X Strikes Again....

[dakrewser]

A charge back is far easier to accomplish on a credit card than an atm card, that's just the way it is.

 

Well, no. The procedure is essentially the same.

 

Your credit card company will work with you and help, good luck with the bank, especially if you have signed a slip.

 

And Brian's bank was working with him. It was Celebrity who kept lying about things.

 

Did this Brian actaully "check out" of the ship, or just walk off? If he checked out, his account should have been closed.

 

"This" Brian, (or did you mean this "Brian"? either way, it sounds demeaning to me) is well known to those of us who regularly visit the HAL boards. What brought you around for this discussion, so far from your usual haunts?

 

Mistakes happen and we deal with them, it's just a part of life sometimes. How we cope is different for everyone, I prefer not to get my britches in a twist over things like this. Yes, this type of thing has happened to us in the past. We were once charged for someone elses cruise. A call to the credit card co. and the TA was all it took.

 

Perhaps you should review the entire saga of Celebrity, Brian and this cruise before blowing off what is just a small part (but the 'crowning touch') to this fiasco of a cruise odyssey.

[GMoney]

And it was dollars that Brian was upset about ... about 1500 of them which had been fraudulently kited from his account by a company which he had trusted with access to his financial instruments.

 

"...fraudulently kited"??? please. c'mon.

I hope charges be pressed for this crime. ;)

 

Well, I am off to the inaugural sailing of Freedom of the Seas, where I will be using my credit card to secure my account. Have fun with the dead horse! :)

[Copper10-8]

I hope charges be pressed for this crime. ;) /quote]

 

Don't hold your breath!;)

[RevNeal]

"...fraudulently kited"??? please. c'mon.

I hope charges be pressed for this crime.

 

Yes ... that was strong language on my part. I was using it to make a point. If *you* were to take my credit card number and use it to fund your shipboard purchases on your upcoming cruise that WOULD be a crime ... right? In a sense, the only substantive difference between that and what happened to Brian is that it was the Line's financial offices that did it.

 

Now, I don't think their error was intentional, hence criminal charges would not be possible in this case -- besides, the money has now (at long last) been refunded. HOWEVER, what the the Line did could be construed as negligent misuse of financial instruments followed by deliberate obstruction of an investigation of the event by interested parties and financial institutions (Brian, his bank, the two other passengers whose accounts were charged to Brian's account, and their banks); if a pattern could be traced, and dozens or hundreds of other similar cases of negligent accounting be documented, it would make for an excellent civil suit.

 

Here's a hypothetical ... let's see how you like it: your credit card has been charged $1500 for goods and services which you never authorized, used, purchased, or received. The party which charged your card is a company with which you have done business in the past, but their use of your credit card was unauthorized by you for those specific charges. If intentional, such would be a crime, however we're feeling charitable and will assume it was an honest mistake on the company's part. When they are shown their error, rather than agreeing to correct it their first response is (1) to deny that an error was made. Then, their second response is (2) to inform you that the charges were for goods and services purchased by other customers of their company and that, if you want to be re-imbursed for these charges your best recourse is to go to those other customers and have them pay you back directly. When you point out that you are not their collection agency, they (3) accuse you of being unreasonable and (4) state that your funds will have to be held as a guarantee that those other customers will pay their bills, and that only after this is done can you be re-funded your money. When you remind them that you have not authorized them to use your funds either to pay these expenses or to serve as a guarantee of payment for these other customers' bills and that the company remains in a state of wrongful use of your financial instrument, they (5) finally state that they can refund your money but that it will take 5 working days to process the request .... I could keep going, but my point is made. Was the error felonious? If it were intentional, yes ... it would be a chargeable crime. However, I don't think it was intentional. Their obfuscation of the event AFTER the fact is another matter altogether, and of more serious import.

 

Yes, the horse is dead. What I still want to know, however, is WHY they fought the refunding of the money for so long.

[thomasale]

"I cancelled a Celebrity cruise to book the one I have on the Volendam.(too many problems with Celeb right now) I paid Celebrity with a debit card in full when I booked it in January (over $4200). I received my refund to my debit card in 2 days after cancelling. First time I have cancelled a cruise. I was surprised at how quickly they refunded my money. I have booked the HAL cruise through my TA as they (HAL) still allow discounts and I received a nice discount and some goodies. My TA does not charge cancellation charges.

 

BTW the Celebrity cruise (concierge class) was $381 per day (myself and wife) and the HAL is $350 per day Cat AA. This will be my first HAL cruise and I am looking forward to it."

 

I posted this on another thread but feel it has a place here. I recieved my refund quite promptly. I am sure many others have also. It was not fair the way Brian was treated. I have known little vindictive people to hold things up to make a point. I am not referring to Brians actions as those of a "little vindictive person" but this whole mess could have been predicated by Brians exasperated tone. I believe this could be delivered by Brian. This could have had these unintended and unwarranted consequences. Perceived condecension and annoyance by Brian could have initiated this slow response. If so, this should not be tolerated by Celebrity management.

 

Rev Neal you of all folks here should know we reap what we sow.

 

I am just throwing this out as food for thought. I am in no way blaming Brian for what happened, however, he could very well have been the cause.

[peaches from georgia]

Now, I don't think their error was intentional, hence criminal charges would not be possible in this case -- besides, the money has now (at long last) been refunded. HOWEVER, what the the Line did could be construed as negligent misuse of financial instruments followed by deliberate obstruction of an investigation of the event by interested parties and financial institutions (Brian, his bank, the two other passengers whose accounts were charged to Brian's account, and their banks); if a pattern could be traced, and dozens or hundreds of other similar cases of negligent accounting be documented, it would make for an excellent civil suit.

 

Was the error felonious? If it were intentional, yes ... it would be a chargeable crime. However, I don't think it was intentional. Their obfuscation of the event AFTER the fact is another matter altogether, and of more serious import.

 

Yes, the horse is dead. What I still want to know, however, is WHY they fought the refunding of the money for so long.

 

FOUGHT FOR SO LONG- 4 BUSINESS DAYS?

 

These are serious charges to make - negligent misuse of financial instruments, deliberate obstruction of an investigation, negligent accounting, obfuscation of the event? Fraudulent kiting? Civil suit? Isn't this just going a little overboard? :rolleyes:

[sail7seas]

I am just throwing this out as food for thought. I am in no way blaming Brian for what happened, however, he could very well have been the cause.

__________________

Tom

 

 

As long as we are providing food for thought.........gee, I wonder if maybe some folks at Celebrity got a little attitude all their own seeing as Brian left their ship after two days....obviously displeased. Maybe they were a teeny bit sensitive about someone who clearly did not enjoy their product. A bit defensive, shall we say??? Don't know, of course. I'm just providing some food for thought.

 

Maybe they decided they'd adminster a dose of aggravation to express their own displeasure????

 

Of course I am only speculating and hypothetising etc.......who knows??? But as long we we're providing food for thought..........;)

 

 

[elmorejj]

The knackers yard called and said the dead horse arrived....BUT they are considering charges for cruelty to animals, evidently it had been flogged to death!!!..........jean:cool:

[Ma Bell]

This slamming of cruiselines is ridiculous. Having sailed on both these lines and having good and not so good expertiences on both, I would say they are both good lines and although I give the edge to Celebrity it's just my personal preference. I would not hesitate to sail either. Anyone who has travelled extensively must know that ocassionally there will be problems, regardless of the quality of the product.

 

I find it amazing that someone would discover a mistake in billing in the morning and then be on a message board in the afternoon stirring the pot. Most people would wait a few days to see if the problem was resolved before starting something like this.

[HeatherInFlorida]

Maggie, I'm so glad I misunderstood you! Thanks for explaining. I honestly think you'll really enjoy your Celebrity cruise, but of course nothing is for sure. Gail's story about her illness now has me a bit worried about the Prinsendam so I'll just hope for the best.

 

Dave, people "endure" snafus and adversity every single day ... mistakes happen; it's just part of life. If you let it consume you, you go nuts. Once something is ironed out the best thing you can do for yourself is learn the lesson and move on with grace. Without that attitude I'd be a dried up old prune. I'm not.

 

And how was it determined that Brian's bank was the "truth-teller" and Celebrity was the "liar"? I mean, how do we actually know that? I have noticed many times that $$$ going from one "bank" to another have a way of hanging in thin air sometimes. It's really quite extraordinary.

 

Greg, HAL charged me $20 for a deposit recently ... not a mistake I rushed to clear, but in the end I was the one to correct it. To be honest, much too worried they'd catch it at some point and cancel my reservation.

 

As to your experience with the quick reversal on your card, I've not been so fortunate. Recently I switched cruises on HAL and had to make a new deposit on the new cruise. That hit my card immediately. But for some reason it took considerably longer to credit the original deposit from the cancelled cruise ... I was told it might be 2 to 3 weeks. It was 10 days. But had it been a debit card, I would have been out the $$$ for that time period. It's a puzzle to me that it took so long to credit me yet mere moments to debit me.

 

235 posts and we still haven't figured out that this is just one more snafu in the craziness we call life? I'm amazed we're not more tangled up more of the time in a sea of computers and "press 1 for ...."

[arzz]

There is no question that this thread is "beating a dead horse" -- but I cannot resist --

 

The speculation that Brian somehow caused the cruise line employees to treat him badly by his attitude (see earlier post by Thomasale) does throw me over the edge.

 

If the question to be debated revolves around the professional behavior of the Celebrity folks, if we assume Thomasale's hypothesis then the question is proved-- it was not Brian's fault but, rather, repeated extremely unprofessional behavior by X employees. Unless, of course, we were to subscribe to the unethical position that employees are allowed to behave in an unprofessional manner and treat customers badly if their tone of voice implies that they are unhappy. NOT

 

I, honestly, think that Brian is the unfortunate victim of a series of errors, mix ups, and neglectful behavior, on the part of MANY folk who did not conspire to do this to him -- rather the configuration of the stars or some such karma caused a series of occurences that converge to create an incredibly unpleasant and inexcusable TOTAL cruise experience from the moment he "won" his cruise to the moment his debit card was finally credited by X. I invite those who feel otherwise to review in its entirety not just this thread by the other threads in this saga that began with "I won a cruise" -- followed through "I cannot claim the cruise I won" to the review of the cruise to Brian's shipboard illness and lastly this mishandling of Brian's finances. I do not believe anyone conspired to make this happen, but, nevertheless, happen it did and the net result is inexcusable.

['Dam' high seaser]

Well put Arzz!! Thanks for putting it all back into perspective but I am fairly certain that it is not dead yet.:rolleyes:

[dakrewser]

I must agree with arzz.

 

If the "mistaken" charges was the only problem associated with this cruise, then it could be chalked up to experience. But it's simply the last in a long line of incredibly dumb, stupid moves on Celebrity's part. And, not surprisingly, everyone except Celebrity has come in for blame by some people whose rose-colored glasses are shaped like an "X" :rolleyes:. They've blamed Travelocity, Wells Fargo bank, even Brian himself. I haven't seen it yet, but I'm just waiting for the grand conspiracy theory to surface - Brian orchestrated the whole fiasco, inveigling the travel agency and the bank to conive with him to sully the good name of the cruise line.

[Copper10-8]

Aha, I knew it was only a matter of time! The vast (or is it fast?) right-wing conspiracy theory has reared it's ugly face (or is it head?)!:cool:

[HeatherInFlorida]

Until a few posts ago, no one ever suggested that Brian is at fault for any of this. I never saw that until someone just suggested that perhaps his "tone" might have had an effect. Since I wasn't there and neither were any of us, I have no idea whether his tone had an effect on Wells Fargo or Celebrity.

 

However, Brian did say that he was understandably aggrevated and did a bit of yelling. I know the feeling ... done it myself when in very similar situations, but we all know you catch more bees with honey and I have never been successful in getting anything done by getting angry with the people I want help from.

 

I had to have a lot of birthdays before I learned the best way to go about getting what you want ... and it works every single time.

 

But there is one thing we do know. We have only heard one side of the story. I believe everything Brian has said to be 100% true from his perspective of his experience. However, there is another side. There always is.

[xpcdoojk]

Personally, I still can't imagine leaving a cruise after 2 days. Honestly, the idea would never have entered my mind. I think I could have roughed it thru til the end. I guess I am just a gamer!:D

 

jc

[gizmo]

OT. Heather, where is Molly ? I miss her pix. :D

[tech]

All this mess aside, Customer Service is getting flakey.

 

I had a small problem with a medical bill so called the 800 number.

 

Later in the conversation, I made a remark that someone was making an

omniopent decision. I wasn't yelling or anything. No bad attitude, just preplexed at a decision that did not jive with the insurance rules.

 

At this point the call center girl in Iowa told me that I was using vulgar language and she was not going to listen to it.

 

I asked her what I had said, she told me she could not repeat it for she would get in trouble. !!

 

I guess the word omniopent sounded bad to her and she was going to stop the conversation. :D

 

I asked if I could speak to a supervisor because I really needed to get an answer.

 

The supervisor told me that his people were not expected to listen to vulgar language. I assured him that I did not use bad language.

 

However, he was sure his employee was correct.

 

At this point I knew I had fallen down the rabbit hole and Alice must be just around the corner ! :D

 

Anytime a problem comes up that requires pushing the #1, #4 #24 button and then finally getting a person to resolve a problem...I have to get in a comfortable chair, have a snack, drink and a form of entertainment so I can last the amount of time it will take. :)

 

In Brian's case I probably would have died in the chair, hand on the wine Bottle.

[sail7seas]

Groan......... I feel you pain!!!

 

We keep thinking it can't get worse but it actually does!!!

 

[HeatherInFlorida]

OT. Heather, where is Molly ? I miss her pix. :D

 

Ask and you shall receive!! That's what "service" is all about.

 

So you're saying you didn't like my own smiling face???

[dougnewmanatsea]

we all know you catch more bees with honey

Isn't it "more flies with honey" (than with vinegar)? At least that's what my late great-grandfather said.

 

Anyhow, that's neither here nor there! But you are absolutely correct; things always work out better if you're nice to the person you're dealing with - even if they're not nice to you. That said, we all have only a certain amount we can take before we get really peeved! After a while, even the most patient and understanding person in the world will have had enough.

 

It is, frankly, the job of the customer service employee to deal with - and placate - angry and dissatisfied customers. There is no excuse for being obnoxious (and I am certainly not suggesting that Brian was), but there's also no excuse for a customer service employee who doesn't do his or her job because of the customer's attitude.

 

At any rate, this is all entirely hypothetical and frankly I doubt that anyone's tone of voice had anything to do with anything.

[HeatherInFlorida]

Isn't it "more flies with honey" (than with vinegar)? At least that's what my late great-grandfather said.

 

......

 

Yes!!! And why I typed bees I haven't the foggiest!!! LOL:D ! Thanks, Doug. My brain must have been thinking bees make honey and it slipped.

 

I have no idea what we'd catch bees with (if we wanted to);) .

[RevNeal]

Personally, I still can't imagine leaving a cruise after 2 days. Honestly, the idea would never have entered my mind. I think I could have roughed it thru til the end. I guess I am just a gamer!:D

 

JC, I normally would agree with you. I've never left a cruise early, and even if I were sick I think I probably wouldn't myself (not unless there were some very good reasons to leave ... as in danger of death or of seriously infecting/harming others, etc.

 

This case is alittle different, however, from most cases. Brian was uncomfortable, unhappy, and coming down with Norovirus. And, the day he disembarked his ship was docked IN San Francisco. In other words, it was a short taxi ride from the ship terminal to his apartment. His home was about 20 or so minutes from the ship! Given this factor, I can see WHY he would decide to check himself off the ship.

[RevNeal]

Very well put, arzz. VERY well put.

[RevNeal]

FOUGHT FOR SO LONG- 4 BUSINESS DAYS?

 

Peaches ... that might not seem long to you, but place it within a bit of context and allow that context to illustrate why it felt so very long and so very wrong and so very frustrating to Brian.

 

It was "just" 4 business days ... true ... but, remember, there was a 3-day weekend in the middle of it and, during that entire period Brian's bank account stood with a NEGATIVE ballance in the multi-hundred dollar range because of this error.

 

What if this had been YOUR money, taken in error to pay someone elses' bills? When you call to challenge the charge and to request refunding of your money you are told that they are not going to release your funds back to you because SOMEBODY has to pay those bills and, until they can collect from the rightful debtors, they're going to hold YOUR funds as security. Don't you see SOMETHING wrong in that? Even a little something wrong? It's compounding the erronious billing with an even more erronious argument to justify not transfering the funds back. It's this kind of argument that was tossed at Brian -- along with the idiotic suggestion that he should just collect the money from the two people who owed it to the Line -- that really casts their response in such a negative light for me. WHAT BUSINESS did they have holding Brian's money A SINGLE HOUR past the identification of their error? They should have, immediatly upon realizing the error in their billing, initiated an electronic transfer of funds back to Brian. They didn't.