Voyager is SCREWED in Athens - Cruise CANCELLED

[peteropny]

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.

 

Just checked our credit card account online - it shows that Regent has refunded the "final payment" - apparently they are doing it in batches with the "deposit" still "forthcoming".

[jhp]

Peter, thanks for the reminder. I just checked my Amex, and have two different credits, one for the final payment made, and the other for the deposit I made before that. Seems they have had a busy day in FLL today getting all of this out to those of us who have not decided yet between a replacement or a FCC. Speaks well for the line to do this in such a timely fashion.

[cruisebugbit]

Just checked our credit card account online - it shows that Regent has refunded the "final payment" - apparently they are doing it in batches with the "deposit" still "forthcoming".

 

Here's what we got (seperate entries) as credit to our Amex (Penthouse B, Air in, no insurance) all dollars in US:

$4236.90

$200.00

$870.00

$23,983.10

 

These all came through on Friday the 8th. (When we should have been in Tel Aviv... but that's another cruise.)

[PSO123]

We were to sail on the Oct. 17th cruise. We purchased air, cruise, extra tours and insurance. Regent has refunded nothing yet. They claim they will refund after Oct. 18th. They REFUSE to refund our insurance. I plan to pursue this. We have not used the insurance in any way and we have not filed a claim with it.

 

Needless to say, we are very disappointed with Regent. Mechanical problems happen, but why should we be out $2000 because THEY have a problem? Not everything in a contract is ethical or legal.

[WC11]

Peter, thanks for the reminder. I just checked my Amex, and have two different credits, one for the final payment made, and the other for the deposit I made before that. Seems they have had a busy day in FLL today getting all of this out to those of us who have not decided yet between a replacement or a FCC. Speaks well for the line to do this in such a timely fashion.

 

No it doesn't. I'm at Silver and have never heard of Future Cruise Credit's. After reading the last post where some get their money back right away and other's don't seems to indicate a double standard.

[peteropny]

No it doesn't. I'm at Silver and have never heard of Future Cruise Credit's. After reading the last post where some get their money back right away and other's don't seems to indicate a double standard.

 

FCCs are basically an "apology" with hopes that you'll take another cruise with them not direct compensation.

 

I think they're working through the refunds - as of now the "deposit" part of our 10/3 cruise hasn't hit our AMEX account yet. The previous poster is on the 10/17 cruise - perhaps they're working through the 10/3 cruise first then will do the 10/17 passengers next.

[WC11]

I've got a call into my TA, I don't want to rant yet until I talk to them.

[JMARINER]

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 must have missed something somewhere: What caused the the POD problem?

 

I don't remember reading that they knew (or announced) what exactly went wrong with the POD or why.

 

j

[CruisinGerman]

Dear friends:

 

You seem to be missing the point.

 

A cruise cancelled by the cruise line itself due to a mechanical failure of the ship renders the cruise line and nobody else 100% liable. Period. It doesn't matter what caused the mechanical failure.

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

[Wendy The Wanderer]

I'm not sure I fully understand the insurance issue. For those who were already on the ship, I thought the cruise line asked for claims to be filed first, then Regent would cover any shortfall, or for those without insurance. That's the usual primary/secondary approach to this kind of thing.

 

But for those who hadn't started their cruise, not compensating for your insurance doesn't seem right to me, since you can't use it for anything. I've never had this happen to me (luckily), so I have no experience--has this happened in the past?

 

WC, I doubt there are second class citizens, and that they are just working through a very long list.

[Roland4]

I'm not sure I fully understand the insurance issue. For those who were already on the ship, I thought the cruise line asked for claims to be filed first, then Regent would cover any shortfall, or for those without insurance. That's the usual primary/secondary approach to this kind of thing.

 

But for those who hadn't started their cruise, not compensating for your insurance doesn't seem right to me, since you can't use it for anything. I've never had this happen to me (luckily), so I have no experience--has this happened in the past?

 

WC, I doubt there are second class citizens, and that they are just working through a very long list.

 

 

As an FYI, the "cancellation" portion of the insurance kicked in right after the final payment date when cancellation penalties started, so even though those on the Oct 17 may not have left home, they have "had use" of the cancellation portion of the coverage. Insurance regulations are different in the US and Canada, but I am not aware of any carrier up here that will refund on cancellation after the final payment date. Keep in mind that even though the policy is sold through Regent, it is still underwritten by an insurance company.

[WC11]

Dear friends:

 

You seem to be missing the point.

 

A cruise cancelled by the cruise line itself due to a mechanical failure of the ship renders the cruise line and nobody else 100% liable. Period. It doesn't matter what caused the mechanical failure.

 

Kind regards,

 

Gunther and Uta

 

Same as aircraft, you can't expect them to put to sea with a bad engine. Things do go wrong. It's making everyone happy under these extreme circumstances like yours.

 

They should however refund as fast as they collect. They are very good at collecting. Wendy I've put the question to my TA. I'll get her response to the Future Cruise Credit before I comment. I want to see if she has even heard of that. She is very good with all lines which is confusing.

[Wendy The Wanderer]

As an FYI, the "cancellation" portion of the insurance kicked in right after the final payment date when cancellation penalties started, so even though those on the Oct 17 may not have left home, they have "had use" of the cancellation portion of the coverage. Insurance regulations are different in the US and Canada, but I am not aware of any carrier up here that will refund on cancellation after the final payment date. Keep in mind that even though the policy is sold through Regent, it is still underwritten by an insurance company.

 

Right, so if this is the case, and all these folks with insurance are actually *using* their insurance, why would Regent refund the cost of it? That's what it's for.

[graciegirldog]

Right, so if this is the case, and all these folks with insurance are actually *using* their insurance, why would Regent refund the cost of it? That's what it's for.

 

I disagree with the "using" of the insurance. The insurance is underwrite by a third party. If Regent was the company issuing refunds, the insurance did not pay out, so I doubt the 'insurance' was used.

 

My two cents

[Wendy The Wanderer]

Sorry, that's still confusing to me. I'm talking about *our* insurance, that we buy to insure our cruises. Often third party, not sold by Regent. And not Regent's own insurance, which I'm sure they have against events like the recent one.

[DaveFr]

I disagree with the "using" of the insurance. The insurance is underwrite by a third party. If Regent was the company issuing refunds, the insurance did not pay out, so I doubt the 'insurance' was used.

 

My two cents

Insurance does not have to pay a claim before it is "used." Among other things, as Roland4 mentioned, cruise insurance protects you against possible pre-cruise cancellation penalties caused by specific events set forth in the policy. Protection against those penalties is what you're buying and is part of the use of the policy. If you have an automobile insurance policy and don't have any claims during the policy year, would you ask for a refund because you have not "used" the policy? :)

 

Dave

[Mark_T]

Same as aircraft, you can't expect them to put to sea with a bad engine. Things do go wrong. It's making everyone happy under these extreme circumstances like yours.

 

... and in Europe the airlines tried to argue the same point, that a mechanical failure was unfortunate but not their fault, they failed ...

 

I'm beginning to realize just how comprehensively those of us in Europe are protected from the foot shuffling and ducking of responsibility that you still have to suffer in the USA.

 

I hope Regent steps up and makes things right for all of you who are affected by this.

[cruiseluv]

Insurance does not have to pay a claim before it is "used." Among other things, as Roland4 mentioned, cruise insurance protects you against possible pre-cruise cancellation penalties caused by specific events set forth in the policy. Protection against those penalties is what you're buying and is part of the use of the policy. If you have an automobile insurance policy and don't have any claims during the policy year, would you ask for a refund because you have not "used" the policy? :)

 

Dave

 

You bring an interesting point, the insurance protects in case of specific covered events. Out of curiosity I'm going to read my CSA policy covering my cruise earlier this year and see if it says anything about covering any expenditures I incur if my trip is interrupted/terminated by the supplier (ie Regent). I doubt it would.

[graciegirldog]

Right, so if this is the case, and all these folks with insurance are actually *using* their insurance, why would Regent refund the cost of it? That's what it's for.

 

Insurance does not have to pay a claim before it is "used." Among other things, as Roland4 mentioned, cruise insurance protects you against possible pre-cruise cancellation penalties caused by specific events set forth in the policy. Protection against those penalties is what you're buying and is part of the use of the policy. If you have an automobile insurance policy and don't have any claims during the policy year, would you ask for a refund because you have not "used" the policy? :)

 

Dave

 

I understand the statement, but 'we' buy insurance to cover our own mis-haps. If the auto insurance folds, you would need to file a claim to recoup your un-used coverage. It is the providing company of service 'Regent' who is unable to provide the 'service purchased' who had the mis-hap. I understand with the small print in coverage talks about both parties, but we buy coverage or insurance to protect ourselves from the provider.

[Travelcat2]

Insurance does not have to pay a claim before it is "used." Among other things, as Roland4 mentioned, cruise insurance protects you against possible pre-cruise cancellation penalties caused by specific events set forth in the policy. Protection against those penalties is what you're buying and is part of the use of the policy. If you have an automobile insurance policy and don't have any claims during the policy year, would you ask for a refund because you have not "used" the policy? :)

 

Dave

 

You, Roland4 and MarkT are right on point (IMO) If Regent had not refunded the price of the cruise, then you "might" be due the money from insurance. However, since Regent is refunding the price of the cruise, it makes no sense to me that, in addition, there is an expectation of a insurance refund. I also do not feel that Regent should reimburse the cost of airfare that was purchased on your own. Regent protection simply does not extend that far.

 

In terms of what is done in the EU and in the U.S. or Canada. . . . . this conversation causes nothing but further misunderstanding and frustration. Nothing is going to change the laws of individual countries. It would be wonderful if the U.S. had laws simiiar to the EU . . . but, it doesn't. No point in trying to apply EU laws to the U.S. (or visa versa).

 

Feel free to flame me on this. Those personally affected by the Voyager mechanical problem have been through a lot. Most of us have, thankfully, not had to go through a cruise being cancelled on the first day -- you are on the ship. Fortunately, these individuals can work directly with Regent or their travel agent. I know of someone from the October 3rd cruise that cried over this thread. Being supportive of the affected passengers, rather than bashing Regent, insurance, etc. may ease the disappointment that so many passengers are going through. There are many people angry over something that does not affect them in any way.

[RachelG]

TC is correct that, if Regent is refunding the cost of the cruise, your insurance would not also pay you that amount.

It would be like having 2 health insurance policies, a situation that commonly occurs. They will not both cover the entire cost of an operation. Now if there are costs that are not covered by one, the second MAY cover those (it all depends in the fine print of the policy as far as coverage).

In the same way, a travel insurance policy might cover other costs incurred that are not included in the refund from Regent.

[rallydave]

You, Roland4 and MarkT are right on point (IMO) If Regent had not refunded the price of the cruise, then you "might" be due the money from insurance. However, since Regent is refunding the price of the cruise, it makes no sense to me that, in addition, there is an expectation of a insurance refund. I also do not feel that Regent should reimburse the cost of airfare that was purchased on your own. Regent protection simply does not extend that far.

 

In terms of what is done in the EU and in the U.S. or Canada. . . . . this conversation causes nothing but further misunderstanding and frustration. Nothing is going to change the laws of individual countries. It would be wonderful if the U.S. had laws simiiar to the EU . . . but, it doesn't. No point in trying to apply EU laws to the U.S. (or visa versa).

 

Feel free to flame me on this. Those personally affected by the Voyager mechanical problem have been through a lot. Most of us have, thankfully, not had to go through a cruise being cancelled on the first day -- you are on the ship. Fortunately, these individuals can work directly with Regent or their travel agent. I know of someone from the October 3rd cruise that cried over this thread. Being supportive of the affected passengers, rather than bashing Regent, insurance, etc. may ease the disappointment that so many passengers are going through. There are many people angry over something that does not affect them in any way.

 

Huh??? Think you have it backwards tc. Since this action of cancelling the cruise is totally a Regent responsibility and they are refunding the price of the cruise, they should also refund every penny the ex-passenger has spent because of their attempt to take the cruise including insurance payments since the insurance company paid out nothing as their was nothing to insure due to the cancellation. Just why should the air fare paid not be refunded when the Regent air fare is being refunded? That makes totally no sense. The people should also be refunded every dollar that is non-refundable and directly related to the cruise. Had they not tried to take the cruise, they would not have expended the money

 

Cannot believe you don't think air fare refund extends to personally purchased air fares. Everyone who booked a Regent Cruise should be left in the same position as they would have been had they not tried to take the cruise and the only way they can be in that position is if every dollar and cent paid in relation to hte cancelled cruise is reimbursed, either by Regent, insurance, or who the money was paid for. Should the insurance provide any reimbursement, of course the insurance premium should not be refunded by Regent but, if Regent provides the refund it should include an insurance premium refund.

 

Not flaiming on you at all, just applying logic to a bad situation. Of course EU law does not apply to someone booking in the US

[JMARINER]

..... Regent protection simply does not extend that far........In terms of what is done in the EU and in the U.S. or Canada. ..... It would be wonderful if the U.S. had laws simiiar to the EU . . .

 

 

Cat, Let me wade in here.

 

In the US, Regent (and all common carriers) can and do shift the risk of loss to the passenger. The passenger then has the choice to purchase insurance or assume the risk (and for how much, limits and deductibles). There is a free market system of insurance companies to compete for that business offering various coverage, limits, etc.

 

EU and other counties shift the risk to the carrier and the carrier has to pay the cost of insurance (or be self insured). It is a "one size fits all" deal. The limits, exclusions, coverages, etc are all set by law. The carrier recovers the cost, presumably, by adding the cost into the ticket. I say presumably because many common carriers are Government run or subsidized.

 

As to which is better, I will leave to another conversation.

 

I don't always buy insurance. If I am taking a week long Caribbean cruise, I know the risks and I am willing to take them. I can be back in the US in a few hours and for not much cost. On the other hand, if I am going to the other side of the world, spending what a Luxury cruise cost I always buy it.

 

As for the Voyager, in the US, contracts for carriage are generally in favor of the carrier. So does Regent have to pay? Probably not. Should they, sure. Do I think they should pay all of the ancillary costs? Isn't that what buying insurance is for: Gives me a choice if I want that risk or a lower cruise cost.

 

 

J

[Wendy The Wanderer]

Is Regent in fact giving people full refunds on their cruise fare? I thought Regent was asking customers to file a claim with their insurers first?

 

I also agree that if Regent wants the goodwill of their customers, they should pay the independent air costs, as they have done in the past.

[Travelcat2]

JMariner: Your post makes a lot of sense. Regent certainly does not have to pay. . . . but, it is the right thing to do and they are doing it. (Wendy: from what I've heard, Regent is refunding the cost of the cruise -- no insurance involved).

 

In terms of independent airfare. Regent advertises an all--inclusive package. They have negotiated contracts with air carriers that are generally lower than anything the public can purchase themselves. When you purchase the whole package, and, as in the case of the Voyager, the cruise doesn't occur. . . . Regent will refund the total package, or, give you a choice of other cruises (longer itineraries than the scheduled October 3rd itinerary are being offered at no additional cost to the passenger). As with the cruise fare, Regent is not legally bound to reimburse for Regent airfare.

 

If a passenger decides not to take advantage of Regent air. . . whether it is because they do not like the routing, they are using frequent flyer miles or for some other reason, there is an obvious risk involved. While this situation is probably the worst case scenario, if the ship arrives late and you miss your independent flight, it is your responsibility to work it out.

 

rallydave: while a lot of what you say is logical (not all of it:-), to my knowledge, there is no legal basis for what you posted. In an ideal world, everything you posted would happen.

 

The area that, IMO, is not at all logical is in the area of insurance. As has been mentioned several times, you do not get reimbursed for unused insurance -- not homeowners insurance, car insurance, medical insurance. . . it just does not happen. Many homeowners lose their homes due to floods which, under most insurance polices is not covered. . . . no one gets a refund. This seems like a non-issue since Regent is reimbursing passengers whether or not they have insurance. If, however, they have insurance that may cover independent airfare, they have the option of placing a claim.

 

I am not trying to be argumentative and do feel very badly for the affected passengers. Everyone says this is Regent's fault as if it were intentional. Regent is doing a sub-standard job of communication regarding this issue. . . . however, it has not been determined that this is their fault. Regardless, the company is currently doing reimbursements to those people who were scheduled to sail on October 3rd and will then start working on October 17th.