Are "Fuel Surcharges" Legal????

[mrtractor]

A barrel of oil is now fully a third of it's high and is actually trading at under $50 a barrel - $12 LESS than what it was at the beginning of the year. This was before the lines all instituted a "Fuel Surcharge." Yet they continue to charge this "surcharge" while advertising super low prices for a cruise. They continue to pocket the fuel surcharges even though they are paying significantly less for it.

 

This is EXACTLY what the cruiselines all agreed NOT to do. Seems to me I remember an agreement with the State of Florida in which CLIA members agreed to advertise prices that reflected the true cost of a cruise. I think it was a consumer group that sued CLIA accusing them of adding "hidden" charges." They won, and from that point on, only government taxes could be stated as a separate item. They have now broken that agreement with the advent of "Fuel Surcharges." Let's be REAL. These are nothing but an increase in the price of the cruise. If that's what they are, they should be added to the price of the cruise. I"m OK with that. But if they're not, and the only justification for them is the price of a ton of bunker fuel, THEN THEY SHOULD BE ELIMINATED.

 

I'm aware that some cruiselines buy their fuel well in advance and may have had to pay a premium earlier this year to insure their ships weren't left at the dock without fuel. But if that's true, then they are buying their fuel futures now for cruises going forward. So shouldn't they be eliminating or drastically reducing (assuming they still have some shortfalls to make up, which they probably don't!) the "Fuel Surcharges" that they are illegally adding to the price of cruises? Using the logic that the lines are purporting, buying the futures at near today's prices for fuel to be delivered in February should result in a REDUCTION IN THE BASE COST OF THE CRUISE! Fat chance of that happening.

 

At the very least, they should be eliminating the fuel charges until the price of crude increases. If they feel that fuel prices have significantly impacted the cost of doing business, let them increase their prices. Goodness knows they have found all sorts of little ways to get into your wallet AFTER you get on the ship. What's next, a "Laundry Detergent Surcharge?" caused by the increase in the cost of phosphorus? Or maybe a "Food Surcharge" forced upon them by the cost of corn??

 

In light of the current price of oil, Fuel Surcharges are now nothing more than a way to advertise a low price and charge a higher one on the pretext that fuel is so expensive. Well it's NOT anymore. Should the AG of Florida be looking into this????

 

MrTractor<----------hadn't stirred anything up in a while and thought it was a good time to start......:rolleyes:....

[BalconyBumz]

Well I think they are perfectly legal and any business has the right to charge what they want. However, do I think what they are doing right now to people is fair and ethical? NO I do not. I think people were fair by saying, ya, with the price of fuel so high, I have no problem paying a fuel surcharge. Now, the cruise lines don't want to play the same game and be fair to their patrons.

[Arwenmark]

NCL has a policy in place now to possibly adjust or remove the surchages based on quaterly fuel costs.

Sure it would be nice if they just said ok no charges, but at least they are doing something.

 

Utilities however, which are regulated to some degree still and were more in the past have added these charges and never removed them in over 30 years or so.

I remember when Fuel charge was first an emergency measure added to our electric bill it is now WAY more than the electric bill itself and has been for years.

[cruizinwithkids]

I don't really care what the cruise lines do. Basically they can charge what they want. If you want to pay, then pay. If not, find another line, or don't cruise.

 

What I am much more disgusted with is the drastic increase in the price of food over the last 6 months to a year. Food is not a luxury item. I haven't seen that go down, since transportation costs have decreased.

[garycarla]

Do I think it is right? No way.

 

Is it legal. Sure is. They can add any of the following fees if they want:

 

Daily Use of Telephone $1.95

Resort Fee: $10.00

Shop Disposables: $3.00

Entertainment Fee: $4.00

Environmental Fee: $5.00

and many others.

 

These are just examples of what I have been charged by various businesses.

 

 

(these are just a few

[ugen512]

The fuel surcharge is absolutely legal as well as any other they would like to add. I will give you a different perspective on them...Fuel supplements are what we call in the travel business as Non-commisionable fare. Port charges and gov't taxes are also NCF since they are paid to a third party and the cruise line does not profit from these. So travel agencies are not paid commision on the additional fuel surcharge.

 

Although we all feel that since oil is lower than well before the fuel supps started, the cruise lines lost alot of $$ when the oil was going up and have every right to make it back, after all it is a business.

[mrtractor]

Of course it's legal for a business to increase their prices. But CLIA, if I'm correct about the agreement, agreed NOT to add extra charges except Government taxes. This is simply a cost of doing business. As if the price of a cruise was so fixed that the lines had to put a surcharge on so it wouldn't be so hard to remove it from the "real price" later. HA!

 

And the idea that a cruiseline and a public utility are in the same league doesn't fly with me. That's like saying the State Highway Department should run their business like a restaurant. While I'm sure that many utilities are using questionable methods to increase their revenue, the question is not whether it's justified. The question I'm asking is, are the cruise lines in violation of their agreement to advertise cruise prices without extra charges.

 

What does the law say here and is it legal???

 

I have a "Cruise Reward Certificate" good for the deposit and $250 for an NCL cruise. But like BalconyBumz, I'm going to wait. First because I think booking last minute will be the cheapest considering the economic environment. And secondly, I think sooner or later, NCL and others will have to come to their senses or be forced to by the AG of Florida, and drop the "Fuel Surcharges." I think the first line to do this will be miles ahead in the eyes of the cruising public. Let's see who has the guts to do it!

 

MrTractor<----------agrees that businesses that play by the rules should be able to set their prices according to demand and the quality of their product or service.........

[terrymtex01]

I don't really care what the cruise lines do. Basically they can charge what they want. If you want to pay, then pay. If not, find another line, or don't cruise.

 

What I am much more disgusted with is the drastic increase in the price of food over the last 6 months to a year. Food is not a luxury item. I haven't seen that go down, since transportation costs have decreased.

 

I could not agree more.

[mrtractor]

Resort Fee." HA! Yeah, I love that one.

 

But behold the power of the internet.

 

I went to a resort in Hawai'i a couple of years ago. When I check out, I get a bill that includes a "Resort Fee" of $10 per day! I had no choice but to pay it. One of the first things I did when I got home was to go to the various hotel booking websites and write reviews to tell everyone about the fee.

 

Lo and behold, a month or so later, the hotel dropped the fee! I noticed that the price of the hotel went up slightly. And maybe they mad up for it in other ways by charging for other things that were not extra before. But at least when someone books that hotel in the future, they'll know what the real price is!

 

I also wrote a letter to the internet hotel booking site and told them I felt that they should disclose it when a hotel charges a "Resort Fee." If you stay there, you have to pay it, so it's really a part of the price, right?

 

No response from them. So guess what????

 

I voted with my dollars. I decided to never use that site to book another hotel ever again!!!

 

Isn't it great how the free enterprise system works????

 

I paid a net $150 for the "Cruise Rewards Certificate" on our last NCL cruise. But I'd sooner used it to line the bird cage than I would go on a cruiseline that I feel is using unfair, unethical and possibly illegal practices to get my booking. We'll see.

 

As far as all the other charges garycarla mentioned, I understand entirely. I work for a business that charges a number of those fees.

 

But we really DO have costs related to disposing of hazardous materials.

 

We really DO have to use very specialized and costly shop supplies.

 

We don't charge customers for things we don't use and we don't ask them for a surcharge to keep the lights on.

 

IT'S PART OF THE PRICE WE CHARGE THEM.

 

Shouldn't fuel be part of the price of the cruise since it's part of what makes a cruise A CRUISE! That is, the ship has an engine that makes it move through the water which consumes fuel!

 

I recently stayed on the Queen Mary in Long Beach Harbor. The engines are fully disabled. It uses no fuel. Imagine my surprise if I were to go to check out and I were presented a "Fuel Surcharge!"

 

How is that any different than the cruiselines charging me for the additional expense of FUEL THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO PAY EXTRA FOR????

 

MrTractor<----------thinks maybe he'll email the Florida AG just for kicks and giggles..........:p............

[watchdiva]

I agree with the previous poster - if the line is charging you for something you don't think you should pay for (i.e., fuel surcharges), you can cancel your booking and just line the birdcage with your cruise rewards certificate.

 

How much of what you're posting on these 2 threads is just because you "like to stir things up" (your own quote), how much of what you're posting is just because you like your own writing style and how much really of your posts are that important to you that you are ready to "vote with your feet".

[NCL_Cruiser]

My guess is that the OP is unaware that NCL, along with several of the other cruise lines, has eliminated the fuel surcharge for sailings in 2010, and will issue fuel surcharge rebates in the form of OBCs if the price of a barrel of oil is below a certain standard (which it is now) on a set date before the fiscal quarter of the sailings.

[terrymtex01]

My two thoughts from the OP's last postings are this:

 

How many people where on here offering to pay an extra fee during the years fuel was going up before cruise lines started charging the fuel surcharge? Where they not losing money then? So if it is not right for them to make money now, why was it right for them to lose money then?

 

You stated "How is that any different than the cruiselines charging me for the additional expense of FUEL THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO PAY EXTRA FOR???? . Since you admit that cruise lines contract their fuel prices in advance, how do you know how much they paid for the fuel on the cruise you are taking? It's not like they pull up to a pump and whatever the cost of the fuel is that day is what they pay.

 

I think WatchDiva is totally right.. You just like stirring up things here on the boards and you are getting a kick out of this thread.. 8-) Nothing wrong with someone who likes to have a good discussion.

[SukaCruise]

At the very least, they should be eliminating the fuel charges until the price of crude increases. If they feel that fuel prices have significantly impacted the cost of doing business, let them increase their prices. Goodness knows they have found all sorts of little ways to get into your wallet AFTER you get on the ship. What's next, a "Laundry Detergent Surcharge?" caused by the increase in the cost of phosphorus? Or maybe a "Food Surcharge" forced upon them by the cost of corn??

 

They're actually eliminating the fuel surcharge based on the price of oil. Details here:

http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=2916

 

Here's to hoping that the WTI crude price is below $65 on Dec. 18 and March 18! :D

[mrtractor]

Aw, c'mon Watchdiva! Can't a guy have little fun around here???

 

I only care what a cruise costs me. If it's what I'm willing to pay, I'll go. If not, I'll stay home or do and all inclusive. Believe me. I get it! My only question was if the institution of "Fuel Surcharges" or "Fuel Supplements" is in violation of the cruise industry's agreement with the legal authorities that govern these sorts of consumer and travel affairs. Is it or isn't it?

 

For some reason, I'm gonna guess that you're a travel agent, watchdiva. Can you answer that question?

 

Yes, I did hear the the lines have agreed to ease off on the fuel charges. But the argument that they are making up the cost of fuel they didn't cover the cost of previously doesn't make sense to me.

 

Let's say the lines are buying their fuel 6 months in advance. If the price is say $500 a ton for bunker fuel in January for a June future, then the cruise lines know what their fuel costs are! They have smart people that can tell them within a small delta how many tons of fuel they'll use in a given itinerary. That has to be built into the price of the cruise, doesn't it? I think they're smart enough to do that. If they didn't do that, it was a concious decision to set their pricing at that level. So if they are now continuing to charge the "Fuel Surcharge" on cruises today and through the entire year of 2009, then why is that now justified? Aren't they buying futures to lock in their prices six months from now, don't they KNOW what their costs are going to be?

 

I'm sorry if you don't like my writing style. I'm just thinking out loud. I don't expect you to agree with me. In fact it's a lot more fun if you don't! But don't make this a personal thing, watchdiva. And if you are a travel agent, doesn't that make your opinions more biased than just the average cruising joe like me?

[gtalum]

Fuel surcharges are perfectly legal as long as they are disclosed before purchase.

 

They could charge a "Bigfoot Protection Surcharge", and as long as they clearly advertise it before purchase it would be perfectly legal.

 

The only time fuel surcharges are illegal is if the line tries to make them retroactive.

 

You should shop for cruises like you shop for everything else: considering ONLY the final bottom line price. Then it doesn't matter what they call the fees and surcharges.

[mrtractor]

Someone who actually answered my question!!!

 

Thanks, gtalum!

 

Of course I'll be cruising again, watchdiva. Know a good agent?

 

MrTractor<--------appreciates everyone's input, but just asked a simple simple question....;).....

[Suni99]

Aw, c'mon Watchdiva! Can't a guy have little fun around here???

 

I only care what a cruise costs me. If it's what I'm willing to pay, I'll go. If not, I'll stay home or do and all inclusive. Believe me. I get it! My only question was if the institution of "Fuel Surcharges" or "Fuel Supplements" is in violation of the cruise industry's agreement with the legal authorities that govern these sorts of consumer and travel affairs. Is it or isn't it?

 

For some reason, I'm gonna guess that you're a travel agent, watchdiva. Can you answer that question?

 

Yes, I did hear the the lines have agreed to ease off on the fuel charges. But the argument that they are making up the cost of fuel they didn't cover the cost of previously doesn't make sense to me.

 

Let's say the lines are buying their fuel 6 months in advance. If the price is say $500 a ton for bunker fuel in January for a June future, then the cruise lines know what their fuel costs are! They have smart people that can tell them within a small delta how many tons of fuel they'll use in a given itinerary. That has to be built into the price of the cruise, doesn't it? I think they're smart enough to do that. If they didn't do that, it was a concious decision to set their pricing at that level. So if they are now continuing to charge the "Fuel Surcharge" on cruises today and through the entire year of 2009, then why is that now justified? Aren't they buying futures to lock in their prices six months from now, don't they KNOW what their costs are going to be?

 

I'm sorry if you don't like my writing style. I'm just thinking out loud. I don't expect you to agree with me. In fact it's a lot more fun if you don't! But don't make this a personal thing, watchdiva. And if you are a travel agent, doesn't that make your opinions more biased than just the average cruising joe like me?

 

i have to say that after thinking for a bit about what mr is saying i agree to a certain extent. there are alot of different ways you can look at this.i do not think they buy fuel for years in advance maybe months and the cost is and has been going down for several months now..if they had a loss in money from fuel cost last year , as a new cruiser now i have to pay for it? to me it would eliminate alot of hassel if they just adjusted the cruise fare when the fuel prices jump way high.

[watchdiva]

Sorry Mr T - definitely NOT a TA. I would think my screen name would give a hint on how I earn my living...

 

It's really not personal - I've been reading your posts for years and you are indeed a good agent provacateur. In fact, I remember when you and 'Bama used to tear up these boards.......

[mrtractor]

You bring up a good question Suni99. Are people today paying the cost of fuel for people who cruised last year?

 

MrTractor<--------uh, oh.....he might be starting something again!!!....:eek:......

[newmexicoNita]

A barrel of oil is now fully a third of it's high and is actually trading at under $50 a barrel - $12 LESS than what it was at the beginning of the year. This was before the lines all instituted a "Fuel Surcharge." Yet they continue to charge this "surcharge" while advertising super low prices for a cruise. They continue to pocket the fuel surcharges even though they are paying significantly less for it.

 

This is EXACTLY what the cruiselines all agreed NOT to do. Seems to me I remember an agreement with the State of Florida in which CLIA members agreed to advertise prices that reflected the true cost of a cruise. I think it was a consumer group that sued CLIA accusing them of adding "hidden" charges." They won, and from that point on, only government taxes could be stated as a separate item. They have now broken that agreement with the advent of "Fuel Surcharges." Let's be REAL. These are nothing but an increase in the price of the cruise. If that's what they are, they should be added to the price of the cruise. I"m OK with that. But if they're not, and the only justification for them is the price of a ton of bunker fuel, THEN THEY SHOULD BE ELIMINATED.

 

I'm aware that some cruiselines buy their fuel well in advance and may have had to pay a premium earlier this year to insure their ships weren't left at the dock without fuel. But if that's true, then they are buying their fuel futures now for cruises going forward. So shouldn't they be eliminating or drastically reducing (assuming they still have some shortfalls to make up, which they probably don't!) the "Fuel Surcharges" that they are illegally adding to the price of cruises? Using the logic that the lines are purporting, buying the futures at near today's prices for fuel to be delivered in February should result in a REDUCTION IN THE BASE COST OF THE CRUISE! Fat chance of that happening.

 

At the very least, they should be eliminating the fuel charges until the price of crude increases. If they feel that fuel prices have significantly impacted the cost of doing business, let them increase their prices. Goodness knows they have found all sorts of little ways to get into your wallet AFTER you get on the ship. What's next, a "Laundry Detergent Surcharge?" caused by the increase in the cost of phosphorus? Or maybe a "Food Surcharge" forced upon them by the cost of corn??

 

In light of the current price of oil, Fuel Surcharges are now nothing more than a way to advertise a low price and charge a higher one on the pretext that fuel is so expensive. Well it's NOT anymore. Should the AG of Florida be looking into this????

 

MrTractor<----------hadn't stirred anything up in a while and thought it was a good time to start......:rolleyes:....

 

of course they are legal, I think every line has a plan in place to reduce or eliminate them after a point. Remember the cruise line purchase the oil months in advance.

 

NIta

[sfo2008]

I doubt it is illegal, but if they reached a settlement with an AG (florida's) where they agreed to higher standards, there is always the possibility they are breaching.

 

Here's a question though T? How about the tips? Why not fold that in. It's all but mandatory and another "hidden" charge on the price.

 

My $0.02 is that I also dislike the practice since it makes it hard to price shop.

 

I think like the EU is trying to force airlines to do, it would be better if cruise lines were forced to advertise the full price. So just like the EU is saying Ryanair, you cannot advertise 1 EUR fares if the taxes are really another 30 EUR, cruise lines should put a real bottom line price down.

 

Fuel fees, mandatory service charges, taxes, etc.

 

That way, if you are price shopping for a 7 day cruise you could tell if NCL @ $499/person was a better bargain than XYZ Cruise Line @ $599/person for a similar itinerary. If XYZ has no fuel surchage, then NCL might be more expensive.

 

Separately, I want to second a point T raised, which is waiting to book. Given that NCL seems to be inconsistent at best about price protection, why book far in advance? If you are relatively flexible about rooms and have a general sailing date in mind, it seems like you should just wait until ~30 days out.

[mrtractor]

Sorry, watchdiva. It seemed like you were defending the cruiselines. There really isn't any need to defend them. It's a business. I get it. Businesses are in business to make money! I get that, too! And of course I'll cruise again. And I think I'm smart enough to know what the total cost is. You should see my onboard account!!!???:eek:

 

But a while back the cruiselines and many of the big agencies got their wrists slapped for false and misleading advertising. They agreed to certain ways of presenting their product. I'm just wondering out loud if this "Fuel Supplement" is just a way to get around that.

 

Here is another way to look at it. And it's why the changes in the way that cruise lines and agencies were required to sell cruises came about. Let's say a person or couple books a cruise.

 

The line/agency advertises $479 per person for a 7 day cruise. The customer puts down his deposit and waits for final payment date. The agent would wait until final booking date and ask for the money. But now the price is $489pp plus $94.50 in port charges and $39.25 in government taxes. What was advertised as a $479 cruise is actually a $612+/-pp cruise. The cruise should have been advertised as a $574pp cruise plus govt taxes. It's all that razzle dazzle that they wanted to put an end to.

 

Nowadays, they advertise a 7 day cruise for $499. C@@L! But when you look at the final pricing, it's actually a lot higher. Add $77 for fuel charges and you've got a $576 cruise. Add the $39.25 in Govt. taxes and you've got about the same price. About the same razzle dazzle, don't you think?

 

Sorry if it sounded like I was picking on you. I remember you now from the old days when Bama and I used to have some whacky fun and banter on CC. Ahhhh, the good old days. Bama has been posting over on a lame board that seems to revel in four letter words, obscene gestures and constant bashing of anything they don't agree with. I couldn't go there. So, every once in a while I get bored and try to bring up a controversial subject to see what people think.

 

So don't be surprised if I start another thread here something along the lines of the question Suni99 just posed: "Are we paying for last year's fuel costs???"

 

Sorry, I can't help myself!!! HehieehheeheheiheiehehehEHIEHEHeheehee....

 

MrTractor<------thinks his writing style is pretty average..............but it's never boring!!!..........;)..........

[mrtractor]

I knew I'd need a good attorney. I just didn't think I'd need one this soon!!!

 

Seriously, I think there was a ruling about this a number of years ago. I'm not an attorney and don't play one on TV or the internet, so I can't tell you all the legal stuff on it. But I covered the basics in previous posts. Are they breaking the agreement they made? Could an agressive AG see this as just a way to get around that agreement? I really wish somebody who is high up in the travel business could refresh my memory of just what transpired back then.

 

Your point about comparison shopping is right on target. I think that's one of the things they were trying to do with their last agreement. Level the playing field for everybody. Now that different lines have different "Supplements" and each one has it's own plan for mitigating or eliminating them based on the price of a barrel of crude, HOW DO YOU COMPARE CRUISES?

 

Auto tipping is fine with me. I hate to see the help get stiffed because they work damn hard for the money. The luxury lines that don't ask for, expect or accept tips will advertise that. I think I'm a fairly good tipper and don't mind figuring that into the cost of a cruise. It's mostly the razzle dazzle BEFORE I get on the boat that bothers me. I have to admit, once I'm on the boat, I'm a lot more vulnerable to buying pressure because I'm on vacation! :eek: I get that, too!

 

Maybe you should email the Florida AG? It would hold more sway coming from you!!!

 

Hi Nita! I see you are still alive and well and cruising the boards for some interesting topics. Do you think Bill Richardson will be coming to Washington??? (I hope so! We need all the good people we can get!)

 

But the fact that the cruiselines buy their fuel months in advance is the point. If they buy their fuel months in advance, don't they already know what they are paying for fuel by the time they price and offer a cruise? The lines do their homework and decide what to sell a cruise for based on what their costs are - months in advance. Is it OK for them to add another charge for "Artichoke Supplements" or whatever because the price of artichokes went up - even though they knew EXACTLY what the price of artichokes would be the day they set sail???

 

MrTractor<----------Just wondering out loud.........

[nolaAlive]

Nobody hedges 100% of fuel costs.

[mrtractor]

Nolaalive,

 

So how did they manage it before prices went up? Just asking, not trying to start anything. With you, anyway :)..........

 

MrTractor<---------is a lot more fun when he's ON a cruise..........