Celebrity breach of contract.

[vjmatty]

9 hours ago, mnocket said:

It never fails to disappoint me how many cheerleaders will reflexively jump to side with the cruise lines against almost any complaint against the company. I don't know if Celebrity has the contractual right to change any or every aspect of their product after a customer has purchased it, or not. To me it really doesn't matter -  either way it's treating their customers wrong.  Something can be both legal and wrong. If the OP does indeed proceed with legal action, I hope they win - although I fear it will likely be throwing good money after bad. Still they have my support and gratitude for standing up against a company for doing wrong by their customers, because they know they can get away with it. It's sad to see so many side with the company🙁

 

Many people do not understand that "legal" and "good customer service" are not the same thing.

[vjmatty]

11 hours ago, The_Big_M said:

 

That isn't correct - except it was as marketed that way by Celebrity spin so they avoided having people cancel.

 

There is no new "team" that has replaced the butler that was listed as part of the booking. The only replacement for the removed butler is a "head butler" who obviously is shared across tens of rooms, and already had other responsibilities so does not deliver anything that butlers did before to an individual suite. You will be unlikely to see him any more than once if at all, and he will have no involvement in the day to day operation of your suite.

 

All the other people involved in your service delivery are the same people who were involved when a butler existed, i.e. it is a loss or degradation of service that has not been replaced.

 

 

 

I have no idea why anyone is laughing at this post.  From what I understand it is an accurate description of the butler "team."

[sanger727]

12 minutes ago, alexandria said:

If I wasn't going to accept a case, I would never agree to send a letter or take any other action where it could be inferred that I had undertaken representation of the aggrieved party (or that even had the appearance of such).  Nor would I send such a letter unless I had investigated the allegations, reviewed the applicable statutes and cases, and determined that there was a legitimate basis to support the legal position that is being asserted. 

 

An attorney who would send a demand letter to a potential defendant without being engaged to represent the potential plaintiff and without doing sufficient due diligence is asking for trouble.  Additionally, a client who has unreasonable and unrealistic expectations about "their case" and only wants to pay you a few hundred dollars to send a letter is a red flag for a potential bar complaint when that letter fails to achieve the client's desired results.  Nothing good can come of that for an attorney and I don't know of a single attorney that would agree to such a request.  But, I suspect there are some lawyers out there who are so desperate for a fee of a few hundred dollars, that they would be happy to send a letter to Celebrity.  The likelihood that a letter from such a lawyer would generate anything other than a boilerplate "go pound sand" reply from Celebrity is very, very slim.

 

 

I work in the government. People sue their employer often. The attorneys almost always take the cases on commission. You would think that would mean they have some confidence in the case; but they lose as often as they win. 🤷‍♀️

[vjmatty]

11 minutes ago, alexandria said:

If I wasn't going to accept a case, I would never agree to send a letter or take any other action where it could be inferred that I had undertaken representation of the aggrieved party (or that even had the appearance of such).  Nor would I send such a letter unless I had investigated the allegations, reviewed the applicable statutes and cases, and determined that there was a legitimate basis to support the legal position that is being asserted. 

 

An attorney who would send a demand letter to a potential defendant without being engaged to represent the potential plaintiff and without doing sufficient due diligence is asking for trouble.  Additionally, a client who has unreasonable and unrealistic expectations about "their case" and only wants to pay you a few hundred dollars to send a letter is a red flag for a potential bar complaint when that letter fails to achieve the client's desired results.  Nothing good can come of that for an attorney and I don't know of a single attorney that would agree to such a request.  But, I suspect there are some lawyers out there who are so desperate for a fee of a few hundred dollars, that they would be happy to send a letter to Celebrity.  The likelihood that a letter from such a lawyer would generate anything other than a boilerplate "go pound sand" reply from Celebrity is very, very slim.

 

 

 

I can't tell you how many people wanted to hire me to "just send a letter" when I was practicing.  When they asked why I wouldn't do it I said because it's never just a letter.  I'm sure they'd find someone fresh out of law school trying to start a business and needing every potential retainer that walked in the door.

[leaveitallbehind]

The majority of the responses on this thread have been valid and helpful in terms of the reality of the OP's complaint, Celebrity's current policy and position, and the legal obstacles and likely outcome with any legitimate attempted actions.  IMO it is also likely that none of this is what the OP was hoping to hear and doesn't support their desired end result.  But I think its nothing more than a dose of reality and hopefully they will move past this situation and continue to enjoy cruising with whatever cruise line lies in their future.  

Edited December 27, 2023 by leaveitallbehind

[markeb]

4 hours ago, hcat said:

never read the full contract as we are mainly interested in insurance issues if we get sick or injured

 

.Is there an arbitration/ mediation clause, where is jurisdiction set? 

 

if these cases were goldmines  I'm sure we would have heard!

 

Not a cheerleader but "it is what it is." We tried a suite but prefer AQ class so not directly affected...other than  our sympathy .

 

It's been awhile since I looked, and it was pure curiosity, probably in response to something similar to this once upon a time. 

 

There is a set jurisdiction, in Florida (probably Miami). I'm sure there's an arbitration clause. I mean there's practically an arbitration clause if you buy toilet paper at Target! So at this point, if the OP has taken any action they've paid an attorney that will have a clerk go through the cruise contract and highlight all the "you're screwed" clauses and hopefully be ethical enough to advise his soon to be former client on the cost and likelihood of success in any action he takes. And how hard it would be to estimate real damages (as the actual attorneys on this thread have stated). But they will keep whatever minimum hourly rate they agreed to. As they should.

 

BTW, I believe we also forfeit our ability to participate in most class actions. Don't ever read the terms and conditions from LiveNation/Ticketmaster on your next concert/show ticket...

 

And I agree. There's a big difference between being a cheerleader and a realist. If a multi-billion dollar international corporation's attorneys can't write T&Cs that protect it from almost anything, especially the whole butler thing, then they've got much bigger problems. Ultimately it could come back to bite them in future bookings, but they're booking just fine right now with the changes and they're moving a new generation into their pipeline who won't remember any of this.

[billc23]

46 minutes ago, alexandria said:

If I wasn't going to accept a case, I would never agree to send a letter or take any other action where it could be inferred that I had undertaken representation of the aggrieved party (or that even had the appearance of such).   

 

 Nothing good can come of that for an attorney and I don't know of a single attorney that would agree to such a request.  But, I suspect there are some lawyers out there who are so desperate for a fee of a few hundred dollars, that they would be happy to send a letter to Celebrity.  

 

 

A lawyer may send a letter but not a litigator/trial attorney. Thank you for your comments. 

[tscoffey]

Your damages (if even estimable) are only going to be the value of the services you can prove you should have received, minus the value of the services you actually did receive. This is likely to be only a few hundred, to maybe a bit over a thousand dollars, at best. Your initial consultation with even an average attorney will cost you close to that, and likely more.
And no, you would have zero chance at some kind of punitive damages, as I doubt you can prove any gross negligence or fraud on the part of Celebrity.

 

Edited December 27, 2023 by tscoffey

[hcat]

1 hour ago, markeb said:

 

It's been awhile since I looked, and it was pure curiosity, probably in response to something similar to this once upon a time. 

 

There is a set jurisdiction, in Florida (probably Miami). I'm sure there's an arbitration clause. I mean there's practically an arbitration clause if you buy toilet paper at Target! So at this point, if the OP has taken any action they've paid an attorney that will have a clerk go through the cruise contract and highlight all the "you're screwed" clauses and hopefully be ethical enough to advise his soon to be former client on the cost and likelihood of success in any action he takes. And how hard it would be to estimate real damages (as the actual attorneys on this thread have stated). But they will keep whatever minimum hourly rate they agreed to. As they should.

 

BTW, I believe we also forfeit our ability to participate in most class actions. Don't ever read the terms and conditions from LiveNation/Ticketmaster on your next concert/show ticket...

 

And I agree. There's a big difference between being a cheerleader and a realist. If a multi-billion dollar international corporation's attorneys can't write T&Cs that protect it from almost anything, especially the whole butler thing, then they've got much bigger problems. Ultimately it could come back to bite them in future bookings, but they're booking just fine right now with the changes and they're moving a new generation into their pipeline who won't remember any of this.

we agree!  

but let them vent..

[phoenix_dream]

1 hour ago, vjmatty said:

 

I can't tell you how many people wanted to hire me to "just send a letter" when I was practicing.  When they asked why I wouldn't do it I said because it's never just a letter.  I'm sure they'd find someone fresh out of law school trying to start a business and needing every potential retainer that walked in the door.

Curious what you think about the fact that on their website, under Premium Beverage Package, it still shows several wines as included, while at the very same time they are actually no longer included and people are being charged a surcharge?  I'm no lawyer but this seems illegal to me (and I'm sure is just a matter of not updating their website in time, but shouldn't that come before the change is made?).  I wouldn't bother suing over it, but just curious what the legality is - a slightly different situation as the butler service is written in kind of a grey area but this is a black and white difference.

[markeb]

4 minutes ago, phoenix_dream said:

Curious what you think about the fact that on their website, under Premium Beverage Package, it still shows several wines as included, while at the very same time they are actually no longer included and people are being charged a surcharge?  I'm no lawyer but this seems illegal to me (and I'm sure is just a matter of not updating their website in time, but shouldn't that come before the change is made?).  I wouldn't bother suing over it, but just curious what the legality is - a slightly different situation as the butler service is written in kind of a grey area but this is a black and white difference.

I believe the language is “such as”. And the ticket probably has an exclusion for clear errors. That’s how airlines cancel tickets that were sold for $10.00 instead of $1000. Substituting wines may not make the common sense test, but it might meet a legal standard. And your remedy would probably be $2.40 for each glass of wine you actually bought, not the ones you refused to buy. So $240 if you actually bought a 100 glasses on your cruise. Figure that’s 1/3 of the hourly rate quoted in this thread. 
 

It can be wrong but legal…

[mnocket]

2 hours ago, vjmatty said:

 

Many people do not understand that "legal" and "good customer service" are not the same thing.

THANK YOU!  Good to see someone understands my point.👍

[HopefulCruiser123]

Sometimes when people have  a disproportionate reaction to something that upsets them, its because there is something "else" that is really bugging them.  The something "else" in this case might have more to do with the overall cost of the Sky Suite itself.  The trigger of the disproportionate reaction  would  be compounded by a sense of diminished value when comparing the cost of the Sky Suites today to when they included the Butler service.  In other words, I think there is probably something more than just the lack of the butler going on here.  One could spend a little too much time reading Cruise Critic and find all kinds of reinforcement to the notion that they have been "cheated".  

 

That being said, I do think that Celebrity could dull the sting a bit if they removed from their website and promotional material any mention of the Sky Suite experience including anything that could be mistaken for a butler.   To leave it on there means they intend for you to think you have access to a butler and that he (or she) is going to unpack your clothes for you (will the Retreat host do this?) make your dinner reservations (same question), restock your mini fridge every day (do they if you are in a Sky Suite?).  Moments ago, I double checked the website and it clearly says " All our suites on Celebrity Beyond feature fresh color palettes and design details by Kelly Hoppen. As always, you’ll enjoy a butler, so you never have to lift a finger"  

 

Celebrity wants you to think that the Sky Suites are just a smaller Suite with all the same benefits, but in fact, they are not.  This just sets people up to be disappointed.  Why would Celebrity want to do that?  Is it really worth it?  Or is it just too complicated to make a new category for Sky Suite perks?   A lot of people would still pay the higher price for a larger room.   Some people probably wouldn't.  Are they afraid they might have to lower the price of the Sky Suites if  they bill it as just a larger room with privileges like the Retreat Lounge and deck, premium  drink package, and Luminae as your dining room?  It wouldn't change my mind about booking a Sky Suite.  I don't care about a butler.   But I do like all those other perks.

 

Years ago I stayed in a Grand Suite on RCCL and with it came the Concierge lounge.  This lounge was open to all Suite Guests and inside the Concierge Lounge was a Concierge. He was a very nice fellow, but he didn't do much.  He was kind of like an information  desk, tucked away in a windowless room where I could get a drink and a snack.  But my expectations had not been that he would be much more than that.  So it was fine.  There is something to be said  with "managing expectations".  

 

And by the way Future Cruise  Credits are kind of insulting unless you are the kind of cruiser that cruises often.  For those of us that do not cruise often at all....it's like saying "Oh...too bad, so sad.  Here let me sell you something else".

[hcat]

46 minutes ago, phoenix_dream said:

Curious what you think about the fact that on their website, under Premium Beverage Package, it still shows several wines as included, while at the very same time they are actually no longer included and people are being charged a surcharge?  I'm no lawyer but this seems illegal to me (and I'm sure is just a matter of not updating their website in time, but shouldn't that come before the change is made?).  I wouldn't bother suing over it, but just curious what the legality is - a slightly different situation as the butler service is written in kind of a grey area but this is a black and white difference.

Words like.." package offerings subject to change, subject to availabilty"   usually cover that...

 

We always ask before we order...and always confirm spa pricing before our service begins..another squirelly area!

[abbydancer2003]

Just now, hcat said:

Words like.." package offerings subject to change, subject to availabilty"   usually cover that...

 

 

Which is how both X and Princess started charging for room service except at breakfast, and Princess added a charge to previously free restaurant and started charging to use the app to order (the moved those to the packages, but didn't grandfather in those with packages who booked before they made the change).

[vjmatty]

1 hour ago, phoenix_dream said:

Curious what you think about the fact that on their website, under Premium Beverage Package, it still shows several wines as included, while at the very same time they are actually no longer included and people are being charged a surcharge?  I'm no lawyer but this seems illegal to me (and I'm sure is just a matter of not updating their website in time, but shouldn't that come before the change is made?).  I wouldn't bother suing over it, but just curious what the legality is - a slightly different situation as the butler service is written in kind of a grey area but this is a black and white difference.

There are certain key phrases that cover this… “subject to change” or “based on availability” are big ones. I suppose if you printed a screenshot you might get a sympathetic bartender. 
 

I can’t remember if it’s Celebrity or Princess that will raise the threshold when a majority of the drink prices go up. I haven’t sailed Celebrity since 2019, are they not adjusting for increases?

[abbydancer2003]

4 minutes ago, vjmatty said:

There are certain key phrases that cover this… “subject to change” or “based on availability” are big ones. I suppose if you printed a screenshot you might get a sympathetic bartender. 
 

I can’t remember if it’s Celebrity or Princess that will raise the threshold when a majority of the drink prices go up. I haven’t sailed Celebrity since 2019, are they not adjusting for increases?

Princess did.  We originally had 12.00 and almost all wines were under that.  When they raised the prices, the limit went to 15.00 or something like that.

[vjmatty]

22 minutes ago, abbydancer said:

Princess did.  We originally had 12.00 and almost all wines were under that.  When they raised the prices, the limit went to 15.00 or something like that.

Ok that’s what I was thinking. Princess may drive me nuts about some things, but between the Plus program and cap increases, they do make drinking easier than most cruise lines. As long as you don’t want more than 15 cocktails lol. 

[markeb]

31 minutes ago, vjmatty said:

There are certain key phrases that cover this… “subject to change” or “based on availability” are big ones. I suppose if you printed a screenshot you might get a sympathetic bartender. 
 

I can’t remember if it’s Celebrity or Princess that will raise the threshold when a majority of the drink prices go up. I haven’t sailed Celebrity since 2019, are they not adjusting for increases?

 

Pretty sure Celebrity has historically adjusted the package limit up when prices increased. They didn't this time.

 

But all their marketing includes key phrases. "Such as" being the most obvious.

[PTC DAWG]

41 minutes ago, vjmatty said:

Ok that’s what I was thinking. Princess may drive me nuts about some things, but between the Plus program and cap increases, they do make drinking easier than most cruise lines. As long as you don’t want more than 15 cocktails lol. 

About the time I get ready to play craps..no drinks for you….weak arsed mimosas and beer during the day shouldn’t count, but they do  🙂

[Joker54]

7 hours ago, billc23 said:

Agree!!! I have had butlers that I have known for a while relate the same issue to me. In the past to read on this forum what some consider "hardly ever using their butler", who then go on with all they expect of their butler, amazed me. I'll now duck for cover being an infrequent poster!

I’m not sure this is 100% accurate. Posts I have read where those who didn’t use their butlers are typically the ones saying the change is not a big deal. Some have had great experiences. We do use our butler (not abuse) and our recent b2b in a SS failed to even remotely provide the service as advertised when booked and paid for in full. X also failed to come close to providing the service described by the executive office when we called pre-cruise inquiring about both the change and lack of notice. X did provide the DW and myself with a 1k FCC each.  The FCC made the crew happier than it did for us. Compensation is great for some, it fails to address the real issue and we would prefer X improved communication to set proper expectations.

 

The OP has a better chance of winning powerball tonight than even getting on a docket before any litigation is dismissed with prejudice. 
 

X getting the case dismissed doesn’t mean they are truly right, just means they have a great legal team good at fine print and the cruising industry has case history on their side. Legally right and being good to your customer is not the same. The offer of FCC was a good attempt, it would be better if X had sent a notices in advance describing the change and not gaslight us with the service we supposedly will receive. X has the infrastructure to send out notices so no excuse to keep it a secret.

 

We are usually in higher end suites but do cruise in SS here and there, at least we used too. 

Cheers

 

Edited December 28, 2023 by Joker54

[Cruising Is Bliss]

20 hours ago, Andy&Mary Reno said:

We had paid off the cruise way before  the "penalty period had just begun. Regardless they offered  FCC.  There was other issues. We have decided to retain Counsel. It seems to me. Celebrity wants to hold you to a contract that they breeched. Very one sided. I believe in principles and ethical practices, Celebrity doesn't.    

 

Good luck with that. Tell us you've never read the contract without saying that you've never read the contract. They commit to providing a bed on a cruise ship. Everything else is subject to change. Just this month MSC, the day before sailing, due to weather conditions, informed incoming passengers that their warm Bahama cruise was now a chilly New England cruise which would start with a couple of days docked in Boston before the ship even sailed. MSC offered passengers the choice of taking the altered cruise or getting a FCC.

[Joker54]

3 minutes ago, Cruising Is Bliss said:

 

Good luck with that. Tell us you've never read the contract without saying that you've never read the contract. They commit to providing a bed on a cruise ship. Everything else is subject to change. Just this month MSC, the day before sailing, due to weather conditions, informed incoming passengers that their warm Bahama cruise was now a chilly New England cruise which would start with a couple of days docked in Boston before the ship even sailed. MSC offered passengers the choice of taking the altered cruise or getting a FCC.

Not defending the OP but your comparison isn’t remotely applicable. Definitely no where near apples to apples. Changes related to the safety and well being of the pax, crew and ship are not close to making changes to perks

[mayleeman]

OP: If you can get a lawyer to represent you, run out of there fast. Sanctions for frivolous litigation can be imposed against the party AND their counsel.

[Andy&Mary Reno]

I am surprised by the Celebrity Cheer Squad.  So not to ruin your Day don't read  the rest of the post.

We filed today in Federal court, some of the main issue to be addressed  1)  False / misleading advertising. Failure to disclose required truth in lending disclosures.  and 4 other causes of action. The "contract" will be deemed Null & void.  You cant enforce a contract that was presented  after transaction initiated.  I will post when I get updates and as when case progresses. Other than that, Happy Cruising. stay safe.