Jump to content
  • Deals
  • Find a Cruise
  • Reviews
  • News
  • Cruise Tips

Cancellation of cruise in the Middle East


Hill Country Dakota
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Vineyard View said:

I have to say that this is not what I had hoped would be the outcome for all those who wished to change to another cruise. I truly hope that those who were previously responded to with the answer of FCC being available will be honored. If not, that speaks volumes IMO. 
 

Oceania’s competition is, so far, offering better solutions than this response. 

I have had so much hope for Oceana since NCLH bought them.  NCL was our favorite in our youth and we so wanted to like Oceana.   Their lack of customer service and sometimes just downright hostility to customers is unacceptable 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just confirmed with Oceania that they have rescinded their offer to apply anything to future cruises.  We were told we had until November 10th, but without notice, they just rescinded.  I asked the person I spoke with if it was fair after I was told by Oceania several times that we had until November 10 to cancel, and she refused to answer.  What an awful cruise line. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Rhett789 said:

I just confirmed with Oceania that they have rescinded their offer to apply anything to future cruises.  We were told we had until November 10th, but without notice, they just rescinded.  I asked the person I spoke with if it was fair after I was told by Oceania several times that we had until November 10 to cancel, and she refused to answer.  What an awful cruise line. 

Speaks volumes. I cannot quite get my arms around why they will not, at the very least, honor those to whom they previously committed to provide a FCC. That is pretty low. If it were me, I would be furious….and I would want to find a way to make this whole “not honoring their word” a bit more widely known outside of CC. 
It is certainly giving me pause….

Edited by Vineyard View
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If any of you have travel insurance including the CFAR coverage ("Cancel For Any Reason"), please see this section on CC about travel insurance and the "terrorism vs war" question.

 

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2967678-terrorist-attack-or-war/#comment-66312545

 

This was posted a few days ago, and I don't know if the actual website has been updated.

 

We *always* get travel insurance with CFAR even though it costs extra (and not a trivial amount).  But we've always felt it gives us the decision, to get 75% back in *cash* (not a credit with a time limit) in the worst case.  This type of insurance now also includes "Interrupt For Any Reason", once the trip has started.

 

Yes, we did think about terrorism, but we had (and still have) some questions about how the insurers define terrorism, especially when it is a smaller episode, such as the truck in Nice on Bastille Day several years ago.  We were almost heading there about that time, but our route might not have included Nice itself, so the regular coverage might not have applied.  Or a major storm, such that nothing is cancelled, but WE (who can be a bit wimp-ish at times!) don't want to go there, not then...

Or if very elderly MIL was feeling "funny".  She NEVER complains, but at her age, even if a physician didn't "see anything" that "should" cause us to stay, IF *she* thought something was wrong, we would not be leaving her.  She *always* said, about anything when we were considering travel:  "Go! GO! Enjoy!! Don't worry about me!  GO!" 🙂 

Again, 75% cash back would be terrific to take the sting off of that decision.

 

But we have more reasons than average to want to get "travel insurance"(assorted medical issues), and yes, we've had enough claims, including a few large ones, to completely recover all of our premiums in addition to the insured costs.  Not everyone is in that situation, with enough "concerns" to worry about cancelling.  And about 99% of our claims were for cancellation or interruption (or re-routing), with almost nothing for medical, which would be the "Big Concern", of course. (The medical care was provided before departure, so our regular insurance covered it.)

 

We consider CFAR useful for the SWAN effect:  Sleep Well At Night!

We've never actually used the CFAR coverage!  Not for reimbursement purposes, anyway,  It gives us a LOT of reassurance about that 75% "just in case".

 

I don't know if the insurers have updated how they are handling the Israel situation, if it is still considered "terrorism" - as I asked in my first post in the linked thread?

 

GC

 

ETA:  As for Oceania *revoking* any credits already offered or announced?

That is such a severe NO!  Some people may have already made plans, incurred costs, and might not even be able to "get back to" the original plans if they wanted to.

That's just.... NOT okay! 😡

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The add on of CFAR is undoubtedly a great benefit to have. A large group of people do not, as pre-existing is the primary driver, including ourselves. Maybe  this situation  is a great example for more of us to pay attention to. I certainly will, so thank you for your input. 
As you agreed, this does not change what has been happening to these passengers and it is not okay. HOW Oceania handles this issue moving forward, and how they end up treating these passengers is on my radar as a new customer. They put out there that they will offer FCC to those feeling unsafe and uncomfortable with the revised itinerary….then to turn around and say “oh no, we changed our mind”…..that to me speaks very loudly. I am not certain how all other lines are handling this, and some may be doing the same, but I do know that there are examples in their category of lines that are showing oh so much more class. Ultimately these actions can absolutely drive future decisions…and I also realize that I am a small minnow in a large pond. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Vineyard View said:


It is certainly giving me pause….

This is where I am. I am certainly an O “cheerleader.” I have always been happy with my O cruises in spite of a few niggling things that might/might not arise.

 I was in the “itinerary changes are not refundable” camp. But when (apparently) O offered some FCC for those who requested it, I was happy to see them to “step up” and “do the right thing.” It’s NOT OKAY FOR O TO UNILATERALLY RESCIND THEIR FCC OFFER. 

What’s up?

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PhD-iva said:

This is where I am. I am certainly an O “cheerleader.” I have always been happy with my O cruises in spite of a few niggling things that might/might not arise.

 I was in the “itinerary changes are not refundable” camp. But when (apparently) O offered some FCC for those who requested it, I was happy to see them to “step up” and “do the right thing.” It’s NOT OKAY FOR O TO UNILATERALLY RESCIND THEIR FCC OFFER. 

What’s up?

I’m thinking about other options now. If anyone has some good suggestions, my email is in my signature. Gracias/Grazie/Danke/Arigatogozaimasu!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/21/2023 at 9:35 PM, basor said:

Sounds like same as O offer:

 

Option 1 Re-book another Celebrity Cruises sailing for a later date at prevailing rates.
Please know, you'll be responsible for any difference in pricing for your cruise fare, taxes, fees, gratuities, and other non-cruise fare items.

Option 2 If you wish to cancel, we'll provide you with a Future Cruise Credit to use toward any future Celebrity Cruises sailing.
Future Cruise Credit (FCC) valued at 100% of the cruise fare paid on their current booking to book an alternative Celebrity Cruises sailing.
If you used a Future Cruise Credit on this sailing, we'll refund any NEW funds paid above the Credit amount, and we'll reinstate your original Credit.

Sounds like Celebrity understands the lifetime value of its customers. Oceania seems to want to learn that lesson the hard way.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, PhD-iva said:

This is where I am. I am certainly an O “cheerleader.” I have always been happy with my O cruises in spite of a few niggling things that might/might not arise.

 I was in the “itinerary changes are not refundable” camp. But when (apparently) O offered some FCC for those who requested it, I was happy to see them to “step up” and “do the right thing.” It’s NOT OKAY FOR O TO UNILATERALLY RESCIND THEIR FCC OFFER. 

What’s up?

Exactly.  The cruise contract does cover changes to itineraries and this is a reminder to become acquainted with those contracts. (I am absolutely certain O is not taking the originally planned voyage but they have that right). It is the tortuous twisting in the wind which is the problem.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If O decided to not offer FCC,  that is their contractural right to do so. It is the fact that they went back on their commitment to the passengers that they already agreed to offer the FCC. That is a horrid business practice and outside of “part of the contract” IMO. My impression of O as a company has slipped greatly as a result.  Not sure yet how that will impact my decisions moving forward. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Vineyard View said:

If O decided to not offer FCC,  that is their contractural right to do so. It is the fact that they went back on their commitment to the passengers that they already agreed to offer the FCC. That is a horrid business practice and outside of “part of the contract” IMO. My impression of O as a company has slipped greatly as a result.  Not sure yet how that will impact my decisions moving forward. 

Did those that got the FCC  now lose than option?

Or those that  were late to the party??

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, LHT28 said:

Did those that got the FCC  now lose than option?

Or those that  were late to the party??

 

It appears that it was on offer for a few days, then discontinued without notice.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LHT28 said:

Did those that got the FCC  now lose than option?

Or those that  were late to the party??

 

According to posts from several affected passengers, they had until October 30 (?) to choose their subsequent cruise and use their FCC. I might have the date slightly wrong, however, O did rescind the offer prior to the (verbally) published date.

I never heard that anyone had anything in writing from O, everything was over the phone or through a travel agent, as far as I have read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PhD-iva said:

According to posts from several affected passengers, they had until October 30 (?) to choose their subsequent cruise and use their FCC. I might have the date slightly wrong, however, O did rescind the offer prior to the (verbally) published date.

I never heard that anyone had anything in writing from O, everything was over the phone or through a travel agent, as far as I have read.

Still not clear if pax got the FCC then  it was rescinded  ??

 

 I think the date to rebook was Nov 30th  but  for those that accepted the FCC   not to decide to take the FCC

That is how I interpreted  the  posts  ..but then some threw in speculations & conspiracy theories 😉

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From several posts, there were several quests who were offered FCC. Oceania then rescinded that FCC.
Did some receive it, I believe so.

Others were promised, and then it was rescinded. This is being stated on several threads and on 

the book that cannot be named. If the later is in fact true, then that is the issue. Are their statements conspiracy theory, IDK,  but it appears to have occurred to multiple guests. 

Hopefully some of those directly impacted will clarify here as it is actually a pretty big deal IMO. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, LHT28 said:

Still not clear if pax got the FCC then  it was rescinded  ??

 

 I think the date to rebook was Nov 30th  but  for those that accepted the FCC   not to decide to take the FCC

That is how I interpreted  the  posts  ..but then some threw in speculations & conspiracy theories 😉

 

Thank you for posting this LHT28. It made me double check myself. Not knowing who you might be referring to, it  made me concerned that maybe I  misinterpreted what I read. I would not ever want to be in those categories.
For that reason, I asked on a couple of other threads after this post to clarify. Responses were that others were offered FCC late last week. No respond by dates were provided. Within under a week their offer was rescinded when they called to accept the FCC. 
 I feel that if a passenger was not provided a ‘valid until ‘x’ date (obviously not into infinity), and that offer was requested to be honored in a manner of days following, it is IMO, less than impressive that Oceania did not grant that.
So yes, clearly a business decision. Yes,  the offer was made and not immediately accepted. The thought is that when FCC was offered, there should have been a ‘valid until date’….whatever that may be that was determined by O. Instead it was open ended and people were IMO unfairly caught off guard. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Vineyard View said:

Thank you for posting this LHT28. It made me double check myself. Not knowing who you might be referring to, it  made me concerned that maybe I  misinterpreted what I read. I would not ever want to be in those categories.
 

There were a few in this thread

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2810652-nov-29-to-dec-19-2023-oceania-riviera-istanbul-to-dubai-holy-land-arabian-jewels/page/18/

That posted they had  gotten an FCC  

Posts #443, 448

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, LHT28 said:

There were a few in this thread

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2810652-nov-29-to-dec-19-2023-oceania-riviera-istanbul-to-dubai-holy-land-arabian-jewels/page/18/

That posted they had  gotten an FCC  

Posts #443, 448

I am really happy to know that some people received the promised FCC. Thank you. I still maintain that was a class act….but….
The others who were offered and did not……

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vineyard View said:

I feel that if a passenger was not provided a ‘valid until ‘x’ date (obviously not into infinity), and that offer was requested to be honored in a manner of days following, it is IMO, less than impressive that Oceania did not grant that.
So yes, clearly a business decision. Yes,  the offer was made and not immediately accepted. The thought is that when FCC was offered, there should have been a ‘valid until date’….whatever that may be that was determined by O. Instead it was open ended and people were IMO unfairly caught off guard. 

Yes, Oceania should have included a "good until..." date with the original offer, or some other way for passengers to know about such limitations.

 

However, if they did not, then they absolutely should have notified EVERYONE who received such an offer (and posted wherever the original offer was posted) a NOTICE that there would be a deadline of <some date that was NOT almost immediately out of date or such>.

 

It's unthinkable otherwise.  What about those who, knowing they could make a switch, cancelled some current plans or reservations (planes? hotels? whatever!)... and then perhaps couldn't get them back (or not at the same price?) such that they could still use the original cruise!?

 

That's the absolute minimum they should have done, if they messed it up when they originally made/announced the offer(s) without the proper notification.

 

We have greatly enjoyed Oceania (the Riviera - love it, er, "loved it"?), and we don't expect perfection, etc.

But treating guests/customers like this is simply inexcusable.  They didn't have control over the political situation, obviously.  But they DID have control over "how they handle it".

Full stop!

 

This certainly does give us pause about future reservations.  If we can't trust the notifications or offers they send us... what next!??

They could "do it again", in a similar or different way, any time in the future when they thought it would be profitable...

That's NOT the way to rectify a "goof", not at all.

 

GC

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Abby0651 said:

Turkey is dangerous

The British government advice is only not to travel to very limited parts of Turkey, which border Iran, Syria and Iraq. Many thousands of Britons will be continuing to enjoy their beach holidays in the western parts of the country. Similarly, Cyprus (included the part occupied by Turkey) is also very much open to tourism, in spite of being a major operational base for the Royal Air Force. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Harters said:

The British government advice is only not to travel to very limited parts of Turkey, which border Iran, Syria and Iraq. Many thousands of Britons will be continuing to enjoy their beach holidays in the western parts of the country. Similarly, Cyprus (included the part occupied by Turkey) is also very much open to tourism, in spite of being a major operational base for the Royal Air Force. 

Safety on land and safety at sea are different even in the same region.  Additionally, cruise ships can be considered a high profile target 

Edited by Mary229
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...