Covid on Iona

[Megabear2]

Yes, that's how I read it too.

 

No news from P&O officially yet though.

 

[Megabear2]

To all you Allianz Lloyds/Halifax customers:

 

Good afternoon (       )

 

Thank you for your email.

 

Please accept our apologies for the delay in responding to your enquiry.

 

We are happy to confirm you will be covered with your policy under both circumstances you have listed.

 

If further assistance is required, please do contact us.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Gemma Newman
Customer Experience Co-ordinator - LBG Travel Sales & Service Hub

102 George Street  ·  Croydon  ·  CR9 6HD  ·  United Kingdom

 

 

[terrierjohn]

3 hours ago, molecrochip said:

So, the EU restart protocols required the cruise line to organise and also effectively indemnify the country for the cost of disembarkation, quarantine and repatriation of affected quests. Otherwise they can’t dock.

 

Therefore some ports see this as a money making scheme as the cruise line must pay even though the cruise line are happy to deal with onboard. Other ports take a more sensible approach of not wanting infected passengers in their cities so let them remain onboard.

 

On the flip side, the cruise lines have upped their requirements for insurance for passengers to try and pass the cost on. However this creates a bit of a Mexican stand-off between insurer and cruise line over who pays. Bear in mind that cruise companies take out various insurances to limit their financial risks, this ends up as insurer A v insurer B.

 

So, the passenger shouldn’t pay but the cruise line won’t confirm as that gives the passenger’s insurance a way out of paying. Likewise travel insurance firms will only pay out if they absolutely must hence not confirming coverage either if they is a change they can manoeuvre the cruise line into carry the can.

That all sounds plausible, and hopefully we can forget about this issue, or can we?

[Megabear2]

7 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

That all sounds plausible, and hopefully we can forget about this issue, or can we?

Legally we would still be responsible as the Terms and Conditions state no come back to P&O.  Unless they admit somewhere they or their insurance covers the circumstances we wouldn't have a cat in hell's chance without a massive fight. Basically Molecrochip is speaking of a gesture on goodwill.

Edited October 28, 2021 by Megabear2
Missed words

[xxxCruisexxx]

My wife and I are on Iona 27th Nov and having spoke to P&O on the phone this morning I was told that this cruise would be at 80% capacity, I reckon that’s about 4000 passengers?

[davecttr]

2 hours ago, xxxCruisexxx said:

My wife and I are on Iona 27th Nov and having spoke to P&O on the phone this morning I was told that this cruise would be at 80% capacity, I reckon that’s about 4000 passengers?

Interesting to see the post cruise reports. When i was aboard back in August it was less than 50% capacity

[PEMCO007]

Has anyone else heard of any other stories? I am due to go December, and wondering what is classed as a close contact.  I will have to take my chances with regards to us staying well, and if we are removed due to one of us testing positive I fully accept this.  However I am concerned about being thrown off for contact with others.  I am hoping if no other tests have to be taken, one would assume unless someone has symptoms they could possibly slide under the radar, or am I just being optimistically naive? Do we avoid all public areas for concern we may be classed as a contact? I truly feel it really is not worth the hassle and wish I hadn't booked.  Its not really a holiday if you have to avoid all the things you booked up for.  I do wish these things had been made a little clearer by the cruiselines.

[Son of Bare]

40 minutes ago, PEMCO007 said:

Has anyone else heard of any other stories? I am due to go December, and wondering what is classed as a close contact.  I will have to take my chances with regards to us staying well, and if we are removed due to one of us testing positive I fully accept this.  However I am concerned about being thrown off for contact with others.  I am hoping if no other tests have to be taken, one would assume unless someone has symptoms they could possibly slide under the radar, or am I just being optimistically naive? Do we avoid all public areas for concern we may be classed as a contact? I truly feel it really is not worth the hassle and wish I hadn't booked.  Its not really a holiday if you have to avoid all the things you booked up for.  I do wish these things had been made a little clearer by the cruiselines.

I think you should try and rationalise the very small chance Covid will have of effecting you and your holiday.

There's a chance of you getting knocked over crossing the road but I hope that hasn't stopped you crossing the road? 

 

You should separate the insurance aspect from the threat of Covid. Mega has obviously spent an inordinate amount of time on this and clearly has a very negative view of the holiday insurance industry as a whole. By contrast my own personal experiences of holiday cruise insurance is a very favourable one and I'm sure there are many others like me.

The kind of conformational bias gained from reading a thread like this is often not a good thing.

Consult with your TA if in doubt though.

 

 

 

[Megabear2]

47 minutes ago, PEMCO007 said:

Has anyone else heard of any other stories? I am due to go December, and wondering what is classed as a close contact.  I will have to take my chances with regards to us staying well, and if we are removed due to one of us testing positive I fully accept this.  However I am concerned about being thrown off for contact with others.  I am hoping if no other tests have to be taken, one would assume unless someone has symptoms they could possibly slide under the radar, or am I just being optimistically naive? Do we avoid all public areas for concern we may be classed as a contact? I truly feel it really is not worth the hassle and wish I hadn't booked.  Its not really a holiday if you have to avoid all the things you booked up for.  I do wish these things had been made a little clearer by the cruiselines.

Currently not hearing anything from anywhere that people are in trouble.  Try not to stress about contacts, suggest you just wear your mask, wash hands etc. As normal. Although people have been removed remember it's a tiny proportion of those currently travelling.

 

Close contacts are assumedly those seated very near you on excursion/port buses, sharing tables (remember ashore as well). Onboard you should be very safe because of the protocols.  Just do as you have been doing at home and if you think your getting too close for your comfort step back.  I'm certain you will be fine.

 

Which ship are you travelling on?  I'm sure you'll have a great time. 

 

Meanwhile we carry on at P&O and the insurance companies to get comfort for everyone. You've a while to go yet so chill, plan your days out and pick your nice outfits to pack.

[Megabear2]

4 minutes ago, Son of Bare said:

I think you should try and rationalise the very small chance Covid will have of effecting you and your holiday.

There's a chance of you getting knocked over crossing the road but I hope that hasn't stopped you crossing the road? 

 

You should separate the insurance aspect from the threat of Covid. Mega has obviously spent an inordinate amount of time on this and clearly has a very negative view of the holiday insurance industry as a whole. By contrast my own personal experiences of holiday cruise insurance is a very favourable one and I'm sure there are many others like me.

The kind of conformational bias gained from reading a thread like this is often not a good thing.

Consult with your TA if in doubt though.

 

 

 

Mega has extremely good reason to not trust insurance companies as she's spent a lifetime working with them through the law offices she's worked in, and knows that sadly they will do anything to not pay out if they can.  Yes, if it's a clear cut case they can be relied on and I too have had good experiences in my 60 odd years following claims for sickness, cancellation, redundancy and death but I've also had to fight for payment for ambulances (private ones not included), changing from a local hospital to a private one after a broken wrist was set wrongly and being at risk of amputation as a result and also being told cancellation for my dying father wasn't a good enough reason for them to pay out. So yes, I do spend "inordinate" amounts of time on ensuring I'm fully insured.  That's my choice. Although I have shared my findings and information here, if it is unhelpful and not required I will cease to share any further.  

 

I have no desire to cause stress to anyone.

[free from work]

41 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Mega has extremely good reason to not trust insurance companies as she's spent a lifetime working with them through the law offices she's worked in, and knows that sadly they will do anything to not pay out if they can.  Yes, if it's a clear cut case they can be relied on and I too have had good experiences in my 60 odd years following claims for sickness, cancellation, redundancy and death but I've also had to fight for payment for ambulances (private ones not included), changing from a local hospital to a private one after a broken wrist was set wrongly and being at risk of amputation as a result and also being told cancellation for my dying father wasn't a good enough reason for them to pay out. So yes, I do spend "inordinate" amounts of time on ensuring I'm fully insured.  That's my choice. Although I have shared my findings and information here, if it is unhelpful and not required I will cease to share any further.  

 

I have no desire to cause stress to anyone.

I for one fully appreciate your efforts and sharing of information. 

 

It's certainly making me take more interest in our insurance. Should have done it sooner! 

 

Jim 

[lindyloo22]

You carry on Megabear it’s useful that somebody understands about the insurance etc I have found all your information eye opening not that I understand it all, keep up the good work

[Dermotsgirl]

58 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Mega has extremely good reason to not trust insurance companies as she's spent a lifetime working with them through the law offices she's worked in, and knows that sadly they will do anything to not pay out if they can.  Yes, if it's a clear cut case they can be relied on and I too have had good experiences in my 60 odd years following claims for sickness, cancellation, redundancy and death but I've also had to fight for payment for ambulances (private ones not included), changing from a local hospital to a private one after a broken wrist was set wrongly and being at risk of amputation as a result and also being told cancellation for my dying father wasn't a good enough reason for them to pay out. So yes, I do spend "inordinate" amounts of time on ensuring I'm fully insured.  That's my choice. Although I have shared my findings and information here, if it is unhelpful and not required I will cease to share any further.  

 

I have no desire to cause stress to anyone.

Your work has been very helpful to me, so if you are happy to do so, please carry on.

 

Knowledge is power, as they say, and the more information that we have enables us to make informed choices. 

[Dermotsgirl]

1 hour ago, Son of Bare said:

I think you should try and rationalise the very small chance Covid will have of effecting you and your holiday.

There's a chance of you getting knocked over crossing the road but I hope that hasn't stopped you crossing the road? 

 

 

 

 

 

to be fair, you can see a car coming, whereas you can't see Covid and 1 in 50 people in England have Covid according to the latest ONS figures.

 

My rationalisation tells me I have much more chance of catching Covid than being run over by a car.  

 

 

 

 

[zap99]

1 hour ago, Son of Bare said:

I think you should try and rationalise the very small chance Covid will have of effecting you and your holiday.

There's a chance of you getting knocked over crossing the road but I hope that hasn't stopped you crossing the road? 

 

You should separate the insurance aspect from the threat of Covid. Mega has obviously spent an inordinate amount of time on this and clearly has a very negative view of the holiday insurance industry as a whole. By contrast my own personal experiences of holiday cruise insurance is a very favourable one and I'm sure there are many others like me.

The kind of conformational bias gained from reading a thread like this is often not a good thing.

Consult with your TA if in doubt though.

 

 

 

We have taken 3 staycation cruises, 2 self catering UK and one trip to Spain this year. We had insurance for all of them, which may have not covered all eventualities. If we had got caught out and needed to pay quarantine costs, tough luck. Taking a risk is part of life's rich tapestry. Minimise as best you can, but the way to eliminate risk is not always an acceptable way to live.

[Dermotsgirl]

2 hours ago, PEMCO007 said:

Has anyone else heard of any other stories? I am due to go December, and wondering what is classed as a close contact.  I will have to take my chances with regards to us staying well, and if we are removed due to one of us testing positive I fully accept this.  However I am concerned about being thrown off for contact with others.  I am hoping if no other tests have to be taken, one would assume unless someone has symptoms they could possibly slide under the radar, or am I just being optimistically naive? Do we avoid all public areas for concern we may be classed as a contact? I truly feel it really is not worth the hassle and wish I hadn't booked.  Its not really a holiday if you have to avoid all the things you booked up for.  I do wish these things had been made a little clearer by the cruiselines.

My feeling is that you could only be classed as a close contact if the cruiseline knows that you have had contact with someone that has tested positive - for example if you share a main dining room table or if you have been on an excursion coach.

 

So far P&O don't have any tracking devices, so they simply wouldn't know about any contacts  that a person might have for general movements around the ship. 

 

If I was going on a cruise at the moment, I'd definitely not share any dining tables (even in the buffet, just to be on the safe side) and I wouldn't go on coach trips either.  However, I'd use public areas as I do at home. Plus the public areas are likely to be relatively safe - in England 1 in 50 people have the virus, but on the ship, people receive screening before boarding, and it seems to be doing quite a good job of keeping the virus on shore.

 

I take your point about all the hassle.  I will have to make a final decision about my cruise in January. I've only paid a deposit, but it was quite a big deposit. At the moment, I feel like I'd be happy just to walk away and forget it. I'll have to weigh everything when January comes.

 

I expect you have paid in full by now, so I appreciate it'd be very hard to simply not go.  Hopefully, when you have jumped through all the pre-boarding hoops, you'll end up enjoying it anyway, even if it's not the same as pre-Covid times. 

[zap99]

22 minutes ago, Dermotsgirl said:

to be fair, you can see a car coming, whereas you can't see Covid and 1 in 50 people in England have Covid according to the latest ONS figures.

 

My rationalisation tells me I have much more chance of catching Covid than being run over by a car.  

 

 

 

 

How about those idiots flying down the pavement in their electric scooters. If one of those runs you over, good luck claiming off their insurance.

[Megabear2]

2 minutes ago, zap99 said:

We have taken 3 staycation cruises, 2 self catering UK and one trip to Spain this year. We had insurance for all of them, which may have not covered all eventualities. If we had got caught out and needed to pay quarantine costs, tough luck. Taking a risk is part of life's rich tapestry. Minimise as best you can, but the way to eliminate risk is not always an acceptable way to live.

Glad you have enough money to pay for quarantine yourself. Sadly I'm afraid I and many others do not, and also after being quoted nearly £900 for a policy of insurance my husband quite rightly would expect proper cover.

 

Besides some seem to think I have it in for the insurance companies; I'm afraid that isnt the case. They are selling policies in difficult circumstances and are willing to take a level of risk accordingly.  That's business and I cannot take issue with them. 

 

Long before this thread opened I became aware of the quarantine issues (not just cruising ones) because while shopping the market I made a list of pertinent questions.  The most obvious one was quarantine. It had nothing whatsoever to do with cruising, offloading or ports removing passengers.  It had everything to do with buying the best possible cover for my family which includes people with very serious health conditions and old age.  

 

I too have travelled extensively this year on staycation cruises, land based trips to Europe and hotel based holidays in the UK and this is exactly why I took the time to research fully.

 

Like many have also said it is the cruise lines' lack of clarity I have issue with.  If as suggested by Molecrochip (and also my t/a today) they have been taken by surprise with ports insisting on offloading negative passengers then it's for them to look at the situation urgently and offer comfort to their clientele.  I believe they will do so and work out a solution either with the insurance companies they work with for passengers or directly with their own. 

 

My conversations with Cunard and P&O about this issue go back to August which is why I'm a long way forward in the issue in comparison with most. I'm fortunate to have time and knowledge of how to do this research -  I spent a large part of my working life doing exactly that. 

 

[zap99]

13 minutes ago, Megabear2 said:

Glad you have enough money to pay for quarantine yourself. Sadly I'm afraid I and many others do not, and also after being quoted nearly £900 for a policy of insurance my husband quite rightly would expect proper cover.

 

Besides some seem to think I have it in for the insurance companies; I'm afraid that isnt the case. They are selling policies in difficult circumstances and are willing to take a level of risk accordingly.  That's business and I cannot take issue with them. 

 

Long before this thread opened I became aware of the quarantine issues (not just cruising ones) because while shopping the market I made a list of pertinent questions.  The most obvious one was quarantine. It had nothing whatsoever to do with cruising, offloading or ports removing passengers.  It had everything to do with buying the best possible cover for my family which includes people with very serious health conditions and old age.  

 

I too have travelled extensively this year on staycation cruises, land based trips to Europe and hotel based holidays in the UK and this is exactly why I took the time to research fully.

 

Like many have also said it is the cruise lines' lack of clarity I have issue with.  If as suggested by Molecrochip (and also my t/a today) they have been taken by surprise with ports insisting on offloading negative passengers then it's for them to look at the situation urgently and offer comfort to their clientele.  I believe they will do so and work out a solution either with the insurance companies they work with for passengers or directly with their own. 

 

My conversations with Cunard and P&O about this issue go back to August which is why I'm a long way forward in the issue in comparison with most. I'm fortunate to have time and knowledge of how to do this research -  I spent a large part of my working life doing exactly that. 

 

Insurance companies are a bit like bookies, They calculate odds and risks. I don't have a very high opinion of either, but have zero experience of the former. We have had an annual worldwide policy for a few years with the same company, one that a few folk on here praise. My wife had a fairly minor condition for which they have prescribed medication for many years. They decided that a small procedure could eliminate it, so she in now on a waiting list. I phoned the insurance company. Now she is awaiting a procedure, no cover at all, zilch, policy cancelled. We found another company who provided cover except for cancellations. That is the one we will now use for annual, next time we renew. I don't have the time, or the inclination to spend my life researching every company and policy. Same with household car etc. If I get it wrong and get caught out, tough.

Edited October 29, 2021 by zap99

[Megabear2]

2 minutes ago, zap99 said:

Insurance companies are a bit like bookies, They calculate odds and risks. I don't have a very high opinion of either, but have zero experience of the former. We have had an annual worldwide policy for a few years with the same company, one that a few folk on hear praise. My wife had a fairly minor condition for which they have prescribed medication for many years. They decided that a small procedure could eliminate it, so she in now on a waiting list. I phoned the insurance company. Now she is awaiting a procedure, no cover at all, zilch, policy cancelled. We found another company who provided cover except for cancellations. That is the one we will now use for annual, next time we renew. I don't have the time, or the inclination to spend my life researching every company and policy. Same with household car etc. If I get it wrong and get caught out, tough.

That's fine as it's your choice. I'm not suggesting you do otherwise. You do as you wish  I'll do as I wish. Some are risk takers, some are not.   That's life, it would be pretty boring if we were all the same.

[Angel57]

2 hours ago, Megabear2 said:

Mega has extremely good reason to not trust insurance companies as she's spent a lifetime working with them through the law offices she's worked in, and knows that sadly they will do anything to not pay out if they can.  Yes, if it's a clear cut case they can be relied on and I too have had good experiences in my 60 odd years following claims for sickness, cancellation, redundancy and death but I've also had to fight for payment for ambulances (private ones not included), changing from a local hospital to a private one after a broken wrist was set wrongly and being at risk of amputation as a result and also being told cancellation for my dying father wasn't a good enough reason for them to pay out. So yes, I do spend "inordinate" amounts of time on ensuring I'm fully insured.  That's my choice. Although I have shared my findings and information here, if it is unhelpful and not required I will cease to share any further.  

 

I have no desire to cause stress to anyone.

I think your investigations have proved very enlightening and have highlighted an area that most had not considered. Forearmed is forewarned for all those taking a cruise in the near future. 
Thank you, 

[Stokie33]

Mega I really appreciate everything you are doing as it's certainly helped me after my 77year old MIL  and her nearly 91 year old boyfriend decided they'd had enough of being locked up and want to go on a cruise. This as definitely helped to decide which cruise they can do and to where. Once again many thanks for all you are doing 

[Megabear2]

8 minutes ago, Stokie33 said:

Mega I really appreciate everything you are doing as it's certainly helped me after my 77year old MIL  and her nearly 91 year old boyfriend decided they'd had enough of being locked up and want to go on a cruise. This as definitely helped to decide which cruise they can do and to where. Once again many thanks for all you are doing 

I hope they have a wonderful trip. Hopefully when I'm 90 years old I can still wander the world too!

[Electra 7]

5 hours ago, Megabear2 said:

Mega has extremely good reason to not trust insurance companies as she's spent a lifetime working with them through the law offices she's worked in, and knows that sadly they will do anything to not pay out if they can.  Yes, if it's a clear cut case they can be relied on and I too have had good experiences in my 60 odd years following claims for sickness, cancellation, redundancy and death but I've also had to fight for payment for ambulances (private ones not included), changing from a local hospital to a private one after a broken wrist was set wrongly and being at risk of amputation as a result and also being told cancellation for my dying father wasn't a good enough reason for them to pay out. So yes, I do spend "inordinate" amounts of time on ensuring I'm fully insured.  That's my choice. Although I have shared my findings and information here, if it is unhelpful and not required I will cease to share any further.  

 

I have no desire to cause stress to anyone.

I want to say thanks to you as you made me think about looking into insurance and changed to a better policy

[Electra 7]

3 hours ago, zap99 said:

Insurance companies are a bit like bookies, They calculate odds and risks. I don't have a very high opinion of either, but have zero experience of the former. We have had an annual worldwide policy for a few years with the same company, one that a few folk on here praise. My wife had a fairly minor condition for which they have prescribed medication for many years. They decided that a small procedure could eliminate it, so she in now on a waiting list. I phoned the insurance company. Now she is awaiting a procedure, no cover at all, zilch, policy cancelled. We found another company who provided cover except for cancellations. That is the one we will now use for annual, next time we renew. I don't have the time, or the inclination to spend my life researching every company and policy. Same with household car etc. If I get it wrong and get caught out, tough.

You were lucky to find one we could not get insurance with anyone while hubby was waiting results so we could not go on 1st October