Carnival Australia faces class action by cruisers

This link from Cruise Passenger Magazine below. The allegation is that the company knew about the cyclone well before leaving Sydney - but went ahead with the cruise - not to New Caledonia but to Melbourne and Hobart.

Action unlikely to be successful, one would think, in view of the usual terms of the passage contract. But what makes it interesting that the law firm that took this case (no doubt on a 'no win - no pay' basis) obviously thinks that there is a good chance of success.

http://www.cruisepassenger.com.au/carnival-australia-under-spotlight-for-class-action-by-cruisers/

their only after a free cruise

If t's the cruise I think they're talking abut,

1. It's old news

2. I think the ship started heading to the islands and then changed direction, so I suspect they have their work ahead of them.\\

On the other hand if they can show that the line knew before departure that it would be a totally different itinerary they have a chance. But the damages may be minimal anyway.

If the cruise line new in advance, so what, so would most of the passengers. They could have cancelled knowing their cruise will not get to the planned itinerary. The captain has say whether the route is safe and take appropriate action for the safety and comfort of the passengers. And while it is disappointing for them all, every passenger signs the cruise contract or they cannot board, they don't have a leg to stand on.

Yes old news, ship left Sydney heading for the islands but cyclone forecast changed and they changed direction, the key is that the forecast when they left wasn't too bad but later the cyclone had changed direction so safer to not go towards it.

I think the first question before even starting a case is knowing what should have been done differently.

Given there's nothing to show or even seem likely that a southern itinerary was planned before departure, and that the new weather causing it only arose when they were boarding, I can't see what could have been done differently. Delay the cruise to leave the next day while plans were made? A possible decision in hindsight, but at the time would have also been annoying to many. And would not be in line with their objective to deliver a cruise, so would have also caused requests for refund.

If the cruise line new in advance, so what, so would most of the passengers. They could have cancelled knowing their cruise will not get to the planned itinerary. The captain has say whether the route is safe and take appropriate action for the safety and comfort of the passengers. And while it is disappointing for them all, every passenger signs the cruise contract or they cannot board, they don't have a leg to stand on.

The issue arises Mic if the line knew before hand and didn't let the passengers know, thus denying them the opportunity to cancel.

Most (some/many) cruise contracts have differing rules about canceling depending in the number of Ports to be varied, as I understand it (and I am be wrong) had these passengers been told in advance (the important word being in advance) that the entire itinerary was to change, they would have been able to cancel without any penalty and receive a FULL refund.

The argument is that the co knew tha this was th case, didn't tell the PAX, because if they did there would have been mass cancellations resulting in a near empty ship.

To b frank I see some major evidentiary hurdles for the Plaintiffs and suspect they are looking for a quick settlement.

Evidentiary hurdles

1. Prove the ship knew in advance.

This shouldn't be hard one way or the other, weather forecasts for he area at rainouts times, the route the ship took after passing through the heads, discovery of communications between the ship and co.

2. Prove people would have cancelled

This will be hard. The line will be able to show what % of capacity she sailed at and what is the minimum % to make a no-loss cruise, unless the plaintiffs can prove that there would have been sufficient cancellations to make the cruise a loss, I think they have a problem.

Also why didn't they leave the ship at first Port.

Then... Damages. What they paid less what they got, plus any extra expenses incurred.

I said once before I doubt this matter will see a Court room.

The Plaintiffs will be keen to settle.

The line won't want the negative publicity.

Probably a credit towards a future cruise or maybe some OBC.

I agree they would be looking for an out of court settlement.

I was on the Carnival Legend from the 6th of March till the 15th, we just got out of there in time, we left Noumea on the 12th and the cyclone hit Vila on the 13th.

Apparently the cruise line knew before departure.

I read that several hundred left the ship at the first port after Sydney - their first opportunity to do so once told.

But what dd they know.

Just that there was a Cyclone.

That it was gong to cross their path OR

That it would prevent them getting t09 the islands and they'd have to change itinerary

A subpoena to Melbourne Ports and Hobart Ports should also clarify when the new arrangements were made.

They were advised apparently that the cyclone had turned into the ships path. It is then up to the Captain to make the call. A weather bureau does not have that authority, only the Captain. The ships logs will determine when the decision on that information was made.

The issue arises Mic if the line knew before hand and didn't let the passengers know, thus denying them the opportunity to cancel.

How much more notice would they have had compared to the general public. Cyclones come and go and even though they may trend in certain directions they are still fairly unpredictable in the exact routes and strengths during the lifespan. A storm may get worse or just weaken and die out. I find it ludicrous that a passenger would want to deliberately cruise into a cyclone.:(

They were advised apparently that the cyclone had turned into the ships path. It is then up to the Captain to make the call. A weather bureau does not have that authority, only the Captain. The ships logs will determine when the decision on that information was made.

But the meteorology info will give a guide to at what point the decision could/should have been made.

But what dd they know.

 

Just that there was a Cyclone.

 

That it was gong to cross their path OR

 

That it would prevent them getting t09 the islands and they'd have to change itinerary

 

A subpoena to Melbourne Ports and Hobart Ports should also clarify when the new arrangements were made.

I would and have been very happy to leave safety decisions in the hands of the Master o the Vessel as that is what he is trained for.

As to 400 passengers leaving the ship at Melbourne that is more likely because they came from Victoria and it saved them a journey home later. That makes sense so whay re they now asking for compensation?

How much more notice would they have had compared to the general public. Cyclones come and go and even though they may trend in certain directions they are still fairly unpredictable in the exact routes and strengths during the lifespan. A storm may get worse or just weaken and die out. I find it ludicrous that a passenger would want to deliberately cruise into a cyclone.:(

But the issue remains when was the decision made, or possibly when should have it been made.

And I agree capt don't want to go, nor do I.

I've always thought this would settle but just maybe the line (or their insurers) will decide to fight this one (as I think they can win, unless they are covering something up) and try to put an end to such claims.

If so costs could be enormous.

Well at least the lawyers win.:D;)

I love stores with a happy ending.

Apparently the cruise line knew before departure.

I read that several hundred left the ship at the first port after Sydney - their first opportunity to do so once told.

Even if they allowed cancellations at 1/2 hour before departure then people would need to be debarked pretty quickly. Besides, if you cancel your cruise within the last couple of weeks prior to the cruise you lose 100% of the fare.

I've always thought this would settle but just maybe the line (or their insurers) will decide to fight this one (as I think they can win, unless they are covering something up) and try to put an end to such claims.

 

If so costs could be enormous.

 

Well at least the lawyers win.:D;)

 

I love stores with a happy ending.

I cannot see this going to court either and I certainly don't see the class action succeeding. From Carnival's crusie contract.

2. CRUISE ITINERARIES ARE NOT GUARANTEED Many factors may affect our ability to provide any particular itinerary. These include weather, mechanical difficulties, civil unrest or other unforeseen circumstances. We agree to use reasonable endeavours to provide a cruise in accordance with our published schedules and itineraries. However, we do not guarantee itineraries and they do not form part of your contract with us. If we are unable to operate in accordance with our published itinerary, we may in some circumstances offer you assistance or compensation in accordance with clause 26. - See more at: http://www.carnival.com.au/au-legal-notice/ticket-contract.aspx#sthash.hpPyEDoV.dpuf

Pretty clear whether they knew or not they do not have to do anything, however, perhaps they may provide FCC (for a percentage on this cruise) off their next cruise. This would be for everyone, not just the class action participants.

But the meteorology info will give a guide to at what point the decision could/should have been made.

Bureaus provide the facts and not a ship interpretation of the facts. That is the Captains job. And at what time that is made will be shown in the evidence.

With regards to itinerary it might come down to interpretations. The itinerary sailed is nothing like what people booked. They didn't just drop one or even 2 ports - the whole trip changed. Not sure the contract waivers apply here. Maybe even credit card insurance or their terms and conditions might come into play. They did not cruise to international ports but they did pay for an international cruise.

There are a few assumptions being made as to why people disembarked in Melbourne.

But really only the lawyers will end up happy.

Bureaus provide the facts and not a ship interpretation of the facts. That is the Captains job. And at what time that is made will be shown in the evidence.

 

With regards to itinerary it might come down to interpretations. The itinerary sailed is nothing like what people booked. They didn't just drop one or even 2 ports - the whole trip changed. Not sure the contract waivers apply here. Maybe even credit card insurance or their terms and conditions might come into play. They did not cruise to international ports but they did pay for an international cruise.

 

There are a few assumptions being made as to why people disembarked in Melbourne.

 

But really only the lawyers will end up happy.

If it does even get off the ground , we will end up paying for it all in the higher prices Carnival will charge. It wont cost Carnival anything......they will just pass it on to you and I.;)

I cannot see this going to court either and I certainly don't see the class action succeeding. From Carnival's crusie contract.

2. CRUISE ITINERARIES ARE NOT GUARANTEED Many factors may affect our ability to provide any particular itinerary. These include weather, mechanical difficulties, civil unrest or other unforeseen circumstances. We agree to use reasonable endeavours to provide a cruise in accordance with our published schedules and itineraries. However, we do not guarantee itineraries and they do not form part of your contract with us. If we are unable to operate in accordance with our published itinerary, we may in some circumstances offer you assistance or compensation in accordance with clause 26. - See more at: http://www.carnival.com.au/au-legal-notice/ticket-contract.aspx#sthash.hpPyEDoV.dpuf

 

Pretty clear whether they knew or not they do not have to do anything, however, perhaps they may provide FCC (for a percentage on this cruise) off their next cruise. This would be for everyone, not just the class action participants.

Bureaus provide the facts and not a ship interpretation of the facts. That is the Captains job. And at what time that is made will be shown in the evidence.

 

With regards to itinerary it might come down to interpretations. The itinerary sailed is nothing like what people booked. They didn't just drop one or even 2 ports - the whole trip changed. Not sure the contract waivers apply here. Maybe even credit card insurance or their terms and conditions might come into play. They did not cruise to international ports but they did pay for an international cruise.

 

There are a few assumptions being made as to why people disembarked in Melbourne.

 

But really only the lawyers will end up happy.

I don't think the class action will go far.

If it does even get off the ground , we will end up paying for it all in the higher prices Carnival will charge. It wont cost Carnival anything......they will just pass it on to you and I.;)

 

 

 

It will cost the Insurers. They are the ones making the decisions now, not Carnival. And if the Insurers put up the premiums then yes, we will wear that. Not that I cruise with Carnival. But I do with Princess and Cunard.

The next court appearance in this case is, according to my original link, on 29 Feb 16. Legal matters are usually dragging on for a long time before the final hearing date. And over 90% of negligence matters are settled - often on the doorsteps of the court.

If Carnival refuse to settle on a reasonable basis, then the solicitors have no choice but to assume that this matter will be tested in court. And that means that they will have to brief barristers etc - so extra costs for them.

Since this would be 'no win - no fee' situation, about 50% of any final figure will be taken by solicitors in costs and associated fee (depending on the class action agreement) - so at least solicitors will not be disadvantages.

An interesting case to watch in the long term.

I think the case has no merits at all.

If you look at the path cyclone Pam took on that afternoon, it was heading south-west when the ship sailed but that evening it changed to an almost north-west heading (away from the cruising area) then in the morning it changed again heading south.

Now with that information, if you were the Captain what would you have done.