One less day on with change on Jewel - Not Fair!

[txbuffetslayer]

There is a big difference in missing a port and having an extra Sea Day, or having to overnight at a port you wanted to see, than coming back a day early to stay on a ship in the port of embarkation with no shops or casino open in a construction zone.

 

Anyone who can not see this has their NCL blinders on too narrowly.

 

You pay for the whole cruise experience; food, entertainment (and for many that is casino or shopping time), transportation to ports, and enjoying time out at sea. When you lose 3/4 of this for 1/7 of the time you are due a refund.

 

Pretend you went to a restaurant for 7 nights that had fixed price which included a drink, appetizer, salad, a main course, and dessert. But on one night you only were given an appetizer and dessert because they needed to do repairs in the kitchen. Do any of you honestly think you should pay the whole check on that night?

 

Thank you. This is worded perfectly. Missing the port is bad enough but happens. Missing the port plus early return plus being treated poorly is what is unacceptable.

[gusbourg]

Pretend you went to a restaurant for 7 nights that had fixed price which included a drink, appetizer, salad, a main course, and dessert. But on one night you only were given an appetizer and dessert because they needed to do repairs in the kitchen. Do any of you honestly think you should pay the whole check on that night?

 

Or even what company in their right mind would ask you to pay at all? Remember they're not giving us the option to leave the restaurant (an analogy for not giving us an option to cancel our cruise). If I went to a restaurant and they didn't have the ability to sell me food, they'd tell me and offer what they could and let me take it or leave it. With NCL, their position is take it, you're still paying full price, and here's an after dinner mint because we're really sorry. It's beyond ridiculous. No business operating under a fair model would act like that way, period.

[txbuffetslayer]

This doesn't take the sting away, but there is a Sled Dog Discovery & Musher's Camp excursion available in Juneau - puppies included.

 

http://reviews.ncl.com/4066/JNU_39/sled-dog-discovery-mushers-camp-reviews/reviews.htm

 

Unfortunately we had already booked an all day excursion there that isn't refundable

[txbuffetslayer]

Which is also a thought. I feel bad for anyone who booked excursions in Skagway outside of NCL. I haven't seen a post yet but there has to be.

[AdoraBelle]

Unfortunately we had already booked an all day excursion there that isn't refundable

 

 

Hmm, excursions won't refund if the ship doesn't even make port? This has not been my experience in the Caribbean.

[triptolemus]

Hmm, excursions won't refund if the ship doesn't even make port? This has not been my experience in the Caribbean.

 

The excursion they are referencing is for Juneau.

[AdoraBelle]

The excursion they are referencing is for Juneau.

 

 

Misunderstood, thank you.

[fshagan]

Is it? Will it be legal for me to dispute the charges after the cruise based on them not delivering the services they sold? Terms and conditions, and shrink wrap contracts are a weird thing. They're only binding when the courts agree that they are. Arbitration clauses, jurisdiction clauses, all of that gets thrown out of court all of the time based on local consumer protection laws.

 

I think that if they don't do better than this, it'll go to court. And when it does it'll come down to two things:

 

1) What is the monetary value of the compensation they provided? I'm sticking with a conservative $50.

 

2) How much money per cabin did they save by not going to Skagway?

 

If the answer to #2 is greater than #1 they're going to look pretty terrible here on the question of 'did they deliver the goods, or provide a reasonable compensation for the portion thereof they did not deliver'.

 

Make no mistake about it, they stand to save a ton of money here - and they're not passing any of it on to those of us who have been wronged.

 

#NCLRipoff

 

"The law is an ass" is an old saying, and it means "ass" as in stubborn mule. There is a written contract that you agreed to that stipulates you can't sue them and must enter binding arbitration (although you could sue them in Small Claims Court).

 

There are a couple of cruise industry lawyers on the internet and they all say the same thing: in cases like this you are helpless because you have agreed to their terms.

 

Now, the "gentlemen's agreement" that we all have with our trusted vendors is that if something goes wrong they will make it right. That is our expectation. Our only response when the vendor breaks that trust is to choose another vendor.

 

There is no formula for the amount of compensation NCL gives you vs. the amount of profit they make by (legally) cheating you. That's not how the system works. You could try and get the value of the item they promised that they didn't give you, but they are giving you everything you agreed to in the contract. You should get a refund of the port taxes for the missed port.

 

As a person who has been in customer support, NCL is being run by the equivalent of baboons. They may be very smart in financial matters, or great strategists, but they are ape-like in their handling of customers. It makes me very nervous when I book a trip with them.

[Regguy]

If you're right, that there's an arbitration clause, then you can arbitrate. Arbitration clauses don't prohibit you from bringing claims, they only say in which forum you must do so.

 

I'm pretty skeptical this would be permitted under the contract. If you booked a 10-day cruise from Venice, the positions taken in this thread would mean NCL could scrap the whole itinerary, dock in Ravena for nine days, then return to Venice.

 

"The law is an ass" is an old saying, and it means "ass" as in stubborn mule. There is a written contract that you agreed to that stipulates you can't sue them and must enter binding arbitration (although you could sue them in Small Claims Court).

 

There are a couple of cruise industry lawyers on the internet and they all say the same thing: in cases like this you are helpless because you have agreed to their terms.

 

Now, the "gentlemen's agreement" that we all have with our trusted vendors is that if something goes wrong they will make it right. That is our expectation. Our only response when the vendor breaks that trust is to choose another vendor.

 

There is no formula for the amount of compensation NCL gives you vs. the amount of profit they make by (legally) cheating you. That's not how the system works. You could try and get the value of the item they promised that they didn't give you, but they are giving you everything you agreed to in the contract. You should get a refund of the port taxes for the missed port.

 

As a person who has been in customer support, NCL is being run by the equivalent of baboons. They may be very smart in financial matters, or great strategists, but they are ape-like in their handling of customers. It makes me very nervous when I book a trip with them.

[Jana60]

Unfortunately, what they are doing is perfectly legal. I'm sure folks who don't live in Seattle, and have flights, would not be happy having to leave the ship a day early. Legally, NCL can drive around in circles for 7 days if they wish.

 

Yeah I guess if they want four thousand people, and all of their family members and friends to never cruise with Norwegian again then legally they can do it but as a new ncl stockholder I don't want them to!

Edited August 4, 2016 by Jana60

[S.S.Oceanlover]

I was on a 7 day cruise on Oosterdam in the fall of 2006 when a fire disable an azipod - we missed Puerto Valarta and returned to San Diego a day early. As I recall call we got a $300 credit plus 25% off next cruise. I was delighted - but there were crowds still complaining.

 

The credit and the discount on a longer itinerary in better accommodations came to significantly more than what the Oosterdam cruise cost.

 

I was on a Princess ship in 2012 that was cut short by 2 days due to norovirus outbreak.

 

They bought us airfare home, 25% off a future cruise and a 100% refund of our cruise fares.

 

I was flying Southwest so when I canceled my airfare home I had a credit for the air also.

 

Bill

[IsanTom]

So sorry!

[dexddd]

It doesn't sound like they are quite the same though.

 

In the example with the Star, the hotel night suggests that the passengers had to disembark in Miami.

 

With the POA, I would imagine that boarding was delayed by a day, so in both cases there was a day less onboard ship.

 

I'm not suggesting $100 OBC is sufficient (I've got no view on that), but those two examples aren't necessarily a direct comparison.

 

I'm late to this thread so maybe some of my fellow cruises posted already, but the POA trip was more than just pushing back embarkation one day of 11. There was still quite a bit of work going on the ship with areas/decks closed during the entire trip and one area (spa) closed several trips after.

[gusbourg]

I was on a Princess ship in 2012 that was cut short by 2 days due to norovirus outbreak.

 

They bought us airfare home, 25% off a future cruise and a 100% refund of our cruise fares.

 

I was flying Southwest so when I canceled my airfare home I had a credit for the air also.

 

Bill

 

That sounds like a fantastic approach to customer service. Personally, I'm not asking for anything even comparative to that, I just want 1/7th of the money I paid reimbursed for the day that we simply will not be cruising. NCL is insulting their customers, and I hope all who read this thread consider this before they book their next cruise with NCL.

 

It's clear that stuff happens, and sometimes its out of the cruise lines control. It's how the company responds to make it right by the customer that sets them apart. Here NCL is not just setting itself apart from companies that do a great job, they're setting themselves apart from companies that just do an OK job. They're creating an approach to customer service where the motto is fleece the customer. #FleeceStyleCruising #NCLRipoff

[fshagan]

If you're right, that there's an arbitration clause, then you can arbitrate. Arbitration clauses don't prohibit you from bringing claims, they only say in which forum you must do so.

 

I'm pretty skeptical this would be permitted under the contract. If you booked a 10-day cruise from Venice, the positions taken in this thread would mean NCL could scrap the whole itinerary, dock in Ravena for nine days, then return to Venice.

 

You should read the contract. While you can request your concern be heard by the arbitration board they have no requirement that they have to hear your request. Arbitration is a stacked deck against you. If you send a letter requesting a hearing, you will probably get a refusal back with this snippet from the guest contract you agreed to:

 

6. Vessel and Voyage:

....

© Itinerary Deviation: The Guest agrees that the Carrier has the sole discretion and liberty to direct the movements of the vessel, including the rights to: proceed without pilots and tow, and assist other vessels in all situations; deviate from the purchased voyage or the normal course for any purpose, including, without limitation, in the interest of Guests or of the vessel, or to save life or property; put in at any unscheduled or unadvertised port; cancel any scheduled call at any port for any reason and at any time before, during or after sailing of the vessel; omit, advance or delay landing at any scheduled or advertised port; return to port of embarkation or to any port previously visited if the Carrier deems it prudent to do so; substitute another vessel or port(s) of call without prior notice and without incurring any liability to the Guest on account thereof for any loss, damage or delay whatsoever, whether consequential or otherwise.

 

Source: https://www.ncl.com/sites/default/files/Guest-Ticket-Contract-11-2015.pdf

 

The reductio ad absurdum example you gave doesn't work in this case because they are not docking in Ravena for nine days; they are skipping a port to return to the embarkation port for the benefit of the vessel, and that is specifically mentioned as an exclusion in the contract.

 

So they can do it legally, and you have no recourse other than taking your business elsewhere.

Edited August 4, 2016 by fshagan

[Jules**]

I am sorry for the folks on this cruise. Skagway was my favorite port of my Pearl cruise. I did a dog mushers camp excursion and just the ride part of the excursion, driving to the camp, was heart-stopping. So, so awesome (pic below).

 

[AK Dreaming]

For those of us on this cruise, maybe we should discuss our recourses on the Roll Call thread?

[jm485]

You should read the contract. While you can request your concern be heard by the arbitration board they have no requirement that they have to hear your request. Arbitration is a stacked deck against you. If you send a letter requesting a hearing, you will probably get a refusal back with this snippet from the guest contract you agreed to:

 

--SNIP--

 

So they can do it legally, and you have no recourse other than taking your business elsewhere.

 

Yes and no.

 

NCL's ability to enforce the terms of their contract applies only insofar as a court allows them to do so. If the contract is viewed as being overly "stacked" in favor of a corporation, there is a potential that someone can bring a suit and that a court will rule to nullify that provision of the contract.

 

I work in the insurance industry. I've seen plenty of cases where courts simply say that an exclusion in a contract that was approved by regulators is "not in the public interest" and interpret the contract as providing coverage that was clearly not intended to be provided. Consumer advocates are all over the arbitration clause issue right now, as those provisions are generally viewed as very unfriendly to consumers. NCL can argue that it was in the cruise contract all it wants, but if a court really has a bee in its bonnet about consumer fairness, they might find themselves out of luck.

[Jana60]

Yeah I guess if they want four thousand people, and all of their family members and friends to never cruise with Norwegian again then legally they can do it but as a new ncl stockholder I don't want them to!

 

As I said above This is ultimately the most powerful response you your family and friends have to influence Norwegians Behavior.

[Heronymous]

Yes and no.

 

 

 

NCL's ability to enforce the terms of their contract applies only insofar as a court allows them to do so. If the contract is viewed as being overly "stacked" in favor of a corporation, there is a potential that someone can bring a suit and that a court will rule to nullify that provision of the contract.

 

 

 

I work in the insurance industry. I've seen plenty of cases where courts simply say that an exclusion in a contract that was approved by regulators is "not in the public interest" and interpret the contract as providing coverage that was clearly not intended to be provided. Consumer advocates are all over the arbitration clause issue right now, as those provisions are generally viewed as very unfriendly to consumers. NCL can argue that it was in the cruise contract all it wants, but if a court really has a bee in its bonnet about consumer fairness, they might find themselves out of luck.

 

 

 

This is true, many contracts have consumers waive their rights but certain rights can't be legally waived. Just because you signed a contract waving your rights doesn't mean a particular provision is legally binding. A court may agree and allow you to seek remedy, or it may not. The only way to tell is to try, but be prepared that you may get shut down right away.

 

What I do when presented with situations like that is call the local bar association and get a referral to a local attorney who specializes in the matter. They often provide a free phone consultation, but usually have an extremely discounted consultation such as $30 for a half hour. You present the facts, they present the options. Up to you to decide what to do next.

-Keith

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[xriva]

For the people that are planning to go home early, has anyone said you will be allowed off the ship? That will require Customs & Immigration being present to meet the ship and the passengers, and they aren't always available, especially if there are only a very small number of people that want to get off early.

 

When we got into Houston the evening before we were scheduled to arrive (the ship was trying to beat some bad weather - and it was foggy coming in), we just stayed on the ship all night because we weren't able to get off - the port infrastructure wasn't ready until Saturday morning. So, I could see my car from my balcony, but that didn't help much. We did have a lovely dinner on the ship, we just weren't sailing.

Edited August 4, 2016 by xriva

[Regguy]

You should read the contract. While you can request your concern be heard by the arbitration board they have no requirement that they have to hear your request. Arbitration is a stacked deck against you. If you send a letter requesting a hearing, you will probably get a refusal back with this snippet from the guest contract you agreed to:

 

They can't refuse to arbitrate under their contract. If you file an arbitration claim, they have to respond. I've been pretty successful in arbitrations, and find arbitrators are often pretty consumer friendly, although NCL surely makes it hard by forcing you to file in Florida.

 

This is an obvious contract of adhesion, and Florida is law is pretty favorable in interpreting contracts of adhesion in favor of the adhered party.

[gusbourg]

For the people that are planning to go home early, has anyone said you will be allowed off the ship? That will require Customs & Immigration being present to meet the ship and the passengers, and they aren't always available, especially if there are only a very small number of people that want to get off early.

 

When we got into Houston the evening before we were scheduled to arrive (the ship was trying to beat some bad weather - and it was foggy coming in), we just stayed on the ship all night because we weren't able to get off - the port infrastructure wasn't ready until Saturday morning. So, I could see my car from my balcony, but that didn't help much. We did have a lovely dinner on the ship, we just weren't sailing.

 

I can't imagine a scenario where they're going to take a bunch of grumpy / upset / disappointed people back early, and then have them stay on the ship for > 24 hours. They've scheduled us to arrive in Seattle at 8am on Friday. Telling people you can't leave the boat till tomorrow would be the kind of epic stupidity that only NCL could pull off. I believe they truly would have a mutiny on their hands at that point.

[BirdTravels]

Here's what we received:

 

 

 

The updated table shows Skagway is gone, and instead they just head to Victoria, then Seattle, and stay in Seattle an extra night. So basically you have two days in Seattle... Or as I call it two days at home. I tried to get them to pro-rate the day I'm losing (which I think is actually more valuable than just a single day, but I'm not trying to be unreasonable) and their answer is because it affects everyone, they're not doing jack. Apparently, if it was something specific to me or my situation they'd be able to make a special offer (what I don't know).

 

Again, I urge EVERYONE in this situation to file a complaint with the Washington State Attorney Generals Office. Here's a link to make it easy: http://www.atg.wa.gov/file-complaint

 

As well the executive line they gave me was: 305-436-4000.

 

Additionally, tweet at Andy Stewart. They're doing wrong by every single one of us.

 

The change is consistent with with the cruise contract you agreed to when you checked-in online. Make sure you mention that when you file your complaint.

[Lulubelle45]

Shame they arent staying overnight in Victoria as a common complaint is not enough time there, and they have a shipyard to repair cruise ships.