Fair Compensation for a missed disembarkation port?

[Jade13]

We just got off the Statendam in Vancouver, Monday, with another 80-90 passengers who had all booked the Vancouver to San Francisco 3-day cruise, and wonder what people think of the compensation offered?

Due to storms on the North Pacific Coast, the captain and HAL (Holland America Line, Seattle) decided to stay in Vancouver (along with the Westendam) for an extra night- no problem there, safety is important. However, after the announcement was made that the ship would stay in port overnight (made right after the muster drill), the captain made the announcement that they would be skipping the stop in San Francisco and going directly to San Diego.

Please keep in mind that the San Francisco stop was not skipped because it was dangerous or out of the way to stop there- it was presumably to keep the rest of the cruise segments following this one on time.

The SF disembarking passengers were called to a meeting at 7:30 p.m. Sunday and given the opportunity to get off in Vancouver Monday morning and get a refund for the base price of the cruise plus airfare home OR stay on to San Diego and get flown home from there. (They would not agree to fly people to San Francisco unless this was their home.

What would you have considered to be fair compensation??? Would you sail HAL again if this happened to you?

 

Yes.

 

However, I don't understand why they would not fly people to San Francisco if this was their scheduled diembarkation port?

 

Flying people home (What if they live in Europe?) doesn't make sense. What if someones vacation plans included continuing on to Alaska? Was HAL suppose to fly them there? It sounds like people were trying to get a full refund of the trip, including airfare. This all happened because of weather, regardless if it was possible to make a short stop in San Francisco. I wonder if anyone has a recording of what was actually promised. In any event, the compensation offered was suppose to help defray these additional expenses.

 

We would have stayed on to San Diego and than flown to San Francisco if we already had plans there including a flight home, and than filed with our insurance under "missed connection" to cover the flight to San Francisco. I am sure a lot of people would not purchase any policy for a 3 night trip, but we always do (primarily for the medivac).

[Jade13]

My wife and I were on the inside passage sailing right before this, and were slated to disembark in SFO. We stayed on and disembarked in San Diego. HAL paid for all travel arrangements and shuttle services that needed to be changed. We never even saw a bill.

 

Liesbeth was very clear how things worked in that meeting, and stated at least 5 times that airfare was to be to your home only, and she even worded it that HAL would not pay to send you to Hawaii and then back to SFO. I think she was bluntly clear on that point. I have sailed with her before, and think that she is outstanding.

 

And FWIW, I am *not* the HAL cheerleader I used to be... the change in my future bookings should show that ;)

 

So, HAL flew people home who stayed on to San Diego but not those who disembarked in Vancouver? Was your airfare booked through HAL? In order for them to make all changes without you seeing a bill, they would have had to be holding your airfare, correct?

 

I still think the missed port was weather related, or there was no reason to miss it unless they were trying to save money on port fees.

[Jade13]

If HAL would contact all of us and apologize and say that they were going to reimburse us our airfare and cruise fare, and other non-reimbursable expenses as they originally promised- I would be happy.

 

But this was weather related?

 

How much are the change fees that you are seeking?

[gfsf]

My wife and I were on the inside passage sailing right before this, and were slated to disembark in SFO. We stayed on and disembarked in San Diego. HAL paid for all travel arrangements and shuttle services that needed to be changed. We never even saw a bill.

 

Liesbeth was very clear how things worked in that meeting, and stated at least 5 times that airfare was to be to your home only, and she even worded it that HAL would not pay to send you to Hawaii and then back to SFO. I think she was bluntly clear on that point. I have sailed with her before, and think that she is outstanding.

 

Hi UPNY Guy, I was also on the inside passage sailing right before this and scheduled to disembark in SF as we live there but chose option 1 and got off in Vancouver instead of going to San Diego. As you mentioned Lisebeth was VERY CLEAR that airfare would be paid to our home from either Vancouver or San Diego but as mentioned in my earlier post when we got off the ship in Vancouver we were told our airfare home to SF would no longer be paid for by HAL. I'm glad you didn't have to endure all of the frustration and expense that our group in Vancouver had to go through.:confused:

[Calif. Cruisers]

But this was weather related?

 

How much are the change fees that you are seeking?

 

In my case I only would request the airfare be paid (as well as the cruise fare for the cruise I didn't get.) I live in the San Francisco Bay Area so didn't have to deal with the issues that those who don't live here had to deal with (i.e. scrambling to get hotel rooms or make other changes to their plans.) Any other costs would be minor ones.

I am very sympathetic to everyone who had to make these last minute plans, usually not getting very good rates, etc. I would imagine that most of the people who had booked this 3-day segment instead of the 5-day to San Diego had a very good reason to do so, and this is why most of us did not take advantage of the offer to continue through to San Diego. The fact that HAL is paying for the people who went through to San Diego and not for us is disturbing.

For me, it all comes down to the fact that HAL chose not to come to SF as a convenience to their plans, not due to weather in SF, and the promises that were made on-board to pay these expenses for us.

To many it made absolutely no sense to say they'd be flown home (i.e. to Florida, etc.) when they wanted to be in San Francisco (presumably a cheaper city to be flown to anyway.) I am not aware of anyone who was asking to fly anywhere but San Francisco (if that was not their home.) I am guessing they made this rule (about only being flown home) because some people were from the Vancouver area (probably most of the bridal party?) and they did not want to have to fly them to San Francisco.

[chrispb]

It would seem HAL has conditioned me well. :)

 

We've never been ones to seek or expect compensation and in all our cruises, we've accepted whatever it was everyone 'got' for whatever was the existing circumstance.

 

I am uncomfortable and feel like 'begging' when expecting payment for disappointments whether cruise line's fault or questionably so.

It most assuredly is not because we haven't worked hard for whatever funds we have and spend on travel as it all has come the 'old fashioned way' through hard work but we don't dwell on expecting someone to make up to us for each event that might be less than we expected.

 

Certainly in a case where the ship doesn't sail, we would expect money back but whatever was the offer is what we would accept. We have never once sought 'special compensation' from HAL and likely never will. And, yes....... we have had our fair share of upsets, disappointments and missed days on board.

 

HAL has trained me well. :)

As usual for me, I truly don't expect anyone need agree with me. :o :eek:

 

 

But this isn't all about you:) It seems to me that most posters here don't expect freebies or compensation for zilch. It looks like HAL really dropped the ball on this one. It's unprofessional for any company to promise something and then retract their offer. I'd hardly call it "special compensation".

[chrispb]

I agree. The company would have to pay for a flight anyway. HAL could have said we'll fly you to SFO but if you reschedule your flight from SFO to you home, etc., you're own your own - or something like that. That would have been reasonable and fair.

 

Yes, agree. That's where they were expecting to be so that's fair.

[DaveOKC]

Just off the Statendam yesterday. We were not impacted by missing SF (except for being disappointed in not being able to meet some friends there for the day), but I wanted to comment on the issue of making SF for a short stop.

 

In watching the ship's progress near SF, I noted that we likely could have made a shortened stop there (but again I am not expert on this). HOWEVER, remember that at the time HAL and the captain made the decision to skip SF we were still tied up to the dock in Vancouver.

 

During the next day (Monday) we left Vancouver just after Noon and really did not know if we would be able to enter the Pacific Ocean until around 9 PM (we were all holding our breath hoping for the best).

 

So, I think the captain and HAL did the only thing they could by getting the SF folks off in Vancouver, as they had no idea if we would be stuck in Victoria or elsewhere Monday night thus no way being able to make SF for even a few hours. Further, they could not be sure how fast we could go into the bad weather on Monday and Tuesday.

 

It is easy to second guess a decision AFTER the fact, but at the time it was made, I think the decision to skip SF completely was the correct one.

 

DaveOKC

[gfsf]

The fact that HAL is paying for the people who went through to San Diego and not for us is disturbing.

 

I read on another post that passengers that were scheduled to board the ship in SF were flown to San Diego at the expense of HAL so it seems only our Vancouver group got the short end of the stick.

[voyageur9]

As usual for me, I truly don't expect anyone need agree with me.

 

In this instance, your expectations may have been met, if not exceeded.

[CowPrincess]

But this isn't all about you:) It seems to me that most posters here don't expect freebies or compensation for zilch. It looks like HAL really dropped the ball on this one. It's unprofessional for any company to promise something and then retract their offer. I'd hardly call it "special compensation".

 

I completely agree with your post, chrispb

[sail7seas]

In this instance, your expectations may have been met, if not exceeded.

 

 

:) I agree. I understand what others are saying and don't quibble with it. DH and I just seem to look at these situations differently. Whatever works.......

 

I'll be interested to follow how this all unfolds and hope those who are impacted will let us know how it resolves.

 

 

chrispb

 

But this isn't all about you It seems to me that most posters here don't expect freebies or compensation for zilch. It looks like HAL really dropped the ball on this one. It's unprofessional for any company to promise something and then retract their offer. I'd hardly call it "special compensation".

 

I get it. :)

Not for one moment did I think I held a popular view and seeing it isn't about me, I should not have shared by view. ;) But I choose/chose to. We have been in situations somewhat different yet severely impacting our cruise investment and know the choices we made. We each decide what we think it acceptable to us. Clearly there is a wide variance.

 

 

 

[serendipity1499]

It looks like it would take approx. 16 hours to go by bus from Van. to SFO. Just wondering if HAL offered that as an alternative-or- possibly a train. Last winter when the N. Amsterdam was repositioning to Ft. Laud. from New York she docked in Jacksonville because of an impending hurricane.

Approx. 1000 guests were bussed from Ft. Laud. , roughly an 8-10 hour trip, to board the ship there. Conversely, guests returning to Ft. Laud. were bussed there. Not a great solution for anyone but at least all the guests were accomodated.

 

I bolded your last paragraph only to make a simple correction..It takes 5-6 hrs from Ft. Lauderdale to Jacksonville on the Florida Turnpike not 8 to 10..

[startwin]

:) I agree. I understand what others are saying and don't quibble with it. DH and I just seem to look at these situations differently. Whatever works.......

 

I'll be interested to follow how this all unfolds and hope those who are impacted will let us know how it resolves.

 

 

 

 

I get it. :)

Not for one moment did I think I held a popular view and seeing it isn't about me, I should not have shared by view. ;) But I choose/chose to. We have been in situations somewhat different yet severely impacting our cruise investment and know the choices we made. We each decide what we think it acceptable to us. Clearly there is a wide variance.

 

 

 

 

I will reiterate was pointed out earlier by another poster - it wasn't about you, the OP wasn't asking what you would do. He was asking what was fair.

[sail7seas]

Which begs the answer of what does each of us think is fair?

What do you think is fair and what do I think is fair and what does everyone else who cares to respond thinks is fair.

[cruisin'girl]

...........

 

........ll.llWe have been in situations somewhat different yet severely impacting our cruise investment and know the choices we made. We each decide what we think it acceptable to us. Clearly there is a wide variance.

 

Do you accept whatever compensation or refunds all companies decide to offer when there is a problem with your purchase or is it really just with HAL that whatever corporate HAL decides to offer is fine because so many of their employees are "friends"? You did say earlier in a post that whatever is offered you would accept.

[sail7seas]

Do you accept whatever compensation or refunds all companies decide to offer when there is a problem with your purchase or is it really just with HAL that whatever corporate HAL decides to offer is fine because so many of their employees are "friends"? You did say earlier in a post that whatever is offered you would accept.

 

 

It has been pointed out this thread is not about me and I fully agree but since you asked' date=' I will respond.

 

For the most part, Yes,,,,,, it has been our habit that we mostly accept what is offered and move along. We have not been in a situation where what WE consider to be a very large sum has been involved that we thought we SHOULD be paid very much more so I can think of almost no situation where we have 'fought it out'. We take our loss and move along. If we don't think the company did all they should have for us, we have the choice to take our business elsewhere.

 

We are not inclined to fight for an additional $100 or such. My DH's time from his business day is worth more and the anxiety the argument will cost us is sometimes more than the dollar value.

 

Again,,,, I am very sure there are few if any here who agree and that is fine. You asked. I answered and do not feel the need to defend. :)

 

I can think of two very specific cruises where HAL extended offers to everyone on board and we 'took what they gave'. I know for absolutely sure some passengers fought it out with HAL both on board and later with Seattle office and they received higher compensation. We chose to accept what HAL reimbursed and put it behind us. :)

 

 

 

[/b']

[Jemima]

I'm just off the Westdam which overnighted with the Statendam in Vancouver on Sept. 29. HAL kept both those ships in Vancouver overnight and kept the Oosterdam in Seattle overnight due to weather conditions. It is true that we did US customs etc. in Vancouver. The decision to overnight was made firmly sometime in the afternoon and US authorities would not allow anyone, passengers or crew, to then leave and return to the ship. Then we still had to zero down in Los Angeles which was a port call and turn in customs forms in both LA and San Diego. The weather conditions were better, but still poor, when we sailed from Vancouver at about noon on the 30th and we were quite rocky for about 24 hours. We missed the port of Astoria.

Our cruise was a 6 day cruise Vancouver to San Diego and the next two cruises are jazz charters. Hope this isn't too disjointed. We're tired from disembarkation and I was skimming through this thread before taking a short nap in our hotel room.

[kazu]

It has been pointed out this thread is not about me and I fully agree but since you asked, I will respond.

 

For the most part, Yes,,,,,, it has been our habit that we mostly accept what is offered and move along. We have not been in a situation where what WE consider to be a very large sum has been involved that we thought we SHOULD be paid very much more so I can think of almost no situation where we have 'fought it out'. We take our loss and move along. If we don't think the company did all they should have for us, we have the choice to take our business elsewhere.

 

We are not inclined to fight for an additional $100 or such. My DH's time from his business day is worth more and the anxiety the argument will cost us is sometimes more than the dollar value.

Again,,,, I am very sure there are few if any here who agree and that is fine. You asked. I answered and do not feel the need to defend. :)

 

I can think of two very specific cruises where HAL extended offers to everyone on board and we 'took what they gave'. I know for absolutely sure some passengers fought it out with HAL both on board and later with Seattle office and they received higher compensation. We chose to accept what HAL reimbursed and put it behind us. :)

 

 

 

 

Sail, the bolding and underlining is mine. (I didn't realize until after that your post was totally in bold). With all due respect - time is money for all of us. The last part of your sentence makes far more sense to me - it's just not worth the anxiety or trouble. that makes sense.

 

I'm quite sure that you could handle the complaint department quite adequately and let your DH work. ;)

 

But if you don't want the hassle - I totally get that:)

[sail7seas]

<snip> Sail, the bolding and underlining is mine. (I didn't realize until after that your post was totally in bold). With all due respect - time is money for all of us. The last part of your sentence makes far more sense to me - it's just not worth the anxiety or trouble. that makes sense.

 

I'm quite sure that you could handle the complaint department quite adequately and let your DH work. ;)

 

But if you don't want the hassle - I totally get that:)

 

 

For those who pointed out this thread it not about me..... ;) :D It seems to have been made about me. Fine, doesn't matter. The diversion is unfortunate for OP and others more interested in the topic of this thread.

 

You do not have to understand and my position does not have to make sense to you. :)

Let's hand this thread back where it belongs.

OP....... it's all yours. :)

[kazu]

For those who pointed out this thread it not about me..... ;) :D It seems to have been made about me. Fine, doesn't matter. The diversion is unfortunate for OP and others more interested in the topic of this thread.

 

You do not have to understand and my position does not have to make sense to you. :)

Let's hand this thread back where it belongs.

OP....... it's all yours. :)

 

I'm sorry - as it seems my post wasn't clear - I was agreeing and understanding with it not being worth the hassle. That might be how others feel in this situation as well.

[Jade13]

 

I can think of two very specific cruises where HAL extended offers to everyone on board and we 'took what they gave'. I know for absolutely sure some passengers fought it out with HAL both on board and later with Seattle office and they received higher compensation. We chose to accept what HAL reimbursed and put it behind us. :)

 

 

I know one of the situations you mention was Canada/New England in 2010 and agree HAL was very fair in giving everyone 25% of what was paid on their next HAL cruise since it was weather related and 3 out of 5 ports were missed, and they didn't have to do anything.

 

I definitely know there were people on board and in line pulling their tips, but don't know what happened after that. Would love to know what higher compensation anyone received?

[soccerpapi]

We just got off the Statendam in Vancouver, Monday, with another 80-90 passengers who had all booked the Vancouver to San Francisco 3-day cruise, and wonder what people think of the compensation offered?

Due to storms on the North Pacific Coast, the captain and HAL (Holland America Line, Seattle) decided to stay in Vancouver (along with the Westendam) for an extra night- no problem there, safety is important. However, after the announcement was made that the ship would stay in port overnight (made right after the muster drill), the captain made the announcement that they would be skipping the stop in San Francisco and going directly to San Diego.

Please keep in mind that the San Francisco stop was not skipped because it was dangerous or out of the way to stop there- it was presumably to keep the rest of the cruise segments following this one on time.

The SF disembarking passengers were called to a meeting at 7:30 p.m. Sunday and given the opportunity to get off in Vancouver Monday morning and get a refund for the base price of the cruise plus airfare home OR stay on to San Diego and get flown home from there. (They would not agree to fly people to San Francisco unless this was their home. Many people were unhappy with this as they had made plans in San Francisco where they thought they were getting off- hotel rooms, tickets for tours, even cars left to be picked up there. There was quite a bit of discussion about this.) This information was delivered by Guest Relations Manager, Liesbeth Soors, to about 100 people affected. We were asked to make the decision as soon as possible but no later than the next morning. We were given a letter worded “If you are unable to continue to San Diego with us, we would like to offer you a full refund to disembark in Vancouver. We will also refund you for any non-refundable expenses due to this change. In addition we would like to extend you a Future Cruise Credit equal to 25% of the base cruise fare paid for your 3-day sailing.” “We will reimburse you for any resulting travel change fees.” We were told HAL representatives would arrive about 8 a.m. the next morning and that the captain would make another announcement by 9 a.m.

We were allowed to make calls home and to work (however it is hard to call work on Sunday evening to check to see if we can take another few days off work) to help make our decision.

The next morning another announcement was made that passengers who were going to disembark in Vancouver needed to have their bags packed and in the meeting room by 10:30 ready to disembark. In addition another meeting was called at about 9:00 a.m. to make arrangements and to give out new information. We went immediately to the meeting room where 4 HAL representatives started meeting individually with passengers. However that was taking too long so they opened up discussion to the whole room and made a new announcement- that airfare was no longer included and would be deducted from the cruise refund. (When people complained about this we were basically told that it was a ‘he said/she said’ situation, and that it wouldn’t be paid.) By the time this meeting was over it was 10 a.m. and we rushed to pack our bags. All disembarking passengers were required to carry off their own bags (I noted that one elderly couple DID get help.)

When the passengers left the ship we were seated in the terminal for 4 hours while the HAL team made airplane arrangements for us. (They claimed that ‘computer problems’ were slowing the process of finding flights.) They called us into their office in small groups to give approval for the airfares that they had found for us (almost everyone was going to SF) ranging from $250/pp for the first group to almost $400pp for the later groups. (In the end as we were departing the terminal they announced that the cruise line would ‘pick up’ the difference between all of the various fares and that we would each pay the lowest fare quoted.) During the 4 hours in the terminal we were fed cookies, donut holes, bagels, coffee/water (keep in mind that some didn’t have breakfast in the rush off the ship and that we didn’t have a chance to eat again until we reached the airport at about 4:45. We couldn’t leave the terminal to get something on our own as the terminal was closed for the season.)

We left for the airport at 3 p.m.on a bus they provided, and the flights left at 7:30 and later (mostly two flights for all of us.)

What do you think? If you had paid to fly to Vancouver for this cruise and then got off again in Vancouver, would you consider this fair compensation? We paid to get to Vancouver, then had one night on board where we were basically in a muster drill, then a meeting, then debating our choices, then off in the morning. We then spent a whole day traveling back home. We might get about $70 pp back, and about $70 towards a future cruise (assuming we’d want to take one….) If you took vacation days off work to take this ‘failed’ trip would you be happy?

There has been debate in past forums about missed ports and compensation, but usually it isn’t a disembarkation port (and usually it is because there was a safety issue to go to that port.) Many people had made plans to fly from San Francisco to Las Vegas (or other destinations) after a few days stay in SF(based on their Weds arrival date.) All who flew to SF arrived two days early and had to make interim hotel arrangements until their pre-made reservations kicked in. There were presumably other passengers who planned to board in San Francisco who were also inconvenienced by this decision (and probably had to fly to San Diego on their own dollar.)

Why wouldn’t HAL have just made their stop in SF shorter, saving all of us this grief. The time probably could have been made up in sailing time (since the ship made it to the SF Bay area by mid-day Weds.) They probably would have made it to the next port in San Diego pretty close to schedule.

Most of the people getting off the ship said they would never cruise HAL again. I especially felt bad for the wedding party of about 15-20 whose plans were ruined (they did get married onboard however- congrats!), and those who had taken this as their first cruise (because they may never find out how wonderful a cruise CAN be.) There were also many onboard who were continuing on the cruise who expressed their unhappiness to not get to sail under the Golden Gate Bridge (something on many of their ‘bucket lists’.)

What would you have considered to be fair compensation??? Would you sail HAL again if this happened to you?

 

Dear California Cruisers,

 

I am sorry this happened to you, I am sure you were ready to go on a nice cruise and it sure didn't turn out that way. I am sorry you had to go through all these troubles.

 

To clarify, Holland America employee Lisbeth stated that if the passengers that were scheduled to disembark at San Francisco would be provided with airfare to thier home city. Is this correct?

 

Then, once you and others got off the ship, you were told that if your home city was San Francisco, the offer from Holland America to provide the airfare was taken away. Is this correct?

 

At anytme before you disembarked this ship in Vancouver was it at all clear that if you disembarked iin Vancouver and you were returning to San Francisco that your airfare would no longer be covered by Holland America?

 

Were there any discussions about passengers returning to San Francisco not being provided airfare before disembarking in Vancouver?

 

Again, I am sorry you had to have this experience instead of a nice cruise.

 

Thank you for answering the abive questions and posting your experience on Cruise Critic.

 

Sincerely,

 

soccer

 

P.S. If others that were on this trip with the canceled stop in San Francisco would like to answer the questions above too, that would be great. Thank you.

[Jemima]

I'm just off the Westdam which overnighted with the Statendam in Vancouver on Sept. 29. HAL kept both those ships in Vancouver overnight and kept the Oosterdam in Seattle overnight due to weather conditions. It is true that we did US customs etc. in Vancouver. The decision to overnight was made firmly sometime in the afternoon and US authorities would not allow anyone, passengers or crew, to then leave and return to the ship. Then we still had to zero down in Los Angeles which was a port call and turn in customs forms in both LA and San Diego. The weather conditions were better, but still poor, when we sailed from Vancouver at about noon on the 30th and we were quite rocky for about 24 hours. We missed the port of Astoria.

Our cruise was a 6 day cruise Vancouver to San Diego and the next two cruises are jazz charters. Hope this isn't too disjointed. We're tired from disembarkation and I was skimming through this thread before taking a short nap in our hotel room.

 

Rereading my post, I wasn't very clear. We and nearly everyone on our cruise seemed to enjoy the cruise even though we had to stay in port the first day and skip a port. I just didn't hear complaints; just people who were having a great time. My daughter and I viewed the overnight for weather, the rocky first day of sailing, and the missed port as an adventure. This was true of both first time cruisers and very experienced cruisers.

[Calif. Cruisers]

Dear California Cruisers,

 

I am sorry this happened to you, I am sure you were ready to go on a nice cruise and it sure didn't turn out that way. I am sorry you had to go through all these troubles.

 

To clarify, Holland America employee Lisbeth stated that if the passengers that were scheduled to disembark at San Francisco would be provided with airfare to thier home city. Is this correct?

She said that anyone who disembarked in Vancouver or continued to San Diego (who was originally supposed to disembark in SF) would be provided with airfare to their home only, not just San Francisco area residents. (i.e. if home was Florida then they would only fly you to Florida, not San Francisco)

 

Then, once you and others got off the ship, you were told that if your home city was San Francisco, the offer from Holland America to provide the airfare was taken away. Is this correct?

We were all told as a group that the airfare would come out of our cruise refund, no one ever made any special announcement or arrangement with those of us who lived in the San Francisco area. We were also called into a small meeting once on-shore and told what the airfare would cost each person individually. If they had planned to NOT charge the San Francisco residents then this would have been the time to tell us that- but we were told we would be charged.

 

At anytme before you disembarked this ship in Vancouver was it at all clear that if you disembarked iin Vancouver and you were returning to San Francisco that your airfare would no longer be covered by Holland America?

About 1/2 hour before we had to be back in the meeting room with packed bags we understood that they had changed their story from the night before and were no longer planning to pay our airfare, from Vancouver or San Diego. I think everyone was in shock, and seeing that we had 1/2 hour to be back there with packed bags- we rushed to pack. We were told that if we weren't back in that room with packed bags by 10:30 we had to stay on the ship to San Diego. They wanted to leave port by 12 noon which meant they needed us off, if we were getting off.

 

Were there any discussions about passengers returning to San Francisco not being provided airfare before disembarking in Vancouver?

As mentioned above, the announcements were to the whole group and there were no other specifics given to those who live in San Francisco. There were no specific arrangements made for any of us until we were on the pier, and we were told we would be charged and given a specific fare that would be deducted from our cruise refund. We were told that they were going to try to use their corporate rate to find us fares.

 

Again, I am sorry you had to have this experience instead of a nice cruise.

 

Thank you for answering the abive questions and posting your experience on Cruise Critic.

I hope to someday post a positive resolution.

 

Sincerely,

 

soccer

 

P.S. If others that were on this trip with the canceled stop in San Francisco would like to answer the questions above too, that would be great. Thank you.

Some people new to cruise critic may not know they have to register to post replies. (see my answers imbedded above.)