Feeling a bit screwed over by RC, Irma safety/risk issue and no-refund, greed?

[BND]

$1.19, seriously? I think people should suck it up and let it go. The business owners in St. Maarten are suffering already and shouldn't have to come out of pocket for it. Just look at it as giving back to the economy there.

 

Also, people need to learn the motto "buyer beware" which simply means know what you're purchasing and what you're agreeing to. Very simple.

[MikeBTN]

Good idea. $1.19 sounds a lot less significant than mentioning 5%

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

Or, since the fee is so insignificant, increase prices by $1 per passenger to offset cancellation fees and then have fully refundable fares.

 

You can't have it both ways - either the tour/cruise provider takes all the risk and fares are higher to offset their risk OR the passenger takes the risk and fares are lower.

 

Same goes for airlines. If there weren't federal regulations requiring them to refund fares then fares overall would be cheaper.

[Cuizer2]

Do you think the ships should just go the promised island, anchor offshore but not get off. [emoji12]

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Forums mobile app

 

I wasn't aware ships got on or off.

 

My post was a sarcastic reply to a line I was getting tired of reading.

[Cuizer2]

And you conveniently left out the part that this is a small business owner, whose entire life has been upended, and who will be stuck paying that fee.

 

Who should pay that bank fee? The guy whose country has just been devastated by a category 5 hurricane, or the pampered cruiser who can afford to cruise?

 

Or the big bad bank could just waive the fee. Not every bank has to act like Wells Fargo.

[Cuizer2]

I had the same experience in New Zealand, and it was a lot more than $1.19. I did not question that he was charged the fee by his bank. Not everything operates like U.S. institutions.

 

That is good news. The less Enrons there are in the world, the better off we all would be.

[DaniDanielle]

OK kids, I think we all need to take a breath and move on. Unfortunately, we all had to go through the headaches of refunds, changed cruises, cancelled ports etc. Let's try to agree to disagree.

[LMaxwell]

I had the same experience in New Zealand, and it was a lot more than $1.19. I did not question that he was charged the fee by his bank. Not everything operates like U.S. institutions.

 

If I as a paying guest can't make it, fine lose the fee. If the vendor can't provide the experience why should I lose money?

[LMaxwell]

$1.19, seriously? I think people should suck it up and let it go. The business owners in St. Maarten are suffering already and shouldn't have to come out of pocket for it. Just look at it as giving back to the economy there.

 

Also, people need to learn the motto "buyer beware" which simply means know what you're purchasing and what you're agreeing to. Very simple.

 

$1.19 is a very small trivial amount; if it is so small give it back to the empty handed consumer.

[payitforward]

$1.19 is a very small trivial amount; if it is so small give it back to the empty handed consumer.

 

Seriously?? The guy just lost his home and EVERYTHING he owns! How can people be so cold and callus? If you can't afford to lose $1.19, you have no business on a cruise. If it were me, I would have happily let him keep ALL of my money so that future cruisers might get to experience the St. Marten I once knew.

[jagsfan]

I'd be royally pissed if I was booked on a cruise that was being shortened by the cruise line's choice and they were unwilling to provide compensation to me for my non-refundable travel expenses related to my booking. Right now, doesn't matter if it's for "humanitarian" reasons. There's zero reason RCL couldn't be running these recently-shortened cruises as originally agreed. Insurance isn't going to help. The cruise you booked isn't being canceled. At best you could see a prorated reimbursement for the short-changed days. But if you "chose" to take a 100% future cruise credit, you're stuck. You've still lost out on your travel costs -- at least to the extent any of those aren't refundable. Now maybe a squeaky wheel will get greased if you complain loudly about it. But it shouldn't be that way. When RCL (or any line) voluntarily shortchanges your booking, they need to have some liability for related costs you suffer, too.

 

 

 

Why would you put quotes around "humanitarian" indicating the reason is not humanitarian?

Cruise ships went with critical supplies to the hardest hit Caribbean islands and picked up people who had lost everything but the clothes they were wearing. No shelter, food, water or medical treatment. What is your definition of humanitarian?

Helping survivors get through calamitous natural disaster should take precedence over people's vacations, in my opinion.

I hope I don't know anyone who thinks like you do.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[ColoradoGurl]

No, the Cardinals don't play until Sunday against the Colts.

 

 

[emoji23] I went straight to football too. But I think he was talking baseball.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[ColoradoGurl]

You convienently left out the fact that he's keeping 5% of the fare "per the cancellation policy". Can you imagine if Royal Carribean did that? It might crash the Cruise Critic servers lol

 

 

Haha, yeah I guess that's what the person was pointing out. I didn't see that part as a problem so it went right over my head that that's what he was confused about.

 

Royal keeping a percentage of a deposit? You mean like those crappy non-refundable deposits people keep booking and then screaming and crying when Royal actually keeps it when they cancel? Lol.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[LMaxwell]

Seriously?? The guy just lost his home and EVERYTHING he owns! How can people be so cold and callus? If you can't afford to lose $1.19, you have no business on a cruise. If it were me, I would have happily let him keep ALL of my money so that future cruisers might get to experience the St. Marten I once knew.

And if his island were not devastated but his equipment failed or he overslept or didn't provide your excursion through his own fault he would not give you a full refund either. If that fair?

 

What I can or can't afford has no bearing on what is fair.

 

I lost thousands of dollars this month at work due to Irma. We had no power for four days. Fridge and freezer thrown out. Property damage but way less than it could have been, so I am grateful. The combination of lost money plus replacing food and making repairs is not easy so shame on you wagging a finger in my face over any amount of money.

[jagsfan]

You are absolutely, 100% right. If you don't like the terms of the contract, don't sign it, and vacation somewhere else. That doesn't change the fact that RCI's contract stinks. It favors RCI, not the passenger. If you've read the contract it's clear that it's designed to "screw" the passenger. The letter of the law, being what it is, there is still a thing called customer service. Personally, I would be upset if my cruise was cancelled and was not offered a refund if I were unable to sail in the future. I think Royal Caribbean should, at the very minimum, try to make the customer happy with future cruise incentives, whatever they may be. If a fully paid passenger is unable to partake in RCI's future cruise incentives, a full refund should be offered.

 

 

 

Have you read any of the other cruise lines' contracts? If RCCL's contract seems unfair to you, you might want to avoid all cruise ships.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Edited September 16, 2017 by jagsfan

[BND]

$1.19 is a very small trivial amount; if it is so small give it back to the empty handed consumer.

 

$1.19 times how many? Empty handed? Seriously, $1.19 leaves someone "empty handed"?

[jagsfan]

As I understand his wording, he will not be able to provide his contracted service until the middle of December, so if you have a booking with him before then, you will get 95% of your money back.

 

 

 

It should be 100% back if he cannot honor your booking.

 

 

 

This is a man who lost 3 boats, has no income and no home, and people are going to beat him over the head for $1.19 per person to cover his bank charge. After he pays that he still has no income. That's pretty cold.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[jagsfan]

Or the big bad bank could just waive the fee. Not every bank has to act like Wells Fargo.

 

 

 

If said bank has a building and money to pay employees.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[ColoradoGurl]

Or the big bad bank could just waive the fee. Not every bank has to act like Wells Fargo.

 

 

This would be yet another example of people signing a contract, agreeing to service charges and conditions that they think are unfavorable, and then complaining about it and expecting them to be waived.

 

Sure, the bank could waive the fee, but it's there for a reason, even if it's a profit reason, and they don't have to waive it.

 

It's no different than Royal keeping $100pp for all the people who book non-refundable fares who want to change their reservations, (and people keep willingly booking those), then complaining about the fee. $7.95 room service charge got implemented, did you read the thread with all the complaints and people trying to justify why that charge shouldn't apply to them?

 

It would be really difficult to run a business catering to the general public who insist on trying to buy/book things they really can't afford and then having to deal with them screaming and yelling about how they want something for free or a discount for their inconvenience. If someone is mad about $1.19, or a 5% charge, or a $100 fee, or a $7.95 cost, don't freaking buy that thing!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[nancy513]

I also am scheduled for Alllure on 10/1 - have you heard anything at all about the cruise and whether it still intends to go to St. Thomas and San Juan? I have the RC travel insurance, and I can pull in a medical if I need to as I have necessary surgery scheduled for 9/27. My guest also has the RC insurance and would perhaps lose 25%? I don't know how that all works, and I can't seem to get anyone to answer my question. I would actually love to just postpone.

 

 

 

You may have already seen it. Royal Caribbean posted itinerary changes on their website. For your sailing, you will be going to Labadee instead of St. Thomas. I've been to both ports and while I enjoy Labadee, it is a downgrade from St. Thomas. I'm sure you'll still have great time though.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[LMaxwell]

$1.19 times how many? Empty handed? Seriously, $1.19 leaves someone "empty handed"?

If I pay $100 for an excursion and the vendor cancels on me, I expect $100 back. Can't believe how many people are being purposely obtuse about this

[John&LaLa]

You may have already seen it. Royal Caribbean posted itinerary changes on their website. For your sailing, you will be going to Labadee instead of St. Thomas. I've been to both ports and while I enjoy Labadee, it is a downgrade from St. Thomas. I'm sure you'll still have great time though.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

And we get Nassau in lieu of St Marrten

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Forums mobile app

[John&LaLa]

If I pay $100 for an excursion and the vendor cancels on me, I expect $100 back. Can't believe how many people are being purposely obtuse about this

I used $70 OBC to purchase PART of a catamaran tour in St Marrten this week. The refund to our account WAS $68. I'm not sweating it. [emoji6]

 

Not worth the time and aggravation.

 

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Forums mobile app

[jagsfan]

If I pay $100 for an excursion and the vendor cancels on me, I expect $100 back. Can't believe how many people are being purposely obtuse about this

 

 

 

Why do you expect $100 back if you have agreed to a nonrefundable portion. Not only do you want a full refund, but you want the tour operator to absorb the nonrefundable cost to him.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[jagsfan]

If I pay $100 for an excursion and the vendor cancels on me, I expect $100 back. Can't believe how many people are being purposely obtuse about this

 

 

 

Why do you expect $100 back if you have agreed to a nonrefundable portion. Not only do you want a full refund, but you want the tour operator to absorb the nonrefundable cost to him.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[LMaxwell]

Why do you expect $100 back if you have agreed to a nonrefundable portion. Not only do you want a full refund, but you want the tour operator to absorb the nonrefundable cost to him.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Hmm good point. I wouldn't book with a tour operator tha did that. Let's put the hurricane aside; no hurricane. Tour operators boat blows a motor. He says tours cancelled. No full refund. Bad business.