Complaining Couple Banned from RCI

[isujim]

Yeah, but it's NEW news here.:D

 

Not to many of us:D

[amybear912]

Wow!!!! When I first came across this thread there were literally 5 posts to it... I clicked on the article and read it... then clicked on the review and read that... came back to post my thoughts and my computer locked up and just gave up on me....

 

I certainly agree that it wasn't just the review... I've read much more scathing reviews on here and I don't think any of those people were banned or asked to take their review down... I suspect that if RCI asked Cruise Critic to remove the review it had more to do with their desire to shut this person down due to long-standing problems... The review isn't the problem, the abusive customer is...

 

I work in retail/restaurants... In my retail job, we have frequently asked people to not return to our store and then warned other stores in our area (including competitors) about those particular customers... Usually they are people who simply abuse the system and have found a way to get around things and take advantage of the business... That isn't good for the business and it certainly isn't good for our loyal customers...

 

In most cases, our reasons for banning the person has to do with not just their abusive ways but the TIME it takes our employees to deal with such people... It's not worth the time and takes time away from customers who are truly there to use our business legitimately...

 

I suspect that is what happened here... How many employees were taking their time to deal with whatever issues this couple had??? How much of their time was being devoted to this couples' issues??? And most importantly, how many customers did they disappoint or lose because of the time they were wasting dealing with someone that was COSTING them money instead of MAKING them money... It's all in the figures...

 

I am glad to see CC hold their ground and NOT remove the review... Even though I blame the server for getting clogged with tons of us trying to read the review this afternoon and my subsequent computer meltdown:)

 

I have to wonder though if being banned from CC is next... that might be the best solution here since problems with this poster are not just related to the cruiselines themselves but also to that posters behavior on these boards.... I've never understood what her contribution was anyway...

 

Good job Cruise Critic... the exposure is good for you too! It highlights the great resource this website is for the cruising community....

[cruisePRN]

RCL rewarded bad behaviour by compensating these people after each complaint. The learned behaviour was "complain" and we will receive. Maybe RCL could have given these folks a warning that their complaints were jepardizing their relationship with the company and then resorted to banning them if they didn't change their constant complaining. we'll never know the whole story but I have serious doubts about expressing a negative review and censorship after reading all this thread.

When a sailing i was on got cancelled, Rhapsody was redeployed, many of us chit chatted about what RCL offered us and it was helpful to all of us to know we got the same compensation. I find this whole situation unsettling.

[mjbelen]

Regarding discussing a "settlement" after you get it....

 

Just because you get something for compensation from a compnay does not mean you cannot or should not discuss it. Only a Confidentiality Agreement says that.

 

For instance, as the beautiful and talented Parrotthead pointed out earlier in this thread, I recently stayed in a hotel where I was greeted in my bed by a flying roach the size of Rhode Island (a very nice hotel otherwise, by the way). I got a free room after I took the evil beast down to the desk still kicking in a water glass.

 

But I have EVERY RIGHT to tell whomever I choose, because I signed nothing to say that I wouldn't. I even posted a picture of the roach on my MySpace page to share him with the world. But i have no other complaints against the hotel, they just need a better exterminator I guess. :p

 

So yeah, Hilton in Galveston, big flying roach, free room, film at eleven...:eek:

 

Wow that is really something that they gave you a free room for the night. Yes, they are Palmetto bugs and are called that as they live in palm trees. Unlike German Roaches, they do not live in our homes. They mostly come in through an open window or door and can come up the water pipes in toilets, tubs and sinks. There is no way that a hotel can keep them out, so it was really nice of them to comp the room for you. Though they are are quite large and yes they can fly, they are relatively harmless as they do not bite or carry dangerous diseases.

 

I have mixed emotions about the issue with RCL and the couple who are now banned. I guess I would need to see what they posted, and the letters that they sent before I could make an informed stand. I would hate to have to stay in a room which had sewage back up, and quite honestly 20% off a future cruise booking and $500 would not be enough to compensate me for the smell and the danger of catching disease. Of course, I do not know how serious the back up was or any of the other circumstances that were involved.

 

No cruise is perfect. We can always find fault somewhere. I just came back from a cruise on Princess where I could make a list a page long of things that weren't done, or could have been done better. HOWEVER, I still had a great time. I let the little things that annoyed me go, and I focused on the positive.

 

Yet, if there really is an issue such as a malfunction in my cabin, I do want to be able to complain and have someone take quick action to resolve the matter and if they cannot, offer me fair compensation for my inconvenience. I want to be able to do this without fear of reprisals from the cruiseline. The cruise industry spends a lot of money on ads selling us on the fact that this will be the vacation of a lifetime. They themselves have set the bar high, and it is their obligation to us as consumers to live up their promises.

 

On the other hand, if consumers attempt to take advantage of a cruiseline by constantly complaining to gain unjust compensation, then the company has the right to refuse their business.

[Rala]

the thing that gets me is if the intent of the passenger is not to scam RC out of Service recovery money then why in the world would someone continue to cruise a line that has given them so many issues

 

Some people for whatever reason have a need to be important or appear that way. They need to be center stage with all eyes on them...they need attention. Sometimes negative attention is better than no attention for this type of person and complaining will garner attention. Maybe this is the case with this passenger. If so, it seems like Royal caribbean had enough and banned the couple.

[Cruising89143]

RCL rewarded bad behaviour by compensating these people after each complaint. The learned behaviour was "complain" and we will receive. Maybe RCL could have given these folks a warning that their complaints were jepardizing their relationship with the company and then resorted to banning them if they didn't change their constant complaining. we'll never know the whole story but I have serious doubts about expressing a negative review and censorship after reading all this thread.

When a sailing i was on got cancelled, Rhapsody was redeployed, many of us chit chatted about what RCL offered us and it was helpful to all of us to know we got the same compensation. I find this whole situation unsettling.

 

Maybe RCI and Celebrity was trying to take care of a customer. Did it ever occur to you that RCI saw a pattern developing here and decided that there was nothing that they could do to make these people happy? I remember this persons posts on this very board. The story kept changing. The amount of compensation kept changing and the person also stated that Adam Goldstein himself contacted her which later turned out to be false. When you play with fire and exaggerate the truth, it will come back to bite you square in the butt.

[mommabean]

I tend to be a little incredulous about articles of this nature, so I have two serious questions:

 

1. If you post a review like this, can you come back later and change what you wrote? If so, it seems rather likely to me that the original review was genuinely scathing and the author changed it later to be reasonable so other people'd take her side. After all, the original post said that the review seemed to be instruction on how to scam the cruiseline into giving you free stuff . . . and that's certainly not in the current review.

 

2. How does Royal Caribbean know the name of the person who wrote the review? I only see her email. You can't figure out my real name from my email address!

 

Sorry if this was answered - so many posts I haven't caught up. When we write a review, our CC user name is posted. When we sign up for an M&M on board, we use our CC user name when we register. That means after just one M&M RCI knows exactly what our real name is and who we are on CC. Easy.

[MrsPete]

2.) RCCL asked that the reviews be amended or pulled down?? That is just ridiculous. That is censorship... did RCCL learn their tactics from Joseph Stalin?

Now wait a minute -- I don't really agree. Let me give you an analogy: Today at work I ran into a problem; I'd done something wrong, and when I realized I'd caused trouble for someone, I could not erase the problem, but I could do some little things to make it better. I went out of my way to offer the person involved something "extra" to make ammends for my mistake. She walked away knowing that mistakes happen, but I'd done what I could to be fair and make it better.

 

Does this person now have the right to blast me publically for having made the mistake?

[isujim]

I keep thinking of the line in the movie Butch Casady and the Sundance Kid..........

 

"Who are those guys?":)

 

I think somewhere in the process.......RC found out:rolleyes:

[waite02]

I didn't even read the whole thread... but I will say, I don't think that we know the whole entire story. A company will not make this kind of decision without something seriously threatening their ability to run, again, a business.

 

The facts that we were told are true. But I suspsect that there is more to it than stated. As they say....

 

3 sides to every story...

Side 1

Side 2

 

And the truth.

[dixiediva761]

And yeah, that's a QUARTER he's next to, nice, huh!! I was told he's a Palmetto Bug, fancy name for a ROACH!!:eek:

 

I live in FL and they are called palmetto bugs, they normally live out in the heavy brush and palmetto trees, we call them roaches with wings or flying roaches as they do fly it is disgusting! :)

 

On topic I think when a major corporation with millions of customers knows ones name well enough to ban them then there definitely is an issue. Who's issue is another question. Is the guest a scammer constantly trying to get something for nothing or did the letter/review hit someone high up on a bad day. I wait tables on weekends (cruise money) and have had the nastiest/whiniest repeat customers who always seem to get what they want but then the MGR is having a bad day and I cant get him to compensate not so well known guests with a legit complaint who went about it in a nice way. There are plenty of guests I would love to ban but if you stop giving the compensation they can either go elsewhere or accept it and go about their day. No one held a gun to RCI's head and made them give anything away so they must have had some legitimate complaints at some point. It just seems extreme to me for what we are hearing.

[PeterPan]

It has not been PROVEN that RCCL asked anyone to remove anything from any cruise message board.

 

I, for one, will just consider the source...............

[Charles4515]

Maybe RCI and Celebrity was trying to take care of a customer. Did it ever occur to you that RCI saw a pattern developing here and decided that there was nothing that they could do to make these people happy? I remember this persons posts on this very board. The story kept changing. The amount of compensation kept changing and the person also stated that Adam Goldstein himself contacted her which later turned out to be false. When you play with fire and exaggerate the truth, it will come back to bite you square in the butt.

 

The person named in the article used to post to another forum I read. Before RCI and Celebrity her cruise line of choice was Princess. For a while she bragged about all the stuff she go from Princess. Then she left them in a huff for Celebrity.

[Cruising89143]

The person named in the article used to post to another forum I read. Before RCI and Celebrity her cruise line of choice was Princess. For a while she bragged about all the stuff she go from Princess. Then she left them in a huff for Celebrity.

 

Charles I remember that also. I have been reading comments from this person since 1997 starting on usenet.:)

[iluvcruzin]

I can't count the number of times I've read stories on unpleasant experiences and compensation being mentioned on the cruise boards over the years. I think there is much more to this story. I don't get where the "suggestion" of "sailing with another cruise company" equates to being "banned" unless it's interpreted as such. Sometimes it can be said in a respectable manner. The only ones who really know are those involved. I think there is some "what if's" being mentioned that one could risk being contacted by a cruiseline if someone goes too far. The odds of that happening are slim to none IMHO as what is too far? Whatever....:rolleyes:

[MakinGold]

I have two trains of thought on this one:

 

1.) I can see the cruise lines dislike of dealing with the constant complaints, but I still think it wasn't enough to ban them from the line.

 

2.) RCCL asked that the reviews be amended or pulled down?? That is just ridiculous. That is censorship... did RCCL learn their tactics from Joseph Stalin?

 

RCCL made their own bed by continuing to give the compensations, but yet they want to take it out on the couple and then censor their words?? What did were they trying to do with the $500, buy a good review??

 

I have made many public complaints against NCL over the years (many well documented on here). The only compensation that I have ever asked for was to be moved back to a cabin that they had moved us out of. That is one reason why I don't ask for compensation...it would put me in debt to the cruise line. I will say that NCL has NEVER contacted me about any post on here and I have never been asked to remove anything.

 

I will be sailing on RCCL on July 3 and I will be writing a full review upon my return. Those of you who know me, know that I will tell both the good and the bad. Hopefully, there won't be any bad. RCCL won't be bullying me.

 

On your first train of thought, I would just say that, unless you know more details of the full history of these people's dealings with RCI than the rest of us do, then it's hard to conclude whether it was enough for a ban.

 

On your second train of thought, I'd have to say almost the same as I did about your first train of thought. We don't really know exactly what RCI asked them to do. It's quite possible that there was some misleading information or even downright lies posted that they asked to be removed. I don't really think they concern themselves with asking for all negative commentary to be removed for the forum. If so, most of us here would have been contacted at one time or another, but like your experience with NCL, most of us have never been contacted by RCI about anything we've written here.

 

I don't agree in the slightest that RCI "made their own bed" by giving out compensations. They can and should do that kind of thing, when someone has a legitimate issue that warrants it. It's good customer service. That does not excuse those who want to abuse and take advantage of that customer service. If they find that someone is taking advantage of them, and they have a good case to back it up, then I'm glad they would ban them from the line.

[Merion_Mom]

First of all, I would like to thank LauraS for leaving this thread up so that I could read all ten pages. :eek:

 

To anyone who thinks that RC acted hastily or rashly or without justification: All I can say is, if you have been on these boards long enough, not only are you not surprised at the ban, you are wondering what took RC so long.

 

Many credible members of Cruise Critic have been on cruises with this couple, and their reports of their encounters with this couple would make your hair stand on end.

 

B. seems to have enjoyed her first cruise (in 20 years) on Norwegian very much, and we all wish her many happy sailings there. :D

 

But don't be surprised if we start hearing otherwise. :rolleyes:

[BadBoysDriveAudi]

I agree though, that I think that the review was okay - not overboard one way or another. If I had read it without reading the article I would have come away thinking - Yeah they had some problems but had a good time. After the article and looking through the lens that this person is ticked, you get a different reading. It's just whether or not you are able to be objective when reading it!

 

I just read the review and it didn't look like something that would be deserving of being 86'd. I'm now going to read the article and see if my impressions change.

[BadBoysDriveAudi]

First of all, I would like to thank LauraS for leaving this thread up so that I could read all ten pages. :eek:

 

To anyone who thinks that RC acted hastily or rashily or without justification: All I can say is, if you have been on these boards long enough, not only are you not surprised at the ban, you are wondering what took RC so long.

 

Many credible members of Cruise Critic have been on cruises with this couple, and their reports of their encounters with this couple would make your hair stand on end.

 

B. seems to have enjoyed her first cruise (in 20 years) on Norwegian very much, and we all wish her many happy sailings there. :D

 

But don't be surprised if we start hearing otherwise. :rolleyes:

 

I still haven't read the article yet, but your text did touch on something I noticed in the review. The reviewer did seem to be a "glass half empty" type of person and noted the negative details.

 

Overall, I still got the impression that things went wrong but they made the best of it. I'm wondering if I should read the review again before moving on to the article.

[suzyed]

Perhaps she writes good reviews and than sends nasty letters? I would think that they get tired of hearing complaints from people over and over again. Once in a while perhaps a nice letter would work wonders for people like her.

I honestly thought the review was fair and balanced....but who know what they did later? Some people are professional complainers...for ex....

 

My daughter is a server in a very nice restaurant. One night after serving a very nice couple, they told her the food was wonderful and that she was the best server they ever had! They then proceded to tell the manager that food was awful and the service terrible. Of course their meal was comped....but my daughter was devestated when the manager asked her what happened. She just couldnt believe they did that. :eek:

[suzyed]

The article makes it sound as if the review was a big issue. I just don't see that. There have been worse reviews about Royal Caribbean ships and I find it difficult to believe that the company contacts the authors and asks for them to be rescinded. I find the whole "Big Brother" slant of the article too farfetched to be accurate. JMHO

 

Karen

I agree. Maybe RCI didn't like them sharing all the info on the comps and freebies they got. Maybe other cruisers were now coming and demanding the same types of compensation.

[LauraS]

I suspect that if RCI asked Cruise Critic to remove the review it had more to do with their desire to shut this person down

 

I just want to state, again, that RCI did NOT ask us to remove the review.

[BadBoysDriveAudi]

Now wait a minute -- I don't really agree. Let me give you an analogy: Today at work I ran into a problem; I'd done something wrong, and when I realized I'd caused trouble for someone, I could not erase the problem, but I could do some little things to make it better. I went out of my way to offer the person involved something "extra" to make ammends for my mistake. She walked away knowing that mistakes happen, but I'd done what I could to be fair and make it better.

 

Does this person now have the right to blast me publically for having made the mistake?

 

They always have the right if what they utter out of their mouth is true. It isn't the most appropriate thing to do, and I would lose a fair amount of respect for them if they did blabber, but I wouldn't say that they don't have the right to do something silly like that.

[brmoqueen]

First........I laughed when I realized it took 8 pages of q's asking how Rcl knew who they were before someone said the cabin number was in the review!!.....That was my first thought!!!

 

Second..........As far as the banning becuz of something on the internet......There are many companies firing people, not hiring people ect ect because of the things people are putting on the internet...

 

Third.......The review on CC is NOT the only review on the internet discussing their displeasure with RCL.

 

We were also on that cruise and it was the most awesome one yet out of 14.....Yup, there was some toilet issues, however the cabin next to theirs was occupied by some friends of ours and they never saw nor smelled the sewage problems that 'some' of her reviews had talked about.

 

RCL/Adam Goldstein are RIGHT in banning a chronic complainer...I too have a retail biz and occasionally have to ask someone to shop elsewhere. That's just an appropriate business technique.

 

Even Wal-mart keeps track of your returns so if they are excessive you will be banned from making returns.......

 

I can't believe that after all these months this is hitting the 'news'.......being the center of attention may be exactly what the 'review writer' enjoys the most next to all the freebies.

[CruisesOnMyMind]

If I had to guess who this article was about, I would have been a winner.

I am pleased that RCCL is taking action if indeed this is a case of abuse of manipulating the system.

It to me rings of "sue" at every corner for some folks out there that thinks it is the thing to do. Anytime they see an opening for making a buck they are there. Making a mountain out of a mole hill to get that extra buck.

What they do not realize is that in the end it costs us all more money to cruise.

I truly believe all cruise lines want to hear about the negative to enhance their lines, however they do not want to be held ransom to keep a client.