Are Port Charges refunded in case of cancellation?

[cruiseluv]

Does anybody know if Port Charges are refundable in case of cancellation of cruise within penalty period? For arguments sake, assume the person didnt take insurance. Thanks

[mrlevin]

No.  Regent does not separate out taxes and fees from the cruise cost.

 

Marc

[Travelcat2]

It is a rather long story.  This began when fuel prices were increasing almost daily.  This created chaos with some cruise Iines.  There was some kind of lawsuit regarding this topic (in Florida) and Regent decided to include taxes, fees and fuel (other luxury lines did not do this).  So, if you miss a port, for instance, you do not receive a refund.  On the other hand, the price of fuel could double but we still pay the same price.

[rcandkc]

31 minutes ago, Travelcat2 said:

It is a rather long story.  This began when fuel prices were increasing almost daily.  This created chaos with some cruise Iines.  There was some kind of lawsuit regarding this topic (in Florida) and Regent decided to include taxes, fees and fuel (other luxury lines did not do this).  So, if you miss a port, for instance, you do not receive a refund.  On the other hand, the price of fuel could double but we still pay the same price.

Good explanation.  I was trying to figure out how to explain. 

[Travelcat2]

54 minutes ago, rcandkc said:

Good explanation.  I was trying to figure out how to explain. 

 

Definitely not easy to explain.  Plus, it happened several years ago!

[DaveFr]

5 hours ago, Travelcat2 said:

It is a rather long story.  This began when fuel prices were increasing almost daily.  This created chaos with some cruise Iines.  There was some kind of lawsuit regarding this topic (in Florida) and Regent decided to include taxes, fees and fuel (other luxury lines did not do this).  So, if you miss a port, for instance, you do not receive a refund.  On the other hand, the price of fuel could double but we still pay the same price.

What TC2 posted is more or less correct but some of the details are incorrect.  Actually, the story began a few years before the fuel surcharge fiasco in 2007.

 

At least a couple of years before 2007, the Florida Attorney General's Office became involved in cruise line fare advertisements.  Some cruise lines were playing fast and loose with the fare amounts they advertised.  They would take fixed expenses such as a proportionate share of their office rent and combine it with various taxes and fees that were not shown as part of the advertised fare.  This allowed the cruise lines to advertise a lower fare by hiding part of the total fare.  It was difficult to compare fares across cruise lines unless you checked the fine print for each cruise line.

 

To make advertised fares comparable across cruise lines, the Florida AG reached agreements with various cruise lines specifying that taxes and fees were the only part of the total fare that did not have to be shown in ads.  To keep the cruise lines honest, the agreements stated that all taxes and fees had to be sent to a governmental or quasi-governmental entities.

 

In 2007 the price of oil surged and cruise lines, including Regent and Oceania, began adding fuel surcharges to new cruises booked as well as cruises that had been booked and deposited previously.  Many complaints were made to the Florida AG alleging that the fuel surcharges violated the earlier agreements in that they were not part of the advertised fare, were not taxes or fees, and were not going to governmental or quasi-governmental entities.

 

In late December 2007 and January 2008 the Florida AG reached stipulated agreements with cruise lines amending the previous agreements.  The amended agreements stated that the cruise lines had to remove and refund all fuel surcharges booked before a date which I think was in November 2017.  If a specified oil price set out in the the agreements was exceeded, then fuel surcharges were allowed after the November date and did not have to be shown in the advertised fare for a cruise but could be added to the unadvertised taxes and fees.  In addition fuel surcharges did not have to be remitted to a governmental entity like taxes and fees.

 

As TC2 stated, Regent has decided to include taxes, fees and any fuel surcharges in their total advertised fare.  I believe this puts them at a competitive disadvantage to other cruise lines that separate taxes and fees from the advertised fares.  However, if oil prices rise above a certain level, Regent can assess a separate fuel surcharge although I doubt it would do so.

 

So these agreements were more about truth in advertising than anything else.  I no longer have a copy of the agreements,  Hopefully my memory is accurate but you never know.

 

Dave

[Travelcat2]

Thanks Dave.  Obviously my memory was off a bit.  

 

Since Regent does not have to reimburse port fees for missed ports, it may be easier for them than for other cruise lines that have to deal with reimbursements as well as fuel hikes.  I know that Dennis gets annoyed when we see a price for a cruise and then have to add on the port fees and taxes.  We like it the way it is.

[RachelG]

The short answer is no.