WhansaMi

I took an 11-day (5/18-5/29) cruise on ship Noordam of Holland America that was scheduled to stop at Tunis, Tunisia, the only port I hadn’t been.

 

It was at sea on 5/20. I left my iPhone on the hand dryer in the handicapped bathroom outside the ship gym. 40 minutes later, it was gone. Yes, my own FAULT for being forgetful!!!

 

My daughter (a first-year college student) was going to travel alone in China, learning the language. I have all the apps and info on the phone to stay in touch with her (I speak Chinese), and to make sure she is safe in the country.

 

The ship staff, other than searching my stateroom, told me to wait until it was turned in. At my repeated requests, the cruise director mentioned once on his daily TV chat—“if you lose something, go to the front desk. If you find something, return to the front desk.” Most people, including myself, didn’t hear this.

 

With extreme worry and stress, I developed an acute infection, and begged for some sort of public message-a desperate plea (a half-page flyer) at my own expense and work for the return of the phone. Whoever got it may not know how much the phone meant to me; and the phone maybe totally useless for him/her. I felt the need to let the person know. It might just be a kid who picked the phone up.

 

.

I am in agreement with the others who say that the ship realistically did all it could do. Thousands of passengers sail daily -- things are lost, and many have sentimental or practical value. The ship cannot possibly send out "all calls" or listings for every item.

Phones are replacable. This isn't a life or death situation.

We just got back from a wonderful cruise on the Zuiderdam, from Fort Lauderdale to Vancouver. I had asked about Gus and wanted to report our experience in Guatemala. I did, indeed, get in touch with Gus, and he sent the information that we needed. We booked him and prepaid for his Humanitarian Tour. Well, it didn't work out so well. We never did find either Gus or the tour guide, and THEY LEFT WITHOUT US. Another tour guide saw our dismay, and came to our rescue. She called Gus, who admitted that we had paid him, and that he had forgotten us. She then volunteered to get together a group of eight people and give us a tour to Antigua. She did a fabulous job. She was knowledgeable, kind, interesting, and interested in what we wanted to see. Her name is Rita de Ponce and she is the general manager of VIAJES de GUATEMALA (aka The Blue Team). She and her son were manning the tour desk. I can't say enough about her and what she did for us. For anyone interested, the website is: http://www.viajesdeguatemala.com

When did you show up? The kiosk is *right there* when you get off of the ship, with more than ample signage, so I have to think that you were late in arriving. The trip is a very full day... there were times when I grew concerned about getting back to the ship on time. If you were late, I think Gus was right in leaving without you. Everyone else should not have to either be rushed, or miss some of the sites, because passengers are late in arriving.

There thieves every not just on carnival. That can not be blamed on them. It was a dishonest person.

I have sailed on both lines and had good and bad things on BOTH lines. RCCL has very rue employees. Not everyone is happy all the time. I love both lines but it sounds to me like you need to sail a more upscale line and not a main screen line like Carnival or RCCL.

This is very true.

The OP needs to be careful about saying something would "NEVER" happen in some other place. I have sailed on CCL, RCI, HAL and took a river cruise. I have experienced less than stellar service from *someone* on each line, including RCI.

O.K. So nobody's buying the theory that HAL is trying to sell towels along with or instead of trying to modify guest's behavior? There is a larger issue here as well. Some posters have stated that HAL's new towel policy makes it comparable to NCL, RCL and Princess. With the loss of other amenities such as unlimited wine, complimentary expresso, among others, HAL is comparable to the other standard lines. And isn't that a shame? I became a HAL loyalist precisely because HAL was distinctive from other mass market lines.

If they charged me for the *use* of a towel, it would feel cheap. For my carelessness in losing a towel? Nope, not at all.

The mass market lines have always been more alike than different. I can list 100 other ways they are all alike.

While you are scratching your head about people not being upset by this, I'm scratching my head trying to understand your position! :-) I mean, there are many, many reports of people who have observed HAL towel being left ashore, or dropped on HMC. This isn't the case of HAL reacting to a couple of people each sailing... this is a systemic problem. I am a bit confuzzled as to why you think that is an acceptable situation. Should the ship continue to plan on losing 5% of their towels per trip? Does it really seem reasonable to you that people just walk away on HMC, leaving towels to litter the beach?

Of course not. There is a world full of inconsiderate and irresponsible people. So should we make policy based on their fallibility and penalize the majority of us who are considerate and respectful?

I don't understand how considerate and respectful people are penalized.

I was on the Ryndam last month. We took our beach towels out, we brought them back. Our steward exchanged them for clean ones. No big deal. If I had been careless and lost a towel, of course I would expect to pay for it, just as I would expect to have to buy a new one for myself, if I were careless and lost my own, personal, towel.

Think of it this way: there are people who never go to the beach or a pool while on a cruise. From their point of view, why should they have to absorb the cost of *any* lost beach towel, when they never even use one?

Believe me, I respect and appreciate opposing points of view but some of posts in this thread really have me stomped. It seem clear to me that HAL's change of policy has less to do with modifying people's behavior and more to do with selling over-priced towels and/or reducing the cost of replacing lost or stolen towels. In order words, the policy's objective is to enhance profit. Nothing wrong with this if one understands there is some associated reduction in service whether is needless worry about losing a towel, not having a towel available at the gangway or whatever. So why so many people favor a reduction in service without any corresponding benefit is a mystery to me. Its like being led to the gallows and when the hangman has difficulty putting the noose over your neck, you say: "Can I give you a hand."

Beyond my belief that, even on a vacation, there is some minimum standard of self-care and responsibility that one should assume, I don't have a problem with HAL reducing the cost of replacing lost towels because in the end the cost of cruises will reflect *all* of the cost of doing business, including the cost of replacement towels. In the end, it will save me, the consumer who doesn't lose her towel, money.

I agree with this, but on the flip side I do appreciate a good looking women. Now before you think bad about me, I not talking about some Barbie Doll, I mean any women who takes great time and effort to look the best THEY can. And maybe I shouldn't talk because I'm NO prize.:eek:

 

Also we all know if you call any cruise line 10 times, you will get 10 different answers.:confused:

 

I'm having fun with this conversation, I hope everyone else is.:)

I am!

With all due respect, as a woman, I have to admit I don't really have much investment in whether or not you appreciate my appearance! ;-) And, please believe me, I mean that in the nicest possible way! lol

I think about how I treat people, I think about the impact that my actions have on people (which is the reason I am *really* sorry that I seem to have hurt Cruz Chick's feelings). That's where my energy tends to be directed.

My weight has been known to fluctuate. In my early 20's, I gained some weight, when I entered grad school. After a couple of years, I lost weight, and suddenly guys who had known me for years were asking me out. I didn't date them. The way I viewed it, if they didn't see the value in the *essential* me when I was heavier, they were interested in me for all the wrong reasons.

The qualities that I believe are most important in people don't have anything to do with their outer appearance. Honesty, loyalty, integrity, generosity of spirit, depth of character... these are the things I value, and came be found in people of all different appearances.

My husband has loved me fat and thin, sick and healthy, in make-up and clean-scrubbed, well-coiffed and with major frizzies! LOL And since he is really the only man I want to impress, I guess I don't worry much about those things. ;-)

I think RuthC said it best - the point is not just that a lady couldn't use her curling iron - the point is that personal property was taken that is ALLOWED by the current rules.

 

I take my curling iron all the time and have never had an issue. If it were taken, I would not be a happy camper - sure, I can probably 'fake' my hair, it might not look as good, but I can do it if I have to. But the point is - this is MY property that I am allowed to bring. They had no right to take it.

 

Maybe a curling iron is not big deal to you, but what if it were your duct tape, alarm clock, or whatever YOU think is essential to YOUR trip? This is personal property that belonged to the OP, it was not illegal to bring on and should not have been taken.

 

I don't think seizure of any personal property should be permitted UNLESS you are breaking the rules of course.

I agree. There needs to be consistency about the rules, and everyone involved should know them. Personnel should enforce rules that are clearly written and available to the customer. I completely agree.

I wasn't really focused on that aspect of it. My comments were more about the reactions that said that, if was decided that a curling iron and/or flat iron were no longer allowed on ships, people would not cruise (or leave the house). That is what I meant by having perspective -- allowing that to dictate your ability to travel as you wish.

For me, it is a more introspective issue: how do we judge ourselves? How do we judge others? If, heaven forbid, I went through a windshield, would I never leave the house again?

At the risk of being cliche', Mother Teresa was not a "beautiful" person, but she was a *beautiful* person.

I suppose, in a nutshell, it troubles me that so much pressure is put on people (especially women) that they feel that in the face of potential failure to appear in a certain way, they would choose to hide in a cabin or relinquish the privilege of travel. We are, in my opinion, so much more than our physical manifestation, and what is most important in determining our "fitness" to be in society is what is inside our hearts and minds, not how we style our hair... and that is the criteria by which we should judge ourselves.

bolding mine

 

I agree, the onus was on HAL to return it to you. That's what you were told when it was taken away, and that is what should have been done. I wonder where the confiscated items were stored, and I wonder if for ONE SECOND someone with some authority thought "what are all these doing here?"

 

As for "other ways to style hair", possibly but not necessarily true .... if a passenger KNOWS in advance that they need mousse, gel, de-frizzer, a special brush and possibly a better hairdryer than what HAL provides, maybe she (or he) can manage without the flat iron or curling iron.

 

Like many others, if I can't take my curling iron I will be upset. And no thank you on the ship providing one to use. UGH. No way does anything that has touched someone else's hair touch my hair. UGH.

I honestly don't know how to respond to this.

Unless you cut and color your own hair (or take scissors and combs to your stylist), this isn't possible. What about the headrest on an airplane?

I see a hysteria here (not just you, but on this thread) that makes one word keep coming into my head:

perspective.

I agree wholeheartedly. I haven't used a curling iron for a few years since I changed my hairstyle, but I remember how vital it was when I did. I'm like Lisa in that I wouldn't have left my cabin if the curling iron had been confiscated and I certainly would not have cruised again.

I can see that you feel passionately about this.

I guess, in my life, I've gotten to the point that I'm not going to allow things like my hair (or not being able to wear contacts, or my weight, or stuff like that) rule my life such that not "looking perfect" means that I don't participate in things. I'm getting older. I'm decaying! I'm not going to hide in my house to spare others the challenge of looking at my aging self! ;-)

As I said, I would think that, if the cruise lines feel they need to be concerned about this, there could be some accommodations made such as ship-provided curling irons with moderate maximum temperatures and automatic shut-offs.

I agree with you in that the first cruise where I'm unable to do my hair because my flat iron gets confiscated will probably be my last cruise. I understand that safety is paramount, but unless there have been a rash of recent fires started by women's hairstyling tools, I think this is totally unreasonable.

Yabbut.... do we (or more precisely *they*) need to have a rash of recent fires to take precautions?

How many times on these boards, when things go wrong, do we get all up in arms over the company not taking proactive steps? Remember the step near the Lido the first few weeks on the Eurodam? People were all upset over HAL not being able to anticipate that people might not notice it, and folks were tripping and falling, or were *fearful* of tripping and falling. And, that would be very small potatoes compared to the damage possible from a fire. I once read an interview with a captain of a ship, asking what he feared most... he said fire. I get that. Not a situation that I'd want to have to live through.

That said, I'm wondering if there can be a middle ground, where all people can be safe, and we ladies can feel good about ourselves. On thing that I have been thinking about is the possibility of HAL providing safety approved flat irons and curling irons -- ones whose temperature only reaches a maximum of 300-350 degrees AND has an auto shut off.

I can already hear the screams of outrage --- "But I want *MINE!!!*" (so do I.... I bought a $250 flat iron and I am sure that the ship's won't be nearly as good, but I would give that up to be able to have some flat iron, and peace of mind.

 

Curling Irons & straighteners do not get that hot as they would burn the hair if they did..

Betty[/size]

Sadly, that isn't true:

http://www.electrical-forensics.com/CurlingIrons/CurlingIrons.html

My variable temperature Chi flat iron reaches 450 degrees F. Given that the ignition point of paper is right around 450 degrees, it could easily be the case that, if a flat iron was left on and fell over onto paper (which is much more likely at sea than in a home, probably), it could start a fire.

I have always taken my flat iron on cruises, mostly for formal nights (I let it go curly/natural the rest of the time) but I can understand why they might institute this.

Yup. We had the same. We live in Canada. We had someone tell us ad nauseam how bad our gun control laws were and how awful our universal health care system was (dirty hospitals, nurses wore burkas, cannot select own physician and on and on and on).

 

Sad thing was I do not think that he had ever been north of the Carolinas. We had another lecture the following night on US politics. We did not stay for the third night's lecture...it was in all probability on religion.

 

This was the last or second to last time we did assigned seating in the MDR.

It is amazing how rude people can be. As a southerner, I apologize!

I don't understand why people aren't willing to be kind. I can sit and have a good time with people who believe differently than I do. On one of our recent cruises, we had a *great* time with one couple, and have even been in contact since. I got the sense that they might have different core beliefs than we do (and have since confirmed that), but it is my belief that if people who think differently only have positive interactions with those who believe as they do, no one will ever even begin to grow in their understanding of other people, or the world.

It is through building positive relationships with others, and being willing to talk *and* listen respectfully that we can grow.

Don't know about orientation, but we did ask once to not be seated with the Dutch. :o We are Dutch ourselves and after a few dinners with other Dutch people (and the nagging about prices that usually happens, sigh :rolleyes:) we had a lovely dinner with a British and a Canadian Couple! Was very happy I asked. Next couple nights I had build up tolerance again for those types of questions and comments, so we didn't ask again. We had open seating but had a reserved table for 6.

I love sitting with international groups! That was one of the major problems I had on our river cruise -- a whole bunch of Americans, right before the presidential election. Most seemed to have this belief that *everyone* there, of course, would believe as they do, because anyone with a brain would believe that way, right??? :rolleyes:

I have been involved with gay rights since the 1980's, and have many friends who are gay. One of the things I've always been impressed with was that HAL, since I have cruised on it, had Friends of Dorothy, and now GLBT, meetings on the schedule. I would love to be able to ask to sit with some gay folks, not only because I have an interest in this area, but maybe my butt would sit in a seat that one of those people who are not kind to gay folk would otherwise be sitting in.

Oh' date=' I think some people are so judgmental of folks who are different from them or believe differently than they do that they assume they aren't 'normal', whatever that is, and think they will look freaky. We sat at a table for 8 one time where everyone was completely and totally different- age, background, lifestyle, absolutely everything. We had absolutely nothing in common and it was the best and most fun table we ever sat at. One couple was elderly and they were appalled that another couple was gay. They literally refused to look at or speak to them the whole week. So the other 6 of us ignored the 2 of them and had a blast.[/quote']

 

You know, we ask for tables for 8-10 all the time; I've never thought to ask to sit with the gay guys. I wonder if I could?

 

Of course, anyone would have to be better than the arrogant blowhard we had at our table on the Ryndam last week. I actually found myself dreading going to dinner. His in-laws were nice, and the other couple were nice, but he was one of those people who believed he knew more about everything than anyone else. At one point his FIL looked at me and rolled his eyes!

Now we just have to sit back from the shock and wait..and be glad that alot has been covered here..it is true innocent until proven guilty is what we have in the US. We chose that as a nation; so we must abide by it...

 

The alleged perpetrator did turn himself into his roomate first..as per article...just considering nature of deep uncontrolled rage and then aftershock..ie when someone goes out of control this evening...as humans we can be more capable of this than we like to think. So many issues that have been discussed can be in play and yet not..we really do not know many things.

While I'd like to be open to the idea that his turning himself in was a sign of remorse (and I believe that it is kind of you to think so), I don't think that is the case. It is a ship, isolated in the ocean, with a finite number of people aboard, and I suspect that he was the only one impaled by a corkscrew that night.

Had he been able to throw her overboard, I doubt that he would have confessed to anyone.

Gus is alive and well and still doing tours. In fact, we went with him on the Humanitarian Tour in December 2012. The whole day was a wonderful experience, from the brief tour he gave of his hotel in Livingston to the distribution of the gifts to the children, to the delightful lunch at the hotel and walking tour of his town, and the river boat trip.

 

 

The value was excellent for the experience we got. I had no qualms about sending our check since I had read such great reviews of him and his tour right here--CC has a lot of influence! The address is his son's in Georgia and apparently is used because of the banking difficulties in Guatemala.

 

I went on the HAL Ryndam and had been to Guatemala in the past on another Holland America cruise. It is an interesting port and yes, it is a shame that more cruise lines don't stop there!

We spent the day with him last week, off the Ryndam. He is going to be a grandfather again, soon!

Great trip. Perfect!

Have a great day in San Juan. Hopefully, your fellow passenger will be okay. Medical emergencies are always a little scary.

We had two or three medical evacuations last week! Two were the first day in Key West (at least one was a broken leg) and in Costa Maya we saw an ambulance speeding toward the ship.

Thanks for joining us on the cruise! We missed Heat, but we have listened to Terry in the Mix a couple of times. I haven't noticed Happy Harry or Allan by name in the Lido, but everyone there is very helpful as usual. And, we look forward to visiting St. Lucia again, with the Pitons -- usually viewed from deck with a glass of wine in hand....

 

Dave

Happy Harry serves coffee on the side opposite of Canneletto in the morning. He will be singing "Coffee from heaven! Coffee make you happy!" He also has a small sign that a previous guest made him that says "Coffee from heaven" too.

I hope you get to meet him!

WhansaMi,

Can you post a link to your review?

Wow. Interesting. I guess the Odyssey has been sold or decommissioned? There is no listing for it.

I can summarize some of the problems I had with the cruise:

The sights on the excursions tended to be second or third tier sights, not the ones you would think they would have you going to. Some were, quite frankly, misleading. One listed itself as a "cultural connection" wherein you had "lunch with the locals". By that they meant that they local people *served* us lunch.

When I envisioned "smaller ship", I also envisioned smaller groups on the excursions. I dislike being herded, and tend to feel that it wastes a lot of time, as moving groups of 35 or 40 people is simply time consuming. We also seemed to have a great number of people in our group who would walk through a doorway and stop dead, to look around. The guides kept asking for everyone to come in and move to the far side of the room, but, it didn't happen.

Since the price of the cruise included the tours, we were hoping the main sights in the morning with the group, and then go out on our own in the afternoon. Since the groups were so large, and often the sights were not the major ones, we felt that whatever money we might have saved from being on Vantage was not really saved, as we ended up not using the services, by halfway through the trip.

The passengers were well traveled, but many had gotten to the age where they no longer seemed to have much intellectual curiosity anymore. One, who arrived for the pre-cruise extension in Budapest, didn't know what currency was used there. :-O I'd guess that 95% of the passengers went on the canned tours in the morning, returned for lunch, and never again left the ship, even if we were docked until midnight.

As some folks have mentioned, Vantage tends to serve only Americans. In my case, the cruise was right before the presidential elections, and many people on the cruise were quite vocal about their positions, and, more problematic, seemed to make the assumption that everyone on the ship agreed with them (because, everyone with a brain must, right??). I don't blame Vantage for that, but it did call home to me the fact that, with only two common areas on the ship (the dining room and the lounge), there aren't many places to escape to. If I ever take another river cruise, I will go with a more international group.

While there is "open seating" in the dining room, there is only one seating *time*. In our case, it was pretty much at 6 pm. Since we tend to eat late at home, this felt too early for us. There is no room service or other options for a meal or even a snack in the evening, unless you are docked and you leave the ship.

I need to run now, but these were the main problems I had with the cruise.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks to all for your previous input. I hadn't considered Vantage. Ama sound pretty good. I am interested in their Germany routes. How does costs, food, tours, rooms, average passengers, # of people on board, etc compare?

We have only done one river cruise, with Vantage, and it put me off even considering another river cruise. My review is on the site: River Odyssey. I have come to realize that, maybe, just maybe it was the line, or the particular cruise, or whatever, and so one day I might try again, but definitely with another line.

Check up at the top of the forum in the "Announcements" area.

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/announcement.php?f=171&a=363

Thanks!

Hi, neighbor! If we see them, I will pass on your greetings, but even the S-class ships have a lot of people and we may not run across them. I'm glad you enjoyed your cruise -- how was Mahogany Bay?

 

Dave

It was nice. We went with Joanie, from Victor Bodden, and she was wonderful. We had a tour of the island, and then she took us to Infinity Bay. It was less crowded than most of the other hotels that had day passes, and the reef was *right there*. She walked us down to the beach, got us settled, put us in the very capable hands of one of the hotel's people, and came back to check on us periodically. After snorkeling, we went to a local roadside restaurant, off the main road, a little east of the terminal, for lunch. Very good!

For those saying hal has no responsibility, that is flat out legally wrong. There may not have been an awareness of this person's predisposition to these awful acts, but liability does not end there. As a lawyer if I were defending this woman I would go after the negligence of hal with regard to their key distribution system, never should anyone but mgr level or above have master keys. Security should be monitoring when and why master keys are used. To give them to room service or even room stewards is in fact negligent as it raises the level of predictability that something like this happens. If a crew member can hop from balcony to balcony on the outside of a ship, then again anyone could do the same, and that becomes potential negligence by hal not designing something to prevent this. eg another few inches of protruding steel as a barrier between the balconies.

A ship's primary responsibilty is passenger safety, NOT giving us a fun cruise -no different than flight attendants are responsible for safety, not serving drinks.

Ships make cost cuts, staff cuts, short cuts and that increases the risk of these events, ie negligence!

Now can every circumstance be foreseen or prevented? of course not. But negligence looks at more likely than not. If it is even 1% more likely it could occur it is negligence. Maybe the one positive thing that will come out of this is cruiselines will look at this issue and revisit all aspects of ship security

 

Sent from my SCH-I915 using Forums mobile app

I must say, I disagree with most of the points you make.

In the hospitality industry, it is usual and customary for people to have access to your room, for instance, the cleaning staff has access to your hotel room. Now, I am not entirely sure why a room service waiter needs to have access, but if it is usual and customary for room service staff to pick up trays on cruises, then there is a case to be made there.

The man didn't enter by going from balcony to balcony -- he tried to escape that way, and was not successful. Given that, on almost all the cruises I've been on, the partition extends all the way to the railing, the only way that could be remedied would be to completely do away with all balconies. I don't think that is a reasonable remedy, and it certainly isn't one that most people would like. Heck, I could see an alternative situation where they change the configuration so there is no possible way to move from one balcony to other, and then a fire occurs in a cabin, blocking the door, and they get sued because they made that alteration!

I'm not sure which cost cuts you believe to be the cause of this; there would need to be a causal factor demonstrated.

Of course, as I said, the cruise line *will* provide her with money. (1) It would be bad for PR for them not to (2) it is cheaper than going to court, win or not (3) sympathy often plays a role in these types of civil suits, so whether there was merit or not, there would be a possibility that she would win and (4) I have to think that the powers that be really *do* feel badly about this, and while they understand that money won't make it all better, it is really the only thing they can offer beyond their well-wishes.

Nevertheless, unless something comes to light that we haven't heard about yet (for instance, that there were previous bad acts committed by the man that they knew about, or that he wasn't supposed to have access to the keys, but their system made it easily available to him) I don't see where HAL is legally responsible.

The world has danger and bad people in it. We assume some level of risk simply by breathing -- we could stay barricaded in our homes our entire lives, and someone could still get in and do us harm. I, for one, am not willing to live my life through fear. As I mentioned, I survived a sexual assault. I know what that is like, although my injuries were not as life-threatening as this woman's. But, I made the decision long ago that the perpetrator would not take the *rest* of my life from me.

I don't want to live in fear, and I won't. If a cruise line chooses, based on something like this, to take away all the balconies, stop cabin service, and stop room service, I won't be sailing with them.

I think it important to note that it is not fact she called him a 'son of a bitch'. This alleged (:rolleyes:) violent, dangerous, rage filled violator ALLEGES she said those words but we don't know that as fact.

 

Until this man is tried and convicted by a judge/jury, I'll pay the law the respect of calling him alleged to have beaten, raped, assaulted and attempted to murder this woman the same as I say he alleges the victim spoke those words.

Except that he has admitted beating, raping and attempting to murder the woman, so I think "alleged" isn't really applicable, here. ;-)

It does apply to what he says the woman said, but I don't really think that has any relevance. If she had let out a string of curse words, directed at him, in front of 200 witnesses, I would still say that it wouldn't matter. The remedy for that insult is not what that man did.