Teddy123

I will be on QM2 mid December. Can anyone tell me the current perks for booking on board? Thanks.

Anybody know where the ship's "Amsterdam On Your Own" tour from Rotterdam drops off in Amsterdam? Thanks.

I assume you know that you don't need to buy wifi to use the app for booking restaurants, etc. You can connect to the ship intranet for free for that.

Could be that there are simply no more places in Olive Grove. Recently on Ventura, Sindhu couldn't be booked online, only when onboard.

I'm just pointing out the facts here. I'm not responsible for them. But they are what they are.

I'm not missing the point. Clause 22 says anybody with symptoms of any virus will be denied boarding, without compensation. P&O are simply applying this condition when anybody who says they have such a symptom is denied boarding. P&O are not claiming that the person has Covid, or anything else. So the only way to contest the decision is to show the clause is invalid. Is the clause arbitrary and grossly unfair? Almost certainly, but that doesn't necesarily make it invalid. Like so much else in life, people have to make their own minds up about their appetite for risk, and decide if they want to sail with this clause in the contract. Of course, if they are led to believe that insurance will cover them if the clause is invoked, and that belief is unfounded, that's a different matter.

But the point is, P&O do NOT deny boarding on the basis that a passenger has Covid (or anything else). The grounds are that the passenger has a SYMPTOM and if the passenger fills in a form saying "I've got a cough", then clearly he does have a symptom. The T&C condition may not be appropriate, and perhaps isn't enforceable, but the logic is clear.

It's more complicated than just checking the passport at embarkation. The reason for the checking and stamping for every airport entry/exit is to track who goes in and that they have left. So countries must trust the cruise line to tell them if a passenger doesn't get back on board (and is therefore still in the country, presumably) for any reason. Strictly, it seems the situation should be like it used to be in Russia: every passenger on a trip checked in and out with passport. Perhaps that's how it will end up.

Yes, cruising is different to flying (not sure why but it's fine by me). Had long queues at airports in Germany, Italy and Spain. Now the UK is not in the EU, passports need to be stamped on every entry and exit. As Harry says, the new system will be even worse. It's what the UK voted for.

Just back from shore trips in France, Spain, Portugal and Italy. No checks on passports or vaccination records.

The exclusion condition is that you have a symptom. If you don't have any symptoms, accidentally say you have, then contact P&O to say it was an error and you don't have any, they have no grounds to deny boarding. If they still do it, I would see grounds for a full cash refund and compensation - perhaps after a battle!

I'm afraid a cough IS a symptom of Covid and if you have one, you have a symptom of Covid whether or not you actually have Covid. So P&O can say you have a symptom of Covid. The clause only refers to having a symptom, not actually having the infection - which is the nub of the problem, of course.

I know, I've seen the posts. I'm just presenting an alternative experience to get a more balanced picture. I also know that whether or not there are 100 cases or zero doesn't alter the problem of people being denied boarding in what might seem an unreasonable manner.

There is inevitable variation between cruises. Within the last month we have been on Ventura and Queen Elizabeth, both for a week. No masks, no more coughing than in pre-Covid days (probably less), and no signs of anybody being quarantined. So the current approach to tests/questionnaires doesn't necessarily mean disaster.

But the old wording for the flexible policy said "this policy modifies the transfer policy in our Booking Conditions". So while it also said the policy could be changed at at any time, changes for bookings made before 3 August imply a retrospective change to the Booking Conditions. I'm not sure this is enforceable.

I use video rather than still, and have managed to capture quite a lot of movement in the lights. I can also zoom in quite a bit. This is an example still from the video, taken from the ship

I've been to Alta with P&O twice, done a total of 4 excursions and seen the Northern Lights every time (varying in intensity, of course), as well as on the ship when leaving Alta. I'm now considering a cruise on Queen Anne, with the principal aim of seeing the Lights again, but I'm hesitant because Cunard don't go to Alta, but instead visit Tromso and Narvik. Does anybody have good/bad experiences of seeing the NL from these two? Thanks.

This reflects incredible disorganisation within Cunard. Any communication with customers about any department's activities should be approved by that department (not each individual e-mail, of course, but they should see an example as part of the overall verification process).

I suppose it could be that Cunard's IT systems are really that bad!

The confirmation e-mail says the 15% is added to the onboard account "after the service is rendered", not paid up front, so there's scope for Cunard to drop it.

It's a long time since I booked an excursion(!) but I think this is a new departure, that I too noticed. I will be asking for my service charge to be removed unless I get a very convincing explanation for it. Given its quality, Cunard should be paying me to use their website, not vice versa!