Cowardly Princess Cruises treats passengers with contempt

[dansu]

I feel for OP as it is not a good situation to be in. However, Princess had four news releases regarding the Japan Earthquake last week. The March 14th mentioned potential itinerary changes, the March 17th stated that information about itinerary changes would be posted by the end of the day PST on the 18th and the March 18th release updated at 3:30 PM PST had all of the itinerary change details posted at that time. I believe that OP did not board until March 20. If I were on a cruise with a Japan port I would have been checking with Princess and my TA every day.

 

I called Princess early last week to ask a question about my booking (January 2012). Before I was able to speak with a client service representative I had to listen to a very detailed voice message that clearly stated that Princess had ceased all cruises into Japan until further notice.

 

...with this being said...I understand that the OP is extremely upset. However, in light of all thats going on in Japan, I don't understand why the OP didn't think it was necessary to contact Princess before leaving home and ask...

 

...and if the OP had been made aware of the port change at the time he was boarding the ship, would he have cancelled his cruise entirely and flown home on his own expense? I know I wouldn't have...

[Woobstr112G]

I knew this nuclear problem/Earthquake/Tsunami in Japan was going to cause problems for those passengers scheduled to sail from this area.

I am so sorry you went through this, but I have to admit, the cruise lines had their hands tied until the very last minute.

I would have also been upset at what took place, but what were they to do? Even the news wasn't getting all of the up to date info about what was taking place in Japan.

 

This is one reason why we book Princess flights for cruises this far awary from home. If there is a problem, Princess will re-schedule everything for you and you don't have all of this stress.

 

Again, I totally understand your frustration with this, but when Mother Nature Strikes, there just isn't much that can be done. For the cruise line to move the ship to another embarkation/disembarkation port and change the itineary with all the logistics involved.........it isn't an easy thing to do for them either.

 

I have been waiting for the reports to be posted, as I also knew that some would be totally upset about all of this (as I would be), but what can be done? They can't inform you if they didn't know until the last minute while most were in transit.

 

Sue;

 

Totally agree with you. Not much any line can do when it comes to the whims of mother nature.....:):):)

 

Bob

[KansasCityTBone]

I find it unfortunate for the travelers who dreamed of going to Japan, but also prudent on Princess's part to avoid the island so devastated by the earthquake.

 

Surely the Japanese have other worries than driving around Americans in busses to take pictures. With freezing temperatures and millions of people without power and food it would not be appropriate for a touristic visit.

 

A visit to Japan may have disturbed the passengers more than avoiding it did.

[Shoalwater]

 

Even with insurance...

Matthew

 

Having seen trip insurance invoke civil unrest clauses when we got caught in Egypt during the uprising, I'll bet you somewhere in the small print of many policies there is an "Act of God" exclusion. These are both difficult events to actuarialize, and so I believe get excluded. I will be very interested to hear if passengers are having success with trip insurance claims.

[Loonbeam]

Heard via grapevine that TravelGuard is covering people getting home, but not the cost of cruise for their most basic policy. Will try to confirm.

 

Having seen trip insurance invoke civil unrest clauses when we got caught in Egypt during the uprising, I'll bet you somewhere in the small print of many policies there is an "Act of God" exclusion. These are both difficult events to actuarialize, and so I believe get excluded. I will be very interested to hear if passengers are having success with trip insurance claims.

[bythehex]

Good call Princess!

 

I guess the OP and the people on board the ship can't get news reports. If they did they'd see that the current news stories reporting that the impact from this disaster is being felt all through Japan, with food and gasoline shortages, electrical outages, etc., more than 100 kilometers from the devastation. Not to mention the still very real possibility of nuclear meltdown.

 

Sounds like there are more important things to worry about than some disgruntled cruise passengers who want to get home from a ship where they're eating and drinking and being entertained, while Japanese people are struggling and starving. The ship, I might add, that people boarded fully knowing that an earthquake and a tsunami had hit over a week ago. That should have been a clue that their travel plans might be disrupted, and perhaps the passengers should have been a bit more prepared for this possibility.

 

Remember that there are many Japanese Americans who have no clue where their family members are, or if they're even still alive. People were still being evacuated from Japan and some people are trying to get to Japan to find their relatives and friends.

 

I would think that should be more a priority over people who are being inconvenienced, but who should give thanks that they still have a home to go back to.

[Pam in CA]

Heard via grapevine that TravelGuard is covering people getting home, but not the cost of cruise for their most basic policy. Will try to confirm.

Thanks. I would think that they wouldn't cover the cost of the cruise since the passengers took the cruise. That's the only thing that you're really paying for when you book a cruise: cabin, food and entertainment.

[paul929207]

Thirty five minutes after OP posted to start this thread, he posted on another thread about the Ocean Peincess. He said:

 

"Not for Everybody

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

As others have said, these smaller princess ships polarise opinion. As others have highlighted the positives I'll mention some of the negatives.

 

There are economies of scale on ships and it is possible to be too small. On the ocean princess there is:

A very limited selection at the buffets compared to other ships.

The speciality restaurants only open on alternate days

Not a great showroom with shows at odd times and limited entertainment around the ship.

 

Personally, I loved the Volendam and thought it was a great size. The Ocean Princess I thought struggled, compared with newer and bigger ships. "

 

Seems to have calmed down.

[Pam in CA]

Thirty five minutes after OP posted to start this thread, he posted on another thread about the Ocean Peincess. He said:

 

.................

Seems to have calmed down.

It also seems like there's nothing wrong with the Internet.

[caribill]

Some time in the week before departure, Princess Cruises decided not to travel to Japan. However Princess decided to withhold this information from passengers until the day before the cruise was to set sail, presumably to avoid cancellations. As most passengers were in transit to Shanghai by this time, it meant many passengers were not told of this change until they boarded the ship and entered their cabins.

 

Princess made the decision on Friday, March 18 in the USA which means it was already Saturday, March 19 in Australia (probably about 11 AM).

 

Therefore, for your time zone, the decision was made the day before the cruise was to set sail.

 

You may already have been on enroute when the annoucement was made.

[caribill]

First, OP does not get to the end of the cruise until April 1, so he has a week and a half to change reservations.

 

 

Princess has allowed us free internet and phone calls up to the evening of March 23 (we embarked on March 20th). I would have rather they help us with our air arrangements than to give us free internet/phone calls.

 

But only three days to do it without paying for phone calls and a slow internet.

 

And two of those days are exotic port days.

[soraya]

Terrible for the people of Japan and to add to the awfulness of the natural disaster, the nuclear emergency that is still ongoing.

 

I really feel for the people on the ship - for many this would be a long held dream to go and see the cherry blossom in Japan.

 

I know that some have booked the flights independantly but many will be longtime Princess customers. Many will also have insurance and only some of the insurance companies will pay.

 

I know that if it were me in that position, I would have liked to have been told as much as the cruiseline knew and given help to rebook arrangements.

 

Princess is a large company and over the years has sadly had to deal with issues such as earthquakes in Chile, Volcanoes etc and will have a plan to do so - each one brings suffering to people and disrupts holidays.

 

It always feels and sounds selfish to moan about being out of pocket when you are safe but it is almost a defence mechanism for the human brain.

 

All depends on the business model that cruislines are using. How much better it would have been to have for Princess and the passengers for us to have had posts here from the passengers saying that it has been appalling disaster, we have raised money to help the poor folks in Japan, Princess have been great and done so much.

 

Just my probably naive view on how I would have liked to be helped when things go wrong, I know it's a business not a charity.

[mickp99]

As the OP I thought I should let you know what the travel insurer said. Yes, we will meet all your cancellation fees (could be up to $5,000). But no, we won't pay $1500 to get you to Osaka to enjoy your holiday. Cruise lines taking you to a different port isn't something they considered when writing the policy.

[ooops]

As the OP I thought I should let you know what the travel insurer said. Yes, we will meet all your cancellation fees (could be up to $5,000). But no, we won't pay $1500 to get you to Osaka to enjoy your holiday. Cruise lines taking you to a different port isn't something they considered when writing the policy.

Hi mickp99,

Looks like you're having just as rough a time as we are in dealing with the rescheduling of our flights. It's end of day 3 of our supposed vacation and I still haven't found us a way home from HK. Looks like I'll lose tomorrow's port of call in Dalian because I'll have to deal with our flights still. BTW, we've arranged another CC meeting (sorry you missed this morning's meeting) for the 25th, the Club Bar @ 11am.

Joan.

[ONT-CA]

We are at a loss to understand the relavance of the disaster in Japan to the late notification of the change in port of disembarkation. I'm sure everyone aboard feels as we do that the situation in Japan is disastrous and that they have our sympathy and hopefully are receiving our assistance. But the disaster of trying to find a way home although small in comparison to the tragedy in Japan is the subject of the posting. And whether or not they were customers of Princess flight sales or had their insurance with Princess the point seems to be that unlike anything we have witnessed before with Princess, they stepped back and washed their hands of this "Act of God". That is certainly not the Princess we know and hopefully we will again hear of someone stepping into the breach.

[Bobolino]

I'm also aboard the OP shanghai to Osaka...loops...Hong Kong.

 

Princess is right in changing, due to the disaster in Japan, but I feel they are handling it poorly.

 

They have only seven computers for 600 passengers. Fortunately I have an iPad. They've opened the phone for us to use but it's extremely difficult to get an outside line. I've never gotten one.

 

And it's only until tonight at midnight, just 24 hours into the cruise.

 

Princess seems to be totally unprepared for this situation. Their communications ability is ok in regular circumstance, but not in a situation like this.

 

On top of that, their attitude aboard ship is poor. There seems to be little acknowledgment Of the hassle many are facing.

 

I'm fortunate to have a TA and insurance, but many are not.

 

Princess should be better prepared for acts of god. They should be more understanding of the needs of 600 passengers to rebook hotels, flights, etc.

 

I also would like to hear of some compassion and compensation for those who came mainly to see Japan and cherry blossoms.

 

I'm appalled that so many I talk to aboard the ship did not hear of any changes until they boarded. I had less than 12 hours notice. I've come to the conclusion this was purposeful on Princess' part to minimize cancellations.

 

Bob

[fateseer]

I and my wife are also passengers aboard the Ocean. Like many others, we booked this cruise to see the cherry blossoms and other things in Japan. I am not without compassion for the tragedy that has befallen Japan and I am not without understanding about the decision Princess made.

 

Having said that, I think the way Princess is treating the passengers is poor. When attempting to get information from the front desk, my inquiries have been met with unconcern, rude behavior and condescension. This is just not acceptable from a customer service standpoint.

 

In regards to some of the posts about the internet aboard not being all that bad...think again. This is my 5th attempt to post here...the prior 4 have failed. Yes, the internet is really that bad.

 

As for the phones...well, we did finally get ahold of our daughter back in the States to help us get a flight home (although that has cost us an additional $3500). Of course it would have helped if the front desk would have given us correct information about how to get an outside line to the States...instead of telling us how to call Australia (without actually saying it was for calling Australia).

 

I'm not a fool, I know that Princess can change the itinerary for any reason at all. I also know that Princess will not help me make changes to my plans, despite the fact that they are the cause of the need to make said changes. I do, however, expect them to have some understanding and compassion for the problems caused by their decisions...I also expect them to give me proper information. Of course, none of that has happened, so...

 

In any case, my daughter came through for me where Princess did not. My plans are now done and I have a way home. Now I just have to make Princess understand what my needs are for disembarkation so I don't miss my new flight home (fingers crossed there).

 

For those posting here as "armchair cruisers", it is easy to criticize the passengers that are having to deal with the problems while we are supposed to be on vacation. But, the fact is, you aren't on our ship. Some of the posts I've read here sound a lot like the Princess staff aboard the Ocean.

[mickp99]

This afternoon I decided to read the Princess passenger contract. We are now in an argument over interpretation.

 

Clause 7 C) states:

 

If the scheduled port of embarkation or disembarkation as specified in the passage ticket is changed, Carrier will arrange transportation to it from the originally scheduled port.

 

The meaning is pretty clear if the embarkation port is changed, but if it is the disembarkation port that changed, then the wording isn't quite right.

 

I think it is reasonably clear that it means:

 

If the scheduled port of disembarkation as specified in the passage ticket is changed, Carrier will arrange transportation to it (the scheduled port of disembarkation).

 

While Princess believes it means:

 

If the scheduled port of disembarkation as specified in the passage ticket is changed, Carrier will arrange transportation to the changed port of disembarkation from the originally scheduled embarkation port.

 

Or as they put it more clearly, “If the disembarkation port changes we will go to the new port.”

 

 

I now think their legal standing is as dubious as their moral one.

[mickp99]

I should also say that when I asked Princess about the contract they handed me a copy of Section 8, which doesn't cover disembarkation ports at all. I had to check on-line to get the relevant part of the contract.

 

An announcement was made this morning that 20% of passengers "somehow found out about the change" and cancelled. Interesting choice of words.

[Mom33]

Would the bandwith on the ship improve if cruisers weren't using it to post here and only using the internet for the travel changes?

[mickp99]

This makes one assumption that's not in evidence. Namely that Princess made a decision prior to embarkation. It's entirely possible the final decision was made as the gangplank was being pulled up, based on when they got final information.

 

 

Princess announced full details of revised ports for seven cruises. Those sorts of arrangement aren't done in a day. Clearly the decision to change was made several days before.

 

And in response to another poster, I did call Princess 24 hours before they announced the change. I was referred to their original press release that said the decision would be based on Port Infrastucture and Government advice, and was told that as the port infrastructure hadn't been affected by the tragedy and the advice hadn't changed, the cruise was likely to go ahead. As noted above, when I rang the decision to changes ports must have been made, only the arrangements were being finalised. I was given false information.

 

As soon as I found out the announcement (and yes, I was on a plane when it was made), I called Princess again, as the announcement said they were trying to contact affected passengers. I asked what extra information they has to give me, especially regarding what we needed to do. They said none (and that they weren't trying to contact me). But 10 hours later when we stepped on board we were given two pages of detailed information, that would have been printed when I made the phone call. Again I was given false information. If I had been given the correct information I could have done more in two hours in a hotel with a working phone and a high speed internet connection than in 48 hours on the boat.

 

So defend Princess if you like, but I think they have shown a complete lack of respect and consideration for their passengers.

[Loonbeam]

Fate - thanks for the update - and you are correct, there is absolutely NO excuse for poor service and communication from the crew and ship management (which is an entirely different topic from them actually fixing flights). At the very least Passenger Services and the CD team should be putting out information (I don't know if they have a print shop like the other ships) on how to call out from the ship's systems, etc, as well as at minimum daily updates. If they are not doing that they are not doing their job.

 

The whole point about disasters and acts of god is that no one can predict or plan for all of them, so it's understandable Princess won't have spare computers, for example. But that's a resource issue. Customer service in these situations can be trained and plans developed.

 

One of my clients is a large hotel chain that happened to have one of their properties damaged in Hawaii. Immediately they set up a separate management area in a ballroom specifically dedicated to helping people find other hotels or alternatives. I can see a number of similar ways Princess could have handled this better, but apparently they are not doing so onboard and this saddens me. Times like this are when good teams step up, not fall back. (There's a corollary, the more information you can put out en masse actually reduces the load on your staff)

 

I and my wife are also passengers aboard the Ocean. Like many others, we booked this cruise to see the cherry blossoms and other things in Japan. I am not without compassion for the tragedy that has befallen Japan and I am not without understanding about the decision Princess made.

 

Having said that, I think the way Princess is treating the passengers is poor. When attempting to get information from the front desk, my inquiries have been met with unconcern, rude behavior and condescension. This is just not acceptable from a customer service standpoint.

 

In regards to some of the posts about the internet aboard not being all that bad...think again. This is my 5th attempt to post here...the prior 4 have failed. Yes, the internet is really that bad.

 

As for the phones...well, we did finally get ahold of our daughter back in the States to help us get a flight home (although that has cost us an additional $3500). Of course it would have helped if the front desk would have given us correct information about how to get an outside line to the States...instead of telling us how to call Australia (without actually saying it was for calling Australia).

 

I'm not a fool, I know that Princess can change the itinerary for any reason at all. I also know that Princess will not help me make changes to my plans, despite the fact that they are the cause of the need to make said changes. I do, however, expect them to have some understanding and compassion for the problems caused by their decisions...I also expect them to give me proper information. Of course, none of that has happened, so...

 

In any case, my daughter came through for me where Princess did not. My plans are now done and I have a way home. Now I just have to make Princess understand what my needs are for disembarkation so I don't miss my new flight home (fingers crossed there).

 

For those posting here as "armchair cruisers", it is easy to criticize the passengers that are having to deal with the problems while we are supposed to be on vacation. But, the fact is, you aren't on our ship. Some of the posts I've read here sound a lot like the Princess staff aboard the Ocean.

[Loonbeam]

Thank you for the most valid point of the whole thread, and I am ashamed I had not thought to check sooner.

 

Wow, that's a badly worded phrase, but I agree with your interpretation, that if Princess changes their disembarkation point it is their responsibility to get you to the original port as schedule (personally I would accept home as an alternate but the contract does not provide for that in this form).

 

There are other issues with this (for example how long do they have to get you to the other port and what happens with missed flights, etc) but anyone still on the ship should start waving this around (or better yet present it as a group).

 

The reason I suspect they are showing part 8 is clause C, to wit "Comply with all governmental laws and orders given by governmental authorities" I suspect they will claim relief from liability if they can show an order from Japan not to dock.

 

Based on the badly worded section 7© and section 8© I sense court cases in the future if Princess doesn't step up.

 

 

 

This afternoon I decided to read the Princess passenger contract. We are now in an argument over interpretation.

 

Clause 7 C) states:

 

If the scheduled port of embarkation or disembarkation as specified in the passage ticket is changed, Carrier will arrange transportation to it from the originally scheduled port.

 

The meaning is pretty clear if the embarkation port is changed, but if it is the disembarkation port that changed, then the wording isn't quite right.

 

I think it is reasonably clear that it means:

 

If the scheduled port of disembarkation as specified in the passage ticket is changed, Carrier will arrange transportation to it (the scheduled port of disembarkation).

 

While Princess believes it means:

 

If the scheduled port of disembarkation as specified in the passage ticket is changed, Carrier will arrange transportation to the changed port of disembarkation from the originally scheduled embarkation port.

 

Or as they put it more clearly, “If the disembarkation port changes we will go to the new port.”

 

 

I now think their legal standing is as dubious as their moral one.

[Loonbeam]

This is another area where I suspect it might come to court. To paraphrase another famous court trial "What did they know and when did they know it".

 

Given the quake happened 3/11, I am not surprised Princess had backup port plans in place and mostly ready to go. The question in a legal sense was when did they know they needed to implement them (and what would be the impact). If they knew the port was closed on 3/17 versus 3/20 that makes a huge difference and we don't know that and may not find that out without legal action. That was the point of my comment, not to defend Princess but to point out we (at least here) don't have all the facts.

 

 

 

This makes one assumption that's not in evidence. Namely that Princess made a decision prior to embarkation. It's entirely possible the final decision was made as the gangplank was being pulled up, based on when they got final information.

 

 

Princess announced full details of revised ports for seven cruises. Those sorts of arrangement aren't done in a day. Clearly the decision to change was made several days before.

 

And in response to another poster, I did call Princess 24 hours before they announced the change. I was referred to their original press release that said the decision would be based on Port Infrastucture and Government advice, and was told that as the port infrastructure hadn't been affected by the tragedy and the advice hadn't changed, the cruise was likely to go ahead. As noted above, when I rang the decision to changes ports must have been made, only the arrangements were being finalised. I was given false information.

 

As soon as I found out the announcement (and yes, I was on a plane when it was made), I called Princess again, as the announcement said they were trying to contact affected passengers. I asked what extra information they has to give me, especially regarding what we needed to do. They said none (and that they weren't trying to contact me). But 10 hours later when we stepped on board we were given two pages of detailed information, that would have been printed when I made the phone call. Again I was given false information. If I had been given the correct information I could have done more in two hours in a hotel with a working phone and a high speed internet connection than in 48 hours on the boat.

 

So defend Princess if you like, but I think they have shown a complete lack of respect and consideration for their passengers.

[Toto2Kansas]

"This is another area where I suspect it might come to court. To paraphrase another famous court trial "What did they know and when did they know it".

Keep in mind the cruise contract, it does clear them in print of all you have mentioned above. They can change ports at any time (even embarkation and disembarkation ports) with no compensation given to the passengers.