NCL's Deceptive Letter to Gem Passengers

[mbisson]

 

Any time you say "EVERYBODY on board" you lose credibility.

 

Not quite anytime. I once stood at the desk and watched and all 2143 people on my cruise came up with the same complaint. ;)

 

The sad part was they were all complaining about my singing in Karaoke the previous night :eek:

[Maryfrei]

Not quite anytime. I once stood at the desk and watched and all 2143 people on my cruise came up with the same complaint. ;)

 

The sad part was they were all complaining about my singing in Karaoke the previous night :eek:

 

rofl!:D

[DMH15]

The letter spoke about the itinerary changes and the reason why and about the repairs. It then states "Because of this itinerary change, you will receive an automatic credit of $75 USD per stateroom, applied directly to your on-board account before the end of your cruise."

 

Nothing misleading in my opinion. The credit is for missing the port, whether it's the port fees or just to make up for the inconvenience or a combination of the two, the letter seems fairly straight forward. I thought it was pretty decent of them and my feeling was that it was probably more than the port charges.

 

I agree, nothing deceptive. OP, if you are coming on CC and just speculating, that opens a lot of worms. How much research have you done with NCL to get the questions you have answered?

 

It is a risk you have with cruising that itineraries can be changed. Just another reason to book NCL excursions or take out insurance.

 

Stuff happens.

[DMH15]

Not quite anytime. I once stood at the desk and watched and all 2143 people on my cruise came up with the same complaint. ;)

 

The sad part was they were all complaining about my singing in Karaoke the previous night :eek:

 

Thanks, Monte... you win my "laugh of the day" award. And today, believe me, I needed a good laugh.

[mbisson]

Thanks, Monte... you win my "laugh of the day" award. And today, believe me, I needed a good laugh.

 

So many of my friends are cruising right now or this weekend that I'm a bit depressed that I'm not. So I needed to laugh as well ;)

[billie5]

Sorry, NJ. Didn't mean to confuse you.

 

My experience with pure mathematicians in academia is that they tend to be literalists, ready to jump down a colleague's throat if his/her statement is not literally true. Unfortunately, I also see many of them treating the rest of the world the same way, viewing statements in a black and white mode, either true or not true. This gives them a rather Asberger's syndrome flavor. The rest of the world goes on in its vague, not quite literally correct, but perfectly happy, understandable and communicative mode.

 

Don't get me wrong. I am surrounded by pure mathematicians and love their world, where everything is subject to proof, and proofs are absolute (more or less). It is just that the rest of the world does not function in a world where every sentence is to be interpreted exactly. Since you are a mathematician, I am sure you would understand if I said that the derivative of the sum of two functions equals the sum of the derivatives, and virtually the whole scientific world would agree with the statement. However, if you are a pure mathematician, you would almost certainly disagree, unless the speaker adds "assuming each of the functions is differentiable!"

 

One wonders, if the front desk person who dealt with OP were a mathematician, whether he/she might have said: "The $75 dollars covers port charges, with some excess, unless there are a sufficiently large number of passengers in your cabin, in which case the payment will only partially cover port charges and there will be no excess." At least then OP would have been happy!

 

Bill

[mbisson]

One wonders, if the front desk person who dealt with OP were a mathematician, whether he/she might have said: "The $75 dollars covers port charges, with some excess, unless there are a sufficiently large number of passengers in your cabin, in which case the payment will only partially cover port charges and there will be no excess." At least then OP would have been happy!

 

Bill

 

Or maybe confused ;)

 

(if you read that fast enough it comes out like the disclaimers/side effects on medicine advertisements. Those side effects often sound worse than the disease they're trying to treat LOL)

[Sooners]

Not quite anytime. I once stood at the desk and watched and all 2143 people on my cruise came up with the same complaint. ;)

 

The sad part was they were all complaining about my singing in Karaoke the previous night :eek:

 

Holy crap, I'm not sure what I would enjoy more, you attempting karaoke or seeing how fast Bliss lounge could be cleared? :D

[mbisson]

Holy crap, I'm not sure what I would enjoy more, you attempting karaoke or seeing how fast Bliss lounge could be cleared? :D

 

Due to that event, my Karaoke career is now over :(

[rkloc]

I too was on that cruise . It also left a bad taste in my mouth , not just because of how they handled the San Juan situation , but because of many other issues as well . I think the Gem is just a bad ship . I've been on 7 other cruises , another on NCL , as well as Royal Caribbean , Carnival , and Holland America and this was by far the worst . Some things , like the weather , were beyond NCL's control . There were many other issues , however , that indicate to me that NCL's standards - or at least those on the Gem - are much lower than other cruise lines .

 

There were many firsts regarding service for me . I had a cabin attendent refuse to help put a fold out bed together ,although he did explain that his section stopped 4 doors from my cabin , and my attendent was off duty , and I could call the front desk . He wasn't even nice about it . I also asked for an iron , but never got one , two days in a row . I stopped asking.

 

We had some terrible sevice in the dining rooms , especially on sea days . It was impossible to get to a 7:30 show unless we were seated by 5:30 . The servers were working hard , even clearing their own tables , but had far to many tables to take care of . I think they were understaffed , and it showed . Some seemed very stressed , and several were just plain rude .

 

The food was well below that of other cruise lines I've been on . Ok in the dining room , below average on the buffet .

 

There were 4 or 5 incidents were various staff were rude , more on this one cruise than on all the other cruises I've been on combined . Of course , the majority were fine , some well above average , but even 4 or 5 incidents makes it seem like the whole crew is rude .

 

The way they handled the San Juan incident seemed to rub many people the wrong way . There were about 50 people at one point at the reception desk , all very angry , demanding to talk to someone about it , and it was quite a scene . Rather than calming the situation , the reception people were actually arguing with passangers .. at one point one of the girls slammed a clipboard down on the desk and started yelling at someone ! Very unprofessional in my opinion . Afterwards , we found out NCL was aware of the engine problem before we even set sail from New York , although they presented it as something that happend to come up after we were underway . The captain himself told me they knew before we left , but thought we still might make it on time , however they cancelled all the rest of the ports and rescheduled them after St. Thomas because they weren't so sure . That was the reason for the itinerary changes.

 

One of our party had $20 stolen , he claims he tried to pay for drinks with it , was told he had to use his ships card , and the money was lost in the confusion . The last person to have it was the bartender , who claimed he gave it back . NCL said they have cameras recording such things , but refused to let us see the video .

 

Of course, even a bad cruise is better than no cruise ... and we still had fun , but I won't go Norwegian again .

[defreeze]

OP, if you are coming on CC and just speculating, that opens a lot of worms. How much research have you done with NCL to get the questions you have answered?

 

Pardon me. I asked a question at recpetion and was given an answer. I am so sorry that I did not do further independent research before I had the audacity to post on these boards. I am, right now, enrolling in an online course on how to properly post on bulletin boards. Forgive the intrusion.

[Globaliser]

I asked a question at recpetion and was given an answer. I am so sorry that I did not do further independent research before I had the audacity to post on these boards.

I'm sure that much of the unpleasantness could be avoided if you were now prepared to say that you are sorry for having unfairly criticised NCL when you were not in possession of all the facts.

[halos]

The absolute INSANE thing about this entire thread is that someone got $75 OBC and is upset, and others get in an uproar as well...saying the wording of the refund was misleading.

For goodness sake. Take the OBC and be happy...or go try another line...and when you get absolutely NO compensation for missed ports, then we'll see how important clarity is in regard to wording.

 

:rolleyes:

 

I swear, people will complain about ANYTHING.

[mbisson]

We're on the same wavelength halos! :D

 

The absolute INSANE thing about this entire thread is that someone got $75 OBC and is upset, and others get in an uproar as well...saying the wording of the refund was misleading.

For goodness sake. Take the OBC and be happy...or go try another line...and when you get absolutely NO compensation for missed ports, then we'll see how important clarity is in regard to wording.

 

:rolleyes:

 

I swear, people will complain about ANYTHING.

[defreeze]

I'm sure that much of the unpleasantness could be avoided if you were now prepared to say that you are sorry for having unfairly criticised NCL when you were not in possession of all the facts.

 

No apology here, and the criticism was warranted. I stand by my original post. NCL is legally required to refund port charges for missed ports. They failed to include that little nugget (which most people don't know) in their letter to the passengers. If you think I am now in possession of "all the facts" merely because some posters, doing quick research on google, purport to know exactly what went into NCL's decision as to how much to refund, then you are sorely mistaken.

 

I think this post has run its course - everyone has had his/her say, and it's fine to agree to disagree. Signing off for now - got an appointment with my class action lawyer.

[NYcruzzer]

I too was on that cruise . It also left a bad taste in my mouth , not just because of how they handled the San Juan situation , but because of many other issues as well . I think the Gem is just a bad ship . I've been on 7 other cruises , another on NCL , as well as Royal Caribbean , Carnival , and Holland America and this was by far the worst . Some things , like the weather , were beyond NCL's control . There were many other issues , however , that indicate to me that NCL's standards - or at least those on the Gem - are much lower than other cruise lines .

 

There were many firsts regarding service for me . I had a cabin attendent refuse to help put a fold out bed together ,although he did explain that his section stopped 4 doors from my cabin , and my attendent was off duty , and I could call the front desk . He wasn't even nice about it . I also asked for an iron , but never got one , two days in a row . I stopped asking.

 

We had some terrible sevice in the dining rooms , especially on sea days . It was impossible to get to a 7:30 show unless we were seated by 5:30 . The servers were working hard , even clearing their own tables , but had far to many tables to take care of . I think they were understaffed , and it showed . Some seemed very stressed , and several were just plain rude .

 

The food was well below that of other cruise lines I've been on . Ok in the dining room , below average on the buffet .

 

There were 4 or 5 incidents were various staff were rude , more on this one cruise than on all the other cruises I've been on combined . Of course , the majority were fine , some well above average , but even 4 or 5 incidents makes it seem like the whole crew is rude .

 

The way they handled the San Juan incident seemed to rub many people the wrong way . There were about 50 people at one point at the reception desk , all very angry , demanding to talk to someone about it , and it was quite a scene . Rather than calming the situation , the reception people were actually arguing with passangers .. at one point one of the girls slammed a clipboard down on the desk and started yelling at someone ! Very unprofessional in my opinion . Afterwards , we found out NCL was aware of the engine problem before we even set sail from New York , although they presented it as something that happend to come up after we were underway . The captain himself told me they knew before we left , but thought we still might make it on time , however they cancelled all the rest of the ports and rescheduled them after St. Thomas because they weren't so sure . That was the reason for the itinerary changes.

 

One of our party had $20 stolen , he claims he tried to pay for drinks with it , was told he had to use his ships card , and the money was lost in the confusion . The last person to have it was the bartender , who claimed he gave it back . NCL said they have cameras recording such things , but refused to let us see the video .

 

Of course, even a bad cruise is better than no cruise ... and we still had fun , but I won't go Norwegian again .

 

I'm sorry this cruise did not meet all your expectations. I have sailed on NCL numerous time, and have always found the staff to be extreamly cordial. If any staff was rude to you, then you should have let management know. I'm sure NCL expects their staff to treat every passanger respectfully and to be as helpfull as possible. Complaining on this board will get you nowhere. If NCL is made aware of any "rudeness" you may have encountered they will certianly do what they can to correct the situation.

[smeyer418]

NCL is legally required to refund port charges for missed ports. .

 

while that sounds nice its not accurate. Look at other cruise line discussions of the same issue.

[Kancruze]

No apology here, and the criticism was warranted. I stand by my original post. NCL is legally required to refund port charges for missed ports. They failed to include that little nugget (which most people don't know) in their letter to the passengers. If you think I am now in possession of "all the facts" merely because some posters, doing quick research on google, purport to know exactly what went into NCL's decision as to how much to refund, then you are sorely mistaken.

 

I think this post has run its course - everyone has had his/her say, and it's fine to agree to disagree. Signing off for now - got an appointment with my class action lawyer.

 

You have got to be kidding!!! Sue because the ship missed a port?? Good luck on that one.

[billie5]

Aha. That proves it. Defreeze is definitely no mathematician.:)

 

Bill

[G'ma]

Just off the Gem today.

 

As some may have heard, there were engine problems on our sailing resulting in one port (San Juan) being canceled and replaced by a day at sea.

 

NCL delivered a letter to all passengers informing them of the itinerary change and stating that each cabin would receive a $75 onboard credit due to the inconvenience.

 

In fact, upon further questioning of the reception staff, it was learned that the $75 credit was, in reality, a refund of the port taxes for San Juan.

 

So, NCL was only refunding what they were legally required to refund, yet the letter made it seem as if we were being compensated for missing a port.

 

I realize that NCL's passenger contract allows them to skip ports for no reason and with no compensation. But it was deceptive to write a letter like that wrongly suggesting that they WERE compensating us when in fact they were merely refunding our port charges.

 

Lots of people were angry about this - personally, I would have been ok if they just came out and stated that they were refunding the port charges. But the way they did it left a bad taste in my mouth.

 

They are NOT required by law to refund port fees.....

 

And, the amount you received was MUCH higher than the actual fees for docking in San Juan.

 

Carnival credits $20.00, RCCL about the same.

 

If you look on your invoice and notice what the actual fees and taxes you pair are, you'll see that what you received was very generous.

 

You acknowledge you are familiar with the contract about itinerary changes......and yet, are upset that they didn't do more...when, in fact, they don't have to do anything at all.

[smeyer418]

while that sounds nice its not accurate. Look at other cruise line discussions of the same issue.

here is the contract

 

https://www.ncl.com/csimages/602/727/NCL_Guest_Ticket_Contract.pdf

 

I think some of it may be unenforceable but not as to the port charges. This is a relatively new form done in Oct 2009. It merges what they do for the NCL America and NCL foreign flagged ships. Even though it says what it says I don't believe they actually have changed what they do with the crew pay but I haven't confirmed that.

[nlt46]

There are some people on the NCL board that I respect so much. Anytime I see a post from them, I know that it will be fair, honest, and sometimes contain humor. However, on this thread there are at least 2 posters that seem very negative toward each other. I surely hope that they temper their negativity as I enjoy the NCL board, but I don't like arguing. I taught school for 34 years and I got enough of that in the classroom.

When we missed the Cayman's on Carnival, we got $20 per person toward the on board expenses. I really wanted to go to the Cayman's, but hey, Carnival couldn't help the wind. I did feel badly for the couple that were getting married there.

Nancy

[sottovoce]

I swear, people will complain about ANYTHING.

Careful, halos, you're starting to sound like me, and you'll hear about it from hamrag.;)

 

You have to wonder if these people have ever been late for a business meeting or a personal engagement because their car broke down. Did they blame themselves for the breakdown? Was it because they didn't maintain the car properly? But when an incredibly complex machine called a cruise ship develops a rare problem...out come the pointing fingers, the ill-tempers, and the irrationality.

[defreeze]

I'm afraid I was just kidding about the lawyer comment. Ha-ha.

 

By the way, I decided to do the "independent research" that others have been clamoring for. Here's what Carnival's web site says on their "Cruise Cancellation and Itinerary Change Policy" of their web site:

 

"REFUND OF GOVERNMENT FEES AND TAXES:

If a port is cancelled from the scheduled itinerary, a refund of the government fees and taxes for the cancelled port will be provided via a shipboard credit."

 

I'm still sleuthing to see if NCL has a similar policy.

[time2cruise1]

I think this post has run its course - everyone has had his/her say, and it's fine to agree to disagree. Signing off for now - got an appointment with my class action lawyer.

 

Make sure you bring a copy of the contract with you. Your class action lawyer :rolleyes: will love Sec 10 c all in caps that you accepted when you got your edocs.

 

© Guest Waives Right to Class Action Relief: THIS CONTRACT PROVIDES FOR THE EXCLUSIVE RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES THROUGH INDIVIDUAL LEGAL ACTION ON GUEST'S OWN BEHALF INSTEAD OF THROUGH ANY CLASS ACTION. EVEN IF THE APPLICABLE LAW PROVIDES OTHERWISE, GUEST AGREES THAT ANY ARBITRATION OR LAWSUIT AGAINST CARRIER WHATSOEVER SHALL BE LITIGATED BY GUEST INDIVIDUALLY AND NOT AS A MEMBER OF ANY CLASS OR AS PART OF A CLASS ACTION, AND GUEST EXPRESSLY AGREES TO WAIVE ANY LAW ENTITLING GUEST TO PARTICIPATE IN A CLASS ACTION.