I couldn’t believe the story about NCL

[Love2cruise77]

If the following items

• Air that was not originally added to the reservation
• Essential Travel Protection
• Ground transfers
• Land items, such as pre and post hotels and cruisetours

will trigger a cancellation of the cruise reservation for non-payment, NCL can opt to cancel just these items when no payment is received or at the very least not allow the customer to book these items themselves (online/in the app) without the intervention of a live person.

[Homosassa]

Let me make clear before I start this post that I am not a NCL cheerleader and have a personal opinion on the NCL "Freestyle" experience. It is not pertinent to this post.

 

Again, the problem that the OP had is a result of her lack of knowledge of the information that is easily available on the NCL website. She compounded the problem by not using the services of someone familiar with NCL's (and many other cruise lines)  restrictions.

 

If one bothers to read the Ticket Contract and the Terms and Conditions where definitions of fares, land packages, payment schedules and cancellation fees are explained, the information given in the email to travel agents makes sense.

 

NCL (other cruise lines) are for profit businesses and have procedures and fees to stop abuse by the consumer. (This can apply across the board to any business entity - the customer is not always right)

 

NCL is also not responsible in judging whether a person is capable of booking themselves without the "intervention of a live person."  They provide all the information needed. It is up to the consume to educate themselves and decide if they are capable of handling the arrangements without "intervention." 

[Oakman58]

Personally if this happened to me I would already have a lawyer looking into my options.  

[PATRLR]

2 hours ago, SeaShark said:

NCL apologists? You could have said "Can anyone explain or justify the policy..." yet you choose the ad hominem attack. Why? Can you explain or justify the reason for the insult?

Sorry @SeaShark but if you took "NCL apologists" as an insult, that's on you.  There is nothing insulting about asking those who stand up for their cruise line no matter what the issue is, to offer an explanation.  

[BirdTravels]

22 minutes ago, Oakman58 said:

Personally if this happened to me I would already have a lawyer looking into my options.  

And you would be wasting your money since there is no case. 

[Ozmodiar]

2 hours ago, UKstages said:

but it's clear the NCL team either didn't consider all the ramifications or didn't consider all use cases or how the rules would be applied under (not so) extraordinary circumstances. or their app developers simply do sloppy work and the app can't handle the same functions as the website and NCL's internal systems.

 

i have no concern about the policy. it's their right to cancel unpaid reservations. but it appears that they haven't built an IT infrastructure capable of discerning the difference between a reservation paid in full and a reservation paid in full that has something added to it - possibly tentaively - within a cancellation window.

I agree with this - it seems likely to me that they automated the cancelation process which previously may have had a human review or check along the way. Most likely the goal was to ensure that unpaid cabins were canceled ASAP in order to return those cabins to available inventory for others to purchase, instead of a delay which meant they had an unsold cabin blocked from being sold as they resolved payment issues.

 

Looking at the list of things that would trigger the cancelation, all of those things are non-ship based (transfers, land tours) and likely are expenses that go directly to NCL "corporate" and probably fall under a single tracking/accounting/billing system. Most (not all) of the rest are ship-based expenses - and it seems likely those are kept in a separate accounting/billing system internally as the money is, in an accounting sense, transferred to the on-board account - this is likely why refundable on-board credit gets cashed out before you leave the ship instead of going back to your payment method. 

 

So I'd guess the system had an algorithm added that automatically cancels anyone with a non-zero balance on the corporate accounting side, and it isn't sophisticated enough to tell the difference between an account that has paid $500 in Cruise Next on a $10,000 cabin and one that has paid $5,000 on a cabin and owes $200 for an add-on. Canceling the first case for non-payment makes a lot more sense than the second and are clearly not comparable scenarios. They may have already fixed this or are working to have it be a bit more forgiving for a slightly longer time frame. It certainly seems to ignore the possibility of a payment not going through immediately due to legit issues, like fraud protection on the credit card side of things declining it, or someone loses their internet connection mid-process, or maybe they just wanted to price the transfer cost like a mock booking? We don't know 100% what happened here, but zero tolerance automated systems regularly fail to account for legit issues that fall outside the intention of the issue being addressed.

 

The problem for me is the inability to fix an instance like this by the human customer service folks - assuming the customers still wanted to take the cruise, or at least a cruise, then there were still options to consider from finding a cabin on-board if not 100% sold out, to credit for a future cruise, that doesn't cost someone $5,000 for what was likely an honest clerical/process error or a policy being triggered that was not planned to cover an instance like this.  

[UKstages]

1 hour ago, Homosassa said:

Again, the problem that the OP had is a result of her lack of knowledge of the information that is easily available on the NCL website. 

 

but she wasn't using the website. 

 

she was using, at NCL's invitation and encouragement, their app.

 

1 hour ago, Homosassa said:

She compounded the problem by not using the services of someone familiar with NCL's (and many other cruise lines)  restrictions.

 

is it a term and condition of NCL that customers are required to use the services of someone familiar with their restrictions?

 

1 hour ago, Homosassa said:

NCL is also not responsible in judging whether a person is capable of booking themselves without the "intervention of a live person."  They provide all the information needed.

 

do they?

 

one would think immediately before canceling a fully paid reservation with no apparent balance due that they would notify the customer and give a small window during which the error could be corrected or the balance (if valid) paid. it doesn't look like that happened here at all.

[PTC DAWG]

After reading the policy as stated, I think it is a terrible policy re the cancellation of fully paid cruises..with no passenger recourse. Convince me otherwise.

 

Side note, I’m sailing on NCL April 1 next week. 4-5 prior NCL cruises. 

[ontheweb]

3 hours ago, UKstages said:

 

• because they haven't prioritized this as a problem because it - up to now - is a situation that has occurred only a relatively small number of times

• because their IT team doesn't speak regularly to their marketing, sales or customer resolution teams

• because they have poor user testing and few who work in IT or customer resolution make mock bookings in the app

• because they have written internal policies that frontline personnel are not empowered to override (or even reconsider or reinterpret), when confronted by unique circumstances not specifically covered in the policy

• because they don't have a strong internal escalation process for problem resolution

• because they lack imagination and foresight

or maybe because they don't care as long as they have the money from the fully paid cruise?

[Homosassa]

1 hour ago, UKstages said:

 

but she wasn't using the website. 

 

she was using, at NCL's invitation and encouragement, their app.

 

 

is it a term and condition of NCL that customers are required to use the services of someone familiar with their restrictions?

 

 

do they?

 

 

You are missing the big picture.

 

How did she book the cruise to begin with?

 

What wasn't research done to familiar herself with the restrictions on her purchase

 

The information was there, she didn't do her homework.

 

NCL made the information available; it isn't up to NCL to make sure that she read and understood what she was buying  Part of what she is buying is agreeing to the Terms and Conditions and Ticket Contract.

 

Checking that the TC has been read, understood and is part of the on line check in. Before that, the information link is included in the written confirmation.

 

[ChiefMateJRK]

2 minutes ago, Homosassa said:

You are missing the big picture.

 

How did she book the cruise to begin with?

 

What wasn't research done to familiar herself with the restrictions on her purchase

 

The information was there, she didn't do her homework.

 

NCL made the information available; it isn't up to NCL to make sure that she read and understood what she was buying  Part of what she is buying is agreeing to the Terms and Conditions and Ticket Contract.

 

Checking that the TC has been read, understood and is part of the on line check in. Before that, the information link is included in the written confirmation.

 

Is this "policy" outlined in the TC?

[Oakman58]

3 hours ago, BirdTravels said:

And you would be wasting your money since there is no case. 

 

That my friend is where you are 100% wrong.  The right lawyer would have no problem getting satisfaction.

[UKstages]

14 minutes ago, Homosassa said:

You are missing the big picture.

 

gosh, i don't think so. i think i've pretty much nailed it.

 

15 minutes ago, Homosassa said:

How did she book the cruise to begin with?

 

What wasn't research done to familiar herself with the restrictions on her purchase

 

The information was there, she didn't do her homework.

 

if, by "information," you mean a disclosure that somebody using the app to casually peruse ancillary services, could have their fully paid reservation canceled... no, that information is most definitely not "there."

 

19 minutes ago, Homosassa said:

NCL made the information available...

 

nope.

 

they did, however, alert travel agents to the possibility of this type of cancellation. they did not feel it was necessary to give their customers the same information at the time of purchase or at the time their customers were "shopping" within the app.

 

22 minutes ago, Homosassa said:

it isn't up to NCL to make sure that she read and understood what she was buying

 

on this we can agree!

 

it is, however, incumbent about NCL to make sure that their terms and conditions are clear and their marketing materials, websites, apps and agents communicate appropriately with customers and don't obscure key conditions related to a customer's purchase.

 

25 minutes ago, Homosassa said:

Part of what she is buying is agreeing to the Terms and Conditions and Ticket Contract.

 

yet again, we agree!

 

kindly show me in the "T&C" or "ticket contract" where it says "warning: once your reservation is fully paid for, do not attempt to add any item to your booking when using our app or your reservation will be subject to immediate cancellation and all monies you have paid us will be forfeited."

 

i may have missed it, but i don't think it says that.

 

the contract simply says that reservations not fully paid by a certain date will be canceled.

 

this customer, using NCL's tools  and following its guidance, had absolutely no reason to believe her reservation was not fully paid by that date. 

[SeaShark]

18 minutes ago, Oakman58 said:

 

That my friend is where you are 100% wrong.  The right lawyer would have no problem getting satisfaction.

 

Easy to say, but why not just point the guest to that "right lawyer" with a referral? The article author is reading this thread and I'm sure she'd be glad to pass on your 100% correct information. 

 

3 hours ago, PATRLR said:

Sorry @SeaShark but if you took "NCL apologists" as an insult, that's on you.  There is nothing insulting about asking those who stand up for their cruise line no matter what the issue is, to offer an explanation.  

 

On me? lol. Again, if it isn't an insult, then why not use the alternate wording? Why the label? Who in the thread are you referring to as someone who "stands up for their cruise line no matter what the issue is"? 

 

Or...how should we address those who blame the cruise line no matter what the issue is? What is their non-insulting label?

 

[Sinbadssailors]

Sometimes labels are insulting but accurate.

 

I also would like to hear the apologists defend this.

 

 

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Sinbadssailors
probably shouldn't say it even if it's true

[ChiefMateJRK]

I don't believe that there are any true "apologists" here.  We do have some that complain about everything NCL and others who live on the sunny side of the street.  That would likely include me.  To the extent that this story is true, it makes NCL look pretty bad.  Hopefully they'll fix it.

[ngrund]

I still don't get that she didn't realize she clicked on "add to cart" and was not just viewing the transfer.

 

 

 

[nextcruiseis]

Just read the article linked in the first post and there was an update today. 

[ChiefMateJRK]

5 minutes ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

Hopefully they'll fix it.

 

3 minutes ago, nextcruiseis said:

just read the article linked in the first post and there was an update today. 

Well that was quick! 🤣

[Two Wheels Only]

Is the FCC in her cart? 😧

[ngrund]

Now, NCL either has to update this policy, or at least ensure that a clear warning pops up if you add one of these items to your cart

[NJGeorge]

16 minutes ago, Two Wheels Only said:

Is the FCC in her cart? 😧

 

Now that's  funny🤣

[Oldsweets]

I am pleased “IF” NCL did indeed actually reverse itself and issued a credit.  Having said that it still leaves NCL with a problem as far as I am concerned in that the opportunity to snare other unsuspecting customers at risk for a policy that seems most unfair at best.  No way in the world should NCL have a policy that can penalize any customer for transportation or the other laundry list of items and capture Cruise fare.  The system needs to simply cancel out the unpaid addition and not be tied into a cruise fare.  Let’s see what NCL does with this….  If true let me be the first to congratulate NCL for doing the right thing!

[sammee]

On 3/22/2023 at 6:43 PM, luv2kroooz said:

I would absolutely believe it. We experienced that first hand during Corona. After much efforts and outside help, we finally got our money back. They will try to hide behind their contract at every turn, over and again, even when they their contract isn't even on their side. If there is a way for them to keep your money, they will do it. I also thought Tony's video was a little scattered today. He didn't really explain. I mean, how can you purchase a bus transfer online after final payment, without entering a valid credit card? I guess I am just confused about what really happened, but absolutely not surprised with NCL behavior. To keep thousands of someone else's funds after they have paid for a cruise is wrong. Cancel the unpaid bus transfer, but don't cancel the "paid for" cruise. I mean that doesn't even make any sense to me.

Very true and than some. I had to file a dispute to get my money back at the beginning of Covid. They tried to lie to the bank, but at the same time, they sent them the documents that backed up what I had, so oops on them. I won. That would have been my first cruise with them. The sting was starting to come off until I read this story. I will never consider them again, there is no trust.

[ontheweb]

42 minutes ago, nextcruiseis said:

Just read the article linked in the first post and there was an update today. 

You have to wonder how much the article had to do with this. Would Norwegian have done the same without the adverse publicity? I guess we will never know. But as others have said, it is good that they did reverse this. And does it really matter that the rules that they write allow them to do this cancellation? Does that make it right (morally as opposed to legally)?