Norwegian Sun Passengers Steamed Over Altered Cruise -- But Do They Have a Case?

[Music City]

Again, it's not the same. An airline ticket is for passage from Point A to Point B.

 

A closed-circuit cruise is for a floating hotel that departs from and returns to Point A

 

Oh, yes it is the same. The company that owns the floating hotel agreed to take the passenger from Point A to Point B to Port C and Point D and back to Point A. Now it is understandable that acts of God beyond said company's control could alter that contract, but the performance and/or failure of their equipment is within their control.

 

Also, company disclaimers are not necessarily enforceable under law and could say anything such as all parents with children under the age of 6 would have to surrender them for indentured servitude at the age of 16 for two years (Personally, I think this would be a good thing for America's overweight and over-entitled spoiled brats.), but it would not be enforceable under the laws of Florida and the United States of America.

 

Obviously NCL is not going to bargain in good faith so these good folks need to get a good attorney and knock NCL's d!c2k in the dirt. A group of them need to file a class action lawsuit against NCL and let the courts decide the issue. This would be a no win for NCL because it would draw a whole boatload of negative publicity seen by the very same people they spend millions upon millions of dollars trying to convince them they should take a cruise with Norwegian Cruis Lines.

 

Meahwhile, they need to write letters to the Florida Attorney General and see if his office will take up the cause. I know they did when cruise lines instituted the fuel surcharge without notice and the cruise lines lost that court battle.

 

These

[Music City]

If NCL continues to have ongoing mechanical issues, the free market will take it's natural course.

 

And there's nothing like a big lawsuit in court that will draw TV cameras to hear the stories of those poor elderly folks that trusted the big bad corportation (read wolf here) that screwed these grandmas, grandpas and families with young children out of their savings to take a dream vacation.

 

Remember the first rule of TV journalism..."If it bleeds, it leads."

[swedish weave]

Oh, yes it is the same. The company that owns the floating hotel agreed to take the passenger from Point A to Point B to Port C and Point D and back to Point A. Now it is understandable that acts of God beyond said company's control could alter that contract, but the performance and/or failure of their equipment is within their control.

 

Also, company disclaimers are not necessarily enforceable under law and could say anything such as all parents with children under the age of 6 would have to surrender them for indentured servitude at the age of 16 for two years (Personally, I think this would be a good thing for America's overweight and over-entitled spoiled brats.), but it would not be enforceable under the laws of Florida and the United States of America.

 

Obviously NCL is not going to bargain in good faith so these good folks need to get a good attorney and knock NCL's d!c2k in the dirt. A group of them need to file a class action lawsuit against NCL and let the courts decide the issue. This would be a no win for NCL because it would draw a whole boatload of negative publicity seen by the very same people they spend millions upon millions of dollars trying to convince them they should take a cruise with Norwegian Cruis Lines.

 

Meahwhile, they need to write letters to the Florida Attorney General and see if his office will take up the cause. I know they did when cruise lines instituted the fuel surcharge without notice and the cruise lines lost that court battle.

 

These

 

Comments are unrealistic. Perhaps a trip through the ticket contract would be beneficial. No class action and must take disputes through arbitration. I hope this information is helpful to you.

[newmexicoNita]

Seriously? The websites and pictures about their horrible cruise, contacting congress and free cruises? I can't stop laughing at them. I'm glad that they're boycotting NCL, so I don't have to sail with them.

 

great and good for you. On our Spirit cruise last week we had to tender in Roatan due to high winds. You would not beleive the number of people who were irate. I am glad they weren't on the Sun when that happened. The amazing thing, those doing the bitching were mostly young people and they couldn't understand why it was taking so long to get people off the ship and into tenders.

 

Nita

[newmexicoNita]

Yes, planer's edge, missing ports for various reasons OUTSIDE a cruiselines control is not that unusual. But engine trouble is not the same and I think people have a right to at least expect their ship to be in good working order.

 

I could care less where we go on a cruise but I have a daughter who chooses a cruise based on the ports and spends a lot of time researching tours - both the ships and private - and has that all lined up before leaving. For her family, the DR and the ships island would be a vacation disaster. I know she wouldn't have carried it as far as some of those folks seem to have but she'd have been very disappointed at the least.

 

And, may I add, that a good day at work is very rewarding whereas a bad day at sea sucks! There. I've always wanted to say that!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

What do people not understand: there are 2 issues here: 1-the cruiseline could have chosen to cancel the cruise altogether, then how much crap would they have to take and 2-no matter how well one tries to maintain anthing mechanic, things do happen.

 

Nita

[Music City]

Comments are unrealistic. Perhaps a trip through the ticket contract would be beneficial. No class action and must take disputes through arbitration. I hope this information is helpful to you.

 

No, they are very realistic. While the story below was a crime, it did result in a civil lawsuit. Can you imagine something like this on national TV against NCL...

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/crimes-cruise-ship-12977634

[newmexicoNita]

We have been cruising for over 30 years and aways take a 7 day cruise the first week in December. Last December we went on NCL Sun out of Port Canaveral. First day to the Bahamas was OK knowing we were going on to our favorite ports of St. Thomas and St. Martin. On Monday while attending the Latitudes Meeting when the stern of the ship suddenly began to shudder severely. This serve vibration lasted about 30 seconds. Unknown to the passengers' and latter confirmed by Caption Ronny Borg, we lost the starboard propulsion to both shafts from the engine to the propellers. The caption confirmed that we were dead in the water. So from 1:30pm to approximately 6:00pm when the caption confirmed what occurred, we lost voyage travel time to our next port of call - ST. Thomas. Later that afternoon the captain confirmed that with temporary electrical repairs, we were now able to make about 4 knots.

 

That evening at 8:00pm the caption made the announcement and confirming the route change, that he had changed course for the Dominican Republic - Samana with arrival Tuesday at 10am. One day at Samana, then two days at sea then on to NCL Private Island. We did find out that we were to receive the change parts to fix the electrical/mechanical problem when we anchored at Great Stirrup Cay on Friday 12/10/2010. They would try to make the repairs then, but if not able to fix the problem at the Cay, they would finish at Port Canaveral. With that, we were to return to Port Canaveral, as scheduled, on Saturday Dec 11th.

 

On December 8 and with passenger’s demands, Captain Borg held an afternoon meeting in the Stardust Lounge which over 400 people attended. By the way, no general announcement was made about this meeting. Only by word of mouth were we able to find out. Many people complained about the route change of not going to St. Thomas and St. Martin. The Captain indicated he got his direction to change course from Corporate NCL. Captain Borg also indicated that he believed that NCL would refund from 50% to 75% we paid for this cruise. With that statement, many passengers seemed pacified they would receive some type of compensation. That seamed to quiet the people down a bit. Later on in your letter of December 10, we were informed NCL would only give us a 30% cruise credit on any future cruise that must be used within 1 year. It seems that Captain Borg really can not make any commitments or promises for NCL.

The last item that really got us upset, was the news letter we got on our last day, dated 12/10/2010 which stated all the things NCL did to make up for the bad experience we encounter.

It stated free wine on Wednesday dinner which they never told anyone or made the announcement in their daily news letter. If you didn’t order wine, you didn’t know about it being offered.

It stated free Rum Punch on Thursday afternoon which they never told anyone or made the announcement in their daily news letter.

Free photo’s which we did find out about when we went to buy a picture, whoever they never told anyone or made the announcement in their daily news letter.

It stated half off snorkeling equipment at the Cay which they never told anyone or made the announcement in their daily news letter

It stated free hippo slide at the Cay which they never told anyone or made the announcement in their daily news letter.

In conclusion, this is NOT what we paid for when we booked this cruise. We had plans to meet with our St. Thomas Jeweler and purchase a diamond for my wife (on her birthday). NCL did not fulfill its requirements.

Most of this letter was sent to the CEO, Mr. Kevin Sheenan hoping to get a response from him. Yesterday we got a response from Customer Service. We believe they intercepted our letter and did the usual response saying that if you read the FINE PRINT as they pointed out to us, that they can change YOUR Trip for any REASON - weather or even mechanical. As you can see by the events in my letter, even the Captain of our ship doesn't have the approval from NCL Corporate to make promises to the people on board. The 30% discount on Future Cruise just doesn't cut it. One last thing that is very important, see that the Cruise Lines want your full payment 90 days prior to your departure date. What we learned is that you have NO RECOURSE to take action because the credit card companies can not take any action after 60 days against the cruise lines. I have run large million dollar projects and when we had problems, we corrected them to the satisfaction of our Customer. NOT NCL.

 

of course you can't make any adjustment, if final payment was only due 30 days prior to sailing what do you think you would have gotten from your CC company? Nothing, what is so hard to understand about what happened. Yes, everyone had a right to be upset, no one doubts this, yes, disappointed, specially for those who had their heart set on a particular port, but what in the heck did you expect, a full refund or what? You have no recourse, it is as simple as that.

 

Nita

[swedish weave]

No, they are very realistic. While the story below was a crime, it did result in a civil lawsuit. Can you imagine something like this on national TV against NCL...

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/crimes-cruise-ship-12977634

 

 

I don't "imagine" anything !! If someone agrees to the terms of a contract, the agreement should be upheld by the parties who made the agreement.

 

If you can endure the costs and time to pursue these invalid charges, then I suppose that is the proper thing for you to do. However, you will make a lawyer very happy and rich.

[newmexicoNita]

Yeah, that's a great way to run a busines. :rolleyes:

 

I can just see American Airlines taking a plane load of passengers bound for Dallas instead start their descent into Little Rock when the captain comes on the intercom...

 

"Well, folks...we're having some technical difficulties and running a little low on fuel so we're going to set down in Little Rock rather than Dallas. The flight attendants are going to come through the cabin and give everyone some more peanuts and rum punch and a $25 voucher for a future flight on American Airlines. We hope y'all enjoy Little Rock and remember, ship happens."

 

Music City, get over it, comparing a flight to a different location and changing ports is not only the differenece betwee apples and oranges, it is really a rediculous comparison.

 

Oh, as for building loyalty, if you attended lattitude parties on NCL ships you wouldnt' mention loyalty. They are packed, often the larger ships have to have 2 parties and both are huge.

 

To:sobersailer123, if you think these problems are just with NCL ships, check out a few other companies. For some reason the problems seem to lie with ships that were built from about 2000 to about 2004.

 

Nita

[Music City]

of course you can't make any adjustment, if final payment was only due 30 days prior to sailing what do you think you would have gotten from your CC company? Nothing, what is so hard to understand about what happened. Yes, everyone had a right to be upset, no one doubts this, yes, disappointed, specially for those who had their heart set on a particular port, but what in the heck did you expect, a full refund or what?

 

Nita

 

I'm pretty sure he/she didn't expect some rum punch and a free slide on a giant inflatible slide. He/She expects what NCL promised but failed to deliver.

[sparks1093]

I'm pretty sure he/she didn't expect some rum punch and a free slide on a giant inflatible slide. He/She expects what NCL promised but failed to deliver.

 

If NCL promised anything their terms and conditions would read "if for any reason we don't make it to a particular port you will be entitled to a full refund of your cruise fare". Last I checked that's not what the terms and conditions say;).

[Music City]

Music City, get over it, comparing a flight to a different location and changing ports is not only the differenece betwee apples and oranges, it is really a rediculous comparison.

 

Sorry, Nita, but lawsuits abound against you people in the travel industry for failing to deliver as promised. You just can't screw people and flippantly say,

 

"Oh, well...ship happens."

 

Oh, as for building loyalty, if you attended lattitude parties on NCL ships you wouldnt' mention loyalty. They are packed, often the larger ships have to have 2 parties and both are huge.

 

Nita

 

LOL! Talk about a ridiculous comparison!

 

Yeah, it's not because the folks are especially loyal to NCL, but because they are giving something away for free!

 

This is an interesting debate because today is the start of National Consumer Protection Week. And guess which industry is near the top of the list of consumer complaints?

 

5. Travel – Complaints against travel agencies involved supposed “all-inclusive” vacation packages with hidden consumer fees or other fees and surcharges added to hotel bills and cruises. Last year, the Attorney General’s Office reached settlements with three major cruise lines which provided for approximately $61 million in consumer restitution for retroactively imposed fuel surcharges. A separate settlement was reached with two additional cruise lines in February. Other travel-related complaints addressed timeshare scams, which occur both at the time of the original purchase and at the time of resale.

http://www.myfloridalegal.com/newsrel.nsf/vTimeshares/54D94748ABD5FD198525756D005CAD32

 

 

 

[schmidlapp]

Hello,

I am jumping in on this with one comment.

If an airline has a mechanical issue they compenstate more than if there

is a weather issue.(where they leave you hung out to dry).

Maybe NCL should look at it this way.

They had a mechanical issue which is somewhat under their control

Weather is not.

I think more compenstion is due in this instance.

We sailed the Sun a couple years ago, not a bad trip for a larger ship.

Hopefully this gets resolve to some staisfaction...

[Music City]

If NCL promised anything their terms and conditions would read "if for any reason we don't make it to a particular port you will be entitled to a full refund of your cruise fare". Last I checked that's not what the terms and conditions say;).

 

They didn't just miss one port, they missed the two anchor ports of the entire cruise and it wasn't because of acts of God beyond their control.

 

Can you imagine going to Ruth's Chris Steak House, ordering a big T-bone steak and the waiter brings you a salad and a baked potato and says,

 

"Sorry, but the kitchen manager forgot to order steaks this week, so we are going to give you a free dessert. Enjoy!"

[Music City]

I don't "imagine" anything !! If someone agrees to the terms of a contract, the agreement should be upheld by the parties who made the agreement.

 

If you can endure the costs and time to pursue these invalid charges, then I suppose that is the proper thing for you to do. However, you will make a lawyer very happy and rich.

 

You must work for NCL because your perspective is a bit skewed.

 

What about the part of the contract that NCL agreed to? Why did they not perform and deliver what they agreed to?

 

And no, I am not making some lawyer very happy and rich, that would be NCL because they failed to perform and then refused to make it right.

 

Disclaimers or not, NCL has an obligation to perform. They are not excused from responsibility when they fail to deliver what they promised.

[texastwostepper]

While the missed ports (in my opinion) were superior to the ones that were substituted, one must be prepared for the unexpected. Missed ports are a fact of life when cruising. The difference here is that the missed ports were due to equipment malfunction and not weather, civil disturbance, etc. NCL addressed that by offering some freebies and future discounts. Sounds fair in my book.

[Music City]

I don't "imagine" anything !! If someone agrees to the terms of a contract, the agreement should be upheld by the parties who made the agreement.

 

If you can endure the costs and time to pursue these invalid charges, then I suppose that is the proper thing for you to do. However, you will make a lawyer very happy and rich.

 

Oh, I forgot to point out a very important thing in your flawed "logic."

 

A class action lawsuit like this would not cost the plaintiffs one dime. The attorneys would take the case on a contingency fee and collect a percentage of the settlement or judgement against the defendant. Even if the plaintiffs would not prevail against NCL it would not cost them one red cent.

[sparks1093]

They didn't just miss one port, they missed the two anchor ports of the entire cruise and it wasn't because of acts of God beyond their control.

 

Can you imagine going to Ruth's Chris Steak House, ordering a big T-bone steak and the waiter brings you a salad and a baked potato and says,

 

"Sorry, but the kitchen manager forgot to order steaks this week, so we are going to give you a free dessert. Enjoy!"

 

That analogy is fatuous drivel. The only thing NCL (or any other cruiseline, for that matter) promises is a cruise of a certain length and even that is subject to change according to the terms and conditions. The terms and conditions are not some simple disclaimer in an advertising brouchure, they are what you agree to when you book a cruise. If you don't agree with the terms and conditions then don't book the cruise.

[swedish weave]

You must work for NCL because your perspective is a bit skewed.

 

What about the part of the contract that NCL agreed to? Why did they not perform and deliver what they agreed to?

 

And no, I am not making some lawyer very happy and rich, that would be NCL because they failed to perform and then refused to make it right.

 

Disclaimers or not, NCL has an obligation to perform. They are not excused from responsibility when they fail to deliver what they promised.

 

It is obvious that you have not read the ticket contract nor do you have any desire to do so, so I will bow out of this inane *()^&%%.

[texastwostepper]

Oh, I forgot to point out a very important thing in your flawed "logic."

 

A class action lawsuit like this would not cost the plaintiffs one dime. The attorneys would take the case on a contingency fee and collect a percentage of the settlement or judgement against the defendant. Even if the plaintiffs would not prevail against NCL it would not cost them one red cent.

 

Provided, of course, that an attorney would take the case on a contingency basis. At attorney is not going to invest time and money in a suit unless they think that they have a resonable chance of winning - or at least forcing a settlement.

 

In this case I don't think NCL would settle because of the precedent it would set -so the attorney would have to be prepared to invest a couple of years in pursuing a remedy in court.

 

Possible, but I don't think many attorneys would take this case of contingency.

[Music City]

Provided, of course, that an attorney would take the case on a contingency basis. At attorney is not going to invest time and money in a suit unless they think that they have a resonable chance of winning - or at least forcing a settlement.

 

In this case I don't think NCL would settle because of the precedent it would set -so the attorney would have to be prepared to invest a couple of years in pursuing a remedy in court.

 

Possible, but I don't think many attorneys would take this case of contingency.

 

Oh, I think you are very wrong.

 

NCL would be foolish not to settle because it is a lose, lose situation for them no matter which way you sliced or diced it. Even if they would be foolish enough to go to trial and actually prevail, they would still lose. It would cost them a boatload of money and a whole lot of bad will to hundreds of current customers and untold numbers of potential customers.

 

This involves hundreds of people multiplied by X amount of dollars in damages plus punitive damages. There are plenty of attorneys that would take up this case.

[Music City]

It is obvious that you have not read the ticket contract nor do you have any desire to do so, so I will bow out of this inane *()^&%%.

 

There's no need to. It's meaningless unless upheld by the courts. What do you not understand about disclaimers being unenforceable by the laws of Florida and the United States espeically when the company is negligent?

[Music City]

That analogy is fatuous drivel. The only thing NCL (or any other cruiseline, for that matter) promises is a cruise of a certain length and even that is subject to change according to the terms and conditions. The terms and conditions are not some simple disclaimer in an advertising brouchure, they are what you agree to when you book a cruise. If you don't agree with the terms and conditions then don't book the cruise.

 

Fatuous drivel?? Ooh, I am impressed with your ability to use Google!

 

In reality, it is you that is spreading "fatuous drivel" with your repeated waving of disclaimers that won't hold up in court if it is determined that NCL was negligent.

 

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fatuous

[sparks1093]

Fatuous drivel?? Ooh, I am impressed with your ability to use Google!

 

In reality, it is you that is spreading "fatuous drivel" with your repeated waving of disclaimers that won't hold up in court if it is determined that NCL was negligent.

 

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fatuous

 

Sorry, I've known the definition of "fatuous" since before google was invented (learned it reading Nero Wolfe novels:D).

[Christine Frances]

http://http://www.consumertraveler.com/columns/ship-of-fine-print-7-clauses-to-beware-of-in-your-cruise-contract/