Better let 'em know.....

[Sunshine91]

This tidbit appeared in the Washington Post this past Sunday. Apparently a couple was booked on a Regent cruise leaving from Tahiti. They showed up more than 4 hours prior to the scheduled departure time, but no ship - the captain had already left!

 

Turns out that since the couple hadn't notified the cruise line of their flight plans, the ship didn't know whether or not they were sailing that day. :confused: :eek: Everyone they were actually "expecting" had arrived, so the captain raised the anchor & sailed away. Can you imagine that?

 

Regent put them up for the night, flew them to the next port & offered $$$, which they didn't take. Holding out for more?

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/06/AR2007040600614.html

[bepsf]

Susan--

 

That's outrageous!

Even more-so RSSC didn't even bother to apologize - I would have expected better of that company...

:cool:

[Atomica]

Ouch. That's nuts.

 

I'd be absolutely livid, particularily if I booked an upscale line like Regent, and they sailed before the departure time. Just because they can doesn't mean they should. I like how the line pushed responsibility onto the travellers, and off of themselves (it may be true, but it's in bad taste IMHO.)

 

Having said that, I probably would have taken the voucher and got on with it. Wonder what will happen?

[jhannah]

"We had no idea they were going to show up that evening ..."

 

What?????? They had passage booked on that sailing. Why in the name of heaven would they have no idea they were not going to show up? That's the lamest thing I've heard in a long time.

 

Shame on Regent!

[Krazy Kruizers]

Some heads are going to roll over that one!!!

[Scrumpy]

This is pretty disturbing. Been reading about it over on the RSSC board. I cannot imagine what the rationale could have been for simply sailing away early. The response from RSSC is sorely inadequate and leaves a horrible impression. If there isn't some kind of official apology, it is only going to generate ill will among those considering a cruise with them. We really want to go on PG, but boy does this bother me. I hope they have learned a lesson from this and that it never, ever happens again. Sure would be nice to hear that apology instead of them trying to lay blame at the feet of the passengers... Someone from the RSSC board has sent them an email about it, but had no response yet. If anyone is following this, you might check over there and see if anything new develops.

[sail7seas]

That's outrageous. The travelers had no responsibility to provide their arrival specifics. We never inform HAL when we plan to arrive at a ship......does any independent traveler? Does HAL have any interest in having that information? Do they wish to dedicate employees to wasting their time writing up those lists?

 

PR on this one is terrible. Nothing less than free cruise works for me in this case and I am about the last person on these forums to expect compensation. There are so few cases when I think the cruisers should expect compensation for various things that occur but this is one of them IMO.

 

IF all guests were aboard and Captain wished to leave port early for whatever reason......fine. But not with anyone not yet arrived and well within appropriate time to arrive. With four hours to spare, these guests are 100% in the right IMO

 

[dakrewser]

And anyone who thinks that the "HAL flag-wavers" are hard on complainers should read the thread over on the RSSC board!

[hammybee]

I am speculating that ships may pay by the minute/ hour they are docked and someone decided they might reduce the expense of the sail by pushing off earlier, than scheduled. Corporate boneheadedness !

[babyher]

That's outrageous. The travelers had no responsibility to provide their arrival specifics. We never inform HAL when we plan to arrive at a ship......does any independent traveler? Does HAL have any interest in having that information? Do they wish to dedicate employees to wasting their time writing up those lists?

 

PR on this one is terrible. Nothing less than free cruise works for me in this case and I am about the last person on these forums to expect compensation. There are so few cases when I think the cruisers should expect compensation for various things that occur but this is one of them IMO.

 

IF all guests were aboard and Captain wished to leave port early for whatever reason......fine. But not with anyone not yet arrived and well within appropriate time to arrive. With four hours to spare, these guests are 100% in the right IMO

 

 

Sail,

 

You have been on wayyyyyyyyy more cruises than I have.

 

Have you ever had to tell HAL or any other line what your travel plans were prior to embarkation? I know I never have.

 

I just show up before the scheduled time of departure (in most cases way before) and the ship is always there. :)

 

And yet in the article some spokesman for RSSC gives future cruisers a kind of word to the wise to always let the cruise line know your plans.

 

very strange :)

[jtl513]

A letter posted on the RSSC board states:

... typically we would not expect them to arrive that late at night, several hours after the main embarkation had taken place.

 

(Andrew Poulton, Director of Public Relations for Regent Seven Seas)

The scheduled departure time for this ship was 2:30AM. So what time were the pax supposed to be on board? When was the lifeboat muster? When a ship is sailing at 2:30AM I wouldn't expect a muster at 1:45am and on on-board time of 1:30am. Maybe they were, in fact, a few hours late when they showed up after 10:00pm, not 4.5 hours early. :confused:

[sail7seas]

 

Sail,

 

You have been on wayyyyyyyyy more cruises than I have.

 

Have you ever had to tell HAL or any other line what your travel plans were prior to embarkation? I know I never have.

 

I just show up before the scheduled time of departure (in most cases way before) and the ship is always there. :)

 

And yet in the article some spokesman for RSSC gives future cruisers a kind of word to the wise to always let the cruise line know your plans.

 

very strange :)

 

Absolutely not. Never heard of such a thing.

 

 

jtl........ Life Boat drill time is not relevant IMO IF the ship had already run the organzied drill for all guests, a private one certainly could be conducted for the two persons who arrived after the others.

 

The only pertinent thing IMO is what time did the documents say everyone had to be aboard. Either they were there by that time or they were not.

[leoandhugh]

The lifeboat drill for a ship sailing in the wee hours of the morning would normally be held the next day - within 24 hours. The only significance I can think of concerning an early departure(before midnight) is that the ship COULD have saved IMO its docking fees for the day after midnight. still seems like a bonehead move on the part of RSSC for whatever lame reason

[jtl513]

The only pertinent thing IMO is what time did the documents say everyone had to be aboard. Either they were there by that time or they were not.

That was the point I was making. They could well have arrived a few hours late, not 3.5 to 4.5 hours early.

 

BTW, this incident happened 17 months ago, Nov 2005, and is only coming to light today because of the Washington Post article.

[dakrewser]

That was the point I was making. They could well have arrived a few hours late, not 3.5 to 4.5 hours early.

 

BTW, this incident happened 17 months ago, Nov 2005, and is only coming to light today because of the Washington Post article.

 

As the article states, they arrived at the pier "hours before the boarding deadline."

 

And, really, what does it matter when it occurred?

[jtl513]

And, really, what does it matter when it occurred?

That was for the people who thought it had just happened:

 

wonder what will happen

 

Some heads are going to roll over that one!!!

 

you might check over there and see if anything new develops.

[Sunshine91]

BTW, this incident happened 17 months ago, Nov 2005, and is only coming to light today because of the Washington Post article.

 

When I posted the link, I had NO idea the story was so old. The Post article does not say when the incident occurred. Not that that's really relevant. It still shouldn't have happened.

 

But since the couple did not accept RSSC's offer of compensation - a $500 voucher - I do wonder what it is they are holding out for. It seems to me that if, and it is a big if, legal counsel has been retained, only the lawyers make any $$$. :o But perhaps they chose not to accept simply because they have no intention of ever sailing that line ever again?

[sail7seas]

I don't think the offer was high enough but there probably wasn't much the couple planned to do about that other than not book with the line again.

 

I wonder if once they boarded, the Hotel Manager/GRM went out of their way to offer some small 'treats' and if the Captain ever met them. I would like to think they went out of their way to try and 'make up for' doing this to them.

 

[Scrumpy]

If the couple had no plans to sail RSSC again, then the voucher offer should have been changed to cash - if they found that amount acceptable. The per diem on these cruises can easily be more than the $500 offered. If memory serves, that would be on the low end for most cabin categories.

 

The timing of the incident didn't matter to me. What I was hoping to find was reassurance from RSSC that it wouldn't happen again, except in accordance with their own policy - a policy that was not followed in this instance. Maybe the fact that since this has come to light, coupled with the fact that loyal customers are now contacting them will ensure that the incident is not forgotten and will not be repeated.