Do not sail list

[ZoeyVictoria]

2 minutes ago, BIGBANG22 said:

I am sure information is missing! but What i am starting to believe is "agent" that booked my trip was not an actually agent... It sounds like he was a scammer! I just don't exactly know how i was scammed yet.... i can only assume the card that was used was not his card or if it was he lied to carnival about something to get the chargeback! IDK...im still tryna figure it out

He kept your cash, used his credit card, then did a chargeback after you cruised. That action would be on him, not you.  Carnival should have gone after him.  

[BIGBANG22]

4 minutes ago, ZoeyVictoria said:

He kept your cash, used his credit card, then did a chargeback after you cruised. That action would be on him, not you.  Carnival should have gone after him.  

I would think so! But i have got to together my evidence as another member mentioned... I have all the text messages and amounts showing what was sent! I just need to get the contract/receipt from carnival now sent over...which i will try to work on tomorrow. 

[dabomb6608]

6 minutes ago, ZoeyVictoria said:

He kept your cash, used his credit card, then did a chargeback after you cruised. That action would be on him, not you.  Carnival should have gone after him.  

 

This is true, however in Carnivals eyes there is no proof that OP is not the person who actually did the chargeback. Now that cruiser is attempting to cruise again. 

 

Please note OP I am not trying to claim you did this. I'm just showing the other side of the coin here. Any and all correspondence and documentation will help towards clearing this up with Carnival Representatives.

 

Hopefully you can find a resolution. 

[TiredTrucker]

20 minutes ago, ZoeyVictoria said:

I don’t understand how or why the OP is even involved. If the payment was made by the TA after receiving the money through Zelle from the OP, the charge must have been made on the TA’s credit card. The TA is the one who did the chargeback.  Why would Carnival go after the person who took the cruise rather than the owner of the credit card who did the chargeback?

 

OP's info was on the booking involved.  Must have been enough to flag them onto the no sail list. 

[PlanoTim]

44 minutes ago, dabomb6608 said:

 

This is true, however in Carnivals eyes there is no proof that OP is not the person who actually did the chargeback. Now that cruiser is attempting to cruise again. 

 

Please note OP I am not trying to claim you did this. I'm just showing the other side of the coin here. Any and all correspondence and documentation will help towards clearing this up with Carnival Representatives.

 

Hopefully you can find a resolution. 

My son investigates merchant fraud for a major credit-card processor.  He has some really wild stories to tell of schemes that fraudsters try.  Many times they work with other merchants or just with themselves posing as another merchant or individual to defraud the bank.  I'm not suggesting that the OP was involved in the fraud...but how does CCL know that.  It could be that they have been burned by this before.   Perhaps that is why they have taken this stance.

 

I hope you can get this cleared up.

[BIGBANG22]

Thanks Plano, i understand! 

[kctwinmommy]

Wow! This whole thing is crazy, and good to know for others. I wonder if he had fraudulent credit cards that he used too. Just sounds like something a scammer like this would do. I hope you can at least clear your name in this and get your deposit back. If you haven't yet, I would also check your credit history and make sure there's nothing else in it.

[sparks1093]

9 hours ago, Eli_6 said:

I understand that, but OP said they are holding on to his deposit and refusing to give it back to him on the canceled cruise.  Carnival has no right to do that because any claim CCL could have brought against him for the charge back would be outside of the SOL.  So, they can cancel his cruise but they need to give him his money back for the cruise they are canceling. If your claim for fraud is outside of the SOL it is NO CLAIM AT ALL.  So, CCL may have been out money years ago but by not asserting their rights and pursuing their claim they lost any right to pursue him for that money or hold on to his money he paid for a different deposit on a cruise.  One reason statutes of limitation are put in place is to prevent this EXACT sort of situation where so much time has passed that no one can now get documents or evidence or track down the real offending party. 

 

 

Actually there are two SOLs here. One for the fraud, which is criminal. One for the collection of a debt, which is civil. OP might be able to get a refund if the second SOL has tolled, but if not, we'll, he is SOL.

[sparks1093]

9 hours ago, BIGBANG22 said:

Yes and I understand why they are doing what they are doing. What i don't understand is why i was never notified! This would have been alot easier for to remedy when it 1st happened. I would have never known about this issue had i not booked another cruise! But yes, I undersand why carnival did it... But i was defrauded too! 

This action was done by your agent and they probably communicated this to your agent. Not surprising that your agent didn't pass the communication on to you.

[sailingships]

15 hours ago, BIGBANG22 said:

Yes, i zelled him the money FROM my bank because he said his agency did not accept Amercan express. Zelle is pretty much equal to cash,  

Thank you for clearing that up. I was wondering what Zell was. I guess its like a money transfer. Did the Zell have the name of Carnival on it or the name of the TA ? Do you have any receipts etc.?  Your bank should have a record of the purchase of the Zell. I'm sorry this has happened to you. 

 

I wonder if he ever told you which credit cards he did accept? If any. A reputable company would have accepted AmEx.

[mfs2k]

There’s a moral to this unfortunate tale. 
Book direct or with a reputable agency. If the agency doesn’t take all major credit cards I’d say that’s a red flag. 
When you pay an agency and you rely on that agency to pay a hotel, airline or cruise line, you’re at risk if the agency goes bankrupt or disappears. 
in your situation, it’s a little puzzling how a chargeback occurred between the time the payment was made by the agency and your sailing. Something fishy occurred. 
 

Edited January 17 by mfs2k

[Purvis1231]

I think after seven years you do not have any legal recourse but you may need to consult an attorney. I hope you have checked to see if the travel agent was ever arrested or sued. If so then you may find out if there were any recovered funds available. I would try to contact Carnival's legal department since generally have a brain and may be willing to listen to you and your evidence.  Good luck. I hate that scammers are everywhere and the travel industry is no exception. this is a good lesson- if a business does not take credit cards don't deal with them. 

[realaud]

10 hours ago, BIGBANG22 said:

I am sure information is missing! but What i am starting to believe is "agent" that booked my trip was not an actually agent... It sounds like he was a scammer! I just don't exactly know how i was scammed yet.... i can only assume the card that was used was not his card or if it was he lied to carnival about something to get the chargeback! IDK...im still tryna figure it out

It sounds as if this scammer stole someone else's cc to book trips, asked you to pay him cash and skipped with your money. The person whose cc it was noticed the charge they did not make and disputed it. That charge to CCL was associated with your booking.  That's how Ponzi schemes work. In my earlier post, I gave you s link to the executive contacts at CCL, find the post and contact the execs. Customer service cannot help you with this.

Edited January 17 by realaud

[ontheweb]

3 hours ago, sailingships said:

Thank you for clearing that up. I was wondering what Zell was. I guess its like a money transfer. Did the Zell have the name of Carnival on it or the name of the TA ? Do you have any receipts etc.?  Your bank should have a record of the purchase of the Zell. I'm sorry this has happened to you. 

 

I wonder if he ever told you which credit cards he did accept? If any. A reputable company would have accepted AmEx.

It should not even be a question about which credit cards the TA accepts. The charge should go straight to the cruise line, and they take all major credit cards. At the point the agent said, American Express would not be accepted, you should have run away from that transaction, unfortunately, an expensive lesson.

[ray98]

11 hours ago, ZoeyVictoria said:

He kept your cash, used his credit card, then did a chargeback after you cruised. That action would be on him, not you.  Carnival should have gone after him.  

....but the contract is with the customer who cruised.  The customer 'hired' the agent, not Carnival.  At the end of the day it is common sense for the company not to do business with either in the future if they were basically left holding the bag for a free cruise.

[EllieinNJ]

What I don't understand is that if the OP cruised then Carnival was originally paid.  What reason would a bank agree to credit a charge back after a cruise was already taken?  And Carnival could have contested the charge back at that time and probably have won.

 

We tried to do a charge back for an excursion we took that turned out to be horrible and nothing like what it was described as.  We first tried to talk to the vendor and he wouldn't budge an inch.  So after we did the charge back the vendor contested it, saying we did take the excursion so the bank refused us.

[TiredTrucker]

Just now, EllieinNJ said:

What reason would a bank agree to credit a charge back after a cruise was already taken?  And Carnival could have contested the charge back at that time and probably have won.

 

Exactly what I've been wondering. 

[sparks1093]

20 minutes ago, EllieinNJ said:

What I don't understand is that if the OP cruised then Carnival was originally paid.  What reason would a bank agree to credit a charge back after a cruise was already taken?  And Carnival could have contested the charge back at that time and probably have won.

 

We tried to do a charge back for an excursion we took that turned out to be horrible and nothing like what it was described as.  We first tried to talk to the vendor and he wouldn't budge an inch.  So after we did the charge back the vendor contested it, saying we did take the excursion so the bank refused us.

As I understand it they have only a certain period of time to respond and it's quite possible that CCL missed that window for some reason so the bank had no choice but to approve the charge back. The OP still has quite the mess on their hands to figure out though, regardless of how the charge back occurred. 

[dabomb6608]

36 minutes ago, EllieinNJ said:

What I don't understand is that if the OP cruised then Carnival was originally paid.  What reason would a bank agree to credit a charge back after a cruise was already taken?  And Carnival could have contested the charge back at that time and probably have won.

 

If the actual credit card owner was neither the fake travel agent or the individual who took the cruise then the bank would have every right to perform a chargeback. Scammers are going to scam, so I would be shocked if the fake travel agent actually used a legit card in their name.

[Eli_6]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

It should not even be a question about which credit cards the TA accepts. The charge should go straight to the cruise line, and they take all major credit cards. At the point the agent said, American Express would not be accepted, you should have run away from that transaction, unfortunately, an expensive lesson.

Many legitimate businesses don't accept Amex. The reason is because it charges a significantly higher processing fee. Most businesses of the size of a travel agency having a credit card processing company that charges around 2.2 to 2.4 percent (some slight lower and some slightly higher) to process credit cards.  Amex's fee is closer to 4 percent while Visa, MC, Discovery all charge lower fees.  I would not personally take it as a red flag that a business didn't take Amex.  Now if they didn't take ANY credit cards...that's a different story.  

 

 

[Elaine5715]

OP, what form of payment did you used onboard?  Did you enter the check in information or did the "TA"?  Was that the card that has a chargeback?  Did you pull all three credit reports?  

 

 

[Eli_6]

5 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

Actually there are two SOLs here. One for the fraud, which is criminal. One for the collection of a debt, which is civil. OP might be able to get a refund if the second SOL has tolled, but if not, we'll, he is SOL.

Neither of those matter in this situation unless OP wanted to sue the original bad actor. Then, yes, it may be that the SOL on his civil claims against the agent would have tolled because he was unaware of the fraud. But then you get into questions of whether the OP should have known, etc. For this amount of money, it is unlikely it would be worth a lawyer taking that on...especially when no one knows where the agent is. 

 

The statute of limitations that I am referring to is that Carnival could have pursued the OP for the fraudulent charge back.  They didn't. That statute of limitations has undoubtedly run so, therefore, they cannot then take OP's money they paid for another service (a new cruise) and keep for themselves for a claim they never pursued. They sat on their rights and so they lost them. Their claim to that money and right to pursue OP for that money, has expired.  They can exclude whomever they want from their ships but keeping money for an expired claim (which is effectively no claim at all) is not legal. 

 

The entire reason for running a statute of limitations is for this exact situation.  If Carnival had original sued OP for the money, then OP could have sued the original bad actor and the situation hopefully resolved. Now, seven years later, he probably won't even be able to find him/her.

 

DISCLAIMER: I am an attorney, but not an attorney for anyone on this page.  Nothing I say should be considered legal advice.  

[ChutChut]

16 hours ago, BIGBANG22 said:

How is it sketchy? He was a referral by my brother and my brother friend referred the  "agent" to him ! They both had experience with this guy! I had no reg flags. Even with Amex, i don't travel often! I know of multiple companies that don't accept amex so even that wasn't a red flag. Had this person not be referred, i would not have Zelled him. I paid for the trip back in 2019. I don't have another 2600 to pay. carnival should have informed me of this then

Nah - Carnival isn't to blame here. The sleezy travel agent is. Your beef is with him - not Carnival. Straighten it out with the travel agent - get your money back - and then repay Carnival. 

[ChutChut]

12 hours ago, ZoeyVictoria said:

He kept your cash, used his credit card, then did a chargeback after you cruised. That action would be on him, not you.  Carnival should have gone after him.  

No - OP was the customer - not the travel agent. 

[sparks1093]

10 minutes ago, Eli_6 said:

Neither of those matter in this situation unless OP wanted to sue the original bad actor. Then, yes, it may be that the SOL on his civil claims against the agent would have tolled because he was unaware of the fraud. But then you get into questions of whether the OP should have known, etc. For this amount of money, it is unlikely it would be worth a lawyer taking that on...especially when no one knows where the agent is. 

 

The statute of limitations that I am referring to is that Carnival could have pursued the OP for the fraudulent charge back.  They didn't. That statute of limitations has undoubtedly run so, therefore, they cannot then take OP's money they paid for another service (a new cruise) and keep for themselves for a claim they never pursued. They sat on their rights and so they lost them. Their claim to that money and right to pursue OP for that money, has expired.  They can exclude whomever they want from their ships but keeping money for an expired claim (which is effectively no claim at all) is not legal. 

 

The entire reason for running a statute of limitations is for this exact situation.  If Carnival had original sued OP for the money, then OP could have sued the original bad actor and the situation hopefully resolved. Now, seven years later, he probably won't even be able to find him/her.

 

DISCLAIMER: I am an attorney, but not an attorney for anyone on this page.  Nothing I say should be considered legal advice.  

But Carnival is treating this like a bad debt, and a collection account against the OP, not the original agent (in Carnival's eyes the OP took a cruise and didn't pay for it). Who knows when the SOL started tolling on that. They may or may not have the right to keep OP's deposit but they are acting like they do have that right which means that the OP might have to go to court to recover what they are keeping (unless he can somehow convince them otherwise). Any way that you slice it, this is a mess of highest order.