Norwegian cancels cruise at only hours notice

[MrLee]

Maybe it's just me but I think the person most responsible here is the TA. There is more to being a TA than just collecting the commission. They should be aware what they are selling and stay on top of it.

[Urban trekker]

Good point as usual MRLEE

 

Cheers

 

Dennis

[swedish weave]

Hey Folks -- Wake up !!!! NewWest is to blame -- Not NCL -- Not TA -- NewWest !!

[MrLee]

Hey Folks -- Wake up !!!! NewWest is to blame -- Not NCL -- Not TA -- NewWest !!

 

I certainly can't disagree with that but the OP wasn't dealing with NewWest. They could only rely on their TA.

[newmexicoNita]

You must be kidding....The OP got hammered got by a bunch of strangers and you expect them to come back to explain and appologise..you must be kidding..I know the theory, not coming back shows a lack of credilbility..

 

I've seen it time and time again when a new OP does come back and gets hammered again...I just sit back and wonder "what were you thinking"..

 

The rules around here are simple if a one post wonder says something good they are fine..

 

If they say something bad the are the devil incarnate..

 

I sure do; why, because he posted untrue facts that could be damaging to a newby here, thinking NCL was the cuptrit...

 

You have no clue, first time posters that post objective reviews and comments are normally not hammered, those who publish untrue or exagerated comments and never return are...

[swedish weave]

I certainly can't disagree with that but the OP wasn't dealing with NewWest. They could only rely on their TA.

 

I can't disagree with that either, but when they come onto this board with guns blazing away at NCL, they need to get the correct information. That could have been accomplished at the onset by asking questions instead of blasting away.

[hamrag]

I sure do; why, because he posted untrue facts that could be damaging to a newby here, thinking NCL was the cuptrit...

 

You have no clue, first time posters that post objective reviews and comments are normally not hammered, those who publish untrue or exagerated comments and never return are...

 

I don't believe it is appropriate to hammer anyone. Seems to me there are too many NCL loyalists who think they have the right to take that approach. Incidentally, whilst I do not agree with everything you write, I do not recall you personally flaming the OP but it seems you are trying to defend those who did.

 

Can no-one understand that the OP will most probably be sitting at a computer somewhere LOL at the angst created by their post! Either that, or refusing to become embroiled with those who have hammered most.

[MrLee]

Good point as usual MRLEE

 

Cheers

 

Dennis

 

Thanks Dennis.

 

Hey! Aren't you from Vancover where all the fun us going on now? :D

 

(Sorry for thr OT post folks but I rarely run into him.;))

[juried]

Of course NCL should accept some responsibilty, they leased out a valuable asset to a third party and (apparenlty) allowed them to trade on their good name without (apparently) putting in place any guarantees or security to deal with cancellation.

It appears that Tatmanjj did not know he was booking with a third party, surely NCL and his TA should have made this clear in their contact with him.

At the every least, they should have put a system in place to help the stranded passengers who have travelled thousands of miles, not just a recorded announcment, they knew where they were coming from and who they were, they also probably had a good idea that bookings had fallen short of expectations well before the event and should have acted earlier.

If they didn't know this, they were not in control.

 

Well said.

Juried

[mylesf]

Of course NCL should accept some responsibilty, they leased out a valuable asset to a third party and (apparenlty) allowed them to trade on their good name without (apparently) putting in place any guarantees or security to deal with cancellation.

It appears that Tatmanjj did not know he was booking with a third party, surely NCL and his TA should have made this clear in their contact with him.

At the every least, they should have put a system in place to help the stranded passengers who have travelled thousands of miles, not just a recorded announcment, they knew where they were coming from and who they were, they also probably had a good idea that bookings had fallen short of expectations well before the event and should have acted earlier.

If they didn't know this, they were not in control.

 

Not following you logic here. When a charter is purchased from any cruise line, not just NCL, they don't care if you sail the ship completely full or half full. In theory, if you wanted to sail the ship with only two people on it you can. You purchase the entire ship from the cruise line.

[PangeanSir]

Of course NCL should accept some responsibilty, they leased out a valuable asset to a third party and (apparenlty) allowed them to trade on their good name without (apparently) putting in place any guarantees or security to deal with cancellation.

It appears that Tatmanjj did not know he was booking with a third party, surely NCL and his TA should have made this clear in their contact with him.

At the every least, they should have put a system in place to help the stranded passengers who have travelled thousands of miles, not just a recorded announcment, they knew where they were coming from and who they were, they also probably had a good idea that bookings had fallen short of expectations well before the event and should have acted earlier.

If they didn't know this, they were not in control.

 

This makes no sense and is filled with unsupported assumptions. We simply don't know what the terms of the contract were between NewWest and NCL. Any guarantees that they would put place would be for the protection of NCL (likely deposit and up front payments) not for the protection of third parties. You also assume that NCL had a contract with the OP. On what facts do you base that supposition? And how do you know that NCL had all the guest information or had access to the number of bookings or the financial arrangements for NewWest? NCL just chartered a ship. It didn't sell the cruise to individual passengers. NewWest made a blunder and should be the sole focus of any blame.

 

P.

[budgielady]

(1) Presumably, the OP received the contract in writing. That contract (like all contracts) would specify the parties involved. If the OP had read the contract, s/he would be aware of the "real culprit". Yes, the OP should place blame more appropriately.

 

(2) I suspect the OP is not being intentionally malicious, but just venting through frustration. Yes, it is frustrating to the rest of us, but it is understandable, especially when one considers that the charter company does not have a category on CC in which to voice those frustrations.

 

(3) I feel empathy for the OP because missing a long-awaited cruise is a very large letdown. Even if insurance covers the costs, it is heart-wrenching to have hopes dashed. I am leaving next week for a South American cruise and would be devastated if it were canceled. (My fingers are sore from keeping them crossed in the hope for good weather so we can get into the Falklands.)

 

(4) My suggestion for the OP is to contact the TA first, then the charter company (if the TA's answer is unsatisfactory). Once the complete information is obtained, contact the insurance provider to get reimbursements. Finally, accept that you still had a vacation, even if not what you expected. I sincerely hope you managed to enjoy something of your trip.:)

 

Nancy

[sjbdtz]

Of course NCL should accept some responsibilty,

 

 

Why? That's the same as if your next door neighbour borrows your car, and has an accident. The police don't say it's YOUR fault....

 

 

It appears that Tatmanjj did not know he was booking with a third party,

 

Where does this appearance take place? Just because he failed to state that he knew he had booked a charter? That's called an assumption.

 

 

surely NCL and his TA should have made this clear in their contact with him.

 

And there's the rub. NCL doesn't HAVE a contract with him. NewWest does. NCL was just the hired gun. NCL is 3rd-party to the NewWest contract.

 

At the every least, they should have put a system in place to help the stranded passengers who have travelled thousands of miles, not just a recorded announcment,

 

Umm... what do YOU propose? A personal visit & tap on the shoulder? Excuse me sir, I realize you're in your private automobile driving from Las Vegas to Los Angeles, on your own unpredictable schedule, but I'm here to inform you that your luggage manufacturer has issued a recall, and there's a chance your zipper might break?

 

 

they knew where they were coming from and who they were, they also probably had a good idea that bookings had fallen short of expectations

 

There's that assumption thing again....

 

well before the event and should have acted earlier.

If they didn't know this, they were not in control.

 

You're right. They weren't in control. NewWest was in control. That's what we've been saying, the entire thread.

 

Well said.

Juried

 

Wrong.

[flashdog_1]

OP, did you have travel insurance?

[mbisson]

If I rent a car and agree to take a friend to the airport---but I don't do it and the friend misses his plane, should the car rental company be held responsible? ;)

[lambs2]

If I rent a car and agree to take a friend to the airport---but I don't do it and the friend misses his plane, should the car rental company be held responsible? ;)

EXCELLENT analogy! :)

[NCL_Cruiser]

And what about the poor people who had booked for the Mexican Riviera months in advance, just to find out the Newwest had chartered the ship out from under them?

 

I also feel bad for the OP, but think his anger toward NCL is misdirected

 

BTW-sadly, cruises can be chartered. To some extent, your sailing-my sailing-all sailings are at some small risk, regardless of which cruise line you book with. Best protection is to make sure we buy travel insurance that covers the entire trip. Some cruise insurance will cover only the cruise itself which can leave you hanging for the air & hotels if something happens

[mbisson]

And what about the poor people who had booked for the Mexican Riviera months in advance, just to find out the Newwest had chartered the ship out from under them?

 

Those people are NCL passengers and will have to take it up with NCL (I'd venture a guess that the vast majority already have).

 

In this case (with the newwest charter passengers), I don't think NCL should have much involvement if any. NewWest rented the ship and sold the cruise themselves

[ddakrt]

This attracted some attention from the national media up here and Newwest said they would contact and refund everyone in their news conference.

 

Did they not do that? :confused:

[SeaShark]

If I rent a car and agree to take a friend to the airport---but I don't do it and the friend misses his plane, should the car rental company be held responsible? ;)

 

Are you crazy? Its OBVIOUSLY the fault of the road crew that laid the asphalt on the highway!! :eek:

[mbisson]

Are you crazy? Its OBVIOUSLY the fault of the road crew that laid the asphalt on the highway!! :eek:

 

Are you sure it isn't the Wright Brothers fault?

[NCL_Cruiser]

Don't you think NCL should have contacted all those people they bumped and reinstated their reservations? Seems like the only fair thing to do! ;)

 

Those people are NCL passengers and will have to take it up with NCL (I'd venture a guess that the vast majority already have).

 

In this case (with the newwest charter passengers), I don't think NCL should have much involvement if any. NewWest rented the ship and sold the cruise themselves

[mbisson]

Don't you think NCL should have contacted all those people they bumped and reinstated their reservations? Seems like the only fair thing to do! ;)

 

No I don't---oh wait, I see a ;) in there

 

This attracted some attention from the national media up here and Newwest said they would contact and refund everyone in their news conference.

 

Did they not do that? :confused:

 

I saw the same report...don't know what Newwest has done yet. Hopefully those who got dumped on by Newwest will get satisfaction from them

[ddakrt]

Here's two links, one directly from Newwest and the other from Consumer Protection BC, neither said to contact NCL.

 

http://www.consumerprotectionbc.ca/images/content/news/statement%20from%20newwest.pdf

http://www.consumerprotectionbc.ca/index.php/news/travel-services/799-norwegian-star-cruise-ship-charter

[CruisinGerman]

I am so sorry you turned up on the U.S. west coast and your cruise was cancelled -- no matter who was to blame.

 

All of the advice people are giving you seems to come from the U.S. or Canadian legal perspective.

 

It is important to ascertain whether you purchased your travel arrangements from a U.S. or Canadian travel agency, or from one in the U.K. or Continental Europe.

 

If you purchased your travel arrangements from a U.K. or European agency, you don't need any type of trip cancellation or trip interruption insurance, because the cancellation and interruption was not instigated by you or your family, but rather by the operator providing part of your trip.

 

You are therefore covered by the European Package Travel Directive. The agency you purchased your trip from in Europe has its own insurance policy to cover this situation, because under European Union law, the agency is jointly and severally liable for making this situation right -- i.e. refunding the cruise, paying rebooking fees to change flights, providing alternative arrangements, and providing you with certain compensation, all of which is regulated in the Directive. In Europe, liability for this situation is legally placed on the travel agency, the wholesalers and suppliers, making it necessary for the agency to have insurance to cover this situation, whereas in the U.S. and perhaps Canada, this liability is shifted to the consumer but is usually covered by travel insurance, credit card chargeback laws, etc.

 

Furthermore, the EU Directive is minimum protection. I believe that in the UK, you are afforded protection that goes even beyond the protection offered by the EU Directive.

 

Please insist on your rights with your travel agency, and don't let them try to make you believe you are responsible.

 

Hope you get home safely.

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta