Has anyone had success with a refund from NCL?

[sanger727]

On 8/20/2024 at 4:04 AM, Never cruise with NCL said:

Can we agree that if you were on an excursion booked through the cruise line, you'd expect them to take care of you? Whether you're off the ship for an excursion or have an approved plan to reboard later, the cruise line still has a duty to keep passengers informed. Our situation isn't so different from those who disembark for excursions the only difference is the reason for our disembarkation.

 

No. It's completely different.  If you are on an excursion booked through the cruise line, there is a guarantee to get you back to the ship one way or another.  And there is communication between your tour guide and the ship if something changes.

 

Now, if you were exploring on your own, and an emergency caused the ship to leave early - you most likely would not get notified.  But, since a huge number of passengers would fall into this group, I imagine that they would make arrangements.

 

I don't think passengers would be notified of a mid-cruise port miss by text message or e-mail. That would almost certainly be communications by flyers left in the room, or announcements over the PA.  Most cruise passengers won't be checking their e-mail/text messages mid cruise.

 

This is a bit like booking your own connecting flight.  If you book everything through one company on one ticket, you have some recourse if a delay or cancellation occurs. Once you book something that goes off the rails of the original itinerary, you are on your own. No veteran cruiser would have advised any itinerary changes that depending on you boarding mid cruise at a port stop.  That was at your own risk. 

[The Traveling Man]

19 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

First off, you were booked on two cruises, not one.  One ended, and one began in Reykjavik.

 

Second, this is like saying "I got on a city bus, and paid the fare (which allows me to travel to any stop anywhere along the route, and re-enter the bus at any stop along the route), but I got off after two stops, walked around the corner, and got hit by a car.  Since I was "still a paying customer" of the bus line, they should be responsible for my medical bills.  SMH.

 

 

 

 

Thank you, Chief Engineer.  I was hoping that you would address this issue.  Your comments are always on point and stated authoritatively with great clarity.  The OP clearly "missed the boat," both literally and figuratively.  He took a chance and came up short.  I loved your bus passenger analogy.

[Middleager]

This thread is still going?

The OP should change the handle from "Never cruise with NCL" to "Never cruise again", because the decision to get off cruise, and no longer be a passenger, applies with any cruiseline.

[The Traveling Man]

6 minutes ago, Middleager said:

This thread is still going?

The OP should change the handle from "Never cruise with NCL" to "Never cruise again", because the decision to get off cruise, and no longer be a passenger, applies with any cruiseline.

I think the OP may have left the building.

[Middleager]

8 minutes ago, The Traveling Man said:

I think the OP may have left the building.

you mean the ship. ☺️

[Asawi]

1 minute ago, Middleager said:

you mean the ship. ☺️

I guess they weren't able to reboard... 😄 

[The Traveling Man]

13 minutes ago, The Traveling Man said:

I think the OP may have left the building.

 

4 minutes ago, Middleager said:

you mean the ship. ☺️

 

2 minutes ago, Asawi said:

I guess they weren't able to reboard... 😄 

The building, the ship, this thread, this forum, maybe even the entire internet.  I think they may have departed, declined to continue to converse on this subject.  This is a dead parrot.

[ChiefMateJRK]

2 hours ago, The Traveling Man said:

 

 

The building, the ship, this thread, this forum, maybe even the entire internet.  I think they may have departed, declined to continue to converse on this subject.  This is a dead parrot.

🤣He said "dead parrot."  How many will get that reference?

[The Traveling Man]

53 minutes ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

🤣He said "dead parrot."  How many will get that reference?

It's not much of a cheese shop, is it?

Yes, I realize this thread has been hijacked, but the OP seems to have gone the way of Mr. Wensleydale's cheese.

[Asawi]

1 hour ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

🤣He said "dead parrot."  How many will get that reference?

This parrot is no more! 😁

[ChiefMateJRK]

This thread has suddenly taken a sharp turn towards fun!!😎

 

 

[Never cruise with NCL]

I’ve read through everyone’s responses and comments. I’ve certainly learned from this experience, and the first thing I’ve decided is that I won’t be traveling with NCL again, primarily due to the level of service. How a company handles its customers in difficult situations is crucial. As a shareholder of NCL, I believe in providing people with a great time, and for those who don’t have that experience, it’s important to find a middle ground and try to make things right. Unfortunately, that didn’t happen here they didn’t even offer Future Cruise Credit (FCC).

One thing I can’t wrap my head around is how some of you think it’s unreasonable to expect an email notification about an itinerary change. When you pay for a cruise, you get all kinds of emails offers to upgrade, safety videos, and ads for future cruises. Yet, getting an automated email about something as important as a change in the itinerary is somehow too much? NCL is a big company, and it’s not just about the people on the ship they have the resources to manage this better. This could easily be automated the ship has a roll call, and if a certain number of passengers haven’t checked in, send them an email. It’s that simple.

Let’s be honest, two couples can go to the same show one might think it’s the best show ever, while the other didn’t care for it. Both experiences are valid. For me, this experience with NCL has completely turned me off from their brand. From now on, I’ll be sticking with RCL and CCL brand ships because of what happened and how it was handled. Companies like NCL should be better at managing people, regardless of the reason whether it’s risky decisions, accidents, or anything else. The way they handled this was simply unacceptable. Even filing a claim with NCL is frustrating you’re writing to a chatbot, not even a real person.

At the end of the day, communication is key. If we start accepting that it’s okay for a cruise line to leave passengers in the dark, where does that leave us? This isn’t just about my case it’s about holding companies accountable for managing their passengers, no matter the situation. I hope this resonates with some of you because I believe we all deserve better. I also understand that it could have been the same with other brands but that wasn't my experience. It's like having nasty food at a restaurant and you decided never to eat there again because of how it was handled. It could of happen anywhere but that restaurant isn't getting anymore of your money! NEVER CRUISE WITH NCL! parrot out 🙂

[Never cruise with NCL]

11 hours ago, Middleager said:

This thread is still going?

The OP should change the handle from "Never cruise with NCL" to "Never cruise again", because the decision to get off cruise, and no longer be a passenger, applies with any cruiseline.

While policies might be similar across cruise lines, the quality and effectiveness of communication can vary significantly between companies. NCL failed to provide timely and accurate information regarding itinerary changes, especially when they had approved us to embark in Akureyri, that reflects on their customer service and operational efficiency.  The way a company responds to unexpected situations, including offering support, alternatives, or compensation, is a key aspect of customer service. Some cruise lines might handle such scenarios more proactively or empathetically than others.
Each situation is unique, and personal experiences can significantly shape one's perception of a company. Our dissatisfaction stems from how NCL handled our specific case, including communication failures and the subsequent customer service experience. It's reasonable to base our future choices on this personal experience.

Edited August 23 by Never cruise with NCL

[Middleager]

8 minutes ago, Never cruise with NCL said:

While policies might be similar across cruise lines, the quality and effectiveness of communication can vary significantly between companies. NCL failed to provide timely and accurate information regarding itinerary changes, especially when they had approved us to embark in Akureyri, that reflects on their customer service and operational efficiency.  The way a company responds to unexpected situations, including offering support, alternatives, or compensation, is a key aspect of customer service. Some cruise lines might handle such scenarios more proactively or empathetically than others.
Each situation is unique, and personal experiences can significantly shape one's perception of a company. Our dissatisfaction stems from how NCL handled our specific case, including communication failures and the subsequent customer service experience. It's reasonable to base our future choices on this personal experience.

Suggest you never to cruise, if you have this type of utterly unreasonable expectations, especially when you are in the wrong.

 

We have cruised, and the change of not going to port only announced the night before.  We have reached a port, and they tried tendering.  After a few hours of trying and waiting, they announced that we will miss that port.  If you missed boarding the ship, due to your own choice, you are NOT a passenger on that ship, to know the most up to date info.

 

Be reasonable.  Have common sense.  And admit you are wrong.

[ChiefMateJRK]

34 minutes ago, Never cruise with NCL said:

As a shareholder of NCL, I believe in providing people with a great time, and for those who don’t have that experience, it’s important to find a middle ground and try to make things right.

As a shareholder of NCL, I believe in rewarding corporate officers and everybody down the line for running it like a business, placing shareholder value above all else.  If providing people with a great time increases shareholder value (it does), then they should do that.  If doling out cash (or cash value) to people who leave the ship and don't make it on the next ship through no fault of the company fails to increase shareholder value (it doesn't), then I'm against it.

 

It's silly for me, with a measly 100 shares of NCLH held 100% for the free OBC, to post about how "as an owner, I expect this."  To put it another way, if you feel compelled as an "owner" to influence how the company is run, then you should probably write to the president or attend an earnings meeting.  Posting it on an internet forum will accomplish nothing, except perhaps to make you feel better.  I guess that may have value, but not to the NCL passengers or corporation.

[Never cruise with NCL]

7 minutes ago, Middleager said:

Suggest you never to cruise, if you have this type of utterly unreasonable expectations, especially when you are in the wrong.

 

We have cruised, and the change of not going to port only announced the night before.  We have reached a port, and they tried tendering.  After a few hours of trying and waiting, they announced that we will miss that port.  If you missed boarding the ship, due to your own choice, you are NOT a passenger on that ship, to know the most up to date info.

 

Be reasonable.  Have common sense.  And admit you are wrong.

Yes, cruise itineraries can change last minute weather and other factors are unpredictable, and I completely understand that. However, my situation wasn’t about being unreasonable or ignoring common sense it was about trusting the information and approval I was given by the cruise line.

Imagine this You're on a cruise, and the line offers you an excursion, encouraging you to explore on your own for a bit. You trust them and go ahead, expecting that if anything changes like the ship needing to depart early or skip the port you'd be informed so you can adjust your plans and not be left behind. That’s a reasonable expectation, right? It’s not about blaming the cruise line for the weather or even for the change in itinerary it’s about expecting them to communicate with you when you’re still part of the cruise.

The notion that 'not a passenger' just because we trusted their approval feels a bit off. We’re still their customers, and they should have a duty to inform us of changes that affect our plans especially when they involve approved embarkations. I think most would agree that clear communication is key in any service industry, and a cruise should be no different.

After all, no one wants to be in a situation where they’re left stranded due to a lack of information, whether they’re on an excursion, dealing with an emergency, or in my case, joining after an approved port. Isn’t it fair to expect a level of support and communication from the cruise line to avoid situations like these? Dude if you can't see some of those points it's nothing more to talk about. We just don't agree

[ChiefMateJRK]

2 minutes ago, Never cruise with NCL said:

Isn’t it fair to expect a level of support and communication from the cruise line to avoid situations like these?

No.  Avoiding situations like this is entirely the responsibility of the customer who unilaterally decided to try something very risky.

[Never cruise with NCL]

4 minutes ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

As a shareholder of NCL, I believe in rewarding corporate officers and everybody down the line for running it like a business, placing shareholder value above all else.  If providing people with a great time increases shareholder value (it does), then they should do that.  If doling out cash (or cash value) to people who leave the ship and don't make it on the next ship through no fault of the company fails to increase shareholder value (it doesn't), then I'm against it.

 

It's silly for me, with a measly 100 shares of NCLH held 100% for the free OBC, to post about how "as an owner, I expect this."  To put it another way, if you feel compelled as an "owner" to influence how the company is run, then you should probably write to the president or attend an earnings meeting.  Posting it on an internet forum will accomplish nothing, except perhaps to make you feel better.  I guess that may have value, but not to the NCL passengers or corporation.

I don’t think it’s silly to voice concerns and expectations as a shareholder, even if it's just on a forum. After all, companies like NCL rely on feedback from all their customers and shareholders to improve their services and enhance their value.

When I say 'as a shareholder, I’m not claiming to have the power to change corporate policy single handedly, but rather to highlight that I’m invested in this company in more ways than one. My point isn’t about 'doling out cash' it's about ensuring that NCL maintains a high standard of service that reflects well on the brand, builds customer loyalty, and ultimately, benefits everyone, including shareholders.

While forums might not be where corporate decisions are made, they’re definitely where consumer sentiment is gauged. If enough people share similar experiences or concerns, it can lead to broader changes. Plus, discussing these issues openly helps fellow cruisers make informed decisions.

At the end of the day, being a shareholder, no matter how small, means I care about how the company is perceived and how it treats its customers. That’s why I’m here, sharing my experience that could lead to positive change.

[ChiefMateJRK]

8 minutes ago, Never cruise with NCL said:

At the end of the day, being a shareholder, no matter how small, means I care about how the company is perceived and how it treats its customers. That’s why I’m here, sharing my experience that could lead to positive change.

How many shares do you own?  Is it more than the token 100 shares that many of us own only for the OBC?  I'll go out on a (short) limb (with an 🦉) and suggest that the majority here who own the 100 shares don't give a hoot about anything other than the OBC.  Do we care about how NCL treats its customers?  Yes, but only when we are the customer.  How it is perceived?  Don't know.  Don't care.  If other cruisers don't admire NCL, then my fares will likely drop.  I'm good with that.😎

[Middleager]

32 minutes ago, Never cruise with NCL said:

Yes, cruise itineraries can change last minute weather and other factors are unpredictable, and I completely understand that. However, my situation wasn’t about being unreasonable or ignoring common sense it was about trusting the information and approval I was given by the cruise line.

Imagine this You're on a cruise, and the line offers you an excursion, encouraging you to explore on your own for a bit. You trust them and go ahead, expecting that if anything changes like the ship needing to depart early or skip the port you'd be informed so you can adjust your plans and not be left behind. That’s a reasonable expectation, right? It’s not about blaming the cruise line for the weather or even for the change in itinerary it’s about expecting them to communicate with you when you’re still part of the cruise.

The notion that 'not a passenger' just because we trusted their approval feels a bit off. We’re still their customers, and they should have a duty to inform us of changes that affect our plans especially when they involve approved embarkations. I think most would agree that clear communication is key in any service industry, and a cruise should be no different.

After all, no one wants to be in a situation where they’re left stranded due to a lack of information, whether they’re on an excursion, dealing with an emergency, or in my case, joining after an approved port. Isn’t it fair to expect a level of support and communication from the cruise line to avoid situations like these? Dude if you can't see some of those points it's nothing more to talk about. We just don't agree

You still don't get it.  You did not take an NCL excursion.  You are not a passenger on the ship.  You got off the first cruise early.  You did not take a ship excursion.  Then you missed the boat.

 

You cannot reasonably compare being on a ship excursion, to your situation.  Many people already tried to tell you, but you still don't want to understand.

 

You are NOT part of that second cruise because you missed the boat.  You went to do something on your own, not a ship excursion.  You missed the boat.  You did not get on the ship at the embarkation port.  You missed the boat.  That's your doing.  The risk of the ship not going to a next port, is the risk you chose to take on.  It happened.  That's on you.

 

As some others suggested, if you still don't understand how it's your own fault, hire a lawyer to try to get something.  Many lawyers will gladly take your money.

[chengkp75]

3 hours ago, Middleager said:

You cannot reasonably compare being on a ship excursion, to your situation.  Many people already tried to tell you, but you still don't want to understand.

 

It's not that the OP doesn't understand, it's that they don't want to accept personal responsibility for their actions.  A sad, but all too common, occurrence today.

[Asawi]

4 hours ago, Never cruise with NCL said:

Yes, cruise itineraries can change last minute weather and other factors are unpredictable, and I completely understand that. However, my situation wasn’t about being unreasonable or ignoring common sense it was about trusting the information and approval I was given by the cruise line.

Actually it kind of was... It seems the thought of YOU keeping track of things never crossed your mind. And it seems you actually didn't know what this "approval" actually entailed or didn't entail. You "assumed" things without checking facts.

Some people here would even suggest the whole plan was an example of ignoring common sense, but I'm not prepared to go quite that far.

[hallux]

6 hours ago, Never cruise with NCL said:

Imagine this You're on a cruise, and the line offers you an excursion, encouraging you to explore on your own for a bit. You trust them and go ahead, expecting that if anything changes like the ship needing to depart early or skip the port you'd be informed so you can adjust your plans and not be left behind

First off - if you get off the ship on an excursion the ship hasn't skipped the port, so that part of your hypothetical is out the window.  If the port is skipped before you get off the ship then you'll get your money back for the missed excursion IF you booked it through the cruise line.

 

Second - if you're on a ship-sponsored 'explore on your own' excursion where you've been transported somewhere in the port city and given a time to be back for the bus to pick you up but the ship needs to leave early for weather concerns then the cruise line usually WILL get you to the next port, or make every effort to do so.

 

Take, for example, the couples earlier this year that did their own excursion in an African country but returned late, after the ship left.  They were advised they could re-board at a later port stop if they could make their own way there.  The ship then had to skip that port stop due to weather or safety concerns so NCL picked up the bill (either because they were shamed into it or because it was the right thing to do due to the ship having to skip the port) for them to get to the NEXT port, but still not for travel to the skipped port.  The first leg of travel was still the passenger's responsibility because they chose to leave the ship on their own excursion.  This situation is different from yours, though, in that it was all still the same cruise so they were still passengers on that trip.  You checked out of your cabin, closed out your account and left the ship from the first cruise.  You were no longer a passenger on NCL, not until you stepped back on the ship.

 

So... let me ask you this.  Weather cancellations for port stops are usually, as noted by others, same-day or day-before decisions.  You find out through this new email/texting policy that the ship is skipping the port you're in.  What do you do?  CAN you book a last-minute flight (a same-day one, even) to the next port on the itinerary?  Say you can, what if they decide they need to skip THAT one?  Are you going to book endless flights between ports until you can board?  Somehow I have a feeling that in the part of the world where this happened to you there was not going to be a whole lot you could do to meet up with the ship even if you WERE notified of the skipped port once the decision was made.

 

7 hours ago, Never cruise with NCL said:

especially when they involve approved embarkations.

As someone that used to work in the industry (for NCL even) noted - it was an ALLOWED downline embarkation.  That still carries the risk of the port where you want to embark being skipped.

 

By the way - Royal Caribbean won't allow this AT ALL.  Their policy, per the blog post I found, changed in 2021, but prior to that they discouraged the practice for the exact reason of the possible last-minute itinerary changes causing the ship to miss the port the passenger wants to board at!  https://www.royalcaribbean.com/faq/questions/different-departure-port-city

[Menocchio]

9 hours ago, Never cruise with NCL said:

One thing I can’t wrap my head around is how some of you think it’s unreasonable to expect an email notification about an itinerary change.

With the sole exception of you, the people who needed to know about the itinerary change were all on the ship. Most people on the ship probably didn't spring for unlimited WiFi and didn't have access to email. Announcements and paper notifications on the ship were necessary, and usually sufficient for this situation. 

 

You made up a new kind of problem. Most people don't get off one cruise early and board the next one late. NCL doesn't have a practiced response to your issue. That's a situation you should avoid.

[debenson0723]

4 hours ago, Asawi said:

Actually it kind of was... It seems the thought of YOU keeping track of things never crossed your mind. And it seems you actually didn't know what this "approval" actually entailed or didn't entail. You "assumed" things without checking facts.

Some people here would even suggest the whole plan was an example of ignoring common sense, but I'm not prepared to go quite that far.

This is what I was thinking.  Did the OP try to communicate with NCL that everything was to plan so they could reboard their 2nd cruise at the entended port?  Communication is a 2 way street and when I travel, I always confirm everything before I leave, and while I am traveling, just to make sure nothing has changed. Multiple times I have gotten off one flight only to find my next flight has changed (and no text or email from the airlines).

The lack of common sense and entitlement here is amazing.