Disgraceful treatment!!!!

["Wandering Wino's&quo]

Check out my post 152 - Yesterday I copied and posted from cc information on an issue regarding a pricing mistake made on the website of Windstar Cruises and how management handled that problem. While our OP had already paid in full for her cruise and it had been accepted by Seabourn, the OP on the Windstar site had seen the advertised offer and called Windstar to inquire into placing a booking. You will see that Windstar stepped up to the plate and accepted responsibility and allowed the OP to book at the advertised rate even though no money had changed hands.

I think that is the entire issue here. The OP here had her TA check and recheck with Seabourn as to the validity of the offer and was assured that it was correct, money was exchanged and as far as the OP was concerned she was booked on a upcoming Seabourn cruise to celebrate her birthday. Offering to cover any out of pocket expenses she had incurred relating to the cruise while cancelling here booking unless she ponied up more money because of their mistake doesn't seem fair or possibly legal. Losing a loyal customer over something that could easily have been made right sounds like bad management and poor leadership on the part of Seabourn.

[Cruise Junky]

 

So after pages and pages of post after post saying Seabourn should honour their published rates there wasn't a published rate after all, no advert from the travel agent, no email from Seabourn, no magazine advert, nothing - just your TA seeing a price on their proprietary system that was only there a short time.

 

 

Some people have jumped to the wrong conclusions here and you have fanned the fire by not answering direct questions when you were asked.

 

 

You still have a case but it is severely diminished now and your attack on Seabourn looks all the more OTT in my opinion.

 

 

Dan, you should think about removing some of the posts here that complain about Seabourn not honouring their advertised rates because this simply is not true.

 

With all due respect, you really need to back off and let Seabourn's legal department deal with this. They accepted a booking, paid in full, they showed it paid in full and then asked for more. Other lines make similar mistakes. At least 3 other lines have been mentioned here that made the same mistake and owned up to it and honored the price. As a new poster to Cruise Critic I'm a little appalled at your attitude.

[georgie-porgie]

I see no reason to back off - I say things as I find them, the OP started this thread for people to comment and was more than happy when everyone was on their side. Everyone has been talking/complaining about an advert mistake, we presumed it was a written error in an email or magazine advert, nobody knew (even though many people asked directly where the advert came from) it was an internal Seabourn and travel agent error and there was never an error in an advert at all.

 

Whether the OP is right or wrong is between Seabourn and the OP, although I actually maintain it is the TA who should have to cover this as that is who takes the money and issues the invoice

 

People have openly critised Seabourn based on what the OP wrote, maybe some of them wouldn't have been so vociferous in their attacks if they had known the full story.

 

If people want to build up a frenzy to further their claim I think it needs mentioning when the facts are fully given.

 

Also, where does it say you have to have been posting for years to have an opinion now...................

["Wandering Wino's&quo]

I see no reason to back off - I say things as I find them, the OP started this thread for people to comment and was more than happy when everyone was on their side. Everyone has been talking/complaining about an advert mistake, we presumed it was a written error in an email or magazine advert, nobody knew (even though many people asked directly where the advert came from) it was an internal Seabourn and travel agent error and there was never an error in an advert at all.

 

Whether the OP is right or wrong is between Seabourn and the OP, although I actually maintain it is the TA who should have to cover this as that is who takes the money and issues the invoice

 

People have openly critised Seabourn based on what the OP wrote, maybe some of them wouldn't have been so vociferous in their attacks if they had known the full story.

 

If people want to build up a frenzy to further their claim I think it needs mentioning when the facts are fully given.

 

Also, where does it say you have to have been posting for years to have an opinion now...................

 

Hi Georgie, you may not realize this but I think maybe your font size somehow has gotten stuck on 5 and it makes your comments look like you are yelling at us. I'm sure it is unintentional on your part. Happy cruising to you.

Shirley

[georgie-porgie]

Ooops sorry, I was writing in word so I could spell check and the font must not agree.

 

George.

[Nigella]

 

People have openly critised Seabourn based on what the OP wrote,

 

Also, where does it say you have to have been posting for years to have an opinion now...................

 

It's a pity that your use of Word for the spellchecker has led to you using such a LOUD font here, but I'd like to point out the above so that you can see that your spellchecker doesn't actually appear to work very well.

 

I don't think anyone says that someone has to have been posting for years to have an opinion. What I do think is that you are now coming across as someone with a hidden agenda. It seems remarkable that you've never even sailed Seabourn and yet are arguing so strongly about this.

[NEOPHYTUS]

I think that is the entire issue here. The OP here had her TA check and recheck with Seabourn as to the validity of the offer and was assured that it was correct' date=' money was exchanged and as far as the OP was concerned she was booked on a upcoming Seabourn cruise to celebrate her birthday. [/quote']

 

What specific knowledge/documentation exists of the exchanges between her TA and Seabourn ? It's all second and third-hand hearsay, (information received from other people that cannot be adequately substantiated). Lots of gaps in this story and too many armchair jurists here rendering a verdict with only one testimony and opaque facts.

 

As Seabourn management has addressed the issue as they deemed fit,

the OP has a set of options to exercise. Case closed, and hopefully, also, this rambling and circuitous thread.

[NEOPHYTUS]

It's a pity that your use of Word for the spellchecker has led to you using such a LOUD font here, but I'd like to point out the above so that you can see that your spellchecker doesn't actually appear to work very well.

 

I don't think anyone says that someone has to have been posting for years to have an opinion. What I do think is that you are now coming across as someone with a hidden agenda. It seems remarkable that you've never even sailed Seabourn and yet are arguing so strongly about this.

 

Hidden agenda ? A conspiracy, perhaps ? He's only stating his opinion which is similar to mine.

As you're the self-appointed official to audit one's "Seabourn sail" bona fides, in order to express a point of view via a posting on a public forum,

do we need to provide you with Seabourn Club numbers and days cruised?

Close it, Host Dan.

[georgie-porgie]

It's a pity that your use of Word for the spellchecker has led to you using such a LOUD font here, but I'd like to point out the above so that you can see that your spellchecker doesn't actually appear to work very well.

 

I don't think anyone says that someone has to have been posting for years to have an opinion. What I do think is that you are now coming across as someone with a hidden agenda. It seems remarkable that you've never even sailed Seabourn and yet are arguing so strongly about this.

 

Typical forum put downs, first highlight spelling mistakes, second accuse poster of having an agenda, please have you own opinion but do not try to denegrade someone elses by using spelling mistakes and length of time regisred, oh and I am also dyslexic and have to use spell check, sometimes I add things after spell checking and it slips the net, this is free hand, is that better?

 

George, telling it as he sees it without agenda and without denegrading others to win a point.