Voyager is SCREWED in Athens - Cruise CANCELLED

[Shipless in Seattle]

Voyager is in Cannes (or the vicinity). Too bad we couldn't stay on for the last three days. Whoever was passing rumours of a six day transit were a little off. Ship was making 14+ knots.

 

Regent has handled this as well as could be hoped. We have decided to take the 25 day Sydney to Beijing as replacement; now we just need to figure out how to get reimbursed for our air to Athens.

 

marc

 

It's great for those travelers who are retired or have lots of time on their hands to take advantage of Regents cruise offers; we wish we could take advantage of the options....those of us on the 10/3 sailing that have jobs to get back to for the next year are left with a joke of a $1000 credit to a cruise we cannot use. Regent has not handled our situation well. I've now just canceled our booked Regent cruise for next December and may not book again unless there is some restitution to those of us in this situation.

 

Is anyone else in our boat?

[Robyn2]

I am really sorry for those passengers who cannot avail of the the Regent offers and do hope they are compensated in some other way. I know $1000 would not even cover the cost of our dog minder and car transfers to the airport. Regent needs to look at this and understand the inconvenience caused more than the cost, refunds are for faulty goods, not ruined vacations. Fortunately I am able to consider one of their alternative cruises but feel for those who cannot! Today we should have been in Port Said Egypt....dream on...our cases are now unpacked!:rolleyes:

[wacogirl]

So are you saying that the Voyager hasn't even made it into dry dock yet? We are now scheduled on the Oct. 27 Voyager cruise after being cancelled off the Oct. 17 cruise. Surely Regent wouldn't re-book us on a cruise they are not completely sure of...

[Shipless in Seattle]

So are you saying that the Voyager hasn't even made it into dry dock yet? We are now scheduled on the Oct. 27 Voyager cruise after being cancelled off the Oct. 17 cruise. Surely Regent wouldn't re-book us on a cruise they are not completely sure of...

 

Oh surely not! Regent wouldn't do anything to commit to a cruise that might be jeopardized!

 

After all, they might be stuck giving you a whole big $1000 FCC like they have us!

 

I would not worry at all! ....Right. ;-)

[cruisebugbit]

Did you already tell Regent that you wanted the refund & FCC rather than a "substitute" cruise - our AMEX does not show a refund.

 

The only thing we heard from our TA was that we would be getting a refund before the 15th. (Which, frankly, suits us best.) No mention of alternative cruises or FCCs. We booked air through Regent and got that back too. Didn't bother with insurance.

[WC11]

Just returned from "cruise to nowhere" and I have several observations

 

First - the crew and staff of the Voyager did everything they could to help the passengers deal with the disappointment of the canceled cruise. They were helpful, patient, and professional in making the three days we stayed on board fun and the three days we moved to the Intercontinental hotel interesting. They kept us informed, arranged several tours, and gave us an adequate per diem for meals. I would give them a +

 

Second - the air arrangements were not done very well. There was misinformation and inconsistency in arranging transportation back home. For us, we were put on a flight to Frankfurt, routed through Washington DC, then on to Seattle. I checked other options and the same airline had a flight to Frankfurt and then a direct flight to Seattle with several business class seats available. The difference in time and lay-overs stretched our travel time from 15 to 16 hours to nearly 30 hours. I notified the crew and they e-mailed the air deviation department early in the week but we never heard back concerning any changes. I realize they had a major task in scheduling but a little flexibility and taking input from passengers would have improved things. I would rate them a big -

 

Third- The jury is still out on how we will be compensated. I have been told we will get a full refund and then some options for future cruises. My questions are, will we be given our trip insurance premiums back, how much with be credited towards future cruises, and when will we be officially contacted by Regent? One rumor I heard is that we will receive $1,000 toward a cruise in 2010 or 11. Since we make our travel plans far in advance we already have trips scheduled for those years and would not be looking to cruise again until 2012, so I hope they would extend the use of the credit. In addition I would hope the company would offer more credit towards a future sailing considering the amount of time and planning we put into this cruise and the disappointment and inconvenience we dealt with. We have been on 20 cruises but this is our first with Regent and how they deal with my concerns will determine our future planning with their company.

 

They will fly you for free but not in straight line. Long layovers where their are direct flights. That's happened to me before under normal circumstances. It must not be easy to try to get an entire ship's passengers home, but here is where they could of picked up some badly need brownie points.

 

Things break I guess and as someone said Athens isn't the worst place to get stuck in. It will be interesting in how much Regent will change their policy because of this and what their final explanation of what happened.

 

It's great that this can be discussed on this board, pro and con. Hopefully Convoy comes out with a statement, everyone is compensated for their ruined vacations and something said about how they are keep this from happening again. It's strike two for Voyager and that's a serious problem.

[Travelcat2]

I've been reading these posts and understand the frustration of the passengers that were either booked or the October 17th cruise or were on the October 3rd cruise. Not quite sure about the uproar from those not involved.

 

In terms of booking passengers on flights, I don't think it is as easy as it seems to find flights for 700 people on planes that are already booked with other passengers -- especially when many of those people are suppose to be in Business or First Class. How many Business and First Class seats are available the day of the flight on each plane? While I do not know the answer, it certainly isn't many.

 

I also have a question for the last poster. In terms of Voyager, what was strike 1? Hope last year's pod incident isn't being held against them as it was not the fault of the ship.

 

If Regent is reading these posts, I have two suggestions: 1) improve communication with passengers involved (including those on the Voyager later this month and next month), and 2) think about switching to the Mariner for the World Cruise in 2011. The Voyager is a younger ship, yet, probably has more miles on her than the older Mariner.

[WC11]

So the Voyager has high milage? As old Artie used to say."Very Interesting"

[CruisinGerman]

Dear friends:

 

Perhaps it is the difference between EU and U.S. laws, but common sense should rule here, so I'm missing something.

 

Let's say I pay 20,000 dollars for the doomed Voyager cruise. The 20,000 dollars include 15,000 dollars for the actual cruise paid to Regent, plus 5,000 in airline tickets, taxi and other expenses associated with the trip, but not paid to Regent.

 

Then I show up in Athens and the cruise is cancelled.

 

Remember, this is not force majeure, or something that is the fault of a third party. This is directly Regent's fault.

 

Common sense would tell me that I get returned home by Regent at their expense and get refunded all of the money I paid, including the 5,000 dollars not paid directly to Regent but incurred as a result of this trip.

 

If I choose to take a substitute Regent trip (one of the longer trips Regent is offering this month and next month), then the trip should be arranged so that I do not incur additional expenses -- Regent must pay the airfare, etc., since the idea would be that IN LIEU OF A REFUND, I am accepting another trip, which means that I do not get back anything I already paid for my total trip, but I don't have to pay anything more, either.

 

So what is all of this about people being asked to pay more or being out the money for their airline tickets, etc.?

 

This doesn't seem fair and, in the European Union, is protected by law.

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

[Travelcat2]

CruisinGerman,

 

Unfortunately, the laws in the United States do not have the protection that you have in the EU. The following is a portion of the contract that Regent has with it's passengers (note: this is the same with all cruise lines):

 

Responsibility: Regent Seven Seas Cruises accepts no liability or responsibility, whether occasioned by railroad, motor coach, private car, boat, aircraft or any other conveyance, for any injury, damages, loss, accident, delay or irregularity which may be occasioned either by reason or defect, through the acts or defaults of any of any company or person, or in carrying out the arrangements of the cruise or cruisetour, as a result of any cause beyond the control of Regent Seven Seas Cruises. Guests specifically release Regent Seven Seas Cruises from any and all claims for loss or damage to baggage or property, or from personal injuries or death, or from loss from delay, arising out of the acts, omissions or negligence of any other party, such as air carriers, hotels, shore excursion operators, restaurateurs, transportation providers, medical personnel, ship owners, ship operators or other providers of services of facilities. All arrangements made for Guests with independent contractors, including medical services, are made solely for the convenience of Guests and are done at the Guest's own risk and cost. Regent Seven Seas Cruises shall not be liable for delay or inability to perform any portion of the cruise or cruisetour caused by or arising out of strikes, lockout or labor difficulties or shortages whether or not the Carrier is a party thereto, or explosion, fire, collision, standing or foundering of the vessel or breakdown or failure of or damage to the vessel or its hull or machinery or fittings howsoever and whosoever any or the same may arise or be caused, or civil commotion, riot, insurrection, war, government restraint, requisitioning of the vessel, political disturbance, acts or threats of terrorism, inability to secure or failure or supplies including fuel, Acts of God, or other circumstances beyond its control.

Cancellation by Regent Seven Seas Cruises: Regent Seven Seas Cruises reserves the right to withdraw and/or cancel a cruise or cruisetour or to make changes in the itinerary and hotel accommodations whenever, in its sole judgment, conditions warrant. In the event of charters of the vessels, truces, lockouts, riots or stoppage of labor from whatever cause or for any other reason whatsoever, the Owner or Operator of the vessels identified in the current brochure may, at any time, cancel, advance or postpone any scheduled cruise or cruisetour and may, but is not obligated to, substitute another vessel or itinerary and Regent Seven Seas Cruises shall not be liable for any loss whatsoever to Guests by reason of any such cancellation, advancement or postponement. Regent Seven Seas Cruises shall not be required to refund any amount paid by any Guest who must leave the cruisetour prematurely for any reason, nor shall Regent Seven Seas Cruises or the owners or operators of the vessels identified in Regent Seven Seas Cruises brochures be responsible for the lodging, meals, return transportation or other expenses incurred by such Guest.

 

After reading the above, it makes you realize that Regent is going above and beyond it's responsibilities to it's passengers. Not all cruise lines are so generous.

[CruisinGerman]

The first part of that clause says that Regent is not liable for things beyond its control. The event in question is obviously an event not related to third parties but within the control of Regent, so this apparently does not apply to the case at hand.

 

The second part of the clause states:

 

Regent may cancel the cruise and Regent is not liable.

 

They can say whatever they want, but that sentence would not make sense even to a kindergarten student and, because I have strong respect for the U.S. legal system, I would hope that this type of sentence would be subject to strict scrutiny in court if Regent tried to apply it to this specific case of the Voyager, since we are dealing with an event that is directly related to Regent and no third party, so Regent should have to make sure its passengers do not suffer ANY financial loss and are restored to their original position before ever having purchased this cruise.

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

[WC11]

All that makes me realize that Regent has good lawyers. Like all the other cruise lines. Good lawyers can't usually get repeat business. Which is the issue here.

[Shipless in Seattle]

CruisinGerman,

 

Unfortunately, the laws in the United States do not have the protection that you have in the EU. The following is a portion of the contract that Regent has with it's passengers (note: this is the same with all cruise lines):

 

Responsibility: Regent Seven Seas Cruises accepts no liability or responsibility, whether occasioned by railroad, motor coach, private car, boat, aircraft or any other conveyance, for any injury, damages, loss, accident, delay or irregularity which may be occasioned either by reason or defect, through the acts or defaults of any of any company or person, or in carrying out the arrangements of the cruise or cruisetour, as a result of any cause beyond the control of Regent Seven Seas Cruises. Guests specifically release Regent Seven Seas Cruises from any and all claims for loss or damage to baggage or property, or from personal injuries or death, or from loss from delay, arising out of the acts, omissions or negligence of any other party, such as air carriers, hotels, shore excursion operators, restaurateurs, transportation providers, medical personnel, ship owners, ship operators or other providers of services of facilities. All arrangements made for Guests with independent contractors, including medical services, are made solely for the convenience of Guests and are done at the Guest's own risk and cost. Regent Seven Seas Cruises shall not be liable for delay or inability to perform any portion of the cruise or cruisetour caused by or arising out of strikes, lockout or labor difficulties or shortages whether or not the Carrier is a party thereto, or explosion, fire, collision, standing or foundering of the vessel or breakdown or failure of or damage to the vessel or its hull or machinery or fittings howsoever and whosoever any or the same may arise or be caused, or civil commotion, riot, insurrection, war, government restraint, requisitioning of the vessel, political disturbance, acts or threats of terrorism, inability to secure or failure or supplies including fuel, Acts of God, or other circumstances beyond its control.

Cancellation by Regent Seven Seas Cruises: Regent Seven Seas Cruises reserves the right to withdraw and/or cancel a cruise or cruisetour or to make changes in the itinerary and hotel accommodations whenever, in its sole judgment, conditions warrant. In the event of charters of the vessels, truces, lockouts, riots or stoppage of labor from whatever cause or for any other reason whatsoever, the Owner or Operator of the vessels identified in the current brochure may, at any time, cancel, advance or postpone any scheduled cruise or cruisetour and may, but is not obligated to, substitute another vessel or itinerary and Regent Seven Seas Cruises shall not be liable for any loss whatsoever to Guests by reason of any such cancellation, advancement or postponement. Regent Seven Seas Cruises shall not be required to refund any amount paid by any Guest who must leave the cruisetour prematurely for any reason, nor shall Regent Seven Seas Cruises or the owners or operators of the vessels identified in Regent Seven Seas Cruises brochures be responsible for the lodging, meals, return transportation or other expenses incurred by such Guest.

 

After reading the above, it makes you realize that Regent is going above and beyond it's responsibilities to it's passengers. Not all cruise lines are so generous.

 

Completely irrelevant...

 

who cares what other cruise lines do. What does it matter what Regent is "legally obliged" to do versus what "they need to do" to keep their passenger base. I've already canceled next years' cruise on Regent and will NOT return without resolution.

 

TC2: you seem very protective of Regent for someone not involved in this event. I'm guessing you work for the line? or the industry?

[Travelcat2]

Shipless in Seattle: I have said very little about Regent on this thread. . . and, no, I do not even work in the industry. The last post was in response to CruisinGerman who does not know what protection is given to passengers in the U.S. -- just trying to give a response. I am certainly not happy that, unless you purchase expensive insurance, a person could lose all of the money put towards a cruise. Perhaps you should care about this if you have cancelled your Regent cruise and are going on another cruise line.

 

As stated previously on this thread, I feel badly for the passengers, crew and. . . yes, Regent. Everyone affected by this mechanical failure is going through a lot right now.

[peteropny]

I'm not sure if EU law applies to cruise ships (of any country) departing from the EU. However, for airlines they most certainly do - they apply to carriers of any country (including the US) when the flight is departing from the EU - although, US carriers often try to feign ignorance when they have an interrupted flight out of the EU. But if you push it they will honor the EU laws - this even applies to circumstances beyond the airlines' control (eg the volcanic ash situation).

[Corvette]

Isn't this why we buy travel insurance or do a lot of people not buy it?

[CruisinGerman]

Dear friends:

 

EU laws apply to all trips purchased in the EU. In the case of cruises, it has nothing to do with where ships are registered or what country the cruise line is from, but rather because they are laws aimed at protecting consumers, they apply to trips purchased in the EU. Period.

 

The laws shouldn't matter in this clear cut case where fault lies directly with the cruise line.

 

I am amazed at the stories I am hearing about how passengers who purchased their doomed Regent cruise in the U.S. may lose part of the money.

 

That is just not logical or equitable.

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

[CruisinGerman]

Dear friends:

 

Why should voluntary, third-party, travel insurance, have to make good on something that is the clear fault and responsibility of Regent Cruise Line?

 

We are not talking about someone who suddenly fell ill, or a delay or cancellation due to force majeure or a third party, but rather in this case the cruise line holds full responsibility and fault.

 

My firm position remains that Regent must place its passengers subject to this cancellation in the original position they were in before they reserved this cruise (i.e. refund cruise, air, hotel and all expenses related to this trip, even if not incurred directly with Regent).

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

[jhp]

Shipless can explain further, but it sounded to me what he was upset about is the offer of a FCC of $1K, when he thought it would/should be more. We are already being refunded the full fare paid, (including air if purchased through Regent) and if Regent didn't do it, then I was insured against that possibility anyway. Except that I used FF miles for my air, they're GONE. Of course Regent has all that boiler plate language in the contract, they all do that. When a port has been missed on my previous cruises, I have always been given a Future Cruise Credit, especially on short cruises when every port is important.

 

Each person's situation is different. Because Shipless is young and still employed, the biggest frustration is losing that precious vacation time, and that makes it worse than for someone who has all the time in the world to pick and choose among the cruise "swap" options that were offered, or to just take the $1K.

 

Editing to say that in answer to the question about the insurance, I take it for the main reason that if something happens to ME (not Regent) before or during the cruise, I will be covered for the costs of the fare, and secondarily for the medical, evacuation, etc if necessary.

[TheSeaAroundUs]

I'm not involved in the current situation although I did miss IST->FLL last year due to a pod problem that was caused by some heavy-duty fishing line and net material.

 

However, I am curious -- has it in fact been established that the current problem is Regent's fault? I wasn't aware that anyone has stated what caused the problem with the pod, or if it's even necessarily known for sure yet without a drydock inspection....

[jhp]

There were no problems with the pod on the cruise previous to October 3 that the passengers were aware of. The problem was found during routine maintenance procedures when it arrived in Athens was my information.

[CruisinGerman]

A mechanical failure on the ship is automatically attributed to the fault of the cruise line, no matter who caused it.

 

No fault, force majeure, etc., usually refers to unforeseen circumstances, weather, acts of god, etc.

 

There is no question in this case as to Regent's total liability in this situation.

 

I agree with the reasons the above poster purchases insurance. But insurance should not come into play when the cancellation or interruption is the fault of the cruise line. The cruise line should pay.

 

In this case, because there is a definite allocation of fault to Regent, I don't care whether you bought your air from Regent or from a third party, Regent should pay for it (although it is lucky for you that you had insurance since the peculiar system in the U.S. appears to support Regent's argument for not paying).

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

[lkbside]

We were passengers on the 10/3 cruise.

 

The problem with insurance on this one is that claims fall under the "trip interruption" part of the insurance. That coverage reimburses you for unused land or water travel arrangements - not applicable here because Regent is refundig the cost of the cruise. It also reimburses for additional transportation expenses by the most direct route from the point you interrupted your Covered Trip to the final destination of your Covered Trip. Again, passengers did not incur additional expenses to return home because Regent booked their flights back home.

 

In the policy language I do not see where there is coverage for expenses incurred BEFORE the interruption occurred, such as air and pre-cruise hotel and most people probably purchased non-refundable tickets which have no residual value.

 

So where can one recover the cost of their flights if booked independently? Not likely through the insurance.

 

Regent is refunding the air and pre-cruise hotel costs for people who booked through them, so it is only fair and reasonable to expect that they will need to agree to pick up that cost for those independent travelers as we wouldn't have flown to Athens for a cruise to nowhere.

 

Leslie

[WC11]

Shipless can explain further, but it sounded to me what he was upset about is the offer of a FCC of $1K, when he thought it would/should be more. We are already being refunded the full fare paid, (including air if purchased through Regent) and if Regent didn't do it, then I was insured against that possibility anyway. Except that I used FF miles for my air, they're GONE. Of course Regent has all that boiler plate language in the contract, they all do that. When a port has been missed on my previous cruises, I have always been given a Future Cruise Credit, especially on short cruises when every port is important.

 

Each person's situation is different. Because Shipless is young and still employed, the biggest frustration is losing that precious vacation time, and that makes it worse than for someone who has all the time in the world to pick and choose among the cruise "swap" options that were offered, or to just take the $1K.

 

Editing to say that in answer to the question about the insurance, I take it for the main reason that if something happens to ME (not Regent) before or during the cruise, I will be covered for the costs of the fare, and secondarily for the medical, evacuation, etc if necessary.

 

They didn't do the Future Cruise Credits on the last WC and they missed a few ports, quite a few ports. There were pirates and Tropical Storms along with other engine issues which is of coarse is beyond their control. But this is the first I've heard of that.

So the question is was that the Old Regent?

 

Totally agree on retired vs non retired. I can just get on another ship and go but for those that have x number of days of vacation. That could be a nightmare and those folks could walk to another cruise line if they think they got shafted. It's sales 101, if there not happy they aren't coming back.

[fluckey]

jhp, if I was in your situation, I'd be asking, or perhaps demanding, that Regent provide some value for your lost FF miles. Just as they should provide cash refunds for anyone that tickets purchased rather than using Regent air. Or maybe just ask for free flights on your next Regent cruise.