NCL Customer Service

[Globaliser]

I have no reason not to take him at his word.

I think the more important question is whether one takes NCL at their word. That's a very detailed step-by-step account of what NCL and its port agent did.

 

And if one does take NCL at their word, then what should NCL have done that they did not do? If the couple have declined offers of assistance by way of communication, is NCL supposed unilaterally to override that, and to act directly contrary to what the passengers have asked for?

[sparks1093]

Mooder, that is exactly how I feel. Both sides are being honest, and I can see both sides of the story. As far as I have seen from the posting, news article and press release, NCL has never denied the fact that they weren't able to tell the OP where his parents actually were. To me this is the part that I do find disturbing.

 

 

There are actually three sides to this story and we've heard two of them (the parents haven't chimed in, that I know of, and the parents were NCL's customers). As far as NCL not being able to tell the OP where his parents were- was it a matter of them not being able to or them not being willing to disclose customer information to a third party?

 

I think the more important question is whether one takes NCL at their word. That's a very detailed step-by-step account of what NCL and its port agent did.

 

And if one does take NCL at their word, then what should NCL have done that they did not do? If the couple have declined offers of assistance by way of communication, is NCL supposed unilaterally to override that, and to act directly contrary to what the passengers have asked for?

 

That's the crux of the matter right there. I understand where the OP was coming from, I really do. But the business relationship in this case was between the parents and NCL. I know all about elderly parents not being with it and making mistakes and forgetting things, etc. but that doesn't change the business relationship nor does it give NCL the right or obligation to disclose information to a third party, no matter how well intentioned that inquiry may have been.

[darrengs]

As far as NCL not being able to tell the OP where his parents were- was it a matter of them not being able to or them not being willing to disclose customer information to a third party?

 

That is definitely possible, but is just conjecture at this point, as NCL has never responded to this. If this was the case then I would hope that NCL wouldn't purposefully lie and first state that Colemans were on the ship and then continue to stonewall the OP. I would expect that they would state that they were not willing to release any information to a third party, and tell the OP that they will relay his contact information to his parents.

[Mooder]

There are actually three sides to this story and we've heard two of them (the parents haven't chimed in, that I know of, and the parents were NCL's customers). As far as NCL not being able to tell the OP where his parents were- was it a matter of them not being able to or them not being willing to disclose customer information to a third party?

 

 

That's the crux of the matter right there. I understand where the OP was coming from, I really do. But the business relationship in this case was between the parents and NCL. I know all about elderly parents not being with it and making mistakes and forgetting things, etc. but that doesn't change the business relationship nor does it give NCL the right or obligation to disclose information to a third party, no matter how well intentioned that inquiry may have been.

 

This is exactly why I think the 2 stories we have heard are perfectly consistent with one another. Again, not a matter of honesty, simply perspective. The son may not have received all the information he wanted, but that doesn't mean anyone did anything wrong.

 

I don't see a need to choose between 2 stories, only for everyone to learn lessons from the situation.

[dalgirl]

My mother is 72, but I can already see her - the vital, independent, take charge person - slipping slowly into old age. Our recent cruise found her constantly getting lost, turned around, and angry at me because I failed to meet her where I should have guessed she would be.... If she had been in the situtation as his parents, she would have told them not to call me, no she didn't need help (this drives me crazy) and would be focused only on the medical emergency at hand. It would only be after the emergency and she looked around that she would have been confused and a little frightened at being essentially alone and in charge. She would have gone from "they are so helpful" to "they were unhelpful" in a heartbeat.

 

Should they have been "allowed" to cruise alone in the first place? - that unfortunately is only their call. It is not NCL's fault that two adults, not children, had an emergency. NCL did not know these people or the particulars of their cognitive situation (apparently neither did their son). If told not to call someone, then the company would not have called.

 

This is a good point to consider - cruise insurance is not the end all, be all, for any emergency at sea - besides cruise insurance info, we take our personal insurance cards, emergency contact info, and port info with us - even going ashore.

 

I am dreading the coming battles I will have with Mom over her independence, and the OP's worries and responsibilites for his parents are only beginning.

 

It is a sad situation:(

[RuthC]

And if one does take NCL at their word, then what should NCL have done that they did not do? If the couple have declined offers of assistance by way of communication, is NCL supposed unilaterally to override that, and to act directly contrary to what the passengers have asked for?

Ship personel weren't limited to accept or override the parents' decision, though. There were additional ways to handle this; we don't know if they did or not.

 

When faced with an out of the ordinary situation such as this couple was, they have no experience in what is the best plan of action. It is expected that the ship personel have been through this type of thing before, and would have an idea what to do.

Someone in authority on the ship (Guest Relations Manager, Hotel Manager, etc) should have sat down with the woman and told her in no uncertain terms that this was serious, and that she didn't know what she was in for. She needed to be told that her decision not to call her son was a bad decision, and be urged strongly until she was convinced to do it. Then sit there while she did, so she couldn't change her mind.

The couple really needed someone to take charge. NCL was the party in a position to do that, and it isn't clear that NCL did.

[Mooder]

Ship personel weren't limited to accept or override the parents' decision, though. There were additional ways to handle this; we don't know if they did or not.

 

When faced with an out of the ordinary situation such as this couple was, they have no experience in what is the best plan of action. It is expected that the ship personel have been through this type of thing before, and would have an idea what to do.

Someone in authority on the ship (Guest Relations Manager, Hotel Manager, etc) should have sat down with the woman and told her in no uncertain terms that this was serious, and that she didn't know what she was in for. She needed to be told that her decision not to call her son was a bad decision, and be urged strongly until she was convinced to do it. Then sit there while she did, so she couldn't change her mind.

The couple really needed someone to take charge. NCL was the party in a position to do that, and it isn't clear that NCL did.

 

I would be appalled if anyone at NCL spoke to me in the manner you suggest. What's more, you assume that it was clear to an outsider that this woman was not capable.

 

As far as NCL understanding that this is new territory for any passenger, that is why they put them in the hands of their port agent - someone qualified to help in exactly this situation. We have every reason to believe the port agent did exactly that. Nothing bad happened to this couple as far as we know so I am not sure where this feeling that NCL dropped the ball is coming from - other than that the son had to go through a period of panic. The passengers are NCL's responsibility (to a point), not the son.

 

Can you tell me what would have happened differently if the mother had called the son?

[sparks1093]

Ship personel weren't limited to accept or override the parents' decision, though. There were additional ways to handle this; we don't know if they did or not.

 

When faced with an out of the ordinary situation such as this couple was, they have no experience in what is the best plan of action. It is expected that the ship personel have been through this type of thing before, and would have an idea what to do.

 

Someone in authority on the ship (Guest Relations Manager, Hotel Manager, etc) should have sat down with the woman and told her in no uncertain terms that this was serious, and that she didn't know what she was in for. She needed to be told that her decision not to call her son was a bad decision, and be urged strongly until she was convinced to do it. Then sit there while she did, so she couldn't change her mind.

The couple really needed someone to take charge. NCL was the party in a position to do that, and it isn't clear that NCL did.

 

What basis would a ship's officer have for brow-beating a passenger? The fact that she's 80?

[Mooder]

What basis would a ship's officer have for brow-beating a passenger? The fact that she's 80?

 

Yeah, I'm sitting here wondering what the age cut-off is for that? :confused: And I'm having fun imagining the thread this would be if THAT had happened!!!!:eek:

 

"Woman detained on ship by NCL officer, delaying husband's urgently needed medical care!"

[RuthC]

What's more, you assume that it was clear to an outsider that this woman was not capable.

 

What basis would a ship's officer have for brow-beating a passenger? The fact that she's 80?

I am in no way suggesting that the woman was not capable, nor am I suggesting that ship personal "brow beat" her.

But the fact of the matter is that in such a circumstance, denial is strong. People do not think about the possibilites of what can go terribly wrong; the mind will not allow it. These things need to be considered, and ship personal were in a position to suggest she consider them. They knew, or should have known, that bad things can, and do, sometimes get worse.

We don't know to what extent the ship personal did try to get the wife to be realistic. They may very well have done more than just talk about calling her son. I am saying that there were more than two ways to handle this.

 

"What would have happened differently if the woman had called the son?" He would not have had to get so upset trying to find out what was going on. Newspapers and TV would not have had to get involved. And this thread would not exist.

[sparks1093]

and be urged strongly until she was convinced to do it. Then sit there while she did, so she couldn't change her mind.

 

Sorry, that sounds like brow-beating to me.

 

I am in no way suggesting that the woman was not capable, nor am I suggesting that ship personal "brow beat" her.

 

But the fact of the matter is that in such a circumstance, denial is strong. People do not think about the possibilites of what can go terribly wrong; the mind will not allow it. These things need to be considered, and ship personal were in a position to suggest she consider them. They knew, or should have known, that bad things can, and do, sometimes get worse.

We don't know to what extent the ship personal did try to get the wife to be realistic. They may very well have done more than just talk about calling her son. I am saying that there were more than two ways to handle this.

 

"What would have happened differently if the woman had called the son?" He would not have had to get so upset trying to find out what was going on. Newspapers and TV would not have had to get involved. And this thread would not exist.

[Sea Monster 2]

I've been following this all along, and I think the conversation has finally taken a turn towards what I've suspected all along: that perhaps the parents were too overwhelmed or uncertain to make good decisions. In my career as a US consul assisting US citizens in emergency situations overseas, I cannot tell you how often people who I suspect were otherwise competent became overwhelmed, confused or immobilized by the difficult situations they found themselves in. You have so many competing issues: the stress and urgency of the actual emergency, language barriers, a medical system that bears little resemblance to what you're accustomed to, not wanting to unnecessarily worry family who can't do anything to help from afar, not understanding the roles of those who are trying to help you (or being suspicious of them), financial concerns (usually everything has to be paid up front in other countries), lack of availability of familiar treatments or medications, and on and on... I had an emergency surgery behind the Iron Curtain when I was 17 and my tour group was obligated to leave without me. I had no idea if anyone knew where I was or what had happened to me. I didn't speak the language and was being drugged every time I regained consciousness. I made a decision, four days in, to get up and walk out of the hospital in two days if no one came for me-- fortunately, my mom showed up, but she was a seasoned international traveler and wouldn't take no for an answer when they tried to tell her I wasn't there. I don't know what would have happened if I had tried to leave-- in retrospect, it wasn't a great plan, but I didn't see any other options. My own experience made me very sympathetic to others who find themselves in similar situations. You don't have to be elderly to be overwhelmed and have impaired decision-making skills in this kind of high-stress, high-stakes situation. That's why consular officers are there, to help people understand their options and (hopefully) make good decisions. I can absolutely see how this situation could evolve this way, without anyone being "in the wrong." I don't understand the rush to blame-- a little bit of compassion is in order for all involved. To those of you who think you know exactly what to do in any given crisis in a foreign country where you don't speak the language and probably have financial limitations, and that you would never, ever make a poor decision in a crisis situation, all I can say is that my professional experience tells me otherwise. Some people can take care of everything themselves, but many (maybe most) cannot.

[Mooder]

I am in no way suggesting that the woman was not capable, nor am I suggesting that ship personal "brow beat" her.

But the fact of the matter is that in such a circumstance, denial is strong. People do not think about the possibilites of what can go terribly wrong; the mind will not allow it. These things need to be considered, and ship personal were in a position to suggest she consider them. They knew, or should have known, that bad things can, and do, sometimes get worse.

We don't know to what extent the ship personal did try to get the wife to be realistic. They may very well have done more than just talk about calling her son. I am saying that there were more than two ways to handle this.

 

"What would have happened differently if the woman had called the son?" He would not have had to get so upset trying to find out what was going on. Newspapers and TV would not have had to get involved. And this thread would not exist.

 

First, nothing went wrong. They were put in capable hands. Where was she allowed to be unrealistic?

 

Second, again, NCL's responsibility was to the passengers, not the son. The consequences you describe (newspapers, TV, etc.) have no effect on the well-being of the couple. To me, that means NCL and their port agent must have done right by them. If they had been left without the resources of the port agent, I would be agreeing with the criticism against NCL.

 

If I tell an NCL rep that I do not want my family contacted, that's the end of it, and would be furious if they didn't take no for an answer.

[RuthC]

...I would be agreeing with the criticism against NCL.

Now I'm confused. :confused: You quoted me, but I haven't criticzed NCL. I don't know whether or not NCL did anything I would consider wrong, as I am sure we don't know everything that happened.

[Mooder]

Now I'm confused. :confused: You quoted me, but I haven't criticzed NCL. I don't know whether or not NCL did anything I would consider wrong, as I am sure we don't know everything that happened.

 

I'm referring to the criticism NCL has received from some posters on this thread in general, not you specifically, and to your suggestion that, if they did not, they should have pressed her on her decision not to contact her son. You are exactly right that we have no idea how that conversation went.

[Globaliser]

She needed to be told that her decision not to call her son was a bad decision, and be urged strongly until she was convinced to do it. Then sit there while she did, so she couldn't change her mind.

NCL should basically have forced her to call her son?

 

"We will only try to persuade you, but we will not take no for an answer. You cannot and will not refuse our offer of assistance."

[Wayfairers]

I've been following this all along, and I think the conversation has finally taken a turn towards what I've suspected all along: that perhaps the parents were too overwhelmed or uncertain to make good decisions. In my career as a US consul assisting US citizens in emergency situations overseas, I cannot tell you how often people who I suspect were otherwise competent became overwhelmed, confused or immobilized by the difficult situations they found themselves in. You have so many competing issues: the stress and urgency of the actual emergency, language barriers, a medical system that bears little resemblance to what you're accustomed to, not wanting to unnecessarily worry family who can't do anything to help from afar, not understanding the roles of those who are trying to help you (or being suspicious of them), financial concerns (usually everything has to be paid up front in other countries), lack of availability of familiar treatments or medications, and on and on... I had an emergency surgery behind the Iron Curtain when I was 17 and my tour group was obligated to leave without me. I had no idea if anyone knew where I was or what had happened to me. I didn't speak the language and was being drugged every time I regained consciousness. I made a decision, four days in, to get up and walk out of the hospital in two days if no one came for me-- fortunately, my mom showed up, but she was a seasoned international traveler and wouldn't take no for an answer when they tried to tell her I wasn't there. I don't know what would have happened if I had tried to leave-- in retrospect, it wasn't a great plan, but I didn't see any other options. My own experience made me very sympathetic to others who find themselves in similar situations. You don't have to be elderly to be overwhelmed and have impaired decision-making skills in this kind of high-stress, high-stakes situation. That's why consular officers are there, to help people understand their options and (hopefully) make good decisions. I can absolutely see how this situation could evolve this way, without anyone being "in the wrong." I don't understand the rush to blame-- a little bit of compassion is in order for all involved. To those of you who think you know exactly what to do in any given crisis in a foreign country where you don't speak the language and probably have financial limitations, and that you would never, ever make a poor decision in a crisis situation, all I can say is that my professional experience tells me otherwise. Some people can take care of everything themselves, but many (maybe most) cannot.

 

Great information - from someone who has been in a similar situation and who has had to assist people in similar situations.

 

I've often wondered exactly what the US consul was there to do. We checked in at the consul office one time in MX when the drug issues escalated during one of our visits, just to make sure someone in the country knew we were there. The people in the office acted like we were crazy to check in, but I felt better with them knowing our plans - especially since we were driving.

[Mooder]

I've been following this all along, and I think the conversation has finally taken a turn towards what I've suspected all along: that perhaps the parents were too overwhelmed or uncertain to make good decisions. In my career as a US consul assisting US citizens in emergency situations overseas, I cannot tell you how often people who I suspect were otherwise competent became overwhelmed, confused or immobilized by the difficult situations they found themselves in. You have so many competing issues: the stress and urgency of the actual emergency, language barriers, a medical system that bears little resemblance to what you're accustomed to, not wanting to unnecessarily worry family who can't do anything to help from afar, not understanding the roles of those who are trying to help you (or being suspicious of them), financial concerns (usually everything has to be paid up front in other countries), lack of availability of familiar treatments or medications, and on and on... I had an emergency surgery behind the Iron Curtain when I was 17 and my tour group was obligated to leave without me. I had no idea if anyone knew where I was or what had happened to me. I didn't speak the language and was being drugged every time I regained consciousness. I made a decision, four days in, to get up and walk out of the hospital in two days if no one came for me-- fortunately, my mom showed up, but she was a seasoned international traveler and wouldn't take no for an answer when they tried to tell her I wasn't there. I don't know what would have happened if I had tried to leave-- in retrospect, it wasn't a great plan, but I didn't see any other options. My own experience made me very sympathetic to others who find themselves in similar situations. You don't have to be elderly to be overwhelmed and have impaired decision-making skills in this kind of high-stress, high-stakes situation. That's why consular officers are there, to help people understand their options and (hopefully) make good decisions. I can absolutely see how this situation could evolve this way, without anyone being "in the wrong." I don't understand the rush to blame-- a little bit of compassion is in order for all involved. To those of you who think you know exactly what to do in any given crisis in a foreign country where you don't speak the language and probably have financial limitations, and that you would never, ever make a poor decision in a crisis situation, all I can say is that my professional experience tells me otherwise. Some people can take care of everything themselves, but many (maybe most) cannot.

 

Such a terrifying experience, Sea Monster! Thank you for sharing. I agree wholeheartedly.

[Zeno]

Ship personel weren't limited to accept or override the parents' decision, though. There were additional ways to handle this; we don't know if they did or not.

 

When faced with an out of the ordinary situation such as this couple was, they have no experience in what is the best plan of action. It is expected that the ship personel have been through this type of thing before, and would have an idea what to do.

Someone in authority on the ship (Guest Relations Manager, Hotel Manager, etc) should have sat down with the woman and told her in no uncertain terms that this was serious, and that she didn't know what she was in for. She needed to be told that her decision not to call her son was a bad decision, and be urged strongly until she was convinced to do it. Then sit there while she did, so she couldn't change her mind.

The couple really needed someone to take charge. NCL was the party in a position to do that, and it isn't clear that NCL did.

 

I totally disagree - the woman was an adult capable of making adult choices - it most certainly was not NCL's place to treat her like a child. If anyone on a ship DARED to do this to me - they would be speaking to my lawyer about harassment, inappropriate confinement etc etc. A third party cannot "take charge" in a situation like this. Whether she was truly up to it or not, the wife was legally "in charge" of the decision making. The 3rd party can only offer help and make suggestions - which is apparently what ship's staff did.

 

My only quibble with NCL in this - is the poor communication with the son - although his subsequent attempts to dramatize the situation have kind of erroded some of my sympathy. It is becoming clear that he wants and expects much more than a simple "apology".

 

I still feel a lot of sympathy for the elderly couple and I reiterate that there is a very good lesson here for people with elderly parents who travel by themselves (Please PLAN in advance with your parents what they will do in certain emergencies. It will make it a LOT easier on them (and you) if they have a clear PLAN to follow.

[NMLady]

First post:

"As their son, I am listed as their emergency contact."

 

Howard

 

But does he know that for sure? He might have just been presuming that.

Our sons/daughters might think they are on our cruise info as emergency contacts but they aren't since they work. We have a retired friend as our emegency contact. If he needs to he'll contact our 'children' (all adults).

[slidergirl]

Perhaps something as simple as NCL or the port agent contacting the Consulate would have lessened the misunderstandings. An alert to a Consulate informing it that one of their citizens has been taken to a hospital could set some important wheels in motion. It wouldn't be violating anyone's privacy. Since the Consul officers are trained to deal with issues as this, they would have best able to assist.

I, too, had a serious accident out of the US. My traveling group had to keep going. I was left in a hospital in a country where I did not speak the language. Fortunately, one intern had some English skills, so he did his best to translate for me when he was there. Despite being hopped up on pain meds, I got on my cell phone and started calling my ICE numbers. Through them, I was able to contact my travel insurer, re-arrange my flights, and get the necessary paperwork done to be release from the hospital when the doctors deemed it safe. I wish I would have thought to contact the Consulate!! If nothing else, perhaps I could have had some help finding a pair of crutches during the Italian "siesta" part of the day *NOTE- the hospital did not give out medical devices - you were responsible for having someone go out to a store and buy for you once you were told what you needed!!!*

[NMLady]

Ship personel weren't limited to accept or override the parents' decision, though. There were additional ways to handle this; we don't know if they did or not.

 

When faced with an out of the ordinary situation such as this couple was, they have no experience in what is the best plan of action. It is expected that the ship personel have been through this type of thing before, and would have an idea what to do.

 

Someone in authority on the ship (Guest Relations Manager, Hotel Manager, etc) should have sat down with the woman and told her in no uncertain terms that this was serious, and that she didn't know what she was in for. She needed to be told that her decision not to call her son was a bad decision, and be urged strongly until she was convinced to do it. Then sit there while she did, so she couldn't change her mind.

The couple really needed someone to take charge. NCL was the party in a position to do that, and it isn't clear that NCL did.

 

Maybe that particular woman needed that, based on her subsequent problems, but let me tell you that my husband is 80 and I am 70 and if this had been us, I would have deeply resented anyone insisting I phone someone if I didn't choose to call. We're not talking about a life or death situation, but about diarrhea & vomiting. Some of us, although older, are not 'elderly' and are perfectly capable of handling situations such as the one those parents found themselves in.

It varies from person to person, couple to couple. I personally would not want our emergency contact called in this particular situation until I knew if was more serious than diarrhea/vomiting seemed. Just because the infirmary on the ship wasn't sufficient and there was a transfer to a local hospital doesn't make it life or death. If we were in another country I wouldn't want any of our stateside children worried if it weren't really necessary. And in this case, for me or my husband, we'd be able to handle it.

I usually agree with you, Ruth, but not in this case.

[happytraveler11]

It should make us all appreciate the services and behind the scenes assistance our American Embassy's and Consulate's provide when we find ourselves "in need of assistance"; just as apparently the OP found. Thank you Sea Monster for sharing your insider experience with those of us who may not know what all you do.

[rvsullivan]

Again, this was norovirus, not heart attack, stroke or head trauma. He was being treated for this, he needed further treatment. An ambulance was called, assistance given. Port agent actively involved. The woman refused a call home, she was not ill or incapacitated. Had the ship called her family, the U.S. consulate or anyone else, they would have been libel on many levels. He couldn't be safely kept on the ship, he was given over to qualified medical help.

I don't believe the cruise line could even safely give the son information without getting a release. If mom wanted him involved, she had a free chance to do that and refused! Who is at fault here?

Again, after their fate was established, the son still went to the newspaper and tv station and somehow the tv station met the ship and had the son available for the interview. Now tell me, whats up here???

This has run it's course IMHO. The next thing will be the lawsuit!:mad:

[ohioNCLcruiser]

While I don't think the OP is 100% correct about his idea of what happened since he was not there and nobody knows all the details, I find it hard to believe elderly parents would not want to call someone if they were being removed from a cruise in a foreign country? They disembark some passengers very quickly and I know sometimes on my ship, once they were off that was kind of the end of it.