U.K. Couple Billed for £900 Fuel Charge

[LauraS]

Cruise Critic has just posted the following news:

U.K. Couple Billed for £900 Fuel Charge

Read the entire news article... (http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=2684)

[deborahjo]

I do not blame them. That is an outragous price to pay for a fuel charge. What will the cruise line do when fewer and fewer passengers go on their line due to this fee. Isn't that about equivilent to like $31 American dollars. WOW....

[mohavemommy]

£900 = $1783.08 US :eek:

http://www.dollars2pounds.com/

[iheartbda]

Isn't that about equivilent to like $31 American dollars. WOW....

$1,780.03 :)

[deborahjo]

I meant per Euro not totally. So I was high. I thought it was more like over 2,000.00 Guess I should have clearified what I meant. Still at that nuch no thank you to cruise.

[deepnite10]

that s close to a 10% increase in their fare..so much for the
great deal they may have gotten :confused:

[Richard Stein]

I guess I cross them off my list of lines I will sail in the future. I am retired and could not afford the surcharge. Thanks for warning us.

[Host Dan]

I meant per Euro not totally. So I was high. I thought it was more like over 2,000.00 Guess I should have clearified what I meant. Still at that nuch no thank you to cruise.
UK isn't euros, they are still british pounds... Big difference..

[ancientmariner]

Mark - I don't know how you managed to book with a US agent, even through the internet. Whenever I've tried I've been told that the cruise lines don't allow it unless you have a US or Canadian address. I've resigned myself to paying in £s what our fellow passengers pay in $s, but it irks. However, on the plus side, we do reap the benefit of the exchange rate when we shop in the US, so it's not all bad.

We're always being encouraged to book early, but I have cruised with this company in the past and have been disappointed to discover that people who booked later than me got a much better deal. Seems they adjust their prices to suit the situation.

[SueOverend]

Mark - I don't know how you managed to book with a US agent, even through the internet. Whenever I've tried I've been told that the cruise lines don't allow it unless you have a US or Canadian address. I've resigned myself to paying in £s what our fellow passengers pay in $s, but it irks. However, on the plus side, we do reap the benefit of the exchange rate when we shop in the US, so it's not all bad.

We're always being encouraged to book early, but I have cruised with this company in the past and have been disappointed to discover that people who booked later than me got a much better deal. Seems they adjust their prices to suit the situation.

Ancientmariner,

We are from the UK and have booked all our HAL cruises through a US travel agents with no problem. When we travelled with Cunard last year, we had to do this with a UK agent or direct with Cunard.

Have a surf around next time you're booking and contact a few of the big US internet TA's.

Good luck

[sparky1664]

I'm also from the UK & booked my upcoming cruise through a US agent. My tickets came through last weekend..no problem.

I have one booked after this which I booked in the UK as I couldn't get a better price on that particular one. As mentionned above, some cruise lines will allow it, some won't, but it's always worth shopping around to see what deals can be done. :)

[Casshew]

Fuel charge on my flight to Glasgow in September is 450.00 per ticket (the ticket only cost 500pp + tax) so basically double.

[Morgsmom]

What is most interesting about this article is that upon survey 50% of folks said they would not stop cruising even given increasingly high fuel surcharges. Since the cruiselines actually do READ these boards, I think that for everyone who says "I'll cruise at any price" they are doing a disservice to everyone who, at some point, are going to have to say "UNCLE."

Yes, I love to cruise. Probably too much, if there can be such a thing. But I can't compromise other things in order to do so and there will be a point when the "affordable" cruises are just no longer affordable. If I had a 19pound daily fuel surcharge, I'd be in a position to have to cancel that cruise, too.

I only wish that more folks would express their displeasure with the rising fuel surcharges by voting with their feet (or their words on this forum.) Cruiseline profits are HUGE by anyone's standards; why do they feel that they can pass this on instead of taking it in the profit line as so many other businesses have been forced to do in order to stay solvent?

[quester1]

What is most interesting about this article is that upon survey 50% of folks said they would not stop cruising even given increasingly high fuel surcharges. Since the cruiselines actually do READ these boards, I think that for everyone who says "I'll cruise at any price" they are doing a disservice to everyone who, at some point, are going to have to say "UNCLE."

Yes, I love to cruise. Probably too much, if there can be such a thing. But I can't compromise other things in order to do so and there will be a point when the "affordable" cruises are just no longer affordable. If I had a 19pound daily fuel surcharge, I'd be in a position to have to cancel that cruise, too.

I only wish that more folks would express their displeasure with the rising fuel surcharges by voting with their feet (or their words on this forum.) Cruiseline profits are HUGE by anyone's standards; why do they feel that they can pass this on instead of taking it in the profit line as so many other businesses have been forced to do in order to stay solvent?


Please clarify what you mean. I thought that to say "UNCLE" means to quit fighting, surrender to the "Bully" and give into thier terms. I don't think this is what you meant, right?

What businesses are taking it in the profit line, not the gas stations, food stores, airlines etc. In fact the only businesses that I've heard of that have not raised thier prices, slashed their service or down sized their product in order to avoid raising thier prices are business that hedged thier fuel costs by buying future contracts at a fixed price. As soon as these contracts are used you can bet your last dollar that they too will raise their prices, slash their services or down size their product. So why should the cruise lines not pass the cost of doing business on to the consumer like everyone else?

More pressure needs to but on our governments to deal with this problem by stopping the speculators, developing more of our own oil and gas reserves and alternative fuel sources so that we are not dependent on forgiegn suppliers that what to impose their will, culture and religion on us but cannot beat us in fair fight so they are trying to bankrupts i n order to buy our country out from under us, in my opinion.

In the mean time we are going to have to suck it up and vote with our feet. if you do not like the price or can't afford it don't buy it - go buy else where. Supply and demand will soon bring the prices back into line.

[MMDown Under]

"After paying the deposit, the couple were told that based on a £19 per person, per night fuel tax, they'd need to shell out an additional £892. So they decided to cancel the cruise and get their deposit refunded.

No dice. The sting in the tail for the Bennetts is that the Association of British Travel Agents (ABTA) states that if you're cancelling a cruise you've booked because of excessive fees, the amount must add up to more then 10 percent of the price.

The Bennetts' surcharge came to 9.92 percent."


I doubt the American cruise consumer would put up with loosing 900 pounds deposit on a September cruise, because they didn't want to pay an additional 892 pounds fuel surcharge.

The cruise industry may soon learn that many cruisers, like myself, will no longer book cruises in advance like we used to.

[phillipahain]

The big difference between booking any kind of holiday/cruise in the UK is if you Cancel you loose your deposit and often an awful lot more on a sliding scale depending on how close to the sailing date

Whereas in the USA not only are the fares a lot cheaper but you can cancel right up to Final payment

However the UK couple featured need not have lost their £900 deposit they were offered a cheaper cabin but they rejected that

Hence its hard to find full sympathy with them

I would rather do the cruise in a lesser cabin which lets face it is only basically used to sleep in than loose £900 on a principal thanks to a fuel surcharge Like it or not OIL prices have gone sky high

Gas in the UK is now over $10 a gallon

If it was that price in the USA there would be mass revolt

[julieanne]

I have been aware of the fuel surcharges for many months and the Bennett's should have been given the bottom line before being asked for the deposit. I agree with another poster who stated that they will "continue to cruise and it's only about the bottom line". I will choose cheaper,less desirable cruises, off season cruises and cruises closer to home, but I will still cruise.

[Morgsmom]

Please clarify what you mean. I thought that to say "UNCLE" means to quit fighting, surrender to the "Bully" and give into thier terms. I don't think this is what you meant, right?

sorry, to me saying "uncle" is to give up the fight, stop resisting, and WALK AWAY from the big bully. I would never "give in" :o thanks for clarifying.

[editor@cruisecritic]

This is an issue we're starting to cover quite often (have another story in editing queue) -- some US agencies do in fact take UK bookings. Read this for now -- maybe it'll shed some light? Ask the Editor: Can UK Passengers Book with Overseas Agencies? http://www.cruisecritic.co.uk/features/articles.cfm?ID=690

Carolyn

Carolyn Spencer Brown
Editor in Chief
Cruise Critic

Mark - I don't know how you managed to book with a US agent, even through the internet. Whenever I've tried I've been told that the cruise lines don't allow it unless you have a US or Canadian address. I've resigned myself to paying in £s what our fellow passengers pay in $s, but it irks. However, on the plus side, we do reap the benefit of the exchange rate when we shop in the US, so it's not all bad.

We're always being encouraged to book early, but I have cruised with this company in the past and have been disappointed to discover that people who booked later than me got a much better deal. Seems they adjust their prices to suit the situation.

[editor@cruisecritic]

You know, we cover the fuel surcharge story in many different ways (from news stories when taxes are upped to our AYS Roundup that tells you exactly what lines charge -- http://www.cruisecritic.co.uk/features/articles.cfm?ID=580 -- and it, meaning the fuel tax, is going to be with us for the foreseeable future. But I'm going to go on the record here to say that this particular case is an embarrassment for not only Discovery Cruise Line but for the industry in general. Please understand that it's not the "norm".

Beyond the company's inadequate response (and frankly its poor handling of the whole issue) -- what also has to be noted here is that Discovery's 19 pounds a day is the priciest tariff in ALL OF CRUISING ALL OVER THE WORLD. To quote a UK colleague, it's a bloody rip off in the first place.

Certainly, the ship is older and not as efficient and I'm sure its energy costs are higher than the norm. That's no excuse. Tweak the itineraries, then. Find other ways to handle it than to make passengers pay an exhorbitant fee for a ship that's not as ... good a value as many others in the market today.

The best way you can let Voyages of Discovery know how you feel about this is to vote with your wallet and go to a line that not only charges a reasonable fee but also responds to passengers with the respect they deserve.

I'm sure it doesn't show :) -- but I'm really, really furious about the way the Bennetts have been handled and the way the company is not taking responsibility. It's hurting itself, to be sure, but also hurting the industry, too.

Carolyn

Carolyn Spencer Brown
Editor in Chief
Cruise Critic


"After paying the deposit, the couple were told that based on a £19 per person, per night fuel tax, they'd need to shell out an additional £892. So they decided to cancel the cruise and get their deposit refunded.

No dice. The sting in the tail for the Bennetts is that the Association of British Travel Agents (ABTA) states that if you're cancelling a cruise you've booked because of excessive fees, the amount must add up to more then 10 percent of the price.

The Bennetts' surcharge came to 9.92 percent."


I doubt the American cruise consumer would put up with loosing 900 pounds deposit on a September cruise, because they didn't want to pay an additional 892 pounds fuel surcharge.

The cruise industry may soon learn that many cruisers, like myself, will no longer book cruises in advance like we used to.

[editor@cruisecritic]

You know, we cover the fuel surcharge story in many different ways (from news stories when taxes are upped to our AYS Roundup that tells you exactly what lines charge -- http://www.cruisecritic.co.uk/features/articles.cfm?ID=580 -- and it, meaning the fuel tax, is going to be with us for the foreseeable future. But I'm going to go on the record here to say that this particular case is an embarrassment for not only Discovery Cruise Line but for the industry in general. Please understand that it's not the "norm".

Beyond the company's inadequate response (and frankly its poor handling of the whole issue) -- what also has to be noted here is that Discovery's 19 pounds a day is the priciest tariff in ALL OF CRUISING ALL OVER THE WORLD. To quote a UK colleague, it's a bloody rip off in the first place.

Certainly, the ship is older and not as efficient and I'm sure its energy costs are higher than the norm. That's no excuse. Tweak the itineraries, then. Find other ways to handle it than to make passengers pay an exhorbitant fee for a ship that's not as ... good a value as many others in the market today.

The best way you can let Voyages of Discovery know how you feel about this is to vote with your wallet and go to a line that not only charges a reasonable fee but also responds to passengers with the respect they deserve.

I'm sure it doesn't show :) -- but I'm really, really furious about the way the Bennetts have been handled and the way the company is not taking responsibility. It's hurting itself, to be sure, but also hurting the industry, too.

Carolyn

Carolyn Spencer Brown
Editor in Chief
Cruise Critic


"After paying the deposit, the couple were told that based on a £19 per person, per night fuel tax, they'd need to shell out an additional £892. So they decided to cancel the cruise and get their deposit refunded.

No dice. The sting in the tail for the Bennetts is that the Association of British Travel Agents (ABTA) states that if you're cancelling a cruise you've booked because of excessive fees, the amount must add up to more then 10 percent of the price.

The Bennetts' surcharge came to 9.92 percent."


I doubt the American cruise consumer would put up with loosing 900 pounds deposit on a September cruise, because they didn't want to pay an additional 892 pounds fuel surcharge.

The cruise industry may soon learn that many cruisers, like myself, will no longer book cruises in advance like we used to.

[Goldryder]

You know, we cover the fuel surcharge story in many different ways (from news stories when taxes are upped to our AYS Roundup that tells you exactly what lines charge -- http://www.cruisecritic.co.uk/features/articles.cfm?ID=580 -- and it, meaning the fuel tax, is going to be with us for the foreseeable future. But I'm going to go on the record here to say that this particular case is an embarrassment for not only Discovery Cruise Line but for the industry in general. Please understand that it's not the "norm".

Beyond the company's inadequate response (and frankly its poor handling of the whole issue) -- what also has to be noted here is that Discovery's 19 pounds a day is the priciest tariff in ALL OF CRUISING ALL OVER THE WORLD. To quote a UK colleague, it's a bloody rip off in the first place.

Certainly, the ship is older and not as efficient and I'm sure its energy costs are higher than the norm. That's no excuse. Tweak the itineraries, then. Find other ways to handle it than to make passengers pay an exhorbitant fee for a ship that's not as ... good a value as many others in the market today.

The best way you can let Voyages of Discovery know how you feel about this is to vote with your wallet and go to a line that not only charges a reasonable fee but also responds to passengers with the respect they deserve.

I'm sure it doesn't show :) -- but I'm really, really furious about the way the Bennetts have been handled and the way the company is not taking responsibility. It's hurting itself, to be sure, but also hurting the industry, too.

Carolyn

Carolyn Spencer Brown
Editor in Chief
Cruise Critic

Well my curve on this is that VoD have not only shot themselves in the foot on this matter in recent weeks.

They have had an engine problem since March, they have messed about with itineraries - even changing them completely & reselling them under new names - only told booked passengers of the changes 3 days ahead of departure....add on the fact that on the cruises shortly after the crankshaft went pop, they actually gave a significant OBC/credit to next cruise which has not been the case for cruises in the last 2 months (this I know as have many reports from passengers and TA's alike).

Now to add insult to injury they cancel the July 13 cruise after the remaining good engine packed up...not surprising when you consider it has been flogging itself to death making up for the knackered engine since March.

The fuel surcharge quoted to this couple is not a true reflection of the fuel cost but I really do feel that they are trying to recoup losses from cancelled cruises by passengers who were angry at the late notification of not just an itinerary change but an entire cruise change...each passenger who cancelled was instructed to write (not email/phone) and each refund claim was judged on its own merit with no guarantee of success.

VoD have handled everything since March in an extremely bad way. No OBC...not even a happy hour or bottle of wine to those on the ship who didn't get a letter to notify any changes.

In this day and age, with the current economic climate that we all have, VoD are going to have alot of problems in the coming months and tbh I am seriously wondering if the company will even survive after the disgraceful way the whole issue of the ship breakdown & surcharging etc was handled.

I know of many who have cruised with VoD for many years and who have made the decision to go elsewhere in future. TA's are equally peeved at the lack of assistance and the lack of honesty and openness by VoD.

Personally I expected better of a company whose cruises are not exactly cheap to begin with. The reputation of VoD has been pretty much shattered by the engine troubles/how that was mishandled and the difficulties faced by this couple too.

Bad business, end of story.

[ancientmariner]

I concur with everything Carolyn has said. I sent a letter of complaint, following a cruise aboard ms Discovery, directly to David Yellow. I received a reply from the so-called "Customer service Department".

When I had the temerity to suggest their response was inadequate, I received a further letter stating "in view of your dissatisfaction, it may be best for both parties if we remove you from our mailing list."

I call that Customer DISservice.

[Goldryder]

I concur with everything Carolyn has said. I sent a letter of complaint, following a cruise aboard ms Discovery, directly to David Yellow. I received a reply from the so-called "Customer service Department".

When I had the temerity to suggest their response was inadequate, I received a further letter stating "in view of your dissatisfaction, it may be best for both parties if we remove you from our mailing list."

I call that Customer DISservice.

Those are the actions of a company who isn't too bothered if they see the year out...certainly not the actions that you would expect from a company admitting that they got it wrong in respect to their ship's engine problems or the decidedly contrived surcharging.

Unless VoD changes its attitude extremely quickly, it will be they who are knocked off mailing lists and referral lists...and that will be the end of what was a very well respected company.

Damn shame & damn shameful too.

[kanders]

Mark - I don't know how you managed to book with a US agent, even through the internet. Whenever I've tried I've been told that the cruise lines don't allow it unless you have a US or Canadian address. I've resigned myself to paying in £s what our fellow passengers pay in $s, but it irks. However, on the plus side, we do reap the benefit of the exchange rate when we shop in the US, so it's not all bad.

We're always being encouraged to book early, but I have cruised with this company in the past and have been disappointed to discover that people who booked later than me got a much better deal. Seems they adjust their prices to suit the situation.
Ancient Mariner

I have just booked cruise through *************.com, based in Houston and queried if they could accept the booking and they said no problem. Used this company because a friend has booked through them on several occasions, with no problem.

[kanders]

I am just being cynical, but is it a coincidence the surcharge works out at just below 10%.

[cweave02000]

I guess one issue is when did they pay their deposit? We booked an Alaska cruise on the Tahitian Princess for May / June '08 last fall, and before all these 'surcharges' startedappearing. The Florida AG stepped up and made Carnival either refund or not charge passengers who booked before the date the charges were announced, so we were OK (Princess is a Carnival subsidiary, of course). Same story with the airlines.

I got an e-mal from a travel guru the other day, and it offered a great deal - "Atlanta - Las Vegas roundtrip for $179.00 (plus $200 fuel surcharge)."

The games people play . . .