YOU CAN FORCE CARNIVAL TO REFUND YOUR MONEY

[EscapeFromConnecticut]

1 hour ago, roxievegas said:

All total I have $6500+ in dispute - why do I have to wait 60 - 90 days when they wanted their money 75 days paid in full prior to sail date ???

 

 

Definitely right. 

And remember, the deposits were always the customers' money - it never belonged to the cruise line. Passengers are only the prompt return of their own money. Don't let any of the double-dealers or snake-oil hawkers confuse that point.

[ontheweb]

3 hours ago, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

They are no longer legitimate charges.

No one least of all the cruise lines are disputing that monies need to be returned. The debate seems to be over the speed of the return.

 

We are arguing semantics when I say they were legitimate charges when made, and you counter with they are no longer legitimate. The cruise lines have said money and or FCC will returned.

 

No let me give a counterexample where I threatened to dispute the charge which made the merchant back down from no refunds.  Note and this is important, no refund is a lot different than it will take longer than you would like.

 

DW and I had a bus trip with Broadway play tickets from a local merchant. Broadway cancelled all plays. I called and asked for a refund. And the following conversation took place.

 

"No refunds."

 

"Yes, I can read that on your site, but it cannot possibly apply when you can no longer provide the service. And I'm sure you are being paid back for the tickets."

 

"We're friends. Give me time."

 

I guess I will have to contact the credit card company (actually said the name of the card).

 

" Please don't. You'll get your refund."

 

And I soon had an e-mail to that effect, though it did take a few weeks to be processes and posted.

 

Do you see the difference between you're refund will take time and no refund even though the service can no longer be provided?

[EscapeFromConnecticut]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

No one least of all the cruise lines are disputing that monies need to be returned. The debate seems to be over the speed of the return.

 

We are arguing semantics when I say they were legitimate charges when made, and you counter with they are no longer legitimate. The cruise lines have said money and or FCC will returned.

 

No let me give a counterexample where I threatened to dispute the charge which made the merchant back down from no refunds.  Note and this is important, no refund is a lot different than it will take longer than you would like.

 

DW and I had a bus trip with Broadway play tickets from a local merchant. Broadway cancelled all plays. I called and asked for a refund. And the following conversation took place.

 

"No refunds."

 

"Yes, I can read that on your site, but it cannot possibly apply when you can no longer provide the service. And I'm sure you are being paid back for the tickets."

 

"We're friends. Give me time."

 

I guess I will have to contact the credit card company (actually said the name of the card).

 

" Please don't. You'll get your refund."

 

And I soon had an e-mail to that effect, though it did take a few weeks to be processes and posted.

 

Do you see the difference between you're refund will take time and no refund even though the service can no longer be provided?

Based solely on the account you provide, what we see is a company that initially tried a ploy ... one that could have cheated you out of your own money if you'd let it stand.  Had you hung up at the point of "no refund," do you believe you'd have ultimately gotten your money back?

In any event, the company's opening ploy was an invitation for the customer to escalate. The company cannot enforce an absolute policy of no refunds precisely because of circumstances like this. Happily, years of voters foolishly electing anti-regulation ideologues who undermine consumer rights, there are still laws on the books to prevent businesses from flat-out stealing customers' money.

Getting back to CCL, though, CCL is not able to tell the consumer "We're friends." And it hasn't even publicly owned up to the truth that it's trying to stretch repayment to conserve cash; "Give me time."
 

And regardless of all of that, it's your choice - if you wish to make it - to let this tour company first decline a refund, then agree but only on its delayed timetable. But nobody else is obligated to make your choice; other CCL customers are entirely within their rights to expect transparency, honesty and prompt refunds.
 

They're getting none of those things. 

[BlerkOne]

57 minutes ago, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

Getting back to CCL, though, CCL is not able to tell the consumer "We're friends." And it hasn't even publicly owned up to the truth that it's trying to stretch repayment to conserve cash; "Give me time."
 

 

 

Why would CCL plead guilty to a LIE?

[ontheweb]

2 hours ago, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

Based solely on the account you provide, what we see is a company that initially tried a ploy ... one that could have cheated you out of your own money if you'd let it stand.  Had you hung up at the point of "no refund," do you believe you'd have ultimately gotten your money back?

In any event, the company's opening ploy was an invitation for the customer to escalate. The company cannot enforce an absolute policy of no refunds precisely because of circumstances like this. Happily, years of voters foolishly electing anti-regulation ideologues who undermine consumer rights, there are still laws on the books to prevent businesses from flat-out stealing customers' money.

Getting back to CCL, though, CCL is not able to tell the consumer "We're friends." And it hasn't even publicly owned up to the truth that it's trying to stretch repayment to conserve cash; "Give me time."
 

And regardless of all of that, it's your choice - if you wish to make it - to let this tour company first decline a refund, then agree but only on its delayed timetable. But nobody else is obligated to make your choice; other CCL customers are entirely within their rights to expect transparency, honesty and prompt refunds.
 

They're getting none of those things. 

You are conveniently ignoring that there are people posting that they got their refunds. It may be slow but it is happening. That is truly a contrast to "the policy is no refunds".

[EscapeFromConnecticut]

27 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

You are conveniently ignoring that there are people posting that they got their refunds. It may be slow but it is happening. That is truly a contrast to "the policy is no refunds".

 

You seem dreadfully confused. You are the one who introduced the subject of "no refunds" as a policy, in reference to your friend the tour operator. Nobody here said it was a CCL policy.

What's being discussed here is the lengthy delay in CCL refunds. If CCL had tried a "no refunds' answer, surely the topic of this thread would be "Status of our class action against CCL."  

 

[BlerkOne]

3 hours ago, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

 

You seem dreadfully confused. You are the one who introduced the subject of "no refunds" as a policy, in reference to your friend the tour operator. Nobody here said it was a CCL policy.

What's being discussed here is the lengthy delay in CCL refunds. If CCL had tried a "no refunds' answer, surely the topic of this thread would be "Status of our class action against CCL."  

 

 

You can't file a class action suit, but good luck trying.

[Nursecruisers couple]

In our case Uniworld changed their Cancellation policy AFTER we paid in full.  One party CANNOT changes the terms of the contract. My TA tried to escalate our claim to a full refund with no luck.  I made a copy of my original TOC with the date circled and highlighted the sentences where it states that if UNIWORLD cancels on me, I get my money back.  They convienently removed this on March 27th.  We disputed the charges- a clear breech in contract on their part.  I was not going to wait, when they never even agreed to give us a refund in the first place.  

Sent copy of contract to Uniworld and Credit card company with letter explaining our position.  The credit is sitting in my account- however i wont spend it until the dispute is resolved.

[EscapeFromConnecticut]

52 minutes ago, Nursecruisers couple said:

In our case Uniworld changed their Cancellation policy AFTER we paid in full.  One party CANNOT changes the terms of the contract. My TA tried to escalate our claim to a full refund with no luck.  I made a copy of my original TOC with the date circled and highlighted the sentences where it states that if UNIWORLD cancels on me, I get my money back.  They convienently removed this on March 27th.  We disputed the charges- a clear breech in contract on their part.  I was not going to wait, when they never even agreed to give us a refund in the first place.  

Sent copy of contract to Uniworld and Credit card company with letter explaining our position.  The credit is sitting in my account- however i wont spend it until the dispute is resolved.

   Desperation drives executives to do some dreadful stuff. (And, those things often turn out to be deeply stupid in the long run. CCL and other lines are simply setting fire to customer loyalty right now by behaving like the shabbiest salesman at Honest Louie's Used Pontiacs)

[BlerkOne]

10 minutes ago, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

   Desperation drives executives to do some dreadful stuff. (And, those things often turn out to be deeply stupid in the long run. Uniworld and other lines are simply setting fire to customer loyalty right now by behaving like the shabbiest salesman at Honest Louie's Used Pontiacs)

 

You misspelled Uniworld - I fixed it for you.

[jimbo5544]

9 hours ago, EscapeFromConnecticut said:

Based solely on the account you provide, what we see is a company that initially tried a ploy ... one that could have cheated you out of your own money if you'd let it stand.  Had you hung up at the point of "no refund," do you believe you'd have ultimately gotten your money back?

In any event, the company's opening ploy was an invitation for the customer to escalate. The company cannot enforce an absolute policy of no refunds precisely because of circumstances like this. Happily, years of voters foolishly electing anti-regulation ideologues who undermine consumer rights, there are still laws on the books to prevent businesses from flat-out stealing customers' money.

Getting back to CCL, though, CCL is not able to tell the consumer "We're friends." And it hasn't even publicly owned up to the truth that it's trying to stretch repayment to conserve cash; "Give me time."
 

And regardless of all of that, it's your choice - if you wish to make it - to let this tour company first decline a refund, then agree but only on its delayed timetable. But nobody else is obligated to make your choice; other CCL customers are entirely within their rights to expect transparency, honesty and prompt refunds.
 

They're getting none of those things. 

was this a reply....say it ain't so?  

[EscapeFromConnecticut]

On 5/9/2020 at 10:42 AM, roxievegas said:

I had two cruises with Carnival and Princess - used two different credit cards.  I disputed both and I have the credit sitting on both cards as of this morning.

 

Outstanding.