Baltic cruises

[mrsgoggins]

I’m also pleased by the substitutions.

[Cpt Pugwash]

1 hour ago, arlowood said:

Just had an email from P&O. Our May 1st Baltic itinerary has now been amended. Stockholm and Riga have been added in place of SPB. Hopefully nothing kicks off between Russia and Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania before then. However with the current uncertainty- who knows what FCO advice develop in the next weeks and months 

Very little chance the Russians doing anything in Estonia,Latvia and Lithuania as there all members of NATO.

 

[jeanlyon]

3 minutes ago, Cpt Pugwash said:

Very little chance the Russians doing anything in Estonia,Latvia and Lithuania as there all members of NATO.

 

You wanna bet?  He could do anything.

[Fionboard]

34 minutes ago, jeanlyon said:

You wanna bet?  He could do anything.

If he does it is WW3. Quite scarey!

[Bazrat]

1 minute ago, Fionboard said:

If he does it is WW3. Quite scarey!

We should be ok we're going to the Caribbean

[Fionboard]

Just now, Bazrat said:

We should be ok we're going to the Caribbean

Good choice!

[Son of Anarchy]

1 hour ago, Fionboard said:

Yes I am delighted that Stockholm and Riga have replaced St P to which I have been too many times. Let's hope we are not vaporised before then!!

Don't know whether or not in it is still there but Riga used to have a very good Occupation Museum.  The Soviet occupation 1941 - 1989.  

[Fionboard]

2 minutes ago, Son of Anarchy said:

Don't know whether or not in it is still there but Riga used to have a very good Occupation Museum.  The Soviet occupation 1941 - 1989.  

Topical!!

[Son of Anarchy]

Tallinn also has/had one.  Wasn't as good though.

[tring]

22 hours ago, twotravellersLondon said:

 

How do the Package Travel Regs. 2018 apply to the loss of one port?

 

I am the director of a company and I have spent a considerable amount of time representing the company in court as a plaintive (100% success rate). I am also as someone who has spent over 10 years as a legal advisor to a major organisation, has frequently attended court proceedings, instructed solicitors, attended the County court  in the role of advisor, sat behind barristers with files of advice on hand, instructed firms of solicitors and briefed barristers, worked with one of England's most distinguished Head of Chambers and discussed details matters with judges in chambers  as my "day job."

 

However, I can't understand why you suggest that Travel Regs. 2018, regulation 13. relating to the "Termination of the package travel contract by the organiser" applies to a omission of a single port. But, I am always more than willing to learn.

 

The reason is that; missing one port, because of UK government advice, is not a case of the cruise-company cancelling the contract as it is within the cruise company's conditions and has been agreed to by the cruise passenger on booking as part of the T&Cs. Anyone taking that argument to any court is likely to have a very difficult time from cruise-industry Legal Counsel. 

 

Have you experience of taking a case through the small claims court and, if so, did you win the action?Alternatively, can you provide a link to one case that has been successful in the small claims court where a single individual has successful claimed compensation from a cruise company under the terms of Travel Regs. 2018, regulation 13 for the omission of a single port?

 

It would seem that you are assuming that the loss of one port is the same as the termination of the package travel contract and should provide the traveller with a full refund of any payments made for the package.

 

I think that you're correct in suggesting the chance of loosing the whole cost of the holiday is a very real risk. However I also think that there is a risk that the client could also lose a much greater amount in legal costs.

 

I really do think that it would be such a shame for someone to begin on an ill-advised course of legal action which would potentially result in a far greater loss than the entire cost of the original cruise.

 

Life is for the enjoying. We've all missed out on that recently. It's time to have fun now while we can.

 

 

 

Maybe there is a misunderstanding, but at no time had I advised anyone to take a case to court, in fact the only time I had commented on an individual case, I had suggested that, as they had a chance to change to another cruise, that was a good option.  You subsequently answered the same post by starting with the comment that the person had “You have already been given some good advice” (it was only me who had previously replied to that poster).

 

The points I was making in my two posts yesterday, is that the comments you had made about costs and court cases escalating are really not realistic, including your mention of something going to The Crown Court – admittedly you did make another post correcting that, but as your original post is still visible, it seems you may not have asked for the original to be removed.  If you have asked for that and it has still not been done, I apologise for my comment.

 

Sorry to confuse, my mention of regulation 13 was to explain that in the case of what T&C’s call force majeure (which I understand was not originally a legal term, though is now). The reference was to 13(2)(b) with reference to  compensation is not being payable in such circumstances when, "an organiser is prevented from performing the contract because of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances", but does not affect any other entitlements which an earlier poster had thought it would.   Regs. 11(3)(a) and reg 12 are other references to that I understand.  An aside, to an extent.

 

Regards the Small Claims Track, (DH in a part of his role in overseeing a team of advisors dealing with claims on that track regards consumer issues, which included holiday cases, over a number of years), had experience of precisely zero such claims going beyond the Small Claims Track, nor did cases fail, but obviously people would not be advised to progress such claims if they were not clear cut.  The District Judges deal with those cases in the vast majority of cases.  DH’s main role in prosecutions and co-operating with Barristers for Crown Court and Appeals Court cases alone, would not have gained him wide knowledge in how the Small Claims Track worked in practice.

 

Your mention SPB as a single port yet cruise lines have happily replaced those two port days in SPB with two other ports.  The number of ports considered to not be insignificant are more to do with the length of an overall cruise – if only one or two ports are visited, then a change to one could hardly be considered as insignificant, which is the current threshold.  I have seen reports of three cruise lines replacing SPB and of those, one had allowed a transfer to another cruise after balance payment and another a refund of a deposit (neither being normally encountered for a single port change on a two-week cruise).  Also at least two of the three had added extra perks due to the change (a better drinks pack or some OBS).  The mention of SPB in a cruise title would be likely to affect a decision, as would the reason that an individual booked the cruise initially (though may take a bit of persuasion to suggest the main reason a person booked a two-week cruise was to spend just two days in SPB, when they could have booked a land holiday instead).

 

As you have agreed with Harry (an extremely level headed poster here) the point is to know your rights and use that situation to negotiate your case, though admittedly it does take a fair bit of knowledge, or an ability to take advise to be able to do that convincingly.  It is indeed a shame that the public can no longer pop into a local authority office to get that advise, though some help can be obtained elsewhere and, if necessary, many household insurance policies include legal insurance, which will take a case if there is a reasonable chance of success, so that approx. £200 per hour, that would (admittedly) be charged by a solicitor may be covered, if required.

 

I have no wish to further this conversation as I have a number of other things in my life at present.  It is indeed good to be able to get back to some sort of normality after that last two years and I am sure we all appreciate that, though whether current world events will settle is a great concern for all of us, though nothing like as much as the Ukrainian people.

 

 

Edited March 4, 2022 by tring

[tring]

9 hours ago, arlowood said:

Just had an email from P&O. Our May 1st Baltic itinerary has now been amended. Stockholm and Riga have been added in place of SPB. Hopefully nothing kicks off between Russia and Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania before then. However with the current uncertainty- who knows what FCO advice develop in the next weeks and months 

 

Good to get this thread back to what it was originally meant to be as it has been quite useful since it started to keep in touch with what is happening to Baltic cruises.  We are booked on the 24 th May Aurora cruise and heard nothing about that yet, other than the general email P&O sent out this afternoon to say they are looking at the best ports (possibly means cheapest, and most lucrative for excursions methinks, but, hey, they would not be in business otherwise 🙂).  From a personal view we are happy to skip SPB as we have spent several days there as well as going to other parts of Russia.  Hence any other port would be an advantage to us from the original itinerary, but still feeling I would like to know where we will go

 

Can I ask if the email with your new itinerary was sent direct by P&O or through an agent?  We have booked with an agent, so we are thinking that may mean a slight delay on receiving a new itinerary notice.

 

I share you concern of what the future holds, both for us and the wider world.  I had been spending too long looking at the news which was getting me down quite a lot, so have made a point in getting out and focusing on other things, though that will not stop events happening, even if it does help me at present.

   

[wowzz]

37 minutes ago, tring said:

 

Maybe there is a misunderstanding, but at no time had I advised anyone to take a case to court, in fact the only time I had commented on an individual case, I had suggested that, as they had a chance to change to another cruise, that was a good option.  You subsequently answered the same post by starting with the comment that the person had “You have already been given some good advice” (it was only me who had previously replied to that poster).

 

The points I was making in my two posts yesterday, is that the comments you had made about costs and court cases escalating are really not realistic, including your mention of something going to The Crown Court – admittedly you did make another post correcting that, but as your original post is still visible, it seems you may not have asked for the original to be removed.  If you have asked for that and it has still not been done, I apologise for my comment.

 

Sorry to confuse, my mention of regulation 13 was to explain that in the case of what T&C’s call force majeure (which I understand was not originally a legal term, though is now). The reference was to 13(2)(b) with reference to  compensation is not being payable in such circumstances when, "an organiser is prevented from performing the contract because of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances", but does not affect any other entitlements which an earlier poster had thought it would.   Regs. 11(3)(a) and reg 12 are other references to that I understand.  An aside, to an extent.

 

Regards the Small Claims Track, (DH in a part of his role in overseeing a team of advisors dealing with claims on that track regards consumer issues, which included holiday cases, over a number of years), had experience of precisely zero such claims going beyond the Small Claims Track, nor did cases fail, but obviously people would not be advised to progress such claims if they were not clear cut.  The District Judges deal with those cases in the vast majority of cases.  DH’s main role in prosecutions and co-operating with Barristers for Crown Court and Appeals Court cases alone, would not have gained him wide knowledge in how the Small Claims Track worked in practice.

 

Your mention SPB as a single port yet cruise lines have happily replaced those two port days in SPB with two other ports.  The number of ports considered to not be insignificant are more to do with the length of an overall cruise – if only one or two ports are visited, then a change to one could hardly be considered as insignificant, which is the current threshold.  I have seen reports of three cruise lines replacing SPB and of those, one had allowed a transfer to another cruise after balance payment and another a refund of a deposit (neither being normally encountered for a single port change on a two-week cruise).  Also at least two of the three had added extra perks due to the change (a better drinks pack or some OBS).  The mention of SPB in a cruise title would be likely to affect a decision, as would the reason that an individual booked the cruise initially (though may take a bit of persuasion to suggest the main reason a person booked a two-week cruise was to spend just two days in SPB, when they could have booked a land holiday instead).

 

As you have agreed with Harry (an extremely level headed poster here) the point is to know your rights and use that situation to negotiate your case, though admittedly it does take a fair bit of knowledge, or an ability to take advise to be able to do that convincingly.  It is indeed a shame that the public can no longer pop into a local authority office to get that advise, though some help can be obtained elsewhere and, if necessary, many household insurance policies include legal insurance, which will take a case if there is a reasonable chance of success, so that approx. £200 per hour, that would (admittedly) be charged by a solicitor may be covered, if required.

 

I have no wish to further this conversation as I have a number of other things in my life at present.  It is indeed good to be able to get back to some sort of normality after that last two years and I am sure we all appreciate that, though whether current world events will settle is a great concern for all of us, though nothing like as much as the Ukrainian people.

 

 

Just wanted to say that I have nothing but admiration for such a well written, precise and factual post.

You and Megabear are what differentiates this forum from  other social media sites.

[wowzz]

18 minutes ago, tring said:

I had been spending too long looking at the news which was getting me down quite a lot, 

As a bit of a news junky, I had been following the news from Ukraine on an hourly basis,  and consequently getting more and more depressed.

I now look at the BBC news page once in the morning, and once at night, to keep myself abreast of developments,  and no more. 

I deplore what is happening in the  Ukraine,  but in reality, I can do nothing to influence events, and therefore have decided to carry on with my life as normal,  cynical as that may seem.

[Son of Anarchy]

P&O website now showing amended itineries for Baltic cruises.

[RaspberryCremeBrulee]

2 hours ago, Son of Anarchy said:

P&O website now showing amended itineries for Baltic cruises.

Thanks.  Can see that Arcadia and Britannia itineraries for May now updated but, we are still awaiting notification of changes for our Aurora Baltic in May.

[RaspberryCremeBrulee]

Itinerary for our May on Aurora now updated on P&O website.

 

[tring]

On 3/18/2022 at 7:27 AM, RaspberryCremeBrulee said:

Itinerary for our May on Aurora now updated on P&O website.

 

 

We cancelled that because of the widescale changes, including removal of Tallin and Riga as well as other calls. 

 

We have now replaced it with a reduced price Fred cruise departing 18th May on Balmoral, which is still scheduled to call at Tallin and Riga as well as spend most of two days docked centrally in Stockholm, compared to the slightly out of town docking location for that Aurora cruise (and having to book a tour to get a transfer both ways from/return to, the ship).  The Fred cruise leaves from Newcastle as well, which is easier for us to drive to than Southampton and we have been able to spend a few nights pre cruise, in what is a lovely part of the country.

[twotravellersLondon]

On 2/27/2022 at 9:21 PM, twotravellersLondon said:

And that; "little bit of Russia", mentioned in a previous post (Kaliningrad)...( between Poland and Lithuania)  is very nearly the size of Devon, it has a population of about  1,000,000 people, a considerable military and strategic role and very a significant naval base... think Devonport! So should we abandon all thoughts of visiting Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Check Republic, Austria, Finland, Germany Sweden as well? Personally, I don't think so... but if things change significantly, I would take informed advice.

 

Two years later... things have now changed significantly... Sweden is newly a member of NATO and is finding that it needs to very seriously beef up it's military presence on Gotland. Finland is also now a NATO member.

 

There are reports today and yesterday in usually authoritative and trustworthy newspapers (and copied by some others as well) that as a result Russia plans more intensive exercises in the Baltic... both from Kaliningrad, where the Russian Baltic Fleet is now based, as well as from the rest of Russia.

 

We've very recently cruised to within sight of Russian waters in the Baltic and the ship's Captain and the cruise-company were willing to do so. Long may that continue. Probably worth noting that cruises have continued unabated up the Norwegian coast despite various military exercises in recent ears.