Shame on Princess Cruises

[MikeKool]

Let me start by saying we have been Princess fans since our first cruise on the Regal back in 1993. We also cruise most of the other lines so we are not fanatics about sticking with Princess only.

I was somewhat disturbed to hear about "the turn" on the Grand off the coast of Texas. That incident was blamed on Captain's error for turning the ship too quickly for the speed she was traveling. Passengers were injured. In my opinion a "mistake" that should never have happened. O.K. an "isolated incident"?

Back in April I booked two mini-suites on the Crown Princess for September 21. Of course the booking are paid in full. We were all looking forward to this cruise. Two new ports for us and being able to sail from the new Red Hook pier. We have tickets on JetBlue from IAD to JFK the day before and were thinking of staying at the Brooklyn Marriott.

Now another "incident" on the Crown. Again people are injured. Three days after the "incident" I call Princess to inquire about cancelling because we are scared to sail this particular class of ship. Because we are roughly 60 days out, Princess wants cancellation fees of the amout of our deposit ($450.00) per cabin.......PLUS the cost of Princess insurance. Not totally unexpected.

Given the circumstances of what happened on the Grand....and now again on the Crown I thought Princess might be willing to work with me. Princess nor anyone else seems to know what caused this "list" and there is an "ongoing investigation" into what exactly occurred. I offered to let Princess hold our deposits and let us re-book on another class ship. Princess countered with four "conditions". The first "condition" was we must sail before September 21. Well.....Princess has no smaller ships sailing to the Caribbean before September 21. We got great rates and a premium cabin/location on the Crown because we booked five months out. I can't get a similiar deal on another Princess ship less than two months out. To add insult to injury Princess would have refused to waive the $50.00 per person "change fee". In subsequent telephone conversations with Princess Customer Relations I asked the same question to four different agents.....and got four different answers. No professionalism whatsoever.

In short....I cancelled both bookings and will "suck up" monies lost. Chaulk it up to a bad night in the casino! I was just very surprised by Princess' non-caring attitude and the fact they were so willing to lose long-standing platinum Captain's Circle members. Too many other ships/lines out there to waste my time arguing with Princess.

The "spin doctors" at Princess like Julie Benson would have you believe NOTHING ever happened on the Crown. (read between her lines folks) Benson states "some cosmetic" damage and no "ongoing" problems with the mechanics of the ship. In other words......the ship is not listing 15 degrees now. Other posters have mentioned they can't believe the ship is being allowed to continue sailing with passengers while an "investigation" is being conducted. I agree 100%.....but just goes to show the different standards allowed by the cruise industry.

I have re-booking with Regent Seven Seas and have peace of mind. The "spin doctors" at Princess would piss in your ear and tell you it's raining. Most of us are NOT idiots! Since no cause has been determined in the Crown accident we feel very comfortable with our decision. If my car suddenly lost it's brakes and I was injured, I certainly wouldn't drive the car again until I knew why it happened in the first place. Irregardless of the fact the brakes might be working today.

Just felt the need to share my experience with Princess Cruises. I'm sure the Crown is a beautiful ship but at this point I have to question it's integrity.

[ILov2cruise]

What experience, that they won't let you cancel? You knew when you booked there is a penalty when you cancel this close to sailing.

 

I have not heard/read anywhere that the ship is now cruising with a 15 degree list.

 

 

 

I want answers NOW, NOW, NOW. Give it a rest, 400 people posted this before you.

 

I'm on the 9/12 sailing and can't wait.

[PrincessCrewGirl]

If my car suddenly lost it's brakes and I was injured, I certainly wouldn't drive the car again until I knew why it happened in the first place. Irregardless of the fact the brakes might be working today.

 

If my car's brakes went out, I would have it looked over by a mechanic and if it given an okay, I would take their word on it. Looking at it that way, the Coast Guard would not allow the Crown to sail if it was unsafe. Believe me, I have been on ships for around a dozen Coast Guard inspections. They won't let a ship sail if there is even the slightest chance the ship or crew are not prepared.

 

The only people Princess should be going out of its way to help right now is the passengers and crew from the Crown, and the passengers from the first (shorter) cruise back.

[loving2cruise]

Let me start by saying we have been Princess fans since our first cruise on the Regal back in 1993. We also cruise most of the other lines so we are not fanatics about sticking with Princess only.

I was somewhat disturbed to hear about "the turn" on the Grand off the coast of Texas. That incident was blamed on Captain's error for turning the ship too quickly for the speed she was traveling. Passengers were injured. In my opinion a "mistake" that should never have happened. O.K. an "isolated incident"?

Back in April I booked two mini-suites on the Crown Princess for September 21. Of course the booking are paid in full. We were all looking forward to this cruise. Two new ports for us and being able to sail from the new Red Hook pier. We have tickets on JetBlue from IAD to JFK the day before and were thinking of staying at the Brooklyn Marriott.

Now another "incident" on the Crown. Again people are injured. Three days after the "incident" I call Princess to inquire about cancelling because we are scared to sail this particular class of ship. Because we are roughly 60 days out, Princess wants cancellation fees of the amout of our deposit ($450.00) per cabin.......PLUS the cost of Princess insurance. Not totally unexpected.

Given the circumstances of what happened on the Grand....and now again on the Crown I thought Princess might be willing to work with me. Princess nor anyone else seems to know what caused this "list" and there is an "ongoing investigation" into what exactly occurred. I offered to let Princess hold our deposits and let us re-book on another class ship. Princess countered with four "conditions". The first "condition" was we must sail before September 21. Well.....Princess has no smaller ships sailing to the Caribbean before September 21. We got great rates and a premium cabin/location on the Crown because we booked five months out. I can't get a similiar deal on another Princess ship less than two months out. To add insult to injury Princess would have refused to waive the $50.00 per person "change fee". In subsequent telephone conversations with Princess Customer Relations I asked the same question to four different agents.....and got four different answers. No professionalism whatsoever.

In short....I cancelled both bookings and will "suck up" monies lost. Chaulk it up to a bad night in the casino! I was just very surprised by Princess' non-caring attitude and the fact they were so willing to lose long-standing platinum Captain's Circle members. Too many other ships/lines out there to waste my time arguing with Princess.

The "spin doctors" at Princess like Julie Benson would have you believe NOTHING ever happened on the Crown. (read between her lines folks) Benson states "some cosmetic" damage and no "ongoing" problems with the mechanics of the ship. In other words......the ship is not listing 15 degrees now. Other posters have mentioned they can't believe the ship is being allowed to continue sailing with passengers while an "investigation" is being conducted. I agree 100%.....but just goes to show the different standards allowed by the cruise industry.

I have re-booking with Regent Seven Seas and have peace of mind. The "spin doctors" at Princess would piss in your ear and tell you it's raining. Most of us are NOT idiots! Since no cause has been determined in the Crown accident we feel very comfortable with our decision. If my car suddenly lost it's brakes and I was injured, I certainly wouldn't drive the car again until I knew why it happened in the first place. Irregardless of the fact the brakes might be working today.

Just felt the need to share my experience with Princess Cruises. I'm sure the Crown is a beautiful ship but at this point I have to question it's integrity.

 

MikeKool,

I too am a bit surprised that "The Crown" ship is sailing with an on-going investigation not closed as of yet. I'm surprised THEY are "Letting" it cruise with that status.... I wonder what other cruise lines would do in that situation........Risking lives BEFORE the investigation is closed...??? My "Crown" cruise is booked for "07" (First time on the Princess line) and I hope by then they figure out what happened. Perhaps the cause of the list is that particular "class" of ship. Hopefully they are looking into that as well. Makes more sense since there was an incident of the "Grand" ship, same class as the "Crown". Coincidence??

[MikeKool]

What experience, that they won't let you cancel? You knew when you booked there is a penalty when you cancel this close to sailing.

 

I have not heard/read anywhere that the ship is now cruising with a 15 degree list.

 

 

 

I want answers NOW, NOW, NOW. Give it a rest, 400 people posted this before you.

 

I'm on the 9/12 sailing and can't wait.

Guess you missed my point. I'm fully aware of cancellation fees. I'm just surprised Princess wouldn't transfer my monies to a different sailing. I never said the ship was sailing with a 15 degree list.

I don't want an answer NOW,NOW NOW. I just don't want to sail on a ship prone to unexplained "lists".

So now there's 401 posts. Something wrong with that?

[MikeKool]

If my car's brakes went out, I would have it looked over by a mechanic and if it given an okay, I would take their word on it. Looking at it that way, the Coast Guard would not allow the Crown to sail if it was unsafe. Believe me, I have been on ships for around a dozen Coast Guard inspections. They won't let a ship sail if there is even the slightest chance the ship or crew are not prepared.

 

The only people Princess should be going out of its way to help right now is the passengers and crew from the Crown, and the passengers from the first (shorter) cruise back.

What does preparedness have to do with this? Obviously nobody was prepared for what happened.

So using your logic Princess should only be concerned with those two sailings? Maybe they should not be accepting any new bookings or assisting passengers on other ships or sailings.

[hgatsawgrs]

Mike Kool, Of course you know that this site is read by "Princesses" who want to believe the Princess spin and will almost always defend the line they "love".

I believe you have identified the "nut" of Princess's risky business strategy. Going back out with the ship before the "cause" and corrective action is indentified is a surprise to me. It goes to the root of a business strategy that is short sighted.

If, it turns out to be , "Human error ", I would think the line would want to not go out to sea again with the same crew that may include the one who screwed up big time. Or even with the management that allowed that person to be in that job.

I am a Carnival Stockholder and would rather have had the management say- "While the strict letter of the law allows our company to continue to sail with the ship(and other ships of its class), we will not do it until we are sure of the cause and the full investigation is over and all changes that need to be made have been done. That is the only way we can assure the public that our line is the safest on the seas."

I am shocked they did not do this. It seems like the only option to pursue for long term preservation of customer good will. Why save a few weeks bookings to risk that. Oh well, I just have a few shares.

I am sure they would have done it this way if a person had gone overboard or had died during the incident- why not when many were just injured.

Tylenol would not be a brand today if J and J had left it on the shelves during the poisoning because they could have by law.

Carnival/ Princess could have enhanced their reputation by doing this the most conservative way- no the way they did it.

[hgatsawgrs]

Mike Kool, Of course you know that this site is read by "Princesses" who want to believe the Princess spin and will almost always defend the line they "love".

I believe you have identified the "nut" of Princess's risky business strategy. Going back out with the ship before the "cause" and corrective action is indentified is a surprise to me. It goes to the root of a business strategy that is short sighted.

If, it turns out to be , "Human error ", I would think the line would want to not go out to sea again with the same crew that may include the one who screwed up big time. Or even with the management that allowed that person to be in that job.

I am a Carnival Stockholder and would rather have had the management say- "While the strict letter of the law allows our company to continue to sail with the ship(and other ships of its class), we will not do it until we are sure of the cause and the full investigation is over and all changes that need to be made have been done. That is the only way we can assure the public that our line is the safest on the seas."

I am shocked they did not do this. It seems like the only option to pursue for long term preservation of customer good will. Why save a few weeks bookings to risk that. Oh well, I just have a few shares.

I am sure they would have done it this way if a person had gone overboard or had died during the incident- why not when many were just injured.

Tylenol would not be a brand today if J and J had left it on the shelves during the poisoning because they could have by law.

Carnival/ Princess could have enhanced their reputation by doing this the most conservative way- not the way they did it.

[FlaLawdog]

For a comprehensive news report on the cause of the incident go to the WESH Orlando TV station web site. http://www.wesh.com/news/9555476/detail.html. There are several video clips also.

 

Apparently the list was caused by a junior officer on the bridge (who probably isn't on the bridge anymore) who disengaged the autopilot and essentially overcorrected for what he thought was an autopilot error. The Grand Princess list was reportedly caused by turning too tightly when that ship was making an emergency return to port for a pasenger that had a heart attack.

 

The two big questions being asked are (1) why did the Coast Guard find out about the incident from a passenger's mother (The USCG contacted the ship when it should have been the other way around!) and (2) why wasn't a head count taken of the passengers to make sure everyone was accounted for. The National Transportation Safety Board and USCG both had staff members on the ship when it sailed from Port Canavaral.

[Guest LetMeGo]

I am a Carnival Stockholder and would rather have had the management say- "While the strict letter of the law allows our company to continue to sail with the ship(and other ships of its class), we will not do it until we are sure of the cause and the full investigation is over and all changes that need to be made have been done. That is the only way we can assure the public that our line is the safest on the seas."

I am shocked they did not do this. It seems like the only option to pursue for long term preservation of customer good will. Why save a few weeks bookings to risk that. Oh well, I just have a few shares.

 

In theory that sounds like a good plan. Wait a few weeks, and it will only cost the cruise line what, $10-20 million? Not a big deal.

 

The truth is that if there was an easy answer to why ships list, it would be already sorted out by now. Since there have been two incidents in close proximity, it's probably going to take a lot longer than a few weeks to sort out all the common factors, and decide how to prevent them in the future.

 

So it's pretty much impossible to say just how long it will take for a final report to be published. Are you as a shareholder willing to keep the fleet's latest $500 million ship docked at the port for an indefinite period of time? Six months until a report is published means the loss of revenues up to the ship's entire building costs, and lost profits of at least $50 million.

 

It is a sad world where we live in, but financial aspects are the most important to some people. Corporations of course get the blame for that, but they are run by people just like some of those who have appeared on CruiseCritic after the incident.

[Nliedel]

WESH's report is a bit premature. I would not believe it whole hog yet.

 

I would like to point out that the Grand and the Crown are not the same class of ship.

[spongerob]

Mike Kool, Of course you know that this site is read by "Princesses" who want to believe the Princess spin and will almost always defend the line they "love".

There is no reason to say this. Some of us have a different perspective on life and are not necessarily so quick to believe the latest rumors and innuendo that have been posted or reported in the news.

 

The OP of this thread made his decision. I have no argument with that. Grousing about the penalties, I can live with. When it comes to posting accusations that there is a cover-up or that the ship is being operated in an unsafe condition, I think that is going too far. To further add that anyone who wishes to offer an alternate perspective to such assertions is in some way being a pawn to the corporate owners is ludicrous. Such statements are nothing more than ad-hominem attacks and have no place in mature discussions.

 

I have my own opinion. I think Princess has made some mistakes and failed to learn from past experience. I do not believe that there is an inherent problem with the Grand-class ships. Grand Princess operated for years without any incidents. We will sail Grand Princess two more times in the next 12 months, with confidence.

 

Why is it wrong to suggest that perhaps Princess is telling the truth, and that the problem has been found and corrected?

[hgatsawgrs]

Spongerob, Princess ,as of this date, has not said that they have found the problem and it has been corrected. That is the issue. If they said that and told us what is was, I would be ok.

What I disagree with , is they are NOT saying what is was and it has been corrected. I can only assume they are not hiding the facts as they know them, but do not know what happened and how to correct it.

Good corporate governance would be to get the facts and correct it- Not disclosing or not waiting is not good.

[spongerob]

The ship has been inspected by the Coast Guard and NTSB. Whatever procedures or fixes that were put in place have satisfied those authorities. The Coast Guard has the power to prevent sailing if they believe there is an ongoing issue. If they are satisfied, I'm okay with that. If that's not enough for others, that's okay too.

 

I understand that you want answers. I do, too. We have to wait out the official reporting process. Don't expect anything to be released before then. A sad reality in our society is that anything that is said prior to the official report will likely end up being used against Princess in court. Our own corporate attorneys put it another way, "Silence is golden."

[rebeccalouise]

I am glad someone else agrees with me that it was to early to put the ship back in service. I cancelled my 8/7 cruise. First they tried to tell me I would lose 100% of the fare but I read the small print and I was more than 14 days out and got 25%- I took the money and booked a 3-day Disney cruise (obviously I had to add to that).

I am not happy with the way I was treated by Princess. I voiced my concerns about the ship. I asked Princess the cause of the problem on the Crown when I called on July 20th. The head of customer relations , Deanna, snapped back " It has only been 48 hours!"- to which I said "Exactly, how can Princess in good conscience put the ship back in service on the 22nd!" She then said something like "if the Coast Guard and the NTSB and British flag have said it is safe- it is safe".

 

According to what I have read on the Princess website...

A. The investigation is still ongoing

 

(Not to mention that how can they fix everything in 4 days. Especially the carpets, which I know from having a flood in my basement- stink to high heaven and take a while to air out. Yes, even with a shop vac)

 

What is lacking at Princess and their website is this:

 

Customer Safety and Satisfaction is Princesses number one priority.

We will not sail this vessel until Princess has been about to identify what caused the list. We are sorry for and inconvience to our customers but passenger safety must come first.

 

Had I read something like that, I would never have cancelled my cruise. I would have waited a couple weeks for them to resume sailing if at all possible.

[caviargal]

To the OP, IMO Princess should have been flexible in this situation and let you transfer the deposit to a different sailing date of your choosing. I do not think it is unreasonable to expect them to be cognizant of the fact that some cruisers are just not comfortable with this ship at this time. I also believe that it would have been a better business decision to maintain a good customer, than to alienate him.

 

As a TA, I think Princess made a bad call.

 

On another note, you will just love Regent. Of my many cruises, they delivered the most consistently excellent experience across the board and are my favorite line.

 

I cancelled my December Crown sailing two weeks ago and booked Regent instead. That decision obviously had nothing to do with safety concerns, but was based on my preference for smaller ships and personal service.

 

Enjoy the "Regent Experience"!:)

[Navy_Chief]

It is your choice to cancel and book with another cruise line. It is the cruise line's right to charge posted fees Non-Refundable or otherwise, as listed in the cruise agreement. Is it the right choice, well I think I would have been able to flex a little, but I don't own the company. So as you said, your going to have to "suck it up" and move on. I personally would not have cancelled but that would be my choice.

 

I believe the ship to be seaworthy otherwise, the Coast Guard would not have let it leave port in the first place. There are only a couple of factors that could have caused this event, the first being human error and, the second being mechanical malfunction which caused the rudder to suddenly shift to port. The NTSB and Coast Guard, no doubt, conducted Rudder Swing Tests from both the Bridge and After Steering in order to clear the ship to leave and head to New York. As far as the Human Error portion goes, my instincts tell me that the Bridge Watch Standers who were on the Bridge at the time this occured have been relieved of standing Bridge Watch pending the official outcome.

 

At this point, I like evryone else, have no difinitive insight to what the NTSB report will say. I would have to rely souly on my judgement as a professional sailor who has 1800+ "Sea Days" to his name and that experiance tells me that I've had far worse "events" tossed at me by the sea, I have been through these types of turns during sea trials, all ships are structurly designed to do this manuver to avoid sudden hazzards to navagation, and this type of event can hapen to ANY SHIP including the one you just booked on.

 

The part that comes into play here (mind you, I have never stepped foot on the deck of this ship and have only seen pictures of it) is the lack of preparedness to secure static items. I've read people's accounts (I can't verify these accounts) of stacks of dishes falling over to the deck, why weren't these dishes in Plate and dish dispensers, silverware and tray dispensers, and rack dispensers (for glasses) to keep them secure? I did see pictures of display cases in the shops that had toppled over and again, these should have been secured. I know that not everything can be secured as it is on a warship but these type of things can. Are these types of "Missile Hazzards" restricted to this ship alone? No way, every cruise ship has "Missile Hazzards", even warships have additional "Missile Hazzards".

 

Professional sailors get injured at sea just like everyone else. We chose to do the job (be it military or Merhant Marine). Casual cruisers also made a choice to vacation at sea and that choice carries the same risks. The sea is a harsh environment and doesn't care if your on a cruise ship, a war ship, or a container ship, it's going to act the same way. I'm not trying to scare anyone here, just stating the facts.

 

To cruise or not to cruise, it is your choice. Consider this though before you make up your mind. There are cruise ships around the world every day that are getting underway and going to sea. The amount of them weighed against the few that have encountered problems at sea are relitively small which means that when I do cruise, I'm sailing with other well trained professional sailors and THAT is what makes me feel safe at sea.

[alibail]

As to the comment about allowing the ship to sail while the investigation is under way?

 

The official invesitgation will takes months to complete, and until it is published anything you hear in the press / read from any source other than Princess, the Coast Guard or the NTSB should be taken with a pinch of salt.

 

The investigation on the Star Princess and even the Grand Princess (I believe) are still on going. If the itinerary you booked was on one of these ships would you not sail? (Im assuming you picked the ports, not the ship)

 

They say bad things happen in 3's, so at least Princess has had its 3, hopefully!

[MikeKool]

Spongerob, Princess ,as of this date, has not said that they have found the problem and it has been corrected. That is the issue. If they said that and told us what is was, I would be ok.

What I disagree with , is they are NOT saying what is was and it has been corrected. I can only assume they are not hiding the facts as they know them, but do not know what happened and how to correct it.

Good corporate governance would be to get the facts and correct it- Not disclosing or not waiting is not good.

Exactly my point. If Princess knew what caused the "list" and fixed the problem, I'd have been there. I have always liked my Princess cruises. Unfortunately, by all accounts......Princess doesn't even know why it happened. With so many choices out there......why should I sit and wonder whether the same thing is going to happen on my cruise? On top of that, I didn't like the attitude of Princess' customer relations. We were charged our $450 cancellation fee which I though could have been avoided....but that's the road Princess chose. The refund from the remaining balance will be spent on another cruise......with another line. We like Celebrity, Holland America and have sailed the RCI Grandeur out of Baltimore three times in the last year. Driving 1 1/2 hours to Baltimore or flying to NY in an hour is easy. Maybe I'll take the Princess refund and sail the Grandeur again.

I have sailed on the Grand back in 4/99 and am aware there is a slight difference in "class". 109,000 vs 116,000.....not much difference. there.

[stephenandrew]

To the OP, IMO Princess should have been flexible in this situation and let you transfer the deposit to a different sailing date of your choosing. I do not think it is unreasonable to expect them to be cognizant of the fact that some cruisers are just not comfortable with this ship at this time. I also believe that it would have been a better business decision to maintain a good customer, than to alienate him.

 

As a TA, I think Princess made a bad call.

 

 

I would concur with the above. I find it to be almost unbelievable that Princess would deliberately sail a ship that felt might potentially be unsafe (doesn't mean I am right about this--just would be hard for me to believe. Given the circumstances, however, I think it would not be unreasonable for Princess to be more flexible and give passengers who might not be as certain about the ship's safety the opportunity to rebook without penalty, or to retunr thair money wihtout penalty. I remember after 9/11, airlines were giving passenger refunds (on non-refundable tickets) even after the airlines starting flying again to passengers who were uncertain about flight saftey. I am sure the FAA, NTSB, etc, all felt flying was safe, otherwise they would not have re-opened the airways.

[Chat Noir]

I do think Princess should be more flexible in allowing an exception to passengers who choose not to sail the Crown in the near future where term cancellation fees are already in effect. However, this is a good case in point for choosing the Princess Travel Care insurance.

 

That said, since Princess is now under the Carnival umbrella, I think this type of customer service is to be expected. Same for the Holland America cruise you mentioned considering.

[MikeKool]

To the OP, IMO Princess should have been flexible in this situation and let you transfer the deposit to a different sailing date of your choosing. I do not think it is unreasonable to expect them to be cognizant of the fact that some cruisers are just not comfortable with this ship at this time. I also believe that it would have been a better business decision to maintain a good customer, than to alienate him.

 

As a TA, I think Princess made a bad call.

 

On another note, you will just love Regent. Of my many cruises, they delivered the most consistently excellent experience across the board and are my favorite line.

 

I cancelled my December Crown sailing two weeks ago and booked Regent instead. That decision obviously had nothing to do with safety concerns, but was based on my preference for smaller ships and personal service.

 

Enjoy the "Regent Experience"!:)

Thanks Caviargal, I think a couple posters think I was out trying to scam the system or looking for something for nothing. No quick decisions were made here. The four of us felt the same way and were all prepared to lose our deposit as the brochure states. We all agreed that Princess could keep our money.....just give us a little more than two months to sail! The Crown was going to the Caribbean.......but Princess doesn't have a smaller ship going there before September 21. So in our opinion Princess' offer was no offer! Had Princess chosen the higher road....most likely we would have sailed on the Sun,Sea or Dawn Princess this winter on a longer and mostly likely more expensive cruise than the 9-day Crown. I agree with you....just not a smart business decision. I think our fears are reasonable and Princess just dismissed them as nothing. The reason I spoke to four different customer relations people was because I knew the cancellation fee was equal to the deposit......which was $450.00. The first girl told me $450.00 but I didn't cancel immediately because I wanted to make sure the others in my party were in agreement. When I found out everyone wanted to cancel/transfer I called again and was told $700.00. The next person told me $648.00 and the last person said $450.00 but then changed it to $648.00 when he read the notes from the previous agent. When I asked to speak with a supervisor I was told rather snippy that "Nobody was around". Who needs this aggravation? So yes....I'm looking forward to my cruise on Regent.

[MikeKool]

I do think Princess should be more flexible in allowing an exception to passengers who choose not to sail the Crown in the near future where term cancellation fees are already in effect. However, this is a good case in point for choosing the Princess Travel Care insurance.

 

That said, since Princess is now under the Carnival umbrella, I think this type of customer service is to be expected. Same for the Holland America cruise you mentioned considering.

Being afraid to cruise is not a "covered reason" for cancelling. Therefore even though one couple bought the gold plan coverage, they are out $198.00 for the cost of the insurance.....but because they bought the insurance they will get 90% of the $450.00 cancellation fee in future cruise credit. Do you really think these folks will cruise Princess again? I think NOT.

I understand about the Carnivore umbrella too.

[Chat Noir]

I know under the regular insurance 'fear of cruising' wouldn't be covered. Only gold offers 'any reason'. We certainly debated over which insurance (regular or gold) to purchase for our Alaska cruise on the Sapphire Princess earlier this year. Not for 'fear' but because of an incident with our Carnival Spirit Alaskan cruise the previous year.

 

I'd've loved to have the option to file my claim for a refund and skip the cruise we had last year rather than board a damaged ship. Unfortunately... Carnival personnel didn't let the 'cat out of the bag' that our ship had sustained damaged from an iceberg on the previous sailing. Passengers were all boarded, and the following morning, only when we were sailing at half speed on a noisy, vibrating ship and far off course from the stated itinerary were we finally informed our sailing was making a slow beeline for Juneau where repair divers were being flown in to work on the ship. Stablizers weren't used to full effect due to the 'drag' they would create, slowing us further... so add seasickness from the rocking...ugh.

 

Anyway, all this is minor compared to what the Crown went through. But it's my reason to purchase insurance from now on. A cruiseline will only be as classy when it comes to customer service as it's parent company... and we know how that's going.:rolleyes:

[land lover]

Mike I am with you, Princess should have been more flexible, if you as a client has a concern, they should view it as valid, there are always exceptions to the rule and you could have been one of them. By keeping your $450. they lost more than your booking. Enjoy your cruise with Regent.