What Warrants Compensation?

[YOW]

We've seen a trend across all cruise lines as of late with increasingly negative threads and reviews. Many of these cruisers have stated or implied they are/were due compensation from the cruise line. The reasons have ranged from the more-or-less logical to the downright ridiculous.

Having worked for a major online travel agency in a previous lifetime, I've seen some extreme examples of why people somehow feel that they're entitled to compensation, but of course I also know that there are legitimate cases where compensation is warranted.

In your opinion/experience, what are some valid reasons for which cruisers can or ought to seek compensation from the cruise line? What could happen (or has happened) on a cruise to you personally, where you would consider making a request for compensation?

[George C]

Ok there are many small and large thing that could go wrong on a cruise, in most cases these thing will be solved immediately via front desk or other ships personnel. On occasion this does not happen and people will complain to the cruise line. Cruise line must determine if this is a valid request or not, as customers we can choose the line and ship we want to sail. I did have a complaint recently (1st time in 54 cruise I ever sent in complaint other than survey at end of the ship), was very satisfied by the response and compensation I was given.

[SJSULIBRARIAN]

Call me naive,but I can't think of any reason I would request compensation from a cruise line. We have received OBC and future cruise reductions a couple of times due to delays and missed ports which I felt was generous but I didn't expect it. Things happen. Maybe we have just been lucky not to have anything horrible happen on our cruises. Knock on wood.

[HamburgAvonLady]

When my DH was quarentined to our cabin for 72 hours due to possible stomach problems ---we had the auto tips adjusted as we tipped the room service staff who brought his trays. We also were not charged for the shore excursion we had to cancel on short notice.
However, that's not say that I was VERY tempted to cancel the auto tips on the Dawn Princess (one and only trip with that line) as the entire staff (from the captain, officers and crew) acted like THEY were doing us a favor by allowing us on the ship !! We were 5 couples and were not the demanding sort. Fortunately, that didn't turn us off to future trips.

[IRL_Joanie]

The only major thing that I might even consider wishing for compensation would be an experience such as last years Carnival Miracle cruise.

BUT, on the other hand, I am a Pollyanna personality and think that I would truly have enjoyed the severe problems they had, just because of all the excitement.

Call me weird, which I know many already do, to include my hubby, but I make lemonade out of life!! If you do not believe me just read my bios page on my personal web site!!

I've had a personal injury on board a HAL ship that nearly required an evacuation to a major US Hospital for, while in the Caribbean. I did not want compensation for it, and refused it when offered by the ship. The only thing they would not let me fight them on is their covering the total cost of my medical care for 10 of our 14 days on board the ship.

BTW, got to say that it was hilarious to be able to LEGALLY give the Captain and everyone else the "Finger" during this time frame:D:D

Joanie

[Krazy Kruizers]

The only ones I can think of are:

If the toilet in my cabin didn't work the entire cruise even after numerous plumbers have been there.

If the air conditioning didn't work in my cabin after having maintenance there numerous times.

With the above 2 conditions if they were not able to move us to another cabin - then some kind of compensation should be in order.

We have missed ports -- we even had an entire itinerary changed one time -- never got any shipboard credit or any other form of compensation.

[powderhorn]

This is a good topic. In the context of some of the common issues I have read on here, I'd like to present a scenario to get some opinions:

We all know that if we are on land and get poor service while in a hotel, we can always leave and find another hotel. This is not the case with a cruise. Of course we all know this going in but it presents some unique challenges in customer service and what our expectations are relative to hotel service on land. for example:

Some have had the experience of the broken toilet and in spite of the crew's efforts, it continues to be a bother through the length of the cruise. Because of sellout, there is no option to relocate guests to another cabin nor is it practical to get off the ship, so they are forced to endure the aggravation.

Should a circumstance like this warrant compensation? What would be appropriate compensation, if any? Any experiences of this sort you can provide as examples would be welcome!:)

[Cruising-along]

The only ones I can think of are:

If the toilet in my cabin didn't work the entire cruise even after numerous plumbers have been there.

If the air conditioning didn't work in my cabin after having maintenance there numerous times.

With the above 2 conditions if they were not able to move us to another cabin - then some kind of compensation should be in order.

We have missed ports -- we even had an entire itinerary changed one time -- never got any shipboard credit or any other form of compensation.

Took the words right out of my mouth, KK :)
I can think of only two things, toilet issues and air conditioning issues.
We have also missed ports and had an entired itinerary changed, those things are understandable.

[boaterette]

I would think that if one got food poisoning from the ship's food then compensation would be in order. And yse if the bathroom and/or air conditioning did not work for the cruise then that should be compensable.

[iancal]

Agree. Plumbing issues and/or A/C issues.

Maybe that is why HAL's S class ships are not profitable as has been reported by others.

[Randyk47]

The only ones I can think of are:

If the toilet in my cabin didn't work the entire cruise even after numerous plumbers have been there.

If the air conditioning didn't work in my cabin after having maintenance there numerous times.

With the above 2 conditions if they were not able to move us to another cabin - then some kind of compensation should be in order.

We have missed ports -- we even had an entire itinerary changed one time -- never got any shipboard credit or any other form of compensation.

I'll second this comment. Pretty much the way we feel. We've had at least one cruise that wasn't quite up to par but it never crossed our minds to ask for compensation. We did take a break from cruising for a couple of years but finally got to the place where missing cruising overcame our disappointment from that cruise so we're back.

[raindropsalways]

It should come down to basics: Was the cruise negligent or did they do something wrong?


A broken toilet is not negligence on the part of the cruise line. True, they are responsible for repairing it, however there are times when things cannot be repaired. It is also true that the situation was probably a very unpleasant experience. However that is all it was, an experience, no one was harmed in any way. I think the complaining parties are very fortunate in that apparently they have not ever experienced faulty sewage lines and hope they never have to endure it.


I personally do not feel the cruise line was obligated to provide any compensation for the above situation. If they did, the receiving party should be very gracious if they accepted the compensation.


Air conditioning – In relation to room temperature, that's a joke. The cruise lines provide air quality as probably outlined by WHO. Hot and cold are not that important.


If the ship fails to make a port call, the port fees may be returned, this is not compensation. It would be reimbursement of fees paid. The cruise lines does not have any control over docking, it is up the the local Port Authority.


Now, if someone is injured due to negligence on the part of the cruise line, yes, the individual should be compensated.


Cruise canceled by cruise line... gray area. Under most circumstances, the cruise lines is not legally obligated to offer any compensation. However, depending on the cruise and the time element when it is canceled, we feel they are morally obligated to give us something especially if someone has paid non-refundable expenses in relationship to the cruise.




Betty

[tip]

The only major thing that I might even consider wishing for compensation would be an experience such as last years Carnival Miracle cruise.
Joanie

I would agree with the above. I would expect compensation for something like that and as I recall, Carnival treated their passengers quite well in this area.

We have been fortunate that in our twenty cruises to date, we have experienced nothing major and I would be hard pressed to recall even minor nuisances. Evidently we just remember the pleasant aspects of cruising.:D

If we ever experience plumbing or AC problems, a token compsensation would be welcomed, but not expected on our part.

Having read some of these threads recently, I feel that there are some folks who just love to complain and who are looking for "something for nothing"!

[RMLincoln]

The number one reason for compensation, I think, would be if the cruise line shortened the number of days of the cruise... and I don't think it would matter if it were because of weather or ship issues, whatever. If I purchase a cruise of n# of days/nights and I don't get that many days/nights on the ship, then I think compensation is appropriate.

As for lack of basic cabin nessecities of working toilet, shower, A/C etc., I would expect them to make extrordinary efforts to move me/us even if that meant shuffling staff to get us a cabin that worked. And I would be camped out at the Hotel Manager's office requesting resolution if I felt that issue made the cabin unfit for occupancy. If they got me into a room that was livible then I may not be as expecting of compensation but I'd think they'd offer something, at least a token OBC for a future cruise to try to get my business back after a less than good experience. I think that's just basic good business. JMHO. m--

[RMLincoln]

What happened to the Miracle? I remember the Carnival Splendor's engine room fire and followed all the miseries that it precipitated but those pax were well compensated including paid passage home... but the Miracle? I'm having a senior moment.... :) m--

[billie5]

We were on the NCL Spirit when it lost power at sea, had to limp into San Juan, from where NCL had to fly all passengers back to Miami on chartered flights over a period of two days. NCL was ridiculously generous, in my opinion, refunding half of the fare PLUS a free cruise within the next year. Personally, I would have been perfectly happy with no compensation at all. Admittedly, we had to eat sandwiches and barbecued items the last two days since there was no functioning kitchen, and sleep on deck since there was no air conditioning, but it was on the final return leg of the cruise, so all scheduled ports had been visited already. And, after all, it was a grand adventure. We've been on so many other cruises, where I can no longer tell you the name of the ship, or even the cruise line, but this was one we do remember.

[kyriecat]

In April 2009 I took a 14-day cruise on Maasdam. During the course of the cruise we experienced several problems.

From day 1 the air conditioner didn't work in our cabin. We made several complaints about the temperature and maintenance came to our cabin at least once a day. The air vents were fully open but there was no air flow into the cabin. They checked it several times. I have a travel clock with a built-in thermometer. The lowest temperature I saw was 78 deg F in the cabin. A few times when the steward left our drapes open it was 88 deg F inside the cabin. On day 5 I insisted on a meeting with the hotel manager about the situation. He agreed that the cabin temperature was unacceptable, but maintenance was unable to correct the problem. The best resolution he could offer was to give us a fan and tell us to leave the balcony door open to get some air circulation.

On that same cruise we also had problems with the hot water not working. After several days, we discovered that if we left the hot water constantly trickling, we would have hot water when we needed to shower. Otherwise, it would take at least 10 minutes to reach a luke warm temperature and a few times it didn't heat up, even after running for 45 minutes. Maintenance "fixed" the problem for a day but it stopped working again. When I told one of the woman at guest relations that the hot water wasn't working again, she called maintenance but was told it was working. I'm not sure how they knew it was working since they weren't in my cabin. I had her come back to the cabin with me and ran the "hot" water for 25 minutes while she waited. It never even got warm so I asked her if she would want to shower in that. She decided to call maintenance again and they came back, spent a couple hours adjusting something, and the hot water worked for about a day. We discovered the trickling water trick not too long after that so we just left the water running constantly instead of continuing to bother maintenance.

The final big problem on that cruise was the water leak in the wall that started day 4 and left a large area of our carpet constantly wet. Maintenance was unable to fix that problem either. Our cabin steward brought a wet vac and sucked up as much water as he could each time he cleaned, but the wet carpet was a constantly recurring problem. The hot temperature in the cabin didn't help matters any. We had mold growing under the carpet and a horrible musty smell in the cabin. The steward brought an ionizer to get rid of the smell, and they replaced the carpet mid-cruise. A few days later, the mold and smells were back.

We met with the hotel manager a couple times because we were frustrated that the various problems all seemed outside maintenance's ability to correct. We wanted to make sure the hotel manager was aware of the problems so they could get fixed, if not on our cruise, then soon. We never asked for any compensation for the problems listed above, but the hotel manager offered us a refund of 25% of our cruise fare as compensation. Some people may not agree, but the problems did affect the quality of our cruise and I don't feel bad about accepting compensation for it. We have occasionally suffered from clogged toilets or lack of hot water for a day and not expected anything. However, we have never had as many problems as we had on Maasdam.

The fact that we were offered compensation for the problems made us more favorable to giving Holland America another try, which we did last year. I am happy to report no major problems on Zuiderdam. The toilet plugged a couple of times but got fixed and the TV remote never worked but those are things that don't really bother me.

[Wakepatrol]

Well after reading this board there's several times compensation is warranted.

1. I boarded at 11:30am and my cabana wasn't ready till 3:00pm

2. I rented a cabana and they chased me out of it at 2:30 last tender was at 3:00pm.

3. I booked a cruise 2 years in advance and just got notified the ship has been chartered.

4. I heard people dragging chairs above me every morning (never read deck plans though)

5. I was underneath the galley and they were tenderizing meat all night.

6.There was salt spray on my window.

7. I was turned away on formal night. My Joey Buttafuoco track suit was a flop

8. HalCats were to loud and ruined my pool experience.

9.Missed a port due to Hurricane force winds

10. Baggage handlers broke 2 bottles of my two buck chuck wine.


here's a head start ...feel free to add to the list.

[PBC29]

I'm with IRLJoanie on this one. Other than something like what happened to the Miracle I wouldn't demand compensation for problems onboard such as a cabin with a broken toilet or no AC.

Now if they give it without my asking I'd happily accept.

[surfergirle]

Negligence-

What can be controlled.

-Backflush from a jaquzzi tub with 1 inch of black debris on top of water, after its fixing had been confirmed, I would not book a cabin with a jaquzzi tub if I did not intend to use it. Some people do not care, we do. Its not safe or healthy for a woman to sit in that, and not see it until the water settles.

-Insisting multipule food items has been done correctly multipule times when it has not, and its because the employee does not know the difference. Avoiding allergies are easy if you order right, but only if the employee knows what they are serving. This comes down to a breakdown in communication and language barrier. I truely believe that the diff employees thought what they were giving me was right. This happened on our last cruise as well.

-Cancellation:
Excursion Canceled for weather- refunded
Ship Cabana rental not available because of weather, should be refunded same as excursion. Sometimes it is, sometimes isn't. Depends on who you talk to.

Sometimes compensation comes down to giving a company a second chance. In our case, it did. We gave HAL a second chance, and have 3rd and 4th cruises booked. We become 3 star mariners soon after this next cruise. Still feel like HAL newbies.

[IRL_Joanie]

What happened to the Miracle? I remember the Carnival Splendor's engine room fire and followed all the miseries that it precipitated but those pax were well compensated including paid passage home... but the Miracle? I'm having a senior moment.... :) m--

Thanks Maureen, I meant the Carnival Splendor... To many with similar names for me to recall. But yes the one whos' engine room caught fire and was escorted in by the USS Ronald Reagan:)

That would have been one heck of an adventure!!:D

Here is a link to the story from November 2010 for those unaware of what we speak: http://travel.usatoday.com/cruises/post/2010/11/carnival-splendor-cruise-ship-fire-uss-ronald-reagan-coast-guard/130568/1

Joanie

[bepsf]

In your opinion/experience, what are some valid reasons for which cruisers can or ought to seek compensation from the cruise line?

If the cruise were completely or partially cancelled, the accommodations were severely compromised by chronic and repeated mechanical, plumbing or safety issues which the staff/crew could or would do nothing about - or the ship sank - Those would be the only occurrances when I'd ever consider writing (not screaming at the Front Desk) for compensation if sufficient amout due was not already offered.

Even if I disliked the cruise or the ship so much that I'd abandon it mid-cruise (Which I have done before) I wouldn't request compensation.
I'd just chalk it up to experience, never cruise with that line again - and make sure that EVERYONE heard about it...
...because compensation usually means "Discount on a Future Cruise" - If it was truly that bad, I'd never wish to return.

[Typhoon1]

The cruise contract clearly states Ports are subject to change.

That is about the only thing you wouldn't be compensated for.

Problems with your cabin that they were unable to solve is the most obvious example of compensation. The cruise line was unable to deliver a promised service.

As Brian indicates, the best thing you can do is take your business elsewhere, and make sure everyone you talk to is aware of your negative experience.

[RMLincoln]

Thanks Maureen, I meant the Carnival Splendor... To many with similar names for me to recall. But yes the one whos' engine room caught fire and was escorted in by the USS Ronald Reagan:)

That would have been one heck of an adventure!!:D

Here is a link to the story from November 2010 for those unaware of what we speak: http://travel.usatoday.com/cruises/post/2010/11/carnival-splendor-cruise-ship-fire-uss-ronald-reagan-coast-guard/130568/1

Joanie

I've gotta agree with you Joanie! One heck of an adventure. I almost wish I'd been there:D. I bet we'd remember the name of that cruise in our list! And yes indeed they deserved everything they got. Business is business. And to me that's what compensation is about - if the cruise line didn't live up to what was advertised they should try to get that customer to try them again. m--

[Cindy]

I would expect to be compensated if one of the major systems (plumbing, air conditioning, or electricity) in my cabin didn't function for a length of time and attempts to make repairs were unsuccessful. For example, if I repeatedly had to get dressed in the middle of the night to find a working toilet I would expect to be compensated because I didn't get what I paid for. Mechanical systems do malfunction, and I would not expect anything more than an apology for an issue that was quickly resolved.

I wouldn't expect to be compensated for being exposed to the horror of worn carpeting on the stairs or a scuffed piece of furniture.;)

[kazu]

The last time we sailed princess, our cabin was totally flooded. I couldn't use the washrooms for two days (not to mention the worries of the luggage under the bed). We couldn't use our room and the fan ran 2 days in a row to try to dry it out.

I am pretty good about most things but i did feel that they should do something. We were in one of those situations where the ship was sold out and there were no other rooms. So we had to try to sleep with a fan running. I'd turn it off until dh fell asleep and then turn it back on as I knew the longer it ran, the sooner we would not be walking on a damp carpet.

What did they do? Nothing! I really didn't want money, but an apology would have been nice. I did talk to them on ths ship but they had done what they could do. Princess wrote me a long letter reminding me that they had given me a $100 obc as they didn't get our air tickets to us (yup, dummy me, back then, I let them do it), so it was too bad so sad

Yes, I think if crucial services are unavailable for any reasonable length of time then it is fair to ask for compensation (princess disagrees of course).

I totally get the toilet issues that have been on recent threads and do think these should apply or something could have been done (jeepers - what about a special Le Cirque night for these victims?)

Sometimes people don't want money - but they do want to feel some empathy. HAL does that if there is an issue - Princess did not. Everyone makes choices and I made mine.

All I wanted was a sincere apology - anything else would have been a bonus. Now, older, wiser and cruised more, I probably would have done a few things differently. all that aside, compensation may be necessary in some instances, but I think if there is a sincere apology, empathy and perhaps some small gesture, many people would be very happy. JMO;)

[Taxguy77]

Let's see...
Woman gets a cup of coffe from store, opens it and spills some on her leg and gets several million dollars.
I think some of these people on ships should have gotten at least a minority interest in the cruiseline, maybe more. :):rolleyes:

[Cindy]

The last time we sailed princess, our cabin was totally flooded. I couldn't use the washrooms for two days (not to mention the worries of the luggage under the bed). We couldn't use our room and the fan ran 2 days in a row to try to dry it out.

I am pretty good about most things but i did feel that they should do something. We were in one of those situations where the ship was sold out and there were no other rooms. So we had to try to sleep with a fan running. I'd turn it off until dh fell asleep and then turn it back on as I knew the longer it ran, the sooner we would not be walking on a damp carpet.

What did they do? Nothing! I really didn't want money, but an apology would have been nice. I did talk to them on ths ship but they had done what they could do. Princess wrote me a long letter reminding me that they had given me a $100 obc as they didn't get our air tickets to us (yup, dummy me, back then, I let them do it), so it was too bad so sad

Yes, I think if crucial services are unavailable for any reasonable length of time then it is fair to ask for compensation (princess disagrees of course).

I totally get the toilet issues that have been on recent threads and do think these should apply or something could have been done (jeepers - what about a special Le Cirque night for these victims?)

Sometimes people don't want money - but they do want to feel some empathy. HAL does that if there is an issue - Princess did not. Everyone makes choices and I made mine.

All I wanted was a sincere apology - anything else would have been a bonus. Now, older, wiser and cruised more, I probably would have done a few things differently. all that aside, compensation may be necessary in some instances, but I think if there is a sincere apology, empathy and perhaps some small gesture, many people would be very happy. JMO;)

Interesting that you got OBC for a small issue and nothing for a major problem. A few years ago we also received a $100 OBC from Princess because they messed up our dinner reservations. I certainly wouldn't expect a cruise line to compensate passengers for small issues such as these, but a flooded cabin is another matter entirely!:eek:

[Robin7]

We were on the Nieuw Amsterdam (in 1992, not this new ship so named), in an inside cabin down low, to the Caribbean. It was our second cruise. (Our first being on the *old* Westerdam.) We were young and inexperienced travelers. Our cabin had little-to-no a/c and reeked of motor oil. We complained nicely to the steward. Nothing. To the front desk. Nothing. Finally we went to see the hotel manager. He offered us a fan which made the cabin just bearable for sleeping. Otherwise, we were in and out of that stateroom as fast as possible and spent all of our time elsewhere on the ship during the entire week. We never asked for any kind of compensation, nor were we offered any. I'm not sure what I'd do now.

On our New Zealand/Australia cruise on the Volendam in 2008, my in-laws inside cabin was far, far too cold. They called and called the front desk. Nothing was done. My BIL also went to the front desk. He was not nice. Nothing was done. It was my in-laws first HAL cruise, but they had cruised many times on Princess and some other (smaller) cruiselines and never had that problem.

On the fourth day, I took my clock/thermometer into their room. It was 60 degrees! They were wearing their robes and wrapping up in blankets and were completely miserable. Before the show that night, I went to the front desk. Told them how many calls/requests had been made. Insisted I was going to wait there until someone came with me to see the cold in the cabin. Someone (an assistant Hotel Manager?) finally came out to meet with me. We went to their cabin. He had his own thermometer thingy. "Ah. You are correct. It is very cold. I will have it fixed." It was WARM when we returned from the show.

They never asked for nor were offered any kind of compensation. But they will also never go on HAL again. HAL, by their inattention to their complaints, lost my in-laws' return busineess. They are happy on Princess.

I think it would serve in the cruiseline's best interest to offer some kind of compensation to keep customer's good will and return business. ::shrug:: But I'm not certain I would demand it myself even now unless it was something like the Splendor thing. We are very much "ship happens" kind of travelers. (Just ask me about getting stuck in the "Budget Motel" for 13 hours in Lordsburg, New Mexico, on December 22nd when I-10 closed. Heh.)

Robin

[holomuku]

Last May we went on the Statendam on a short 5 night West Coast repositioning cruise. We were celebrating our 25 year wedding anniversary and since we're still teaching it's tough to get much more than 5 days off in May. Usually we don't do such a short cruise- but the event timing called for it. We were in different careers when we got married....silly us! Should have waited for another month!

So- very good friends of ours (who were 2 of the 14 people at our wedding) took the same cruise ONLY to celebrate the event with us. I prebooked and prepaid for the Pinnacle Grill for the 4 of us. When booking that I stated that it would be the evening of our 25th anniversary (actual date) and she said "we'll take note of that." We were in a suite (a splurge for the anniversary) and I checked with the concierege and he said it was on the reservation. Our friends came to our cabin before dinner, we got pre-dinner snacks from the Neptune lounge and played the DVD of our wedding 25 years earlier. My goodness- both the gentlemen now have gray hair and the other wife and I- nope, not yet. Must be genetics......

We go to the PG table for the 4 of us. In my opinion it is the worst table in the room (looked out at the corridor until they closed the drapes and they we had a view of....drapes.). Food was substandard (in our opinion- and we're not picky) and we were there for OVER 3 hours even though I cancelled one of my courses. It was nuts. Then to top it off at the end of the meal we see a cake with candles on it-- go to the table NEXT to us who were celebrating their 17 year anniversary. They were very nice and offered to share it with us (the tables were so close we all ended up conversing) but we passed. It's not like we needed anymore food-- however it did sting a bit. Our friends with us were probably more upset than we were as they had suggested HAL because of their previous positive experiences. Things happen, not the end of the world by any means.

On a positive note, our friends had requested a photographer stop in the PG for the event and apparently they (HAL) requires that the reservation be verified before he was allowed to come in and take our picture. Picture turned out great- one of our better ones!

The next day I mentioned our experience to the concierege and he said "oh dear I'll have the PG manager call you." Never happened -- and we were on ship 3 more days.

Upon return home I wrote to the President of HAL a letter that I thought was fair. I mentioned several positive things such as our cabin stewards but also stated our unhappiness with the 25 year dinner. I mean- you don't have that day twice, do you? And we were married in our 30's/40's so it's not very likely we'll have another "major" anniversary. I shared with HAL that we've cruised on seven or eight different cruise lines about twelve or thirteen times and this was our first experience with HAL. We had a few other problems on this cruise but nothing we thought was major- our closet door got stuck one morning and they couldn't get it open until after 1pm which meant we pretty much had to stay in the cabin until then as we couldn't get to our clothes and I didn't want to wander around in my PJ's (I mean, they do have a dress code!). That was not a big deal, it was a sea day and we just had breakfast in that gorgeous suite and enjoyed the surroundings. We didn't think that was a problem at all, however had it been a port day and we had a tour booked- might have bothered me a little more. In this case- good excuse to eat in and have a couple of Bloody Mary's!

After I sent the letter, I received a response from the Presidents assistant (I think?). At any rate, they addressed it and provided what I consider more than reasonable compensation. Not wanting to ruin it for someone else I won't specify what it was however it was not just cash but class (as in flowers.....) oops......

And yes, I felt I was being reasonable in at least sharing my experience with the top HAL managment.

We still can't get the day back but life brings us these things. I felt HAL recognized their shortcomings and addressed them well. Yes, we'll sail HAL again because of how they handled this.

[Jo-Bob]

Let's see...
Woman gets a cup of coffe from store, opens it and spills some on her leg and gets several million dollars.
I think some of these people on ships should have gotten at least a minority interest in the cruiseline, maybe more. :):rolleyes:

Really tired of people throwing this example around. Do a little research into the case and discover just how badly this woman was injured. It's not as though it was just a 'hot' cup of coffee. McDonalds admitted the coffee had been well beyond the temperature that coffee is normally served at....the very elderly woman who was injured suffered 3rd degree burns (inner thighs) that worsened into a much, much longer issue with infection and hospitalization.....and likely the fact she was sitting in a car when the burn happened, she was unable to get up and away from the burning as quickly as she might have been able to, had she been elsewhere.

As a general rule, people don't recieve that sort of compensation unless fault/negligence is determined. The above example is not as frivilous as most assume. And I'm nearly certain it wasn't millions.
Once again, sorry for the drift.

[powderhorn]

We go to the PG table for the 4 of us. In my opinion it is the worst table in the room (looked out at the corridor until they closed the drapes and they we had a view of....drapes.). Food was substandard (in our opinion- and we're not picky) and we were there for OVER 3 hours even though I cancelled one of my courses. It was nuts. Then to top it off at the end of the meal we see a cake with candles on it-- go to the table NEXT to us who were celebrating their 17 year anniversary. They were very nice and offered to share it with us (the tables were so close we all ended up conversing) but we passed. It's not like we needed anymore food-- however it did sting a bit. ...snipped

I think this thread has covered the mechanical issues well, but wondering now about more opinions around dining experiences (such a subjective area) and whether there is any consensus around compensation for any mishandling of service or quality in this area?

For example, if you're served your main course in the MDR and something crawls out from beneath your meat or fish...what would you expect the management to do about that?:)

[fann1sh]

I'm late to this party, but it's an interesting thread.

However, with the greatest of respect to those who hold only negligence requires compensation, I must disagree.

Classic case of no negligence, but compensation better follow:

hurricane resulting in shortened cruise/disembarking somewhere other than planned. Relying on the cruise contract in a case like that is public relations suicide.

Negligence = law suits. Cruise lines don't want law suits. They want happy passengers and good word of mouth to generate fat profits.

Companies who stick to the letter of the law and niggle over freebies don't get that great word of mouth.

As already wisely noted above, sometimes the "compensation" doesn't cost the cruise line a thing. Free night at the Pinnacle?

However, these things have to be nicely calculated. A plate of chocolate covered strawberries to "compensate" for a entire cruise regurgitating toilet would just make me mad. Toilet waste is a health issue.

****************

Sorry, Powderhorn that I strayed back to the mechanical.

The only "service" issue I can think of (happened to me) is if the steward smoked in my cabin. I handled that privately. Told him I knew it had to be him, and by golly he'd better set up the ionizer and run it. If it happened again, it would get reported, and go on the comment card.

No further problem.

[SwissMyst]

Compensation can only be granted after a clear breach of contract based upon written cruise documents.

Courtesies may be extended which are quite different from a "right" to composition.

Yes, there is a trend in a new generation to bully their way into special treatment that is disturbing. I see this in other areas of life today.

[SwissMyst]

...... A plate of chocolate covered strawberries to "compensate" for a entire cruise regurgitating toilet would just make me mad. Toilet waste is a health issue. .......

What is the value of exaggerated examples that never happened?

1. Entire cruise of regurgitated toilet waste.
2. Worth one plate of chocolate strawberries

Reminds me of the old adage: 20% of the people cause 80% of the problems. Cruise line is better off without those who complain the loudest and the most often.

[lawyerrose]

Really tired of people throwing this example around. Do a little research into the case and discover just how badly this woman was injured. It's not as though it was just a 'hot' cup of coffee. McDonalds admitted the coffee had been well beyond the temperature that coffee is normally served at....the very elderly woman who was injured suffered 3rd degree burns (inner thighs) that worsened into a much, much longer issue with infection and hospitalization.....and likely the fact she was sitting in a car when the burn happened, she was unable to get up and away from the burning as quickly as she might have been able to, had she been elsewhere.

As a general rule, people don't recieve that sort of compensation unless fault/negligence is determined. The above example is not as frivilous as most assume. And I'm nearly certain it wasn't millions.
Once again, sorry for the drift.

Thanks! I also hate people using this as an example when most don't have any idea of what actually happened.

[iancal]

Yes, compensation may be due when there is a clear breach of the cruise contract. So what??

Have you ever read that cruise contract document-in full or in part. It is written by skilled counsel to completely protect the cruise line and leave the poor passenger with virtually no rights-and even less financial recourse. Why would the cruise line write the contract in any other way?

And when there is doubt about a service, such as medical, most cruise lines contract that service out for the express reason of avoiding liability and subsequent litigation.

Search the web and find out really how very difficult it is to even take legal action against a cruise company-even if there has been a perceived breach. They are foreign companies for a reason-not American as many people like to believe. And they travel in international waters. Cruise companies have organized thier affairs in order to avoid as many of those pesky labor, safety, enivironmental, tax, consumer, etc. regulations that get in the way of profit as possible. I would do the same if it were my company.

[Valley Girl of VA]

Let's see...
Woman gets a cup of coffe from store, opens it and spills some on her leg and gets several million dollars.
I think some of these people on ships should have gotten at least a minority interest in the cruiseline, maybe more. :):rolleyes:


You know, I really get tired of this lawsuit being used without many people actually understanding it. This woman suffered 3rd degree burns over 6% of her body and lesser burns to 16%. Her burns were so bad that skin grafting was required. McDonald's refused to settle for 20K (actual amount of her medicals); instead she was awarded so much more and then reduced by a judge. Sure sounds like to me that this particular cup of coffee was way too hot for consumption.

As far as the original question posted on this thread, IMHO, we just can't issue a "yes" this receive compensation and "no" that shouldn't. There are so many individual variables that impact each passenger differently. We could go on and on but bottom line, there need to be guidelines and then review individually as needed. I know that personally I would not want a damp carpet due to allergies; I would not want a non-working toilet to due my personal medical problems; I could live without A/C up to a point. If I got sick, that is my problem. If my cruise was cancelled and I had already purchased airfare, I would want some kind of compensation that would pay to change my flight.

[YOW]

True, the matter of compensation (this is the customer service term, not necessarily equating to the legal term) is not black and white. One of our guidelines was, 'Did the customer pay for something and fail to receive it? And did this have a significant impact on their trip?' Another question we often asked was, 'What role did the customer play in this scenario?' Was due diligence done in communicating to us (or to the vendor) what was wrong and how it could be fixed? Or was the customer in fact looking for something to complain about, a ritual or game that we see many undertake, the ultimate goal of which being not to have smooth journeys but rather to receive money back (and some kind of gratification that they got a better deal in the end?:confused:)

Powderhorn mentioned dining... another subjective topic, but one which IMHO generally does not fall under the umbrella of compensation. Having said that, if a maitre d' sees that a customer or table are particularly dissatisfied despite ongoing communication to remedy it, or if (as in your example) something has gone horribly wrong vis-a-vis healthy & safety, a bottle of wine or a comped dinner at a specialty restaurant (which cost the cruise line very little) can be gestures appreciated by guests. This is not, however, something that we ought to expect or even ask for. Our role, again IMHO, is to communicate our wishes and expectations... nicely, of course. Ultimately, if the cruise line tries (or not) and can't deliver on this, we can then decide whether to do business with them again.

[raindropsalways]

I'm late to this party, but it's an interesting thread.

However, with the greatest of respect to those who hold only negligence requires compensation, I must disagree.

Classic case of no negligence, but compensation better follow:

hurricane resulting in shortened cruise/disembarking somewhere other than planned. Relying on the cruise contract in a case like that is public relations suicide.



I'm bewildered...

A person books a cruise in the midst of hurricane season and expects the cruise line to compensate them if there is a hurricane. Why? Isn't that one of the reasons we get travel insurance?

.

[fann1sh]

With respect, I don't think you're bewildered - I think you just disagree.

Of course silly people who book during hurricane season should expect problems. But, if corporations didn't deal with silly people, they'd have a much smaller market share.

Cruise lines (other than HAL!) which persist in sailing the Caribbean during hurricane months are behaving with just as much silliness. They know full well the pax will go away unhappy if their cruise is cut short.

(Note: I don't refer to missed ports or other "normal" problems.)

But, a 7 day cruiser who gets a 5 day cruise had better be compensated, no matter what that exquisitely drawn contract says.

As a former lawyer, I'm well aware of the difference between what a client is legally obligated to do, and what they are smart to concede.

If Carnival had forced a class action over Splendour the courts would have bent over backwards to hear the case. Despite the niceties of contract law, they would have unearthed a way to let it proceed on a common law equity basis.

Instead, Carnival was pro active. They got a public relations bonanza, and John Heald doubled his blog subscriptions. That is smart compensation, because it "feels" fair to the so called reasonable man.

Have *I* ever asked for compensation? No.

Would I persist on harassing the HotMan for a fix if I had a vomiting toilet? Yes.

Would I demand compensation? No.

Would I be mad as hell if *something* wasn't offered to indicate HAL felt my pain if no toilet fix was possible? Yes.

Would it be human nature (not "right", but human nature) to feel I'd gotten less than I'd paid for? Yes.

Would I have any legal rights to compensation? No.

Would I post about it here on this board? Yes.

Would here people call me a liar, imply I was an extortionist, and generally flame me, no matter how truthful I was? You betcha.

[Robin7]

Would here people call me a liar, imply I was an extortionist, and generally flame me, no matter how truthful I was? You betcha.

Best statement in the thread! So true. "I was on your cruise, and *I* didn't have the problem you *say* you had, so it must not have happened." How many times have I read that kind of thing over the years?

Robin

[SwissMyst]

Let's see...
Woman gets a cup of coffe from store, opens it and spills some on her leg and gets several million dollars.
I think some of these people on ships should have gotten at least a minority interest in the cruiseline, maybe more. :):rolleyes:

Facts: woman got a super-heated cup of coffee the establishment was still serving, after repeated notices of prior harm to serve coffee at these super-heated temperatures. It it reasonable to be careful with a hot cup of coffee.

It is not foreseeable the woman had purchased a a cup of coffee so super-heated as to cause the degree of burns this person suffered, even when due to her foreseeable carelessness.

Pays not to turn actual facts into unsubstantiated urban myths when trying to make a point. Point taken however: we do live in an overly-litigious society and we all pay for this. Harm to benefit ratio for this has not been sufficiently defined.

Does MacDonalds still sell super-heated coffee?

[SwissMyst]

Best statement in the thread! So true. "I was on your cruise, and *I* didn't have the problem you *say* you had, so it must not have happened." How many times have I read that kind of thing over the years?

Robin

Actually the statement ends when the second person says "I did not have the problem". The second statement does not automatically carry the implication the other person did not have the problem. All the second statement does is establish the problem is not necessarily universal for that ship or that cruise.

We could avoid a lot of trouble on the net, if we read only what was written and not what we thought was written.

[SwissMyst]

......
But, a 7 day cruiser who gets a 5 day cruise had better be compensated, no matter what that exquisitely drawn contract says.
.....

As a former lawyer, what compensable legal grounds are you suggesting beyond the four corners of the document?

If there are "exquisitely drawn" clauses that allow a ship to deliver fewer days than stated, how do you get around this mutual agreement to risk this possibility? Why did the passenger sign the agreement knowing up front this could happen?

Are you claiming it was a contract of adhesion and therefore all rights and privileges found under that contract are abrogated?

Does a legal principle similar to the California Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing allow going outside the contract for your compensation demands?

[AjaxDB]

Facts: woman got a super-heated cup of coffee the establishment was still serving, after repeated notices of prior harm to serve coffee at these super-heated temperatures. It it reasonable to be careful with a hot cup of coffee.

It is not foreseeable the woman had purchased a a cup of coffee so super-heated as to cause the degree of burns this person suffered, even when due to her foreseeable carelessness.

Pays not to turn actual facts into unsubstantiated urban myths when trying to make a point. Point taken however: we do live in an overly-litigious society and we all pay for this. Harm to benefit ratio for this has not been sufficiently defined.

Does MacDonalds still sell super-heated coffee?

Not to mention that upon appeal the amount awarded was cut back substantially.

[SwissMyst]

Not to mention that upon appeal the amount awarded was cut back substantially.

Not claiming Wikipedia is a defensible legal resource, but it is a good place to start getting facts and cross-references for popular cases like this McDonalds Hot Cup of Coffee case that end up in urban mythology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants

Urban reality: concerns about frivolous litigation versus remedial needs for tortious behavior.

[FrankNJ]

I think anything that would deserve compensation in a land hotel deserves compensation in a floating hotel ; No ac , no toilet , no hot water . etc.

I understand some people want compensation if the pictures on the wall are crooked and others would be quite content if the cruiseline threw them overboard every day and made them catch up. People are funny .

[Robin7]

Actually the statement ends when the second person says "I did not have the problem". The second statement does not automatically carry the implication the other person did not have the problem. All the second statement does is establish the problem is not necessarily universal for that ship or that cruise.

We could avoid a lot of trouble on the net, if we read only what was written and not what we thought was written.

Except I've seen such things explicitly stated many times. Usually they call the poster who is complaining a troll because often the poster complaining does not have many posts.

As one who comes on here to research before I book a cruise, I am glad there are people who reply that their a/c-toilet-heater-etc. worked fine, because then I am aware the problem was not shipwide.

Robin

[fann1sh]

As a former lawyer, what compensable legal grounds are you suggesting beyond the four corners of the document?

If there are "exquisitely drawn" clauses that allow a ship to deliver fewer days than stated, how do you get around this mutual agreement to risk this possibility? Why did the passenger sign the agreement knowing up front this could happen?

Are you claiming it was a contract of adhesion and therefore all rights and privileges found under that contract are abrogated?

Does a legal principle similar to the California Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing allow going outside the contract for your compensation demands?

No legal grounds at all.

And definitely not moral high ground.

No demand - EVER - by me.

I understand you disagree with me.

But, reiterate: Carnival Splendour compensation was smart, not legally necessary. Celebrity took a big hit at the same time for being dumb as a rock and sticking to the law.

When Carnival gave public relations "compensation", they let the legal department earn their money by making sure it was weasel worded so no LEGAL "compensation" precedent was set. Of course.

If Carnival hadn't been smart, they would have spent millions more on lawyers than they did on public relations "compensation", and lost a ton of bookings.

Vindication in court? Maybe - maybe not. Page 3, and the reasonable man still would have said "That sucks."

I always counselled clients about the occasions when they were right, yet it was stupid to fight. "It's the principle of the thing" or even "it's the law" just don't cut it in the press.

Stubborn clients who knew they were right and who refused to settle? They paid for my cruises.

Look, I'm not saying every whiner deserves a freebie. I'm saying some things cry out for "fairness", not the letter of the law. Something which affects a whole ship seems a fairness issue to me.

No, sorry, you're not going to change my mind on that. "Everyone is entitled to his own stupid opinion - even me". YMMV.

As for vomiting toilets: they happen. They can usually be fixed. Sometimes they can't.

I'm also a skeptic about whiners. But my default setting is wondering if the problem didn't get fixed because the complaint was handled wrong. Odd, how red faced hysteria seldom works.....

[fann1sh]

(PS - "tortious behavio(u)r?" A lot less of that here. The courts I worked in gave up a lot to "equity" but ZERO to punitive damages. Never saw a case. Pain and suffering? Incredibly low compared to the U.S. Never for "this case frayed my nerves", just for blood on the pavement.

Maybe that accounts for my skewed perspective.)

[raindropsalways]

Bewilderment is correct. To me it is bewildering as to why some people expect compensation for so many things. Or why some people feel that when something goes wrong, somebody else is responsible and must pay.


Again, I do not feel anyone should expect to be compensated for a hurricane. The cruise fare is a separate issue; reimbursement as appropriate would be expected. I personally feel that the fare or prorated portion of a fare is reimbursement more so than compensation, others may feel it is compensation, both are correct. Regardless, that is not the issue here. The “interruption” clause on travelers insurance should cover any incurred expenses caused by a hurricane.


It is also bewildering to me as to why anyone with a law degree would presume something different than what is stated.


Betty

[SwissMyst]

Except I've seen such things explicitly stated many times. Usually they call the poster who is complaining a troll because often the poster complaining does not have many posts.

As one who comes on here to research before I book a cruise, I am glad there are people who reply that their a/c-toilet-heater-etc. worked fine, because then I am aware the problem was not shipwide.

Robin

If you read it, you read it. I am only cautioning about reading into something what is not there. And many people do, and have, read the implication the original poster is a liar if anyone follows up with their own experience, just to keep the record fair. All I am saying is we can all do better when we read, and not read what we don't read. Glad you are getting a balanced view overall.

[surfergirle]

Would here people call me a liar, imply I was an extortionist, and generally flame me, no matter how truthful I was? You betcha.

So very very right Patricia!

[fann1sh]

Bewilderment is correct. To me it is bewildering as to why some people expect compensation for so many things. Or why some people feel that when something goes wrong, somebody else is responsible and must pay.


Again, I do not feel anyone should expect to be compensated for a hurricane. The cruise fare is a separate issue; reimbursement as appropriate would be expected. I personally feel that the fare or prorated portion of a fare is reimbursement more so than compensation, others may feel it is compensation, both are correct. Regardless, that is not the issue here. The “interruption” clause on travelers insurance should cover any incurred expenses caused by a hurricane.


It is also bewildering to me as to why anyone with a law degree would presume something different than what is stated.


Betty

Thanks for the clarification, Betty. I truly do respect your position, and you articulate it persuasively.

I think we have a genuine difference of opinion here, and I thank you- and all the rest - for engaging me civilly.

I don't think I have any more to say on the subject.

Obi Wan is now waving his arms and saying, "This is not the thread you, Patricia, are looking for. Move along."

[SwissMyst]

(PS - "tortious behavio(u)r?" A lot less of that here. The courts I worked in gave up a lot to "equity" but ZERO to punitive damages. Never saw a case. Pain and suffering? Incredibly low compared to the U.S. Never for "this case frayed my nerves", just for blood on the pavement.

Maybe that accounts for my skewed perspective.)

Well they do call it the "Anglo-American" legal system so while roots are similar, paths diverged somewhere in the subsequent centuries. i salute the sanity and good sportsmanship in Canada I so often see. I relish the verve still seen in the US. Both of us are spending ourselves dry, which binds us in common purpose.