Additional TAX in UK ports now!

[DCGuy64]

1 hour ago, graphicguy said:

(sigh)

 

Don’t know how else to explain what’s going on.

 

If you don’t want a refund, but want someone to say they were wrong, if you promise to give this a rest, I’ll apologize.

 

Sorry!

The issue, of course, as many have refused to acknowledge, is that NCL is giving people FCC as a courtesy, not because they did anything wrong. I have never seen proof NCL messed up in any way. Therefore, I would consider it a sign of good faith that the company is giving people future cruise credit. In my view, NCL was not at fault at all. But that's my opinion only. Others continue to insist, without evidence, that this was NCL's mistake. I do not believe that.

[insidecabin]

1 hour ago, graphicguy said:

(sigh)

 

Don’t know how else to explain what’s going on.

 

If you don’t want a refund, but want someone to say they were wrong, if you promise to give this a rest, I’ll apologize.

 

Sorry!

 

Refund has already been given

NCL have agreed they were wrong.

[Stevio]

19 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

The issue, of course, as many have refused to acknowledge, is that NCL is giving people FCC as a courtesy, not because they did anything wrong. I have never seen proof NCL messed up in any way. Therefore, I would consider it a sign of good faith that the company is giving people future cruise credit. In my view, NCL was not at fault at all. But that's my opinion only. Others continue to insist, without evidence, that this was NCL's mistake. I do not believe that.

Norwegian Star 5.11.2023 Beverage Package Limitations.pdf

I am aware the above evidence submitted is dated May 63rd but we are talking NCL here...

 

They refused to serve or sell drinks for two days anywhere on the ship and lied / fabricated their reasons for doing so... 

 

I know I was there.

Edited June 1, 2023 by Stevio

[DCGuy64]

9 minutes ago, Stevio said:

Norwegian Star 5.11.2023 Beverage Package Limitations.pdf 110.89 kB · 4 downloads

I am aware the above evidence submitted is dated May 63rd but we are talking NCL here...

 

They refused to serve or sell drinks for two days anywhere on the ship and lied about their reasons for doing so... 

I know I was there.

This letter is not an admission of guilt, it is an apology due to the fact NCL was unable to deliver the drinks as promised. However, that was not NCL's fault, they were given insufficient time to pay a tax owed by the local authorities. IOW they didn't do anything wrong, but because of factors beyond their control, they were unable to honor the drink package and are therefore offering FCC to make up for that. It's no different than if you and I go to your favorite pub and we each plan on paying for our own drinks, but then when we arrive the pub is closed, so you say "oh sorry mate, we'll go somewhere else and I'll pick up the tab." Is it your fault the pub was closed? No, but you offer me something to make up for that, just the same. I dispute your contention that they lied about anything.

[DCGuy64]

On our last NCL cruise, we had to skip the port stop in Bermuda due to bad weather. The cruise line offered us each $100 OBC due to the missed stop, and they expressed their apologies for the inconvenience. However, it would be ludicrous to say that the OBC was an admission of guilt, as though somehow the cruise ship was responsible for the bad weather! 😆Same principle here. No doubt government bureaucracy was to blame and they got caught in the middle. Glad you were offered the FCC, that was good of NCL.

[Stevio]

10 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

This letter is not an admission of guilt, it is an apology due to the fact NCL was unable to deliver the drinks as promised. However, that was not NCL's fault, they were given insufficient time to pay a tax owed by the local authorities. IOW they didn't do anything wrong, but because of factors beyond their control, they were unable to honor the drink package and are therefore offering FCC to make up for that. It's no different than if you and I go to your favorite pub and we each plan on paying for our own drinks, but then when we arrive the pub is closed, so you say "oh sorry mate, we'll go somewhere else and I'll pick up the tab." Is it your fault the pub was closed? No, but you offer me something to make up for that, just the same. I dispute your contention that they lied about anything.

What local authority taxes?.... The same taxes that were paid by themselves and every other cruise line in the past and presumably the future?... UK local authorities do not set laws or duties for ports.

The "we did not hear about this until 2 days ago" was one of the excuses given aboard, until they realised the Dawn had sailed from the same port the previous week.

Edited June 1, 2023 by Stevio

[cruiseny4life]

Just now, Stevio said:

What local authority taxes?.... The same taxes that were paid by themselves and every other cruise line in the past and presumably the future?... UK local authorities do not set laws for ports.

The "we did not hear about this until 2 days ago" was one of the excuses given aboard, until they realised the Dawn had sailed from the same port the previous week.

You're playing a losing game. You might be right. The facts might be with you, but you're not going to win. 

[DCGuy64]

2 minutes ago, cruiseny4life said:

You're playing a losing game. You might be right. The facts might be with you, but you're not going to win.

 

2 minutes ago, cruiseny4life said:

You're playing a losing game. You might be right. The facts might be with you, but you're not going to win. 

Huh? This isn't a game, dude, at least not for me. It's a discussion. Some people are of one opinion, others are of another one. There's no "winning or losing." What an odd thing to say.

[DCGuy64]

4 minutes ago, Stevio said:

What local authority taxes?.... The same taxes that were paid by themselves and every other cruise line in the past and presumably the future?... UK local authorities do not set laws or duties for ports.

The "we did not hear about this until 2 days ago" was one of the excuses given aboard, until they realised the Dawn had sailed from the same port the previous week.

The now-closed thread on this subject stated early on that NCL was given insufficient time to make a payment, and that's the only evidence I've seen.

[insidecabin]

9 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

The now-closed thread on this subject stated early on that NCL was given insufficient time to make a payment, and that's the only evidence I've seen.

That was on cruise(star 11th May) a week after the first refusal on the Dawn(4th may).

 

Why keep flogging the inability of NCL to communicate in their own organisation?

 

 

 

[Stevio]

22 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

The now-closed thread on this subject stated early on that NCL was given insufficient time to make a payment, and that's the only evidence I've seen.

The closed thread stated clearly that NCL was given insufficient time to make a payment was one of the reasons proffered by staff aboard the ship. Along with many others such as Brexit or new UK laws...

 

All of these "reasons" were clearly nonsense to a UK citizen who knew them to be untrue.

 

The same dock hosted MSC the day before and Royal the day after and they had no such problems with any short notice. Plus you would think NCL Dawn from the week before would have mentioned it.

 

This was the problem in that the crew would shrug their shoulders when asked and no sensible reason has ever been officially given.

 

Had they claimed bad weather had caused them to miss paying their taxes it may have been understandable🤣

Edited June 1, 2023 by Stevio

[scooter6139]

Can someone just close this thread already?  🙄

[insidecabin]

1 hour ago, DCGuy64 said:

The issue, of course, as many have refused to acknowledge, is that NCL is giving people FCC as a courtesy, not because they did anything wrong. I have never seen proof NCL messed up in any way. Therefore, I would consider it a sign of good faith that the company is giving people future cruise credit. In my view, NCL was not at fault at all. But that's my opinion only. Others continue to insist, without evidence, that this was NCL's mistake. I do not believe that.

The FCC is two parts. 

 

Failure to perform

 

With additional good will gesture

 

Some are getting proper cash refunds now.

 

Whatever NCL did wrong they fixed.

 

No mention of another change in imagenenary laws changes.

 

 

[MrsTocko]

On 5/26/2023 at 11:56 AM, SpainAlien said:

But it's done this way in the US all the time for example in New York there is a local tax which is applied at the perceived value of the drink you ordered even if you have a drinks package, therefore they have an existing business model for it. Since not all ports on the itinerary (and certainly not time at sea in International waters) incur VAT on the drinks it would make the FAS price different on a per cruise basis which would simply be unworkable.

The individual US ports are the ones charging the tax.  NOT the cruiselines.  Where the cruiselines come into it is how/where/if it is passed on to the customer.  NCL just passes it through.  You will be charged a percentage on the cost of the drink while you are in port.  The % number differs by port.  but if you figure 20% on a $10 drink.  That is .20.  It is nominal.

I have read that some cruiselines will tally the drinks sold in port and then ring them up once in international waters, thereby the "sale" of the beverage is clear of those fees.  I have also read that some cruiselines will just pay it themsleves, and not pass it on to the passenger. (I do not know which ones, as I cruise almost exclusively NCL, and do not have direct, first hand knowledge - so this is hearsay). ALL cruise lines that stop/port in the US are subject to these additional taxes.

NCL would have to do a major overhaul of their entire system - fleetwide - to both add to the software that would allow them to "run" a european specific set of prices, or to update all the prices to include those taxes.  I love NCL, but I dont see them spending that kind of money. because they will also have to do the training on how to switch it over based on where they are.  while they are at sea, this could be problematic, with internet connectivity to switch ALL the registers over (during a transatlantic/pacific for example).

Another option would be to raise the cost of the package or the gratuities on the package to be inclusive of the fees in everyport they will visit on the crusie, or do a flat fee that would cover for all ports that NCL (as a whole vs the individual ship/cruise) visits.  Imaging the flack they would get from that.  I fully admit I am part of the problem. Living in the US, and in CA specifically, we are used to the price, not be the final price, because...sales tax, so we are used to paying a bit more on everything (except perishables found in a grocery store).and we are fine with it. It is usally about $2-$5 MAX for my DH and I combined, in these additional drink charges. We are also okay with paying the gratuities on the FAS packages. When I average it out over the length of the cruise, it is typically 2 drinks per person per day for my DH and I and the package is paid for.  Or about $20 pp/pd.  That is also reasonable. $20 a day for all the alcohol I want to drink? Yes please and thank you.  Yes, I know it is for the gratuties and not the alcohol, technically, but if I choose to think of it that way, that is my choice.  It is the perception.  I also find my bar, and bartender,  and give them an additinal tip in cash, after i have found my place.  I will tip them personally, generously.  during and at the end of the cruise.  As long as there are people like us that are happy to pay what they charge us, things won't change.

As far as the issues that passengers are currently facing in the UK ports, I would rather pay the small fee per drink, and have a drink than not.  I also understand the feeling of not being upfront about it to begin with.  As stated I am used to that extra little bit.  I am sure that I would feel differently if I was being charged the FULL cost of the drink, rather than a few cents on the VALUE of that drink.

 

Happy Sails and Cheers to you

[insidecabin]

System goes down paper is not that uncommon with cruise lines.

 

put everything through end of shift.

 

Won't wash for long no drink sales while in taxable territory.

 

As for systems NCL have been managing all round the world for years.

 

Its not like this is the first year in Europe or the UK

 

Way too much over analysis

 

Bottom line

Policy change that did not work.

 

Remember the tax suggestion of this thread was never supported with any evidence and reports are it's not happening.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by insidecabin

[podgeandrodge]

5 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

This letter is not an admission of guilt, it is an apology due to the fact NCL was unable to deliver the drinks as promised. However, that was not NCL's fault, they were given insufficient time to pay a tax owed by the local authorities. IOW they didn't do anything wrong, but because of factors beyond their control, they were unable to honor the drink package and are therefore offering FCC to make up for that. 

5 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

The now-closed thread on this subject stated early on that NCL was given insufficient time to make a payment, and that's the only evidence I've seen.

 

You were shown evidence before by me and others - NCL eventually made a statemenet ""Upon further investigation, we have clarified that the beverage service is permitted aboard while the vessel is in port within the UK".   That "upon further investigation, we have clarified..." means they messed up, by error, and not becuase they didn't pay a tax.

 

You keep pursuing the long since debunked excuse about lack of notice about taxes, even though NCL themselves have admitted they messed up, and offered refunds.

 

I know that NCL having admitted to screwing up will be upsetting for you, but just try not to think about it for a day, and stay away from this thread.  You'll feel better for it, promise! 🙂

[Travelling2Some]

I'm sure NCL would like nothing better than for the multiple threads on this subject to go away.  If I were a troll or a rather obtuse cheerleader (which I am not) then I would logically stop posting in order not to perpetuate the discussion.  Since I'm in the other camp (and have a handy ignore button) I'm happy to see this getting so much attention. 

[graphicguy]

18 hours ago, Stevio said:

 

I think you are confusing UK NCL cruises with US.

 

Here in the UK we pay up front for the whole package.... Cruise, charges, taxes, fees, "Free at Sea", service charges, tips, the works in advance.

 

And on one particular 10 day cruise they refused to serve alcohol for the two days we were in British Waters. no drinks on either the free at sea or for cash nor even the free latitudes bottle of wine with dinner. A dry ship.

 

What stung was their excuses for doing so everything from new UK laws to Brexit... All total nonsense as evident by no other cruise line behaving this way & their own sudden turn around.

 

If Free at Sea already has all the fees baked in, then it truly is free and has no monetary value.  You can’t refund something that has no monetary value.  That’s the point I was making.

 

If they actually broke out the actual monetary amounts for the taxes/fees, I mentioned you may have a point.  But, what is that amount?  If it’s the $20/day tips added into the FAS drink package, then the refund amount of those taxes and fees would be $20x2 days, or $40.

 

But, it’s a moot point.  Sounds like they gave you $100 FCC.  You have to book another cruise to use it, but it’s there if/when you do.

[DCGuy64]

18 hours ago, Stevio said:

All of these "reasons" were clearly nonsense to a UK citizen who knew them to be untrue.

Like I said before, no evidence whatsoever. Thanks for proving my point.

[DCGuy64]

12 hours ago, podgeandrodge said:

That "upon further investigation, we have clarified..." means they messed up, by error, and not becuase they didn't pay a tax.

That's your interpretation, I could just as easily argue that "upon further investigation" means "the local authority messed up." Again, not evidence.

 

12 hours ago, podgeandrodge said:

You keep pursuing the long since debunked excuse about lack of notice about taxes, even though NCL themselves have admitted they messed up, and offered refunds.

Not debunked in the least, it just means a number of posters believe it. Hearsay isn't debunking.

 

12 hours ago, podgeandrodge said:

I know that NCL having admitted to screwing up will be upsetting for you, but just try not to think about it for a day, and stay away from this thread. 

I could just as easily ask you to stay from this thread, but it's not my place to tell people whether or not to post, just as others have no right to tell me to stay away. Social media 101.

[Sinbadssailors]

When I buy a car,  I expect 4 tires. The tires are part of the package even if their value isn't specified.

 

If one's missing,  I'm owed...something. 

 

It's not my problem to figure out the value- It's up to the company that sold me a package with parts missing.

 

This thread has become something of an echo chamber.  

[graphicguy]

5 minutes ago, Sinbadssailors said:

When I buy a car,  I expect 4 tires. The tires are part of the package even if their value isn't specified.

 

If one's missing,  I'm owed...something. 

 

It's not my problem to figure out the value- It's up to the company that sold me a package with parts missing.

 

This thread has become something of an echo chamber.  

Not a car, but a cruise….two very different things.  But, sounds like the $100 FCC is the “gift” from NCL for the snafu.  They killed two birds with one stone.  You demanded compensation, and got it.  NCL got you back on board to use the FCC compensation, and in turn, giving you a reason to book another cruise that you may not have booked. Win-Win!

[schmoopie17]

59 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

 

But, it’s a moot point.  Sounds like they gave you $100 FCC.  You have to book another cruise to use it, but it’s there if/when you do.

That's exactly why they issue FCC...to suck you in for a few thousand more dollars to collect your $100. It's a win for them every time. If you don't book another cruise they keep their $100. If you do book another cruise, well, you know the rest...

[graphicguy]

1 minute ago, schmoopie17 said:

That's exactly why they issue FCC...to suck you in for a few thousand more dollars to collect your $100. It's a win for them every time. If you don't book another cruise they keep their $100. If you do book another cruise, well, you know the rest...

Gotta give NCL credit.  Not just NCL, but all the cruise lines are similar in that FCC is a tool they use to A) appease anyone who’s upset for any reason, and B) generate even more revenue in the process.

 

Clever!!!!!!

[insidecabin]

1 hour ago, graphicguy said:

If Free at Sea already has all the fees baked in, then it truly is free and has no monetary value.  You can’t refund something that has no monetary value.  That’s the point I was making.

 

If they actually broke out the actual monetary amounts for the taxes/fees, I mentioned you may have a point.  But, what is that amount?  If it’s the $20/day tips added into the FAS drink package, then the refund amount of those taxes and fees would be $20x2 days, or $40.

 

But, it’s a moot point.  Sounds like they gave you $100 FCC.  You have to book another cruise to use it, but it’s there if/when you do.

FAS is a charged extra.

Why ignore that fact?