should they be compensated?

[Room Service!]

BaseballMonof4- Amen sister. You've stated what others have already said. I agree with you.

OK people can we move on now?

[laumicmah]

So move on then.

[MissDiva1]

Comparing a cancelled dental appt. Seriously?

 

 

Did you miss the hotel reference:confused:

[MissDiva1]

I don't think anyone is saying they WANT to see a pax lose anything, be it a port, a day, or an entire cruise.

 

I think the difference of opinion has to do with how people percieve what HAS to be compensated.

 

The only point I am trying to make is that should the cruise line CHOOSE to, they have the legal right under the contract that we all ACCEPT by paying our cruise fare and booking the cruise to cancel all or any portion of the cruise without compensation to the passenger.

 

I am not saying I think this is the right thing to do. What I am saying is we can all discuss how we will expect, or demand or are entitled to compensation; however, under the contract that simply is NOT the case. And the contract would be fully enforceable since we are each made aware of it and give our tacit consent to its provisions by booking passage.

 

Would I like it if it happened to me? NO! But would I understand that is exactly what I signed up for? Unfortunately, yes.

 

 

It would never even make it to court because no company would want to make a fool of themselves in the public media......so in essence the contract is moot in situations as such........you should know this since you work in a law office........

And yes I would demand my money back if they cancelled or cut short my vacation I paid in full for. .......what sane person wouldn't:confused:

[MissDiva1]

BaseballMonof4- Amen sister. You've stated what others have already said. I agree with you.

OK people can we move on now?

 

:confused:

[BaseballMomof4]

It would never even make it to court because no company would want to make a fool of themselves in the public media......so in essence the contract is moot in situations as such........you should know this since you work in a law office........

And yes I would demand my money back if they cancelled or cut short my vacation I paid in full for. .......what sane person wouldn't:confused:

 

It would never make it to court because no sane attorney would file a Complaint where there is no basis for a claim.

[MissDiva1]

It would never make it to court because no sane attorney would file a Complaint where there is no basis for a claim.

 

It would never make it to court because the cruiselines would settle in favor of the customer;)

[BaseballMomof4]

They can, and probably would, but they don't have to. I think we should agree to disagree. :D

[MissDiva1]

They can, and probably would, but they don't have to. I think we should agree to disagree. :D

 

And people can obey by the silly contract or they can fight it.......they don't have too but they can:p Yes I agree I disagree.......

[S.S.Oceanlover]

It would never make it to court because no sane attorney would file a Complaint where there is no basis for a claim.

 

people on here say that when you pay for your cruise you are not paying for the ports which I agree with.

 

You are saying if you pay for a 7 day cruise and only get 6 there is no basis for a refund of the day missed.

 

So my question is when you pay for your cruise what exactly are you paying for?

 

Bill

[BaseballMomof4]

Oyvey :p

[S.S.Oceanlover]

Oyvey :p

 

that's the best you can come up with?

 

Since no quote I don't know if your reply was for me, Diva, or both?

 

Bill

[boo214]

I don't think anyone is saying they WANT to see a pax lose anything, be it a port, a day, or an entire cruise.

 

I think the difference of opinion has to do with how people percieve what HAS to be compensated.

 

The only point I am trying to make is that should the cruise line CHOOSE to, they have the legal right under the contract that we all ACCEPT by paying our cruise fare and booking the cruise to cancel all or any portion of the cruise without compensation to the passenger.

 

I am not saying I think this is the right thing to do. What I am saying is we can all discuss how we will expect, or demand or are entitled to compensation; however, under the contract that simply is NOT the case. And the contract would be fully enforceable since we are each made aware of it and give our tacit consent to its provisions by booking passage.

 

Would I like it if it happened to me? NO! But would I understand that is exactly what I signed up for? Unfortunately, yes.

never mind

[boo214]

I guess I will find out in a couple of weeks how I truly feel, but I do think it's a risk you take for cruising during hurricaine season...and you got a helluva discount for doing so...and that's what cruise insurance is for...and probably why most don't kick in unless 1/2 your cruise is delayed/cancelled/whatever.

 

BUT, if I'm looking for this cruise vacation to be a relaxing getaway and it rains or storms all day every day, am I entitled to anything then? I didn't book this cruise to be stuck inside every day.

 

I relaize they don't have to, but maybe they should in good faith. But if this was YOUR business, what would you do? Does the TA have to give back 1/7 of their commission? How would you feel if you got an extra day or 2 on the ship and the cruisline asked you for more money?

ok, supposing its not hurricane season. there just happens to be a big storm and the cruise before yours takes an extra day to get back due to sailing around it, do you think you should be compensated for having your cruise cut short by a day?

[ryanpatricksmom]

I'm not sure that the contract does let the cruiseline off the hook entirely. It says that the "voyage" can be altered without refund/compensation. I guess the question is, what constitutes the "voyage"? If you're no longer onboard (or haven't boarded yet), are you on a voyage? I feel a little like Bill Clinton, but I'm a fan, so that's okay. ;)

 

They could certainly have let the passengers rock away in the Chesapeake or otherwise docked (in the case of the Pride) and been within the spirit of the contract, but they didn't. Passengers were required to disembark, and the next cruise was not allowed to board until a day later than scheduled. To me, that's more than shortening the voyage; that's no longer providing the contracted accommodations, which I think they should have been (and were by Carnival) compensated for.

[BaseballMomof4]

that's the best you can come up with?

 

Since no quote I don't know if your reply was for me, Diva, or both?

 

Bill

 

That was just me throwing in the towel with Diva - LOL!

 

In a quick skim of the contract you will find in Sections 6 and Sections 7 that the cruise line can alter, change or completely cancel the cruise without having to compensate due to circumstances beyond their control (strikes, weather, wars).

 

The only point I have been trying to make is that while we all hope the cruise line would make us whole, we are not "entitled" and we can "demand" all we like but the bottom line is we agreed to the possibility of cancellation without compensation when we booked our passage. We accepted it. Period.

 

With that being said, I cannot imagine that every happening. And I don't take exception to hoping for some kind of compensation. But when we get into expect, entitled, demand - those kinds of absolutes - that's where I part company. I cannot expect, I am not entitled, I can demand all I want. The reality is, I agreed that the line, whichever one it is, does not have to compensate me.

 

Pretty sure the corporate attorneys are way smarter than me and they have worded these contracts to protect their employer. And when you accept a contract you are bound by its terms.

[halos]

people on here say that when you pay for your cruise you are not paying for the ports which I agree with.

 

You are saying if you pay for a 7 day cruise and only get 6 there is no basis for a refund of the day missed.

 

So my question is when you pay for your cruise what exactly are you paying for?

 

Bill

 

That's what I'd like to know...

I always thought I was paying for days on a ship which is why when the cruise misses a port, I always side with the cruise line...in this case, I do not side with the cruise line.

[DaytonCruiser]

Someone posted Carnival contract, but this is NCL contract, which is very specific.

 

6. Vessel and Voyage:

(a) Risk of Travel: The Guest admits and acknowledges that travel by ocean-going vessel occasionally

presents risks and circumstances that may be beyond the ability of the Carrier to reasonably control or

mitigate. The Guest's understanding includes all risks of travel, transportation, and handling of Guests

and baggage. The Guest therefore assumes the risk of and releases the Carrier from any injury, loss, or

damage whatsoever arising from, caused by, or in the judgment of the Carrier or Master rendered

necessary or advisable by reason of: any act of God or public enemies; force majeure; arrest; restraints of

governments or their departments or under color of law; piracy; war; revolution; extortion; terrorist actions

or threats; hijacking; bombing; threatened or actual rebellion, insurrection, or civil strife; fire, explosion,

collision, stranding or grounding; weather conditions; docking or anchoring difficulty; congestion; perils of

the sea, rivers, canals, locks or other waters; perils of navigation of any kind; lack of water or passageway

in canals; theft; accident to or from machinery, boilers, or latent defects (even though existing at

embarkation or commencement of voyages); barratry; desertion or revolt of the crew; seizure of ship by

legal process; strike, lockout or labor disturbance (regardless whether such strike, lockout or labor

disturbance results from a dispute between the Carrier and its employees or any other parties); or from

losses of any kind beyond the Carrier's control. Under any such circumstances the voyage may be

altered, shortened, lengthened, or cancelled in whole or part without liability to the Carrier for a refund or

otherwise.

[S.S.Oceanlover]

just because it is written doesn't make it so.

 

While I agree with baseball mom that the cruiselines will most times pony up.

 

Just think about it. Every time something like this happens the cruise line says, hey it's in the contract, too bad, so sad.

 

How many people are going to book cruises with a line that does business that way?

 

Bill

[sparks1093]

just because it is written doesn't make it so.

 

While I agree with baseball mom that the cruiselines will most times pony up.

 

Just think about it. Every time something like this happens the cruise line says, hey it's in the contract, too bad, so sad.

 

How many people are going to book cruises with a line that does business that way?

 

Bill

 

People know how CCL, RCL and NCL all reacted to the same situation and no doubt will be considering that in their decision of which line to sail with. At a minimum NCL blew it from the PR perspective, even if they made the passengers whole at a later date.

[H82seaUgo]

People know how CCL, RCL and NCL all reacted to the same situation and no doubt will be considering that in their decision of which line to sail with. At a minimum NCL blew it from the PR perspective, even if they made the passengers whole at a later date.

 

apparently, even ncl knew they blew it, even as some loyalists over there were preaching that these passengers were owed nothing.

[halos]

People know how CCL, RCL and NCL all reacted to the same situation and no doubt will be considering that in their decision of which line to sail with. At a minimum NCL blew it from the PR perspective, even if they made the passengers whole at a later date.

 

 

Memories fade, people forget...CCL screwed people over during the swine flu (but made it up later)...because this time they did the right thing, they're heros.

It all boils down to 'What have you done for me lately?'

In the grand scheme of things, this will be much ado about nothing (as it always is). Once the next big cruise issue occurs these threads will wind up in pages back further and further and so will people's thoughts on it, retreat from the front of their mind and march to the back with all the other useless info we have stored there.

I think RCI is counting on that.

[sparks1093]

Memories fade, people forget...CCL screwed people over during the swine flu (but made it up later)...because this time they did the right thing, they're heros.

It all boils down to 'What have you done for me lately?'

In the grand scheme of things, this will be much ado about nothing (as it always is). Once the next big cruise issue occurs these threads will wind up in pages back further and further and so will people's thoughts on it, retreat from the front of their mind and march to the back with all the other useless info we have stored there.

I think RCI is counting on that.

 

Yep, the PR war is always being fought and won, primarily because people do have short memories (that's what politicians count on, too;)).

[halos]

Yep, the PR war is always being fought and won, primarily because people do have short memories (that's what politicians count on, too;)).

 

absolutely!

[richstowe]

What cracks me up is that this thread goes on (and on) in this Carnival board but has died on the NCL board.

 

Nothing wrong with that. It just makes me laugh.

 

I guess that why if you want a discussion on a topic, ANY TOPIC, post it on the Carnival board.

 

I understand why the Hosts have a never ending job here moving threads to the "correct" board;)