Regent "Free" night

They lie about the "Free" night.

My husband and I were booked to sail on the Regent Seven Seas Cruise starting in Singapore and ending in Hong Kong starting on February 19, 2014 and ending March 6, 2014. Included in the package was a "free" hotel night at the Swissotel in Singapore the night before the cruise embarked which was February 18, 2014. We decided to arrive a day earlier to stay in Singapore and asked Regent to book the night of February 17th for us. The cost of the extra night was $498.

Our United Airlines Flight leaving on February 16th was canceled and we had to leave on February 17th. We called Regent telling them of our canceled flight and to rearrange our pickup by Regent in Singapore. We also asked Regent to cancel the night of February 17th at the Swissotel. They told us that we had to cancel the hotel which we did. We called the 1800 number here in the United States and they canceled the night and said they would not charge us.

When we arrived in Singapore on February 18th at 1am there was no Regent representative to pick us up so we had to take a cab to the hotel. When we asked for reimbursement of the cab, they wanted to reimburse us in Singapore dollars which we refused. We were only in Singapore for 4 hours of daylight time since we arrived the evening before at 1am and the bus was picking us up at the hotel at 12 noon. They finally agreed to reimburse us in US dollars.

The Cruise was fine but at the end of the Cruise we were handed a bill for the $498 for the night that we missed at the hotel. This night we canceled ourselves and the hotel assured us that they were not charging us for the missed night. We have a confirmation number for the one night that we stayed.

When we finally got home we called Regent and were told that since "our ship had sailed" our only recourse was to email them since we could not speak to a representative. We sent an email explaining the entire situation and got a response back that we should have taken insurance on our trip because of the canceled flight. They said that the "free" night they provided was the extra night we booked on February 17th. The "free" night as listed in the brochure was the night before we were to embark on the ship.

Now they tell us that they will do us a favor a give us a $500 shipboard credit on our next cruise with Regent. They will not refund us the money. I am at a loss at what to do. This is ludicrous - how can they insist that the "free" night was the extra night. They provided one night at the hotel which was included in the price of the Cruise package. We only stayed one night at the hotel. What do I do at this point. Who else can I complain to????

You need to turn this into your insurance company .... I also read your posting on trip advisor, this is exactly what Travel Insurance is for!

Your travel agent should be fighting this battle, that's what they get paid for.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

This is not what travel insurance is for. Insurance is to cover delays or cancellations, not a rip off by the cruise company.

This is not what travel insurance is for. Insurance is to cover delays or cancellations, not a rip off by the cruise company.

There was a delay that caused the OP to miss one of two nights, however I have a feeling this will be sorted out once the OP gets past the front line customer service people. They did what they should have done. Wonder where their TA is in all of this?

Sent from my iPad using Forums mobile app

I agree. This is a misunderstanding and should be cleared up fairly easily.

Nana - So what I "think" I hear you saying is that a customer is only legally or morally entitled to (or should only reasonably expect to be) treated "fairly, equitably, and logically" by a cruiseline (in this case, Regent) IF they happened to have booked through a TA, and happened to have a TA who is willing to "do battle" on the passenger's behalf (and act as their intermediary), and happened to have bought a travel insurance policy.......and that all other customers who are "stupid enough" (my words - not yours) to not have booked their trip through a TA essentially "get exactly what they deserve" (again, my words - not yours) and should just be treated as the cruise line sees fit?

Under the terms of the booking, the OP was entitled to one free pre-cruise night. That's all the OP is asking for. No more and no less. Regent already collected the money for that "free night", which was "built into" the original fare that was charged. ((And does anyone seriously think that Regent is really paying the hotel $498/night for those rooms?)) Regent shouldn't be acting as if the OP is asking for an "extra or excess" reimbursement. The OP is merely asking that Regent deliver on their "promise" of one free pre-cruise night in that hotel. As WRIPRO stated, this is not an "insurance issue". The OP was there at the port and embarked onboard the ship at the scheduled time and they stayed in that hotel for just one night prior to the cruise.

What's so hard about Regent simply and immediately "living up to" that agreement without the need for a "negotiator" (TA) or for any of this subsequently winding up on CC at all? Why should the customer be put through all of this by a "luxury cruise line", whether they chose to engage the services of a TA, or not?

It seem like many of the recent cases of "disatisfaction" that we've read about could have been easily avoided, and with no adverse publicity for Regent, if someone representing Regent "on scene" just made the immediate, elemental, and ethical decision to "make things right" for the paying customer before these things ever predictably rose to this "public level".

What am I missing here? Regards

Nana - So what I "think" I hear you saying is that a customer is only legally or morally entitled to (or should only reasonably expect to be) treated "fairly, equitably, and logically" by a cruiseline (in this case, Regent) IF they happened to have booked through a TA, and happened to have a TA who is willing to "do battle" on the passenger's behalf (and act as their intermediary), and happened to have bought a travel insurance policy.......and that all other customers who are "stupid enough" (my words - not yours) to not have booked their trip through a TA essentially "get exactly what they deserve" (again, my words - not yours) and should just be treated as the cruise line sees fit?

 

Under the terms of the booking, the OP was entitled to one free pre-cruise night. That's all the OP is asking for. No more and no less. Regent already collected the money for that "free night", which was "built into" the original fare that was charged. ((And does anyone seriously think that Regent is really paying the hotel $498/night for those rooms?)) Regent shouldn't be acting as if the OP is asking for an "extra or excess" reimbursement. The OP is merely asking that Regent deliver on their "promise" of one free pre-cruise night in that hotel. As WRIPRO stated, this is not an "insurance issue". The OP was there at the port and embarked onboard the ship at the scheduled time and they stayed in that hotel for just one night prior to the cruise.

 

What's so hard about Regent simply and immediately "living up to" that agreement without the need for a "negotiator" (TA) or for any of this subsequently winding up on CC at all? Why should the customer be put through all of this by a "luxury cruise line", whether they chose to engage the services of a TA, or not?

 

It seem like many of the recent cases of "disatisfaction" that we've read about could have been easily avoided, and with no adverse publicity for Regent, if someone representing Regent "on scene" just made the immediate, elemental, and ethical decision to "make things right" for the paying customer before these things ever predictably rose to this "public level".

 

What am I missing here? Regards

YIKS! Where did this come from.....I believe there is a huge misunderstanding between the OP and Regent and if the OP has a travel agent then that TA should be able to make this a much easier fix..... Do what they are paid to do and get to a Regent person with a "Brain" in their head!

If the OP does not have a TA then sadly they end up needing to deal with people at Regents customer service dept that are clueless and many on this board have sadly had to do just that.

The OP called the hotel and let them know that they had missed their flight and if I remember the original post and the TripAdvisor comments the OP made they also contact Regent. The OP did everything right, I am just hoping this can get cleared up in the easiest manner.....

It certainly sounds as if the idiots are still in charge and it's sad that their front line employees are not given the tools to make things right for their guests.

All that being said I still do t know if the OP had a TA or if they had travel insurance, which would surely kick in here as this was due to a delay/missed flight.

Jackie, I'm with you in thinking this is a misunderstanding and will get worked out, sad that they insist on making a guest so angry when doing the right thing is so easy!

Pingpong1, I agree with everything you said and am not sure why you believe I don't. Apparently my reasoning is just not as eloquent as others on his board.

Sent from my iPad using Forums mobile app

What I think everyone is missing here is that we don't have enough facts to determine if Regent is in the wrong here.

From what the OP wrote, it appears that they had Regent book the extra night for them. $498 is more than it would have cost to book the hotel directly.

Most importantly, we don't know when the extra hotel night was cancelled. If it was less than 60 days before the cruise began, Regent has a 100% cancellation penalty for pre-cruise hotels booked through Regent.

We also don't know if the OP paid the $498 charge to Regent either with their final payment or when the extra night was booked if the booking occurred after final payment. It's possible the $498 was to be added to the OP's shipboard account.

So, assuming Regent made the extra night reservation, the cancellation occurred within 60 days of the cruise and the OP had not yet paid the $498 charge to Regent, the following scenario is plausible. In this scenario, the entire $498 penalty would be owed to Regent since the OP had not yet paid Regent for the extra hotel night. Hence the bill for $498 the OP received would be correct.

Under these assumptions, the fact that the hotel told the OP that it would not charge the OP for the cancelled night is irrelevant. The OP's contract was with Regent, not with the hotel. Regent's cancellation policy is what counts, not the hotel's policy.

If all my assumptions are correct, then the offer of a $500 future cruise credit is a generous offer of good will and not a screw up by Regent. HOWEVER, the reason given that the cancelled night was the "free" night is just ridiculous and sounds like a BS response by someone who didn't know about the 100% cancellation penalty.

My reasoning above may be completely out to lunch and it may turn out that what the OP experienced was a total foul up by Regent. I hope I'm wrong here and that the OP will return and fill in the factual gaps in his or her post.

Either I am reading this incorrectly or others are. I do not think the OP is talking about the included pre-cruise night at a hotel. They are talking about a night prior to the included night that they had to cancel (and did so directly with the hotel at Regent's request).

A FCC doesn't cut it here. Regent should not have charged the OP in the first place. Have to agree with nana541 based on the facts as I understand them.

Either I am reading this incorrectly or others are. I do not think the OP is talking about the included pre-cruise night at a hotel. They are talking about a night prior to the included night that they had to cancel (and did so directly with the hotel at Regent's request).

 

A FCC doesn't cut it here. Regent should not have charged the OP in the first place. Have to agree with nana541 based on the facts as I understand them.

We're talking about the same thing. When you book an additional pre-cruise hotel night through Regent (not the included pre-cruise hotel night), I believe there is a 100% cancellation penalty if cancellation occurs within 60 days of the first booked day at the hotel. If the OP had booked the extra night directly with the hotel then you and nana541 would be correct.

Hopefully the OP will return and clear up any ambiguities in his or her post.

Sounds to me that they canceled the hotel after the hotel cutoff time. Many hotels require a 48 hour cancellation and it seems as though this would be the case. I'm sure the insurance would kick in on this.

Debi

Hey Dave

I booked the extra night through Regent when I originally booked my reservation. So you are telling me that since I booked it through Regent I am held responsible for the extra night. Well I called Regent today inquiring about a cruise from Barcelona to Rome, I spoke with a Regent cruise agent, Marana, regarding another cruise just checking on the "free" night. The Cruise was leaving from Barcelona to Rome at the end of May (CN - 511238). I was told that the policy has changed and the free night now only will be given to those who have concierge rooms. Marana encouraged us to book the hotel the night before even though we did not want a concierge room in the event of a flight cancelation. I asked Marana if we booked a concierge room, and planned to stay two or three nights in Barcelona, what night would be considered the "free" night included in the package and she said the "night before the cruise". I asked her if there was a flight cancelation, would the we have to pay for the additional nights if we canceled them when we found out about the flight deviation and did not take out trip insurance and she said it depended on the hotel. The hotel in question Swissotel in Singapore canceled the night and did not charge us. Well that is what we stayed - the night before the cruise. So what gives Regent - do you make promises and then lie to your guests. If anyone plans to take a Regent Cruise beware of the night included in the package - they will look for any excuse to charge you. Also since I booked the room through Regent why didn't a Regent representative have the decency to cancel the room for me. They said they had nothing to do with it - I had to contact the hotel myself. So what gives - they can charge but not have the decency to cancel the night.

And yes I booked through my American Express Travel Agent who has contacted her Regent agent and the Regent agent said there was nothing they could do. I also paid for the trip with my American Express card and started a dispute with Regent through American Express. I am calling my Travel Agent tomorrow with this additional information and am writing to Mr. Victor Gonzalez, Executive Vice President of Passenger Services and Mr. Frank Del Rio, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer - Prestige Cruise Holdings.

I would ask anyone to call Regent with the same question regarding the "free" pre night and the additional nights and see what answers you get. I would really like to hear your replies.

If anyone else needs more facts please let me know and I will be glad to add to this post.

If I remember your comment somewhere, you said you called the hotel and cancelled?? And had an e-mail reflecting that and that there was no charge.

Seems to me that evidence alone contradicts everything Regent is telling you. Once again I think there has to be a huge misunderstanding in this whole mess.

Regent needs to fix this, too bad they have failed once again to use common sense!

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

Hey Dave

 

I booked the extra night through Regent when I originally booked my reservation. So you are telling me that since I booked it through Regent I am held responsible for the extra night. Well I called Regent today inquiring about a cruise from Barcelona to Rome, I spoke with a Regent cruise agent, Marana, regarding another cruise just checking on the "free" night. The Cruise was leaving from Barcelona to Rome at the end of May (CN - 511238). I was told that the policy has changed and the free night now only will be given to those who have concierge rooms. Marana encouraged us to book the hotel the night before even though we did not want a concierge room in the event of a flight cancelation. I asked Marana if we booked a concierge room, and planned to stay two or three nights in Barcelona, what night would be considered the "free" night included in the package and she said the "night before the cruise". I asked her if there was a flight cancelation, would the we have to pay for the additional nights if we canceled them when we found out about the flight deviation and did not take out trip insurance and she said it depended on the hotel. The hotel in question Swissotel in Singapore canceled the night and did not charge us. Well that is what we stayed - the night before the cruise. So what gives Regent - do you make promises and then lie to your guests. If anyone plans to take a Regent Cruise beware of the night included in the package - they will look for any excuse to charge you. Also since I booked the room through Regent why didn't a Regent representative have the decency to cancel the room for me. They said they had nothing to do with it - I had to contact the hotel myself. So what gives - they can charge but not have the decency to cancel the night.

 

And yes I booked through my American Express Travel Agent who has contacted her Regent agent and the Regent agent said there was nothing they could do. I also paid for the trip with my American Express card and started a dispute with Regent through American Express. I am calling my Travel Agent tomorrow with this additional information and am writing to Mr. Victor Gonzalez, Executive Vice President of Passenger Services and Mr. Frank Del Rio, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer - Prestige Cruise Holdings.

 

I would ask anyone to call Regent with the same question regarding the "free" pre night and the additional nights and see what answers you get. I would really like to hear your replies.

 

If anyone else needs more facts please let me know and I will be glad to add to this post.

Thanks for the information. Before I contact Regent, there are a couple of additional facts that would be helpful. I assume from what you wrote above that Regent charged you the $498 charge for the extra hotel night. Is my assumption correct? Also, was the $498 charge added to your Regent invoice or were you supposed to pay the charge at the hotel?

Did you cancel the extra night at the hotel within 60 days of your cruise? Did the hotel send you confirmation of the cancellation?

Unfortunately, the Regent telephone agents don't always relay correct information. So the information you received on the telephone may or may not be correct. IMHO, your best bet is to write to Regent as you propose to do.

Besides Victor Gonzalez and Frank Del Rio, I suggest writing to the President of Regent, Kunal Kamlani (KKamlani@prestigecruiseholdings.com)

Hi Dave,

Yes Regent charged me the $498. We did not cancel 60 days before because we fully intended to use the extra night. We canceled the extra night because our airline canceled our flight the morning we were supposed to leave for Singapore. We had to leave the following morning which meant that we lost the extra night in Singapore. We called Regent with the new flight information so they could pick us up at the airport in Singapore (which they didn't - another problem). We then asked them to cancel the extra night in Singapore and they told us that they had nothing to do with that and we had to call the hotel which we did. We canceled the night and have a confirm number that we only stayed one night.

The $498 was added to the Regent invoice because they booked the hotel for us and that is why they are charging us. The extra night was not part of the Cruise package - only the "free" night. Regent graciously offered to book the extra night for us and now I know why. If we missed that night now they are claiming that because we didn't have insurance, we have to pay. I could have called the hotel myself and booked the extra night without Regent's "help." My travel agent could have booked it for us and put it on our American Express card and then Regent would have not been involved.

For anyone that is planning a Cruise with ANY cruise agent and you want to book extra hotel nights - do it yourself because once the cruise line is involved it becomes part of the cruise package.

I just contacted my travel agent and she is now going to contact Regent. Let's hope something comes out of it.

Thanks for the advice to write to Kunal Kumlani. I have my letters all written and all I had to do is email and send by snail mail also.

Regent "graciously" offered to book the extra night for you because they make a killing on it. Did you check how much you could have booked the same room for on your own? This is another reason NEVER to book hotels through the cruise line. If your TA had just booked the extra night separately this issue would not exist.

I feel that many of us learned a lesson from this experience and I understand why Regent charged for the cancellation. However, since the OP cancelled the hotel and it was not going to cost Regent any $$$, the FCC was a reasonable thing to do (even if a refund would have been better). If the OP used a TA to book the hotel, the TA should have known better (in my opinion). You can't really blame Regent because a person or TA doesn't realize that they should book extra hotel nights on their own. Regent may charge through the nose for hotel nights but no one is being forced to use their services. Again, lesson learned!

"....You can't really blame Regent because a person or TA doesn't realize that they should book extra hotel nights on their own...."

TC - I believe the rather off-hand dismissal obfuscates, side-steps, and seems to (once again) "excuse" Regent from any responsibility to "do the right or ethical thing" for their customers; no matter what the particular words of their contract might say.

Contracts are guidelines to be followed under "normal circumstances". Anything written "by man" can be changed or waived "by man", as unique circumstances dictate. Contracts are waived and modified all the time in the business world, as case by case circumstances dictate. It would only take one word from Mr. Kamlani, himself, to make this "right" for the customer.

Have you never asked (and received) a special consideration or favor from a company that you didn't particularly have a legal "right" to - but the company just went ahead and granted the concession/favor in the spirit of good customer relations, promoting good will, or out of a hope for future business from your? Remember, Regent is not losing a single dime here! In reality, they've pocketed $498 in unearned income.

Good will and good customer relations don't seem to be an overriding concern on Regent's part in this particular instance. Yet - they can deliver a cello to a stateroom for a future customer??!! Where is THAT written into any contract? And yet, some on this board praised Regent effusively at the time for THAT show of "customer good will". I guess I just don't "get" the inconsistencies here.

Regent's responsibility was also to provide transfers for the OP from the airport to the hotel, and yet despite the fact that the OP took great pains to keep Regent informed in a timely manner of their itinerary change....Regent chose NOT to abide by THAT letter of their "contract".

Actually, I don't believe a "future cruise credit" is reasonable at all. It requires the OP to, once again, book more business with Regent. And the OP "loses" that "little scrap of cheese" (the FCC) entirely, which was grudgingly thrown to them by Regent, if the OP's past experience with Regent totally "browns them off" from doing any future business with Regent (or giving Regent one more future dollar). That future "little crumb" thrown to them by Regent is worthless and can't be cashed in at all - unless the OP books more business with Regent in the future. The OP effectively has to spend another $20,000 (on a future cruise) in order to benefit from that $500 "morsel" (credit). And you think that's "generous"?

What if you went to a restaurant, got food poisoning from your meal, the restaurant refuses to refund the price of your dinner, but they offer you a gratuitous 10% discount on your "next meal", if you go back to that restaurant again! That's how Regent thinks they have "resolved" this.

Regards

TC - Please understand that my exasperation is NOT with you! :) My frustration and complete disbelief is with the way Regent has handled (NOT) what seems to be a "no-brainer" and an opportunity to dispense some more "good will" to one of their good and loyal customers. Best Regards

TC - Please understand that my exasperation is NOT with you! :) My frustration and complete disbelief is with the way Regent has handled (NOT) what seems to be a "no-brainer" and an opportunity to dispense some more "good will" to one of their good and loyal customers. Best Regards

Please understand that I am not upset with you at all. I also believe in doing the right and/or ethical things whenever possible. However, having read the boards for years (as I'm sure you have), and understanding that Cruise Critic only represents approx. 5% of Regent passengers, there seems to be way too many people wanting Regent to "do the right thing" for them.

I think of when people missed their cruise entirely due to the devastating hurricane in New Jersey (that extended to other areas as well). Did they deserve a pardon by Regent? What about a death in the family? Not everyone has insurance to cover this events. When you are elderly, the cost of insurance is extremely expensive.

There was a thread recently when someone did not like the hotel that Regent was putting them in. Did they deserve a credit for their unused "free" pre-cruise hotel (it was past the deadline as well)?

Some people think that I will make excuses for Regent no matter what they do. If you read most of my posts, you would know that this is not true. I take Regent to task when things do not go as I feel they should. An example is our last cruise -- it sucked (for lack of a better word). Do I want compensation? Absolutely not. However, I did make my points on my final cruise questionnaire (and subsequent posts on Cruise Critic). At one point, my DH never wanted to sail on Regent again.

I guess I simply get frustrated with people that feel they are entitled to compensation for things that are clearly stated in the policy. As the OP said, they now know that they should not have booked through Regent. Had their TA reminded them of the policy, perhaps they would have booked themselves. While I thought it was a misunderstanding at the beginning of this thread, I now think it is simple ignorance (note: not calling the OP ignorant -- just completely unaware of Regent policies). Do they deserve a refund? IMO, absolutely not. Did people who missed their cruise due to a hurricane or death of a family member deserve "good will"? Absolutely!

Hi TC! Thanks for the thoughtful reply, as always. I will gladly, and happily send a donation of $100 to any charitable organization of your choice in the U.S. (and I will send it to the organization in honor of you and your DH, and I will Email you a copy of the check).....If I EVER see you write a CC post for all to read, after you complete any Regent Cruise on any ship and on any itinerary, were you literally say......"This cruise sucked"! :p Statements like "this cruise wasn't up to par", or "we didn't experience the normal high standards of excellence", or "the bread sticks were a little off", won't cut it!

You must clearly state in that review what, specifically, made you think that this cruise (the service, food, excursions, staterooms, staff, furnishings, anything at all)...... really "sucked" about that cruise.....I make this offer in the warmest, most respectful, and friendliest way!

I have read all of your comments/post over the last several years and I never saw any reviews that ever rose to that level of dissatisfaction. During your Aussie cruise (was that the last one or was there a cruise after that?) and all the many others that you have taken, I don't ever recall any of your comments or complaints documenting any real "negative experiences" that rose to the level were you wanted to actually "quit" Regent.

I know you don't like included excursions. I know you don't much care for the Navigator, and I know you don't like Park West Art. But I just don't ever recall you saying that any of your cruises with Regent, or that any interaction with crew members or the head office in Miami, rose to the level of "sucking"!

If it did, I don't ever remember it being mentioned that any (negative) experiences rose to enough of an annoyance where you and DH ever considered actually "divorcing" Regent. If there were, my apologies for not spotting them and giving you credit for it. :o The only thing I recall is that you didn't like certain bread sticks made by a certain baking chef. And you once or twice had "brown water" :eek: But you ran the tap for awhile and it went away (and that you drink bottled water, anyway). But those are pretty tepid complaints.

You may have been more specific "off line" and directly to Regent, or in E-mails to good friends, but I never recall any really serious complaints mentioned on these threads. The only other instance which you obliquely referred to was at the end of your cruise to "Oz", where you wound up staying in Sydney longer than you have planned. And even then, you didn't explain why.

My offer to make a charitable donation on your behalf is serious! Best Regards!

The OP has just written to Mr. Kamlani and others about her experiences on her cruise as detailed above. Personally I believe that, at the very least, Regent's explanation of its actions to the OP was nonsensical and that Regent was wrong to make the OP cancel her first night's hotel reservation. However, IMHO it makes no sense at this time to condemn Mr. Kamlani before he has a chance to investigate and respond to the OP. I doubt he was aware of the ridiculous response Regent originally sent to the OP.

Hi TC! Thanks for the thoughtful reply, as always. I will gladly, and happily send a donation of $100 to any charitable organization of your choice in the U.S. (and I will send it to the organization in honor of you and your DH, and I will Email you a copy of the check).....If I EVER see you write a CC post for all to read, after you complete any Regent Cruise on any ship and on any itinerary, were you literally say......"This cruise sucked"! :p Statements like "this cruise wasn't up to par", or "we didn't experience the normal high standards of excellence", or "the bread sticks were a little off", won't cut it!

 

You must clearly state in that review what, specifically, made you think that this cruise (the service, food, excursions, staterooms, staff, furnishings, anything at all)...... really "sucked" about that cruise.....I make this offer in the warmest, most respectful, and friendliest way!

 

I have read all of your comments/post over the last several years and I never saw any reviews that ever rose to that level of dissatisfaction. During your Aussie cruise (was that the last one or was there a cruise after that?) and all the many others that you have taken, I don't ever recall any of your comments or complaints documenting any real "negative experiences" that rose to the level were you wanted to actually "quit" Regent.

 

I know you don't like included excursions. I know you don't much care for the Navigator, and I know you don't like Park West Art. But I just don't ever recall you saying that any of your cruises with Regent, or that any interaction with crew members or the head office in Miami, rose to the level of "sucking"!

 

If it did, I don't ever remember it being mentioned that any (negative) experiences rose to enough of an annoyance where you and DH ever considered actually "divorcing" Regent. If there were, my apologies for not spotting them and giving you credit for it. :o The only thing I recall is that you didn't like certain bread sticks made by a certain baking chef. And you once or twice had "brown water" :eek: But you ran the tap for awhile and it went away (and that you drink bottled water, anyway). But those are pretty tepid complaints.

 

You may have been more specific "off line" and directly to Regent, or in E-mails to good friends, but I never recall any really serious complaints mentioned on these threads. The only other instance which you obliquely referred to was at the end of your cruise to "Oz", where you wound up staying in Sydney longer than you have planned. And even then, you didn't explain why.

 

My offer to make a charitable donation on your behalf is serious! Best Regards!

Your response did make me smile. It seems that you really do read my posts! Actually, what I post on Cruise Critic is fairly middle of the road. There is a lot I do not say (not necessarily positive or negative). As you correctly stated, I am much more open with people I know and also people that I meet on the ship when we can just chat about things. I try to post information that will be helpful to people new to Regent.

It is not right to name names on Cruise Critic. There are times I really dislike a person and end up being friends with them (this actually happened when someone from Regent was very unkind to me on Cruise Critic and we later spoke and have since kept in touch). I do apologize for using the word "sucked". That was rather harsh. There were several things that were not to our liking on the Singapore to Sydney cruise. Posting details on CC would really not be helpful to anyone (and I did not post a review in the review section of our last cruise). I truly do not believe the experience will be repeated. After all, I have had 16 great Regent cruises, 1 that had pretty poor food and 1 that we really did not like. For clarification purposes, it was my DH that wanted to divorce Regent.

If we have a Regent cruise in the future that is not good and I feel that the details would be helpful to readers, I will definitely take you up on your offer. After all, Warrior Canine Connection could always use $100 (that was a shameless plug;)

Hi DaveFR - You have many more years of experience with Regent cruising than I do. Has it been your experience that folks "out in the fleet" with Regent.....by that, I mean CD's, officers, Destination personnel, hotel and FB mgrs., Pursers, etc...... right on the 3 ships are not granted the necessary on-the-spot policy, managerial, and supervisory authority to make the decisions necessary to adequately and appropriately smooth out and settle "problems" like this with customers before/without them all having to be elevated to the "Miami level" or wind up as discussions on threads like this?

It is appearing to me (admittedly, I'm an "old Navy guy"), after reading several things like this happening, that things which could/should normally be adjudicated and solved at the "local level", right when they occur, are all having to be "pushed up the chain of command" to where Mr. Kalmani, himself, has to get involved. And by that time, the "optics" are never going to look good.

And all of this..... over just a $498 hotel charge! Which probably shouldn't have appeared on the OP's bill in the first place, once the circumstances were calmly explained. The amount in dispute is less than the cost of one good case of wine served in CR at one evening meal. What is the "cost" to Regent in bad publicity alone, and the potential of a disgruntled customer never booking a Regent cruise again? Most of us clearly see, I think, that the matter should have just been "dropped" and considered a "non-charge" on the OP's bill and in a "normal situation" should not have had to go any higher than the ship's purser or Business Mgr. (if they even have one on the ship)....without it ever going any further than that, let alone as far at the COO of PCH.

And now, incredibly, it is going all the way to the President/COO of PCH to "settle". If Mr. Kamlani is the only person with enough authority to settle a matter like this, then who is taking care of the "real problems" in the corporation? :eek:

Is there no one (within Regent itself - not even PCH) below the COO level, who has the authority to decide that this is really an "unfair and unwarranted charge", and someone who had the authority to settle this matter right on the ship, very quietly and simply with the OP before it ever left the ship? Apparently not!

There seems to be (what we would call in the Navy) some real "delegation of authority issues" going on here. Regards

TC - The WCC is a great idea and a very worthwhile cause at any time of the year and for any occasion! I'm actually going to send them something this afternoon. Thanks so much for the suggestion. Regards.