getting away with it if it did contravene some regulations? After all it happens so often. 

 

Please refer to my previous post.  Also I edited my earlier post, which you may not have seen.

 

I only add information if it may be useful, but have no intention of getting involved in various discussions or arguments at any stage.

[FangedRose]

10 minutes ago, tring said:

 

Please refer to my previous post.  Also I edited my earlier post, which you may not have seen.

 

I only add information if it may be useful, but have no intention of getting involved in various discussions or arguments at any stage.

Be assured I have read your posts. And the many others over the years. And listened to similar on board ship when ports have been changed.

 

They all make the same basic argument, and all are wrong for the same reason. First item in Ts & Cs is that they reserve to right to make changes to the itinerary, and secondly, the itinerary is not part of a 'package.

[tring]

28 minutes ago, FangedRose said:

Be assured I have read your posts. And the many others over the years. And listened to similar on board ship when ports have been changed.

 

They all make the same basic argument, and all are wrong for the same reason. First item in Ts & Cs is that they reserve to right to make changes to the itinerary, and secondly, the itinerary is not part of a 'package.

 

T&C's can never over ride your legal rights. 

 

I do agree there are many posters and cruise passengers who will spout all sorts of information and they have no idea what they are talking about, which is why I have no intention of getting into "discussions". 

 

If you have an interest in such things, I suggest you Google "The Package Travel Regulations 2018" and read them, so you would then be someone who has some knowledge.

 

[Yorkypete]

5 hours ago, bbtablet said:

You also have to consider this:

 

P&O charge a price to provide you with a means of conveyance and all that it provides in the ship for x days - it's called a cruise, not a taxi. It also plans to let you off at certain places the ship intends to visit.

If those places have to be changed, you are still getting the on-board cruise experience for x days, i.e. the major part of the offering, from P&O's point of view, with, in this case, the same number of ports.

 

Unfortunately, and I've done it too, some of us tend to see the product being sold as a means to enjoy the intended ports as the fundamental purpose of the trip, but I suggest P&O would argue that this is not the prime mover of the cruise being offered, and their booking terms that we sign up to state that ports may have to be changed.

 

I am not an apologist for P&O, and have been affected, prior to sailing, by issues with St. Petersburg and Venice, the effects of changes in emission regulations, port berth availability, etc, but I don't think this entitles me to claim that the contract can be avoided, much as I would have liked to have had that option.

I have no idea what a court case would decide but one fact always seems to be forgotten. When you cancel a cruise then that cruise is sold again  but you appear not to have any money back! That may also be a point to consider in any court case. It is about time that ALL cruise lines were made to obey the law and act in a fair and reasonable manner. I would consider that a contract had been broken if a cruise did not take me to the places advertised and for which I had paid  my money for.

[AnnieC]

12 hours ago, bbtablet said:

I'm not confusing the two stances - just stating the current position as both posters, including the original one, confirm, and I believe it will not change even though I agree it is unfair.

De facto as opposed to de jure.

Like Tring, I have no intention of getting involved in arguments, so will depart.

[Megabear2]

8 hours ago, Yorkypete said:

I have no idea what a court case would decide but one fact always seems to be forgotten. When you cancel a cruise then that cruise is sold again  but you appear not to have any money back! That may also be a point to consider in any court case. It is about time that ALL cruise lines were made to obey the law and act in a fair and reasonable manner. I would consider that a contract had been broken if a cruise did not take me to the places advertised and for which I had paid  my money for.

The point on cancellation and the deposit is something that has been challenged in court against a travel company and won by the consumer.  I mentioned this elsewhere in relation to MX-Drew's cancellation problems on which he is taking legal advice.

 

I cannot understand why more people do not challenge on this point. Obviously it isn't without effort and cost unless large sums are involved and assumedly this is why so few choose to challenge.

[tring]

11 hours ago, terrierjohn said:

I am sure you are quoting correctly your understanding of how the package travel rules should apply to cruises. However do you, or anyone else, have derails of any successful claims made agaist cruise companies in relation to missed ports. I doubt there very many passengers willing to take them to court and without some previous recorded successes, I dovt there ever will be.

 

 

One interesting point I will add is that when P&O pulled SPB from our Baltic cruise for May/June this year, they also pulled Riga and Tallinn at the same time, so as it was a 16 night cruise, which meant half the ports had been changed.  Our written notification of those changes from P&O gave us the option to cancel with a full refund - a no quibble option, not that we would have accepted that change anyway, but if I get nowhere with such a complaint, I just hand the job over to DH.  

 

Apart from legal rights, under "Amendments to the Contract" P&O's T&C's state that if they make a significant change, you will have a choice of keeping the cruise, changing to another one, or to cancel with a full refund.  So both of those points are worth mentioning, on any written approach to P&O, sighting references.   

 

Changes being made after full balance payment does make it difficult to actually pursue to court since you would have to either not travel (hence potentially showing disinclination to travel), or travel and sue for loss of the cruise itinerary as booked.  All a case of what is worth it for an individual as there are still fees to be paid on the small claims track and a lot of work would be involved, so most will not bother.  In practice, it probably needs a consumer body to take action against a cruise line if major changes are constantly being made.

 

We have booked autumn and winter cruises on Azura and a  round trip to the Caribbean on Aurora, though our reasons for booking them was for some winter sun in easy to travel to places for very good prices as we are coming out of covid times, so itineraries of those are not really of major importance to us, unless something totally silly is done.

 

Edited August 18, 2022 by tring

[Megabear2]

Never mind port changes, I've just been told by NCL that my August 2023 cruise booked on Norwegian Viva has been changed to Norwegian Getaway!  Apparently due to global supply chain constraints the ship won't be built in time for our cruise.  Ironically this Viva cruise is a replacement for a Prima one which they cancelled earlier this year due to, you've guessed it, global supply chain constraints...

 

I've responded politely to tell them absolutely no way will we sail of Getaway even if they are offering a 20% discount on our fare as in my opinion there is absolutely no comparison.

 

At least P&O haven't cancelled our Arvia cruise due to supply chain issues.  Seems that each cruise line has it's own line to trot out be it operational difficulties, global shortages of crew or supply chain issues.  No doubt lots more to come!

[Yorkypete]

15 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Never mind port changes, I've just been told by NCL that my August 2023 cruise booked on Norwegian Viva has been changed to Norwegian Getaway!  Apparently due to global supply chain constraints the ship won't be built in time for our cruise.  Ironically this Viva cruise is a replacement for a Prima one which they cancelled earlier this year due to, you've guessed it, global supply chain constraints...

 

I've responded politely to tell them absolutely no way will we sail of Getaway even if they are offering a 20% discount on our fare as in my opinion there is absolutely no comparison.

 

At least P&O haven't cancelled our Arvia cruise due to supply chain issues.  Seems that each cruise line has it's own line to trot out be it operational difficulties, global shortages of crew or supply chain issues.  No doubt lots more to come!

As has been pointed out, it is about time someone or some organisation took on the cruise lines about these type of changes and took them to court. If it was ashore then you would have a contract with the company and could demand full refunds if the company tried to change a contract after it was 'signed'.

Edited August 18, 2022 by Yorkypete

[Megabear2]

7 minutes ago, Yorkypete said:

As has been pointed out, it is about time someone or some organisation took on the cruise lines about these type of changes and took them to court. If it was ashore then you would have a contract with the company and could demand full refunds if the company tried to change a contract after it was 'signed'.

My guess is that people do challenge the cruise lines and reach a settlement. However they are forced into NCDs to prevent the floodgates opening to everyone else. For instance I'll bet you a pound to a penny we never hear from MX-Drew about his legal challenge.   I personally know of people who took cruise lines to task over quarantine ashore in the early days of sailing starting up because their travel insurance didn't cover them (not P&O passengers). To reach a suitable outcome they had to sign an NCD and couldn't even discuss the issue with their travel agent.

 

As has been said previously we just roll over and let them tickle our tummies.