Summit Alaskan cruise disappointment (MERGER OF 5 THREADS ON THIS TOPIC)

[la_croisiere_s'amuse]

sorry, but this is totally wrong. Your statments might apply to passengers booked in the US, but my contract (Germany) says something very different.

Well then, I stand corrected! :)

 

This is very interesting. I did a quick web search in my European languages (which do not include German) and I wasn't able to find anything. Celebrity doesn't have a website specific to France, Italy, Belgium or Switzerland (the countries where I've lived). I did note, however, that the UK Celebrity website doesn't include the contract. It sends you back to the US site.

 

I would be very interested to know how many of the protestors booked outside of the US . . .

[FlyingTiger]

An example of that was our request to leave the ship later than 7:45am and being told that would be impossible. We did arrive on time but were not called until 10am. The young lady in charge was in a total fog. All in all I was very disappointed in Celebrity and very embarassed by the way they handled almost every aspect of this cruise.

 

We had a late flight out of Vancouver. I did write exactly that into the questionaire. We wouldn´t mind to get off as the last ones. Nowadays you can´t leave unattended baggage nowhere to go on a cityspree. Now guess? Yes, we had luggage tags "purple 3" and went off among the first that morning. We than took a day room at Fairmont Hotel at Vancouver airport and after 13 days depending on unprofessional holiday management, these couple of hours were a bit like real holiday.

[FlyingTiger]

I did a quick web search in my European languages (which do not include German) and I wasn't able to find anything. Celebrity doesn't have a website specific to France' date=' Italy, Belgium or Switzerland (the countries where I've lived). I did note, however, that the UK Celebrity website doesn't include the contract. It sends you back to the US site.

 

[/font']

 

Well, all that is part of my travel documents, which were send to me by Celebrity Cruises, branch Frankfurt Germany.

 

Strange, I could swear their was a german Celebrity website before I went on this cruise. I even had something printed in german off that website. If I type: "www.celebritycruises.de" now, I get redirected to the german website of RCC.

[FlyingFish***]

We were on the cruise - our 2nd with X, and probably our last. The smarmy cruise director, the rudeness of the hotel director (who curiously seemed to lack many basic social skills), the several obvious deceits on the part of the company, and the few other ship-related disappointments that we had to deal with were unfortunate. On the other hand, we met some wonderful kiwis, Brits and Germans, had excellent experiences with the customer-facing members of the crew, and were astonished by the several Alaska side trips that my most excellent travel agent had arranged.

 

Alaska was great; Celebrity was much less so.

 

For those of you who cruise frequently, a discount against a future cruise may remove some of the sting. For many of us however, cruising is an infrequently-in-a-lifetime experience, and the likelihood of another cruise within the 18 month window brings to mind stories about snowballs in hell.

 

I met many people on Summit who had done >50 cruises. Few of them protested, and like some of the contributors to this thread, several were rather curt in their references to those who were upset. I suspect that having been somewhere 14 times, and having the likelihood of going back 10 more times, removes much of the sting from the disappointment many passengers on board Summit felt. Experienced cruisers might consider cutting the rest of us a bit of slack. Also, readers might want to remind themselves that simply because something appears in a contract does not necessarily mean that particular aspect of the contract is enforceable.

 

We vacation more frequently these days, but another such cruise in the next 2 years is highly unlikely. Fortunately, we have found other ways to travel, and so will likely look to alternatives other than Celebrity. Timeshares have proven a consistant winner for us, and I hear that Holland-America and Princess might be induced to take our money...

 

Timeshares have always treated us well, because they know we will be coming back. Celebrity has treated us less well, and I suspect we will act accordingly.

[Drew B]

Having said that, I do not believe the CD was the main cause of the situation.

 

You're right, I'm sure. He definitely doesn't deserve all the blame. However, he was the ONLY thing that got my blood boiling. Ditto for my father. I have to assume there were others who felt the same way.

[aznails]

Dear Sky Sweet,

I figure, the industrie goes as far as the law allows them to go. It looks like US law favours the protection of the industrie, while european law tends more to protect the customers. A balanced blend of both would be the ideal.

 

And, please, dear community, this is something you can´t blame the passengers for. If I book in Germany, the Celebrity branch in Germany is my legal partner. Same goes for the british passengers.

 

happy sailings

 

Bingo! I think you hit the nail on the head when you say that U.S Law (like current politics) tends to favor Big Business rather than Little Guy Consumer, while your laws obviously are written to protect the consumer.

 

That is quite obvious by the complete different wording in the two contracts. I think we need better consumer-protection laws here in the U.S. that will help back us in our tangles with the large industries.

 

Flying Tiger, do you plan on taking "remedial action"? If so, what do you plan to do? Please keep us posted as to the outcome.

[carolmacey]

We were on this sailing and were very disappointed. To add insult to injury my husband had a cold and cough so we decided to have the doctor check him out. well he had a touch of bronchitis and the bill without a chest xray or antiobiotic ( we had brought the one recommended with us) came to $579!!!

 

We could not believe it. We spoke to another man with the same symptoms and his bill was over $700!

I think this is just another area that needs to be reigned in at Celebrity

Janet

 

Janet,

A table mate of ours went to the Dr. for a problem with his feet. Turned out to be athlete's foot from the ship's shower. This man received four shots of antibiotic, a small bar of soap, and a bill for over $900. He went to the customer service rep and the bil was cancelled. He was also told the Dr. was off the ship as of that morning. Maybe you need to contact Celebrity again.

Good luck,

Carol

[cruiser2004]

If this is supposed to be the real story why don't you just let the people from this cruise tell their story.

 

Apparently you guys who were not on the cruise seem to feel that the people who were on it are not allowed to have an opinion that differs from how you think you would react to the same cruise experience. You were not there and you don't know what the conditions were really like and you really do not know how you would react unless you were there.

 

No wonder Celebrity is in such bad shape these days - it seems to have a loyal bunch of people who will put up with anything Celebrity is dishing out that day. However, it appears from this Board that huge numbers of people are now speaking up and all they get is a flaming response from you rather than any support. So they will go elsewhere for a better cruise experience and you will be left with your backside sticking up in the air asking Celebrity to stick it to you once again keeping things just as they are.

 

If you look at the most common threads for any other Board you will not see the complaints that you are seeing on Celebrity these days. Something is obviously broke and if you don't let these people speak up it will never get fixed.

Thanks FirstCelebrityCruiser for your post and thanks to all who also believe that Celebrity really dropped the ball on this one. I was on this cruise and have been amazed at how many posters who were not on this cruise have offered analysis of what happened and how we should react to the treatment that we received.

FlyingTiger gave an excellent description of what happened onboard the Summit so I will not go into any description here. While I do respect the right of those who were on this cruise to have a different opinion than mine they must also realize that those of us who feel that we were treated unfairly by Celebrity had a right to object. Writing a letter to Celebrity would have accomplished nothing.

I feel that the group that formed to protest the inept handling of this matter by Celibrity was the only recourse that we had and that the group conducted themselves admirably. Contrary to what you have read on these boards this group was driven together by Celebrity's actions and not by a handfull of "Pirates". We tried to enjoy the cruise even through the difficulties, but almost every day Celebrity found a new way to stir things up again.

Celebrity could have avoided all of this had they been upfront with what was going on.

[carolmacey]

 

Can someone on this cruise help me to understand why people reacted the way they did. Is it how Celebrity broke the news to them or do they feel that from the get go Celebrity should do something significantly more for them since they were to miss Seattle.

 

Keith

Keith,

Thanks for asking. I think the hardest part of the cruise was the way information was handed out. There were too many instances where the explanation from the bridge just didn't make sense. And later we were told, from a reasonable relyable source, that the information given to us was absolutely false. In other words, we were lied to.

We left LA and were told we would arrive early in SF for maintenance. We were actually there for an inspection by Lloyd's of London to assure the ship was safe. "We have had our inspection, and the ship is safe to travel in." Does that mean it wasn't safe before?

 

The next morning we were told the ship had problems and could only go 17.5 knots. OK, that's still safe, but why didn't we get the rest of the story in SF?

 

We approached Hubbard Glacier at a snail's pace watching the HAL ship swoosh past us. We waited a long time for a pilot, still moving like a snail, then entered the bay. We were also told we couldn't stay long because we needed the time to get to Victoria on time. Why then, did we sit dead in the water the two following mornings? The following morning I was up at 5 am and we were not moving. We did finally, but then it happened again the next morning when we were supposed to see the Inside Passage. The newspaper for the day told us all the glories of the 1000 miles of inside passeage. I think we were luccky to see 200 miles of it. I am convinced X forgot to order their pilot or ordered it for the wrong day. My itinerary said we would do the inside passage on the way north. A German paassenger's itinerary showed the passage on our way south.

It just seemed like the more excuses we heard, the more lies we heard. My DH and I had stayed clear of the meetings, but were very frustrated by the way things were done. DH's description is, "They treat us like mushrooms. They keep us in the dark and feed us nothing but BS."

 

DH also notice we could only turn to starboard. We were tugged into dock in SF. We turned to starboard inside the glacier, not to port to get a better view. In Victoria, I can only imagine how odd we looked backing way out of the dock, again to starboard to make a complete circle to head to Vancouver.

 

Several people keep saying, "$200 credit is great, I'll take it." I hope they understand that is was $200 per stateroom, not per person. If you had 3 or 4 in your stateroom, it is still just $200 total.

 

We are seriously considering cancelling our RCCL cruise in September because they are connected to X. We found out today, that our September itinerary has dropped LeHavre and opted for Cherbourg. Several other ports have shortened times as well. Sounds too familiar for us.

[FlyingTiger]

 

Flying Tiger, do you plan on taking "remedial action"? If so, what do you plan to do? Please keep us posted as to the outcome.

 

Yes I do, but please understand, that I do not want "Big Brother" to read here what I am going to do. Anyhow, I will try to settle things privat, between them and me, but have talked to my insurance company already and if nothing happens, they are willing to take the case to court. However, I will post the outcome in this forum.

[carolmacey]

If this goes like the other "mutinies" on other crusies.......the mutineers will probably stiff the crew for their tips......to "punish" Celebrity.

I was on this cruise, and anytime I heard anyone threaten to "stiff the crew", I spoke to them regarding it. I hope the crew made out ok. There were quite a few getting off in Vancouver. I hope they were planned vacations.

[carolmacey]

Does anyone have any opinions about the real reasons why so many passengers on this particular cruise protested and caused a ruckus?

 

Thanks for asking. I think the hardest part of the cruise was the way information was handed out. There were too many instances where the explanation from the bridge just didn't make sense. And later we were told, from a reasonable reliable source, that the information given to us was absolutely false. In other words, we were lied to.

We left LA and were told we would arrive early in SF for maintenance. We were actually there for an inspection by Lloyd's of London to assure the ship was safe. "We have had our inspection, and the ship is safe to travel in." Does that mean it wasn't safe before?

 

The next morning we were told the ship had problems and could only go 17.5 knots. OK, that's still safe, but why didn't we get the rest of the story in SF?

 

We approached Hubbard Glacier at a snail's pace watching the HAL ship swoosh past us. We waited a long time for a pilot, still moving like a snail, then entered the bay. We were also told we couldn't stay long because we needed the time to get to Victoria on time. Why then, did we sit dead in the water the two following mornings? The following morning I was up at 5 am and we were not moving. We did finally, but then it happened again the next morning when we were supposed to see the Inside Passage. The newspaper for the day told us all the glories of the 1000 miles of inside passeage. I think we were lucky to see 200 miles of it. I am convinced X forgot to order their pilot or ordered it for the wrong day. My itinerary said we would do the inside passage on the way north. A German paassenger's itinerary showed the passage on our way south.

It just seemed like the more excuses we heard, the more lies we heard. My DH and I had stayed clear of the meetings, but were very frustrated by the way things were done. DH's description is, "They treat us like mushrooms. They keep us in the dark and feed us nothing but BS."

 

DH also notice we could only turn to starboard. We were tugged into dock in SF. We turned to starboard inside the glacier, not to port to get a better view. In Victoria, I can only imagine how odd we looked backing way out of the dock, again to starboard to make a complete circle to head to Vancouver.

We feel there is much more wrong with Summit than we were told.

 

Several people keep saying, "$200 credit is great, I'll take it." I hope they understand that is was $200 per stateroom, not per person. If you had 3 or 4 in your stateroom, it is still just $200 total.

 

We are seriously considering cancelling our RCCL cruise in September because they are connected to X. We found out today, that our September itinerary has dropped LeHavre and opted for Cherbourg. Several other ports have shortened times as well. Sounds too familiar for us.

[docjph]

We just returned home and I've spent quite some time reading some of the threads with regards to the Summit 5/7/06 sailing. I will post a more detailed message at a later date. We saved for two years for a Dream Trip to Alaska, and researched and planned for nine months. The crew were wonderful, warm people in 99.9% of our encounters. We are truly disappointed and disenchanted with Celebrity (RCCL) management and felt they misrepresented themselves in many ways. I am by no means a crybaby nor a militant, but I was upset we lost ports, time at ports but was most astounded by the lack of true customer service (corporate) and the fact that I perceived their actions toward us similarly to an annoyed parent to a child. Well folks, I am not a child and will not allow anyone to treat me in that manner. At all times, I spoke respectfully to personnel on the ship and wish that one of the customer reps I spoke to had treated me in that way. The other customer rep had a much better rapport with people from those I spoke with onboard. I am sad to have lost part of our dream trip, but what happened cannot be changed. We do not feel that corporate has treated us, their customer in a fair manner. May I also say that these are my feelings, my experiences and I respect the same of my fellow passengers, whether their experience was the same or not. We did decide to make the very best of our cruise, and we did. We were fortunate to meet wonderful people, Alaska, San Fran and Canada were and are beautiful, we had great excursions. I don't know if we will be able to do another cruise to Alaska, I'm hoping we will, but I doubt it will be with Celebrity.

[Wilcoam]

I digress, I was not on this cruise, but am a huge fan of X, my fave line...

 

When a cruise misses a port because of weather (IE: I missed Malta on X Constellation in 2002, and Barcelona on HAL OST in 2003, agreed the cruiseline owes pax nothing...

 

Perhaps Ditto for world events, like a 9/11, revolution, a fire, an on board explosion caused by Pax, etc...

 

HOWEVER, when a cruise misses 2-3 ports, and shortchanges 1850 people because the ship has an internel mechanical problem, the lines attempt to

use the weather/world event 'clause' wears thin. It's X's fault, and unlike

the weather/world event clause, (beyond it's control) it is within it's control.

 

It's also X's fault, again not the customer/pax, if it failed to communicate the situation to all the pax, and didn't satisfy a majority of it's pax, thus

contributing to a majority of it's pax 'rebelling'.

 

In my mind, every pax should have gotten a stateroom credit equal to 30% of the price they paid for the cruise, because X couldn't deliver the product, and standing behind a clause reserved for emergencies beyond it's control shouldn't apply here..

 

jc

[safein]

Carol, Lloyds of London is a major insurance carrier and ship's registry for ships as is a company called Assuranceforingard. Both companies require vessels to be inspected no matter where in the world the ship is at. What you were told about Lloyds had nothing to do with the problems that occured with the pods. It so happened that RCI/Celebrity had to let the Lloyds inspectors look at the ship in San Francisco. These are routine inspections and should not be considered whether or not they were considering it seaworthy.

 

I really do feel for everyone who was on this ship and were disappointed that ports were cut and times shortened in others. I am only guessing that the Captain must have suspected something might have been wrong on the voyage before and didn't get it confirmed until the Summit left Los Angeles.

 

Unfortunately your cruise is very reminiscent of the Infinity trouble last year. Two cruises before ours, Infinity ran into pod trouble, once again. They were coming through the Panama Canal and had to cancel one, maybe two ports. The cruise before ours had to be cancelled. Ours managed to sail after the drydock.

 

Celebrity either handles things will when a major crisis occurs or very poorly. Both upper management and Customer Relations needs to take a look at this situation as well as what happened with the Mercury. They need to take a lesson from the Horizon in 1995, which nearly got swept under the rug by the Chandris people. The PR rebound from that was phenomenal.Too many black eyes are being given to Celebrity (RCI, WAKE UP!!!!) I feel a major shakeup has to be done and they need to do something to bring back their customer base. Lawsuits, while being beneficial to the wronged, are detrimental to the industry as a whole. Maybe now that the hoopla regarding the launching of Freedom of the Seas is slowing down, RCI/Celebrity will have to take a serious look to win back past cruisers.

 

Anita

[sammiedawg]

People plan years ahead and fly in from all over the world to see Alaska, I've been there 3 times. This is not a routine Caribbean cruise where one island is much like the next. Cannot imagine the frustration of missing the glacier experiences and ports. 18 months ago I posted Celebrity's ship maintenance was way below par and all these experiences prove my point. One thread after another on these boards about ship problems, rundown conditions. Vote with your feet people

[teedee]

I wasn't on this cruise, but I can understand the frustration of some passengers. I have friends who were on this cruise who said the upset group were often loud & rude. My friends said the worst thing about the cruise were these people. Since I wasn't there I don't know how I would react, I hope I'd try to make the best of it but I'd probably be upset about missing 2 ports. What bothers me are reports of the disgruntled passengers stiffing the cabin stewards & waiters. I just wonder if any of the folks posting here who were on this cruise did this and why. They work so hard it seems a shame to punish them for something totally out of their control.

 

Terri

[FlyingFish***]

I wasn't on this cruise ... My friends said the worst thing about the cruise were these people... What bothers me are reports of the disgruntled passengers stiffing the cabin stewards & waiters. I just wonder if any of the folks posting here who were on this cruise did this and why. They work so hard it seems a shame to punish them for something totally out of their control.

 

Terri

1. I was on the cruise.
   
2. I know of no one who "stiffed" the staff, all of whom were great.
   
3. FYI, many "non-protesting" passengers were quite rude to those of us whom they saw as upsetting the status quo.
   
4. Let's try to avoid postings like this and keep this thread on-track, please.

[captncruise]

I hosted a group of 24 people on the Summit. We had a great time, the crew was excellent and I could recommend the ship EXCEPT for the miserable PR displayed by management. Let me point out some facts.

#1 It was not two missed ports. I counted 9 highly anticipated trip expectations not received because of mis-management.

#2. Management purposely docked the ship in Vancouver at an commercial facility in the middle of no where to avoid expected publicity coverage. Baggage, transportation, embarkation was a disaster. This punished the 1200 non-mutiny travelers such as ourselves to protect their selfish interests. We had no where to go. Our planned day of touring Vancouver was spent sitting at the airport for 6 hours.

#3. Offering each passenger $100 and an hour of free drinks (at noon time!) is insulting. They may as well offered free food for the rest of the trip. The later addition of a "possible 30% discount" on a future cruise sounds like GM & Ford advertising. This is not an option for the approximately 700-800 foreign travelers who spent heavily to see all of what the trip was supposed to offer.

#4 What is the logic of offering a free trip to those who will see everything as advertised (all passengers who were scheduled for the following week which was cancelled) while dismissing those whose money they already had and had no options.

#5. I am speaking for my group of 24 when I say we had a great time regardless and do not expect a free trip but feel slapped in the face with what transpired.

#6. This is not the way you treat customers

 

Capt'n Cruise and the Crewsers

[Old Sea Legs]

Well said!

 

~ Dave

[FlyingTiger]

#2. Management purposely docked the ship in Vancouver at an commercial facility in the middle of no where to avoid expected publicity coverage. Baggage, transportation, embarkation was a disaster. This punished the 1200 non-mutiny travelers such as ourselves to protect their selfish interests. We had no where to go. Our planned day of touring Vancouver was spent sitting at the airport for 6 hours.

 

I agree with you in many points, but the above stated might not be right. When we departed for our first Alaskacruise, last year August, the Radiance of the Seas departed and arrived just on that pier (Ballantine pier). It looked to me, that RCC and Celebrity run that pier solely for their operation.

[naked]

I hosted a group of 24 people on the Summit. We had a great time, the crew was excellent and I could recommend the ship EXCEPT for the miserable PR displayed by management. Let me point out some facts.

#6. This is not the way you treat customers

 

Capt'n Cruise and the Crewsers

Your post has me wanting to ask a few follow-up questions for you, as the host of a 24 pax group and everyone else who was booked on Summit:

1. Did you not know that Summit has a pod/bearings issues in the past and this specific mechanical problem has a history of reoccuring?
   
2. Did you not know that in the spring of 2002, three different M-Class ships had to either alter their intenararies including missing/changing ports and/or cancelling cruises?
   
3. Did you not know that RCI and Rolls-Royce has a pending $300 million lawsuit over the pod bearing issues and Rolls-Royce's inability of find a permenant and lasting fix to the problems?
   
4. Did you know that Milli was the first to have pod issues back in 2001.
   
5. Did you know that a simple search of Google can locate about 300,000 difference pages with the words "Celebrity Pod Problem History"

[sbmaureen]

#2. Management purposely docked the ship in Vancouver at an commercial facility in the middle of no where to avoid expected publicity coverage. Baggage, transportation, embarkation was a disaster. This punished the 1200 non-mutiny travelers such as ourselves to protect their selfish interests. We had no where to go. Our planned day of touring Vancouver was spent sitting at the airport for 6 hours.

 

Our September Summit cruise also leaves from this pier. I don't believe it has anything to do with publicity or press coverage.

[teedee]

1. I was on the cruise.
   
2. I know of no one who "stiffed" the staff, all of whom were great.
   
3. FYI, many "non-protesting" passengers were quite rude to those of us whom they saw as upsetting the status quo.
   
4. Let's try to avoid postings like this and keep this thread on-track, please.

 

Sorry if my question bothers you, but I feel it is on topic. I simply wanted to know if the upset passengers (I'm not saying they shouldn't be) were upset enough not to tip the staff. I wondered if the treatment by the cruiseline management led anyone to this. As far as the "non-protesting" passengers being rude, I imagine I would be as well if my cruise was disrupted by the "protesting" cruisers. Again, I'm not saying they shouldn't have been upset, but I just feel that things were handled badly by both the cruiseline & the passengers.

 

Terri

[griswalds]

To me the most important issue is how Celebrity failed to deal effectively with the passengers on the cruise as opposed to the history of these ships. What I would have expected is Celebrity should have a contingency plan to deal with a predictable problem. Celebrity should respond quickly and in a generous manner. That way most people will accept their fate and try to make the best of it. Celebrity failed on this occasion by all reports. This is not a game of trivial pursuit, but reasonable passenger expectations when a cruise goes bad, really bad.

 

Griswalds

 

 

 

Your post has me wanting to ask a few follow-up questions for you, as the host of a 24 pax group and everyone else who was booked on Summit:

1. Did you not know that Summit has a pod/bearings issues in the past and this specific mechanical problem has a history of reoccuring?
   
2. Did you not know that in the spring of 2002, three different M-Class ships had to either alter their intenararies including missing/changing ports and/or cancelling cruises?
   
3. Did you not know that RCI and Rolls-Royce has a pending $300 million lawsuit over the pod bearing issues and Rolls-Royce's inability of find a permenant and lasting fix to the problems?
   
4. Did you know that Milli was the first to have pod issues back in 2001.
   
5. Did you know that a simple search of Google can locate about 300,000 difference pages with the words "Celebrity Pod Problem History"