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

[magmagee]

I was on the ship and I did see the video. I did not hear or see that either.

[cechase]

Thank you suitedreams and magmagee for your observations.

 

I am a retired attorney who practiced law for 38 years, tried 45 jury trials and over 100 court trials. Rumors did not win cases, facts did. The reason that I asked that question about the video, is that it seems to be the "smoking gun" for those pax on Summit who are afflicted with what we attorneys referred to as "compensation neurosis".

 

Again, I would request that those four or five fervent pax on Summit who have posted here to post the video on cruise critic, in which they have alleged that the captain raised his hand and voted for the pax to receive a full refund. I should mention that your failure to do so raises a severe inference that your claim is bogus.

[florida_cruiser]

Were you on the Summit Cruise? Are you engaged or employed in the cruise industry, and if so in what capacity and for whom?

 

Finally, in all of your posts, you refer to a video. Please post the video on cruise critic so that we can all see it.

 

 

Was not on the cruise and never identified myself as having been on the cruise.

 

Definitely not engaged or employed in the cruise industry.

 

I refer to a video which was referred to by many others. I have not seen it and have no personal knowledge of what is on it or what the captain was seen doing. My opinions were based upon what others had reportedly seen.

 

My position is simply that I am sympathetic to the passengers versus the cruise line or in essence big business versus the consumer. I have been on two Celebrity cruises in the past two years and it is unlikely I will ever return for a third. That is who I am since you so kindly asked.

[magmagee]

Thank you suitedreams and magmagee for your observations.

 

I am a retired attorney who practiced law for 38 years, tried 45 jury trials and over 100 court trials. Rumors did not win cases, facts did. The reason that I asked that question about the video, is that it seems to be the "smoking gun" for those pax on Summit who are afflicted with what we attorneys referred to as "compensation neurosis".

 

Again, I would request that those four or five fervent pax on Summit who have posted here to post the video on cruise critic, in which they have alleged that the captain raised his hand and voted for the pax to receive a full refund. I should mention that your failure to do so raises a severe inference that your claim is bogus.

 

Ok, I am going to have to kind of eat some words here. I just talked to my husband who happen to be in the celebrity theatre when this "walk the plank" meeting was taking place and he saw the tape also. We both agree there is a reference by the captain that he would like to see a refund too but it was said in an under the breath kind of way and more in a jestful kind of way. Maybe he should not of said it at all . One must view the tape to make up ones own mind. It was not like he stood up there and said you all deserve a refund. He was really being put on a spot and I felt it was hard to watch because he was a man trying to do his job and all that could have gone wrong did. If they would have asked him to walk the plank he probably would have but that would not have been enough for this angry mob.

[cruiser2004]

Thank you suitedreams and magmagee for your observations.

 

I am a retired attorney who practiced law for 38 years, tried 45 jury trials and over 100 court trials. Rumors did not win cases, facts did. The reason that I asked that question about the video, is that it seems to be the "smoking gun" for those pax on Summit who are afflicted with what we attorneys referred to as "compensation neurosis".

 

Again, I would request that those four or five fervent pax on Summit who have posted here to post the video on cruise critic, in which they have alleged that the captain raised his hand and voted for the pax to receive a full refund. I should mention that your failure to do so raises a severe inference that your claim is bogus.

 

Suitedreams and Magmagee to answer your question yes you did miss something. We sat in the first row of the Celebrity Theater and saw the captain raise his hand when the question was raised by a passenger "should the passengers receive a full refund". This was captured on the ship's video and several passengers with video cameras. This was also witnessed by around 700 to 800 passengers who were in the theater. I don't know if this has any real importance, but it did happen. I don't know if the video's from the passengers will be made available or not. I really don't think it will change the minds of those on this board who feel that any cruise line has some kind of right to deceive passengers and do what ever they feel like with no possible recourse from their passengers.

[griswalds]

Interesting approach. I don't think the video is an issue or a smoking gun. The real issue is the decision by Celebrity to go with the cruise knowing there were mechanical problems. I am still very surprised that Celebrity did not try to sweeten the deal for passengers. Celebrity made a business decision to run the ship knowing there were problems and the problems are very common on these ships.

 

Only a few have commented on the video.

 

Usually when one finds their case is weak, they start to talk about process rather than the facts. Here we go again.

 

I hope the classs action proceeds and that they do well against Celebrity.

 

Griswalds

 

Thank you suitedreams and magmagee for your observations.

 

I am a retired attorney who practiced law for 38 years, tried 45 jury trials and over 100 court trials. Rumors did not win cases, facts did. The reason that I asked that question about the video, is that it seems to be the "smoking gun" for those pax on Summit who are afflicted with what we attorneys referred to as "compensation neurosis".

 

Again, I would request that those four or five fervent pax on Summit who have posted here to post the video on cruise critic, in which they have alleged that the captain raised his hand and voted for the pax to receive a full refund. I should mention that your failure to do so raises a severe inference that your claim is bogus.

[turtlemichael]

As its most likely Celebrity's video, why not call and ask for a copy?:D Maybe they record over them too ? :D

 

But in any case, what does it matter if the Captain raised his hand or said that he thought a free cruise was reasonable? The decision was not his, it was a Corporate decison, and while Corporate would take into account what the Captain thought, that would only be one small factor in the decision making process.

 

I presume no one is suggesting that he promised a refund? That would have been very silly in my view.

[Ma Bell]

Having met Captain Kafetzis and knowing how good natured he is I wouldn't be surprised if he did that. The question is what was the context of his gesture. Was it serious or a gesture that he was trying to sympathize with the passengers and calm them down.

[magmagee]

Suitedreams and Magmagee to answer your question yes you did miss something. We sat in the first row of the Celebrity Theater and saw the captain raise his hand when the question was raised by a passenger "should the passengers receive a full refund". This was captured on the ship's video and several passengers with video cameras. This was also witnessed by around 700 to 800 passengers who were in the theater. I don't know if this has any real importance, but it did happen. I don't know if the video's from the passengers will be made available or not. I really don't think it will change the minds of those on this board who feel that any cruise line has some kind of right to deceive passengers and do what ever they feel like with no possible recourse from their passengers.

I watched the video at least 3 or 4 times. I can not believe I had forgotten that moment on the video but I can only imagine the pressure he was under. Since he probably does not have any say in corporate decisions it really does not matter what he said. As far a the passengers feeling deceived from the comment, well, I think maybe he should not have said what he said but I do feel i goes back to the pressure . After all he is the captain of the ship and his dignaty must have been crushed when people were not be respectful when he was trying to listen to the complaints. I am going to say that this is just my view. Everyone has their opinion and I can understand that if someone wants to complain that is their business but it will say I felt the captain was being backed up into a corner because at that time he probably did not have any authority to give anyone anything. I felt he was so gracious and this is a captain's worst nightmare to have problems on his ship.

[magmagee]

Having met Captain Kafetzis and knowing how good natured he is I wouldn't be surprised if he did that. The question is what was the context of his gesture. Was it serious or a gesture that he was trying to sympathize with the passengers and calm them down.

 

Wasn't he the most gracious person? That is what I have been trying to say what you have just written about the gesture. Celebrity put him on that stage to try to calm everyone down.

[CaliforniaDreamin]

Thank you suitedreams and magmagee for your observations.

Again, I would request that those four or five fervent pax on Summit who have posted here to post the video on cruise critic, in which they have alleged that the captain raised his hand and voted for the pax to receive a full refund. I should mention that your failure to do so raises a severe inference that your claim is bogus.

 

The video tape I beleive is being referred to so many times was the one made by Celebrity Summit personnel for replaying on the ship's inroom TV system. I did not attend the meeting, due to extenuating circumstances....we were eating lunch. Later that day and/or next day we did watch parts of the replay on our room TV. I do not recall whether the Captain raised his hand to indicate concurrence with the call for a show of hands of people who wanted a full refund of their cruise fare.

 

If there is another video or videos which exist of the meeting I am not aware of it/them. Could be, if so they are owned by some passenger and it's up to them whether to reveal that.

 

That said, what does it matter. His responsibility then, was to try to answer the passengers questions and to operate the ship safely. If he actually did raise his hand, then Corporate Headquarters has full access to the video for what it may be worth. To make such a gesture by the Captain a point of such controversy seems a bit much.

 

OK, my position (for me personally) is that I will accept the $200 per cabin goodwill credit + $15.68 per person tax credit. Also the 30% off future cruise certificate when it arrives. We'll see how that works out.

 

I fully realize that my circumstances are not the same as the European, Australian and other passengers, including some from the USA. I do not allow people or corporations to bully or take unfair advantage of me. Some posters have insinuated that is the case if you don't fight for a full refund. Not so. What is their point making these statements about something without having access to all the facts and particulars of each individual personally involved in the process.

 

So, everyone involved should fight the battle for what they think is just for them.

[magmagee]

The video tape I beleive is being referred to so many times was the one made by Celebrity Summit personnel for replaying on the ship's inroom TV system. I did not attend the meeting, due to extenuating circumstances....we were eating lunch. Later that day and/or next day we did watch parts of the replay on our room TV. I do not recall whether the Captain raised his hand to indicate concurrence with the call for a show of hands of people who wanted a full refund of their cruise fare.

 

If there is another video or videos which exist of the meeting I am not aware of it/them. Could be, if so they are owned by some passenger and it's up to them whether to reveal that.

 

That said, what does it matter. His responsibility then, was to try to answer the passengers questions and to operate the ship safely. If he actually did raise his hand, then Corporate Headquarters has full access to the video for what it may be worth. To make such a gesture by the Captain a point of such controversy seems a bit much.

 

OK, my position (for me personally) is that I will accept the $200 per cabin goodwill credit + $15.68 per person tax credit. Also the 30% off future cruise certificate when it arrives. We'll see how that works out.

 

I fully realize that my circumstances are not the same as the European, Australian and other passengers, including some from the USA. I do not allow people or corporations to bully or take unfair advantage of me. Some posters have insinuated that is the case if you don't fight for a full refund. Not so. What is their point making these statements about something without having access to all the facts and particulars of each individual personally involved in the process.

 

So, everyone involved should fight the battle for what they think is just for them.

 

Amen

[fleckle]

Again, I would request that those four or five fervent pax on Summit who have posted here to post the video on cruise critic, in which they have alleged that the captain raised his hand and voted for the pax to receive a full refund. I should mention that your failure to do so raises a severe inference that your claim is bogus.

Huh? What kind of a statement is that for any lawyer (even a former lawyer) to make?

 

Cechase, what makes you think that an Internet message board is the appropriate venue for releasing such a video? Are you one of the lawyers who attended the meeting?

 

What is your involvement in this case to make you think that people who don't know you and have never met you should post a video at the location you specify upon your request?

 

I was quite amused to see you state that their failure to do exactly what you want raises a severe inference that their claim is bogus. Are you familiar with the term chutzpah? It does not appear that you are acting as a lawyer at all, but rather as judge and jury.

 

When you were a lawyer, was it your practice to post your evidence in advance on a public bulletin board? Correct me if I am wrong, but somehow I think not.

 

If I had such a video, I would turn it over to the attorneys for the side I favor. I would certainly never post it here.

 

By the way, for the information of the other readers, the claim is hardly bogus because there were hundreds of witnesses in the audience who could be subpoenaed if necessary, so a video would not even be necessary.

[Lotsacruising]

another interesting fact, we learned later in the cruise that the captain was very shortly leaving celebrity

Janet

[Drew B]

Hi Drew,

As you know, we did take advantage of the happy hour. We thought of the tip situation for the barstaff, but we did go to our cabin to get a nice tip for our Barman. He must have been pleased as he made a point to say hi to us everywhere he saw us, even on shore.

 

 

I was thinking of you specifically as I made that post. I KNOW that he was very happy with your tips!

 

Have a great day.

[Drew B]

Those who wanted to listen to the "drama queens from hell" did. Those who chose not to, did not attend the meetings. No one was forced to show up, yet over 1200 people out of 1925 people, signed up to be apart of a class action suit. As for those who say, “So I miss a port - being pampered with endless food and a spotless cabin and free entertainment is so irritating, isn't it? Will you turn down a free cruise or a full refund if offered by Celebrity due to the efforts of the “drama queens from hell”? I think not!!!!

 

I think that is really unfair. Unless we literally confined ourselves to our staterooms, it was impossible to avoid the drama. The "meetings" were so constant, and they were held in THE most unavoidable part of the ship (center ship on decks 3, 4, & 5). Even if we avoided those, if we went to ANY public place (the dining rooms, the gym, the casino, the computer lab, etc...), people were talking about it. Loudly. There was NO avoiding it.

[Drew B]

Wookeef - you are right - this has been interesting and I'm glad that docjph

posted his side of the story. I hope that those who were on the cruise can come to some resolution with it.... either to put it behind them, or to get the compensation they feel they deserve.

 

I think the most interesting fact I read on this thread was that over 1200 of 1925 people signed the class action suit. That says a lot!

 

Well, yes and no. It depends on how they are counting people. At the original meeting, a paper was handed around where many people (myself included) put down our names and contact information so we could "stay in touch". It was a blank sheet of paper. It was NOT a petition, nor a list for a class-action suit (neither of which I would have signed). Now, I'm not sure if I (and others like me) are being counted in the 1200 people, or if that number is of people with the serious intent of joining the class-action suit...

[griswalds]

I am sure the numbers being quoted include all who would have signed the "list" as you have mentioned. I would expect there will be discussions with Celebrity at a senior level before a class action suit would be commenced. Once all the "facts" are established then the decision whether to proceed would be taken. At that time you can decide to join in or not....deal or no deal. As I mentioned before we benefited from a class action suit with Princess on an issue I never really followed. It had nothing to do with the cruise itself but more with the way Princess Cruises discounted some fares. We did not sign on or send money but rec'd the odd piece of correspondance as directed by the courts (California, I think). If you are satisfied with the standing offer that Celebrity has made then you can watch from the sidelines and enjoy the process.

Griswalds

 

Well, yes and no. It depends on how they are counting people. At the original meeting, a paper was handed around where many people (myself included) put down our names and contact information so we could "stay in touch". It was a blank sheet of paper. It was NOT a petition, nor a list for a class-action suit (neither of which I would have signed). Now, I'm not sure if I (and others like me) are being counted in the 1200 people, or if that number is of people with the serious intent of joining the class-action suit...

[magmagee]

I think that is really unfair. Unless we literally confined ourselves to our staterooms, it was impossible to avoid the drama. The "meetings" were so constant, and they were held in THE most unavoidable part of the ship (center ship on decks 3, 4, & 5). Even if we avoided those, if we went to ANY public place (the dining rooms, the gym, the casino, the computer lab, etc...), people were talking about it. Loudly. There was NO avoiding it.

 

Thank you for sharing that. That is how I felt. I went to listen to violin players and instead had to walk around passengers who did not want to move to let us walk by. I keep saying the speeches were very loud and comanding and disturbing. I was in the shopping area and there were five men talking loudly and making sure that everyone could hear that they were very unhappy. I did leave the area and went to my room.

[magmagee]

Huh? What kind of a statement is that for any lawyer (even a former lawyer) to make?

 

Cechase, what makes you think that an Internet message board is the appropriate venue for releasing such a video? Are you one of the lawyers who attended the meeting?

 

What is your involvement in this case to make you think that people who don't know you and have never met you should post a video at the location you specify upon your request?

 

I was quite amused to see you state that their failure to do exactly what you want raises a severe inference that their claim is bogus. Are you familiar with the term chutzpah? It does not appear that you are acting as a lawyer at all, but rather as judge and jury.

 

When you were a lawyer, was it your practice to post your evidence in advance on a public bulletin board? Correct me if I am wrong, but somehow I think not.

 

If I had such a video, I would turn it over to the attorneys for the side I favor. I would certainly never post it here.

 

By the way, for the information of the other readers, the claim is hardly bogus because there were hundreds of witnesses in the audience who could be subpoenaed if necessary, so a video would not even be necessary.

 

This video is not part of a crime scene so putting on the internet might be a good idea so some can make a better judgement of what went on.

[gem cruzers]

We've sailed with Celebrity on 5 past cruises, which were pleasant but not memorable. We were on the "ill-fated" Summit this last May 7, 2006. To say that we were dissapointed or unhappy is an understatement. All the facts posted thus far about the missed ports and so on are accurate. We will be suing Celebrity in one way or another because we feel that we were sacrificed so that when they put into Victoria, B.C. for repairs, they would not lose the revenue from our 13 day sailing, but only the one from the 7 day one scheduled after our cruise. Maybe they didn't have the repairs all set in time to tell us beforehand, but, they could have made all the passengers happy with a larger compensation than $200 per cabin. The only reason they upped the ante with the 30% future discount was because the passengers showed how upset we were. This is my first posting because I just found this site. Thanks to those who have come before me.

[Drew B]

If they didn't know in Los Angeles, they certainly knew in San Francisco when they were told to keep their speed down to 17.5 knots. That ship should never have left San Francisco if it couldn't keep it's speed to do the itinerary as planned. And the Captain knew that in advance. So yes, I do believe there was deceit.:eek:

 

It would have been better to cancel the cruise totally. But Celebrity knew they would lose money cancelling two cruises, so they tried to go ahead with the one in progress and only cancel the one cruise following.

 

 

Cancelling the cruise would have been the WORST POSSIBLE OUTCOME for me, personally. This was the first time in over ten years that I have had the opportunity to take two weeks off of work, and it may very well be the last time for many years to come. It wouldn't matter if they gave me TEN free cruises if I wasn't able to take them! I committed to spending the money because I wanted a vacation. If I just wanted the money, I never would have spent it in the first place! I have to say that with the announcement of the bearing problem, my BIGGEST FEAR was that it was going to get worse and they would have to end the cruise earlier than May 20th...

 

As for the captain raising his hand in the meeting, it was a hardly a clear-cut message. A person asked him if he supported a refund, and he made it very clear that it was not his decision to make. He was harangued to give an answer, and after some equivocation, he gave a lukewarm yes... Is that damning evidence? I don't think so.

 

And as for prior knowledge of the mechanical problem, at what point does it become enough of a problem that people need to be notified? Somebody calculated that less than 2% of M-Class sailings are impacted by pod problems. I think that if 20% of sailings were affected, it would be clear-cut that people need to be notified, but with only less than 2% of sailings affected, the odds are OVERWHELMINGLY in our favor that we will have an unaffected cruise. Certain cruise ships have sunk, too. Look at the Titanic. So if a cruise ship were to sink, should we say that the cruise lines had advance knowledge that ships can sink (no matter how miniscule the statistical probability may be), and they had an obligation to specifically warn us? In effect, they DO specifically warn us. The cruise contract not only warns about the possibility of itinerary changes, but also makes clear that the company DOESN'T WARRANT THAT THE VESSEL IS SEAWORTHY! Now, that claim is ludicrous, and if they knew the ship were to have serious issues affecting the safety of the passengers, I'm sure the waiver of the contract wouldn't hold up. However, in light of the litigiousness of certain customers, I don't blame them for putting it in there.

[nmtraveler]

I read that some passengers would have gotten off in San Francisco if they could have. Of course they not only wouldn't have been reimbursed by Celebrity but probably would have been docked $200/per person due to the Jones Act.

[Drew B]

I read that some passengers would have gotten off in San Francisco if they could have. Of course they not only wouldn't have been reimbursed by Celebrity but probably would have been docked $200/per person due to the Jones Act.

 

Thank you! I was having this argument with passengers the whole time. I couldn't understand WHY it was so important to them that they didn't learn of the problem till after we had left San Francisco. Apparantly, they believed that X would have to refund them if they left the ship. I assumed that wasn't true...

[griswalds]

How many people have been charged with the Jones Act over the last 30 years? Does anyone really know if it is enforced? We know it exists but do we have a real live case of someone who has been charged? How would they have been docked? That assumes a refund.

 

Getting off the ship early at SF is a whole different issue...another thread no less.

 

Griswalds

 

 

I read that some passengers would have gotten off in San Francisco if they could have. Of course they not only wouldn't have been reimbursed by Celebrity but probably would have been docked $200/per person due to the Jones Act.