Royal Caribbean strands 145 passengers in San Juan when Irene forces early departure

[Captain Jake]

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

[Turtle_lover]

.Wrong!Verizon provides service In PR

 

 

Just a side note...love your turtle pic and quote!!!

[KathyPet]

Never thought I would see the day that Carnival behaved in a far better manner than RCCL. My daughter sailed Seranade last fall for her honeymoon last fall and loved it. I am looking for a cruise for my DH and my daughter and son in law for Thanksgiving 2012. I was looking at HAL, Celebrity and RCCL. Guess who is now being dropped from consideration?

[icat2000]

RCCL made a decision after it appears getting notice that it must clear the port. I think they did well to only leave 145 behind. This is why we take out travel insurance to cover us for the unexpected. Honestly, things happen. Its our responsbility to ensure we adequately cover ourselves for incidents like this and as for the passport issue well - well what would those people had done if they missed the boat anyway on a normal day?

[ez2logon]

I do not believe that RCI has any obligation to compensate any of the 131 pax who missed the ship and were not on cruise/air. That said, RCI must have decided that the ill will, bad press? etc will cost less in the long run than providing assistance to those 131 people. Carnival, on the other hand and who I have never sailed with, must have decided that the cost of providing assistance to their pax who missed will be recouped due to the good press and good feelings of the people that they helped.

 

RCI has probably lost forever a good number of those 131 pax and many of them will advise their friends, family, co-workers etc etc of their experience. Carnival has probably a very good chance of keeping the pax they helped as well as any new business that occurs from their word of mouth.

 

There is a litany of companies who took their customers for granted and then these companies became a footnote in business history. it really comes down to a corporate cost/payback decision. Just sayin.

 

100 percent agreed. I'll be watching this situation and will make future plans based on which company drops you like a hot rock versus those companies that step up and take care of their clients, whether they are contractually responsible or not.

 

Sometimes it is necessary to 'cut it close' on airline arrangements---I think most cruise-air flights intend for you to arrive on cruise day, and are frequently made in advance with possible penalties. How I determine my flight is my business---fly in a week early if that's your cup of tea. I still have to work to finance my vacation.

 

The question here is who will take care of the customer when things go wrong. My hotel reimbursed me fully for cancellation in Cairns this year for the tropical cyclone. They didn't have to, but they understand that customers 'remember'. It's called goodwill and it's a hell of a thing to get back once you lose it.

[readytogo2]

Never thought I would see the day that Carnival behaved in a far better manner than RCCL. My daughter sailed Seranade last fall for her honeymoon last fall and loved it. I am looking for a cruise for my DH and my daughter and son in law for Thanksgiving 2012. I was looking at HAL, Celebrity and RCCL. Guess who is now being dropped from consideration?

 

Guess you won't be climbing any rock walls,huh:D

 

Seriously, I think you should wait til we see how this unwinds before you drop them.

[reney313]

Seems there are 3 sets of passengers here:

 

1. Those passengers that arrived before 90 minutes prior to departure. My Opinion: Whether or not they booked "air arrangements" through RCCL should at the minimum have a voucher for a future cruise and not told "sorry either get airfare on your own to meet us or go home. Either way we're keeping your money". In good PR, they should get them a room or a discounted room and fly them to the next port.

 

2. Those passengers that arrived after the "cut off" time for a normal departure. My Opinion: At the very least, they should have someone assisting them to help them make arrangements. In good PR, they should help them out as well as they did those that booked air through them.

 

3. Those passengers that booked airfare through them. They should do what they are doing and put them up in a hotel and fly them to the next port.

 

Even if I had insurance, I think I would still expect some support from RCCL. Especially if I purchased my insurance through them. If I fly and my flight leaves early or late (and I've had both, as well as cancelled) all due to weather, they do give me a voucher for discounted room, they give me #'s to call, and they ALWAYS get me to my destination eventually or give me a voucher for my "unused" portion if I get other arrangements.

 

Cruise contracts can be construed many ways, I would like to believe that if the customer arrived on time that the line should have some obligation to at least refund the cruise or honor a future cruise in lieu of the refund. I know you have the ability to fly to the next port, but it is potential someone may not have the funds to do so while they wait for their insurance to reimburse, etc. It will be interesting to see what lawyers have to say about that type of contract.

[ez2logon]

Seems there are 3 sets of passengers here:

 

1. Those passengers that arrived before 90 minutes prior to departure. My Opinion: Whether or not they booked "air arrangements" through RCCL should at the minimum have a voucher for a future cruise and not told "sorry either get airfare on your own to meet us or go home. Either way we're keeping your money". In good PR, they should get them a room or a discounted room and fly them to the next port.

 

2. Those passengers that arrived after the "cut off" time for a normal departure. My Opinion: At the very least, they should have someone assisting them to help them make arrangements. In good PR, they should help them out as well as they did those that booked air through them.

 

3. Those passengers that booked airfare through them. They should do what they are doing and put them up in a hotel and fly them to the next port.

 

Even if I had insurance, I think I would still expect some support from RCCL. Especially if I purchased my insurance through them. If I fly and my flight leaves early or late (and I've had both, as well as cancelled) all due to weather, they do give me a voucher for discounted room, they give me #'s to call, and they ALWAYS get me to my destination eventually or give me a voucher for my "unused" portion if I get other arrangements.

 

Cruise contracts can be construed many ways, I would like to believe that if the customer arrived on time that the line should have some obligation to at least refund the cruise or honor a future cruise in lieu of the refund. I know you have the ability to fly to the next port, but it is potential someone may not have the funds to do so while they wait for their insurance to reimburse, etc. It will be interesting to see what lawyers have to say about that type of contract.

 

I'm fairly certain that under maritime law they can claim that they have no responsibility. My question is why would a business ever take such a stance in this particular situation. I have sailed RCCL and Celebrity and I am shocked at this behavior! How can anyone have the confidence to book a caribe cruise this time of the year? Might as well cancel the whole schedule---NOT.

[Pushka]

For me, the bottom line is that passengers arrived at the time they were told, in writing, to be at the port for boarding, but the ship had already sailed.

 

Further, RCL did not even attempt to contact anyone.

 

How different is this to arriving at the Port and the Ships engines are not working. The cruise will not happen. You are told to go away and they will keep your money as well.

[Feelin' Nauti']

They could have sent an e-mail out to everyone registered for this cruise. And/or, sent a text message. Some of the people wouldn't have gotten the message in time, but some would have. At the least, it would have been a good-faith effort.

 

What I wonder is, what will RCI do to make their left-behind guests whole? I acknowledge that they have no control over the weather, and no control over what the port authorities tell them to do; but then again, neither do the passengers. If the ship leaves early, the cruise line should fairly compensate those who missed it.

 

 

Authorities at the Port of San Juan limited traffic in and out of the port. As a result, Serenade of the Seas was required to depart earlier than our originally scheduled time of 8:30 p.m.

 

The cruise line did reach some passengers, the ones who had airfare to the island booked by Royal Caribbean, passengers known in the industry as “air-sea” travelers.

 

RC did not make the same offer to passengers who booked their own travel to San Juan, known as “independent” travelers.”

 

So even if the passengers who booked independently had text messaging or phone, they were out of luck anyway.

 

Which doesn't seem fair.

I always book my airfare privately. :cool:

[reney313]

I'm fairly certain that under maritime law they can claim that they have no responsibility. My question is why would a business ever take such a stance in this particular situation. I have sailed RCCL and Celebrity and I am shocked at this behavior! How can anyone have the confidence to book a caribe cruise this time of the year? Might as well cancel the whole schedule---NOT.

 

I agree. I'm interested to see how this pans out. Typically, I don't use stories like this to make decisions; however my most recent cruise on Princess made me question whether I wanted to cruise RCCL again. This may make that decision easier to abandon them before they abandon me. I hope they do make it right so it doesn't put me over that edge. I have 2 next cruise certs--I guess I could use for a short 3 or 4 day again so my risk is low. I certainly wouldn't want to risk my hard earned money based on their cruise contract. Maybe they'll start charging gas surcharges since that's in the contract too? ;)

[RADICALBURN]

Buyer beware. Thats why we don't cruise during hurricane season. Not cool Royal, lets see if they change their minds. We will remember this when booking...............DAVE

[IBookHePays]

That about sums up my feelings, you shouldn't have to buy airfare or other transportaion through RC to get compensated for their actions in an emergency situation.

 

 

Ah, but to extend your analogy, Steve, the landlord was forced by weather to close the building, knowing it would be unsafe not only for you as a customer, but also for all the employees (for example, the snow was coming down so quickly the roof was expected to collapse at 8:30 pm. the landlord was doing the right thing and might have saved lives by closing the building. the analogy breaks down because the landlord cannot sail his building away from the danger as cruise lines can.

 

I think Royal should treat well those passengers who arrived after the ship left, but before the scheduled cutoff. Although the events were weather and port related, the passengers need to be able to count on Royal Caribbean.

 

Well put. Those who were there on time (based on latest check-in/boarding time) should be cared for by RCCL as if they were on the ship. Accomodations, Food, Transportation should all be provided to these folks.

 

Although it was not RCCL's fault they were paid to provide these services to the guests who showed up on time.

 

Those who showed up after that sadly aren't owed quite as much help from RCCL and need to turn to their Travel Insurance.

[DrLookGood]

For me, the bottom line is that passengers arrived at the time they were told, in writing, to be at the port for boarding, but the ship had already sailed.

 

Further, RCL did not even attempt to contact anyone.

 

How different is this to arriving at the Port and the Ships engines are not working. The cruise will not happen. You are told to go away and they will keep your money as well.

 

This!!!!

 

(In lieu of the like button)

[spcopps]

Yes a cruise line can predict the weather.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

How about some of you get real. No one is protecting anyone. We are simply stating the facts. How do you know that the airport was open or flights were not canceled? It's called having insurance to cover this. :rolleyes:

 

Or RCCL could do like Carnival did, supply hotels and flights for ALL passengers left behind. Those with passports were flown to Barbados and those without passports were flown home HMMM sounds logical to me.

[calliebear99]

The passengers ALL knew a hurricane was coming too. Anyone with any sense would have been on the ship asap.

There was no way RCL knew they were going to get kicked out of the port.

 

 

Oh, so the passengers should have known, especially those who may not be familiar with cruising...but RCL, who clearly has a history with the port and the weather of the area didn't need to have the sense (to use your word) to forewarn passengers in advance, via email possibly like the upteen emails I get from them almost every day advertising stuff, that there could be issues with the departure? All they had to do was send an email the day before reminding passengers of the weather issues in the area and mention that there may be a risk of departure time changes. Or, if the case was that folks already "check-in"ed with the ship and were exploring, mentioned it upon initial boarding. It would have been proactive on the ship's part and maybe would have helped versus this bad PR.

 

I don't blame RCL for leaving early, but they handled the aftermath just wrong. I am sure if San Juan is a departure port for them they have local staff. Staff should have been waiting at the dock for these people and a plan should have been in place to help them, maybe not compensate, but at least facilitate the reservations by offering phones or internet or access to travel agents, etc. I am dissappointed in their customer service response. Even if things are out of your control you can still attempt to do the right thing.

[wreckem2013]

I am suprised the cruise lines haven't seen a money making scheme.

 

If I were the cruise lines, I would always require passengers show proof of travel insurance when booking or require passengers to book insurance through the cruise line when they travel to the caribbean during hurricane season.

 

Sure people will bitch at first but they'll get over it and you won't have these problems.

[AmandaKaye79]

It seems funny that so many people bash Carnival and say that RC is so much better... however, at least Carnival gave ALL passengers hotel rooms and FREE flights to catch up with the ship. I've only been on one Carnival cruise and 4 RC cruises. With the current prices on RC and especially after the way this was handled, I may become a Carnival cruiser from now on.

It is true that nothing could be done about the storm. However, you KNOW the hurricane is coming.. Why not make arrangements a few days in advance? Carnival and RC could have notified passengers days in advance to arrive early **just in case** I do feel that RC could have handled this situation much better. Maybe they should rethink it.

[YYC F/A]

There's obviously some high emotions in this thread thus far. I'd counter that it doesn't matter whether you're from Canada or Florida or how many hurricanes you have or haven't lived through - an issue like this is clearly of concern to many folks whom cruise with any kind of regularity.

 

Ultimately, Royal Caribbean has very little requirement to do anything with regard to their legal obligations. Remember folks, the RCCL brands even have fine print in their passenger contracts that state that "the seaworthiness of the vessel is neither implied nor guaranteed". They literally have legalese that goes as far as to say they don't guarantee that your ship is safe for sea or will actually go anywhere, and (naturally) they have no liability or legal responsibility for any such occurrences in any event.

 

So yes, I think as some other posters have mentioned, "you are responsible for everything, and the cruise line is responsible for nothing" pretty much sums it up when it comes to the passenger contract.

 

That said - there's a BIG difference between following the fine print and saying "Gotcha - too bad!" versus going above and beyond, stipulating that while there is no obligation in the contract, as a gesture of goodwill and to emphasise with the plight of guests whom have saved up for their cruise, flown many miles, and arrived only to find themselves stranded.... there's a big difference in doing the "right thing" versus doing "what is legally required" (i.e. the "Gotcha").

 

While RCI may think that their legalese saved them, let's say, $600 per passenger x 150 passengers (cost of a hotel night and inter-island flight) - they may find that the guesstimated $90,000 saved was a false economy.

 

On the other hand, CCL may find that the guesstimated $180,000 they incurred was relatively inexpensive vis a vis the positive PR and publicity they are receiving, not too mention the goodwill from not only those 300 passengers, but the friends and relatives of those passengers whom are told about how they were looked after, and in fact the tens of thousands of folks that will now be reading about it on CruiseCritic and making their own conclusions as to which line takes better care of their passengers.

 

Sometimes the "right thing" is not always the "legally obligated thing" and I for one give kudos to CCL for the stellar, and for lack of a better word, classy handling of this unfortunate situation for their 300 guests.

 

I use the words guests - because that's exactly how CCL treated them. CCL went out of their way to accommodate their folks, with the priority on getting them back on track, and back on their ship - with the minimum of fuss, the maximum support, and no financial cost to the client.

 

In so far as RCI not reimbursing the cruise fare paid by folks who arrived in time per their passenger contract for their cruise, and were unable to join... That is unconscionable no matter what legal loopholes RCI may feel allow them to do this.

 

And yes, no matter what, this should serve as a warning to folks to always, always travel with a good comprehensive travel insurance policy.

[SusieV]

I am suprised the cruise lines haven't seen a money making scheme.

 

If I were the cruise lines, I would always require passengers show proof of travel insurance when booking or require passengers to book insurance through the cruise line when they travel to the caribbean during hurricane season.

 

Sure people will bitch at first but they'll get over it and you won't have these problems.

 

Now that would get me never to book with a cruise line that did that. How do they have the right to determine how much risk I'll take? We have an annual medical policy and don't buy insurance otherwise. At this point we've saved enough in insurance premiums that if we lose a trip, well, it's been paid for anyway. It'd still suck but there it is.

 

We're comfortable taking the risk that we'll need to cancel post final payment or other events that might be covered. Why should I be forced to flush ~7-8% of the cost of each trip down the drain because other people make a fuss when sh*t happens?

[Feelin' Nauti']

Or RCCL could do like Carnival did, supply hotels and flights for ALL passengers left behind. Those with passports were flown to Barbados and those without passports were flown home HMMM sounds logical to me.

Apparently, this option was too costly for RC. :rolleyes:

[wreckem2013]

Apparently' date=' this option was too costly for RC. :rolleyes:[/b']

 

No. They don't want to set a precedent of covering stuff like this. People will expect carnival to cover stuff that they in the future won't. People should have trip insurance if they expect to be compensated for stuff like this. Plain and simple. Thats why the product exists.

[KarinaGW]

My brain froze at the notion of reading the full 11 pages of this post, so possibly this has already been brought up.

 

I'm not flying to *Memphis* for another week. yet, the moment the words Tropical Storm Irene (a week or 2 back) became part of the forecast vocabulary, I got paranoid about THAT trip. If I had had a cruise planned during that timeframe, I so would have spent the extra 100 or 2 to come in a day or more early just so this wouldn't happen.

 

"Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency o my part".

[GatorMomInNC]

The day before I leave on a weeklong cruise where I WON'T be able to use my cell phone, I would definitely have my cell phone on. I would be making last minute calls to family and friends, etc. Especially if I'm still in the US, which I would be in San Juan and the rates are the same.

 

 

How many people do you think have their cell phones on when traveling? I don't. It's the first thing that I shut off when going on vacation.

[Pushka]

My brain froze at the notion of reading the full 11 pages of this post, so possibly this has already been brought up.

 

I'm not flying to *Memphis* for another week. yet, the moment the words Tropical Storm Irene (a week or 2 back) became part of the forecast vocabulary, I got paranoid about THAT trip. If I had had a cruise planned during that timeframe, I so would have spent the extra 100 or 2 to come in a day or more early just so this wouldn't happen.

 

"Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency o my part".

 

Again, you assume that every passenger has access to the internet and is at home to hear the weather in the few days before travel. And knows that a hurrican or tropical storm in a particular area will impact on their plans in a different area. And even the weather bureau did not predict the path correctly. While you have access to such information, and local knowledge, it simply is not reasonable to expect that everyone does.