GeezerCouple

Good question. For us, while we "never" use a debit card, we relax the "never" to be "only while traveling, and only with small amounts available". 😉 That is, the debit card is linked to a secondary checking account that has a rather small balance, just for this purpose. We also only use cash machines at actual local banks, not in questionable locations. And we always specify local currency deduction, NEVER the "dynamic currency conversion for [our] convenience"... and for the great profit of the local vendors! We've never been on a trip where absolutely no currency was needed/used. What we've occasionally done was to take a bunch of odds and ends of different currencies left over from other trips, and take them to a currency exchange to get the local currency of the country we are visiting. Yes, they have awful exchange rates, but otherwise, that money is sitting at home for yet more years (!). And this saves converting those other currencies *back* to US Dollars, and then in some other country, again converting the US Dollars to the other currency... incurring exchange fees twice. Fortunately, these cash needs are never particularly large. GC

I'm still not clear about any "wire transfer", but what you describe about the possible "finding" debit cards online (from previous authorized uses, for example) could happen with credit cards, too. A huge difference, in our minds anyway, is that with a credit card, one simply notifies the card issuer, and they handle it as a dispute (or similar) such that the charge is at least temporarily credited back, and the card holder isn't out any money (unless the card issuer decides against the card holder, which we have found to be almost never... actually never, period, for us anyway!) IF that had been a debit card (and this did happen once 😱 ) the account could be cleaned out. That was the last time I used a debit card, almost 20 years ago! [It was a large charge by phone, and the vendor "claimed" that it was an error and the "cash register kept re-ringing the same charge" HONK! Each of the extra charges was a different, and still large, amount. It was a vaguely sketchy vendor, although one that has gazillions of good reviews... I suppose it was gray market? I got all my money back (including for the original purchase, which I cancelled immediately upon seeing the extra charges), but it took several days for all of my money to be returned. Anyway, "NEVER AGAIN" - with a debit card or, separately, any sketchy vendor. IF we have to place an online order with an unfamiliar vendor, we almost always use Amex. They tend to be excellent with consumer protections like this. Er, end rant...!] So yeah, no debit card, but a credit card can also be compromised. It's just MUCH easier to fix that if it happens with a credit card! GC

I guess I've lost track of the initial problem. I didn't realize a wire transfer by charge card was a thing. Any wire transfer we've ever made was a bit of a pain, nothing at all as simple as presenting a card or giving someone a card number. ETA: I thought the title of "wire fraud" included things like charge fraud. GC

Are you closer to 55 or to 85? I wonder if we are heading for a writing test. Ever since I started using my laptop for just about *everything*, my handwriting has deteriorated significantly. Even my own signature isn't what it used to be. That's embarrassing. If it appears that I misspelled my own name, was it because my signature is almost illegible or ... did I actually misspell my own name!? 😳 GC

I didn't take the statement by OP in the first post about what the Chief Security Officer said to be an exact direct quotation (it wasn't in quotation marks, for example), but it was posted as being what that officer said, not what the officer "implied" by some indirect wording (?) or other method. And I'm not sure how the Chief Security Officer would have "implied" that only those two crew members were in the cabin without actually saying so. OP can clarify if they so wish. I'm obviously not able to state that what actually happened was or was not exactly what OP wrote. Without other evidence, we here on CC (and most online forums) tend to accept a description as it was written. An exception might be when someone writes what someone said, when I think we all understand that it might not be an exact verbatim quote*, but we usually assume that it accurately conveys the essence of what was said. * There are times that someone writes something that does include the word "verbatim". I've got some phrases from "memorable" comments I've heard that are indeed verbatim, but they aren't usually comments I share. 😉 GC

For states with ID compliant licenses, can a license get renewed without becoming a REAL ID compliant license? Or can some people just keep endlessly renewing an "old fashioned" license? GC

That's exactly what I thought, from the way OP worded the first post. This was included: "... Reported this incident to the Chief Security Officer with written statement. He confirmed only cabin steward and a plumber were in our cabin. He would question them but he thought they would of course deny. ..." Upon first reading that, I was surprised that any Security Officer would make any comment at all like that about who was or was not in the cabin. Full Stop. I would have expected all of that to remain subject to internal investigation, the kind of information many of us would like to have in such circumstances, but it's not revealed unless there is some legal investigation and it's required. I am NOT suggesting the following actually occurred, but I'm thinking of the point of view and responsibility of ship Security. For all the Chief Security Officer knew, that credit card wasn't actually left out at all, but was retrieved and left out after they returned, but before Security arrived. How could Security even know for sure where the card or wallet was before seeing where it was at the moment they arrived? Isn't that what an investigation is to determine? I mean, for all Security knew, the OP had taken that wallet - and the card - with them on the excursion, and perhaps even used it... and that would eventually clear anyone who "was in the cabin", etc. Again, I'm not trying to claim that happened. I *am* trying to point out that there are reasons for "investigations", and also why it is surprising to hear that a Chief Security Officer would say something like that prior to a proper investigation. (And from what I've heard about other on-ship investigations, they aren't all that forthcoming later, either, absent legal requirements...) And since when does any "security official" decline to question someone because "they would of course deny." That would pretty much stop most investigations before they ever start. GC

We also much prefer private excursions, for a variety of reasons. First, in terms of "ability", I can no longer walk quickly for very long, and I may need to rest. That's either going to get us left behind in group outings... or annoy everyone else. So that's usually a non-starter, except for "bus tours", which are rarely of much appeal. (There could be certain unusual locations where this might be appealing, but that's not too likely. Chances are that we'd still prefer a smaller vehicle, possibly with stops that we are able to arrange, etc.) Then, aside from "ability", we strongly prefer to be able to arrange our own itinerary, such as what to see and how long to spend at each location. In fact, there have been times when we've decided on the spot that we LOVE "this specific <space, event, view, etc.>" that we were able to change things to spend "more time here and less time there" (making some changes to the remainder of the outing). That's especially great if one stumbles across something that wasn't expected. Or... we are able to say, "Oh, this isn't really so interesting to us... could we head on over to <the next place>?" That can make all the difference in the world. It also avoids the delays when others in a group are constant laggards... We can also arrange to avoid "shopping" stops unless we specifically request them for some particular items. We've started with a simple Google search, with something like "<location> cruise excursions wheelchair", and then start investigating. Finally, when we are arranging the specifics by email with the guide, we eventually ask something like, "Given the questions we've asked and the interests we've mentioned, is there anything else you think we might enjoy but might not know about?" That has occasionally led to a change of plans that worked out very well indeed. We do look for others who have given reviews of a guide/agency, not just what they themselves show. But the best indication, in our experience, is the "back and forth" emails in advance. If someone can't be bothered to answer specific questions, then that's probably not someone we would enjoy as a guide. And someone who responds well to our questions has thus far always turned out to be a terrific guide. Sometimes we invite a few others from our Roll Call, such as if we charter a large catamaran that can easily accommodate more people, but often it is just the two of us (or with family when they accompany us). The less likely we are to return to a particular place, the more careful we are about selecting any outings. 🙂 If we are likely to return to the area, then we may use some of that first visit to check out future itineraries, sometimes including hotels for longer stays. Is this a RT cruise, or do you end up in Alaska with some time there before heading home? GC

You had written: "...I know they do not have any accessible cabins on this ship but I have spoken to an agent from Viking and they can provide me with some items in my stateroom to help...." In the future, you'll probably get the most useful answers if you don't announce something in a way that gives the rest of us an incorrect understanding of the situation. If there *are* accessible cabins, regardless of whether they are available or too expensive or whatever, that is likely to be VERY different than if the ship really does not have ANY accessible cabins... especially in terms of how the ship and crew are likely to be prepared to assist passengers with disabilities or wheelchairs vs. perhaps not likely to be prepared... And if you tell us that the ship does NOT have any accessible cabins, many of us are unlikely to "go check to see if you are correct". We'll often/usually assume your information IS correct, and give answers accordingly. Hope this helps in the future so you get the best possible information and help here on CC, and we hope that you are able to take the cruise and have a wonderful time! 🙂 GC

I'm not sure why you are annoyed that LHT28 mentioned they were Canadian. What matters here is whether the cruise line requires passports. We are US citizens and we have also have been on closed loop cruises that *require* every passenger to have a valid passport. (I don't remember the exact wording about "at least x months", etc.) I have no idea how many cruise lines have requirements like this, but it's up to each of them if they wish to be more strict than the minimal requirements for any given itinerary. As stated before, having everyone on board with a valid passport (including any useful "extended timing") would give the ship more flexibility in case a change in itinerary were to become necessary. Bottom line, it doesn't matter what any of the countries require *if* the cruise line has more strict requirements. There is no law that requires the cruise line to allow passengers to board if they don't meet all the requirements that the cruise line stated were required for boarding, even if they might separately meet lesser requirements of any countries/ports to be visited. If someone doesn't like the cruise line's requirements, there may be other lines with different requirements that one finds less burdensome. GC

Thanks as always for the information you provide. I thought I read somewhere that the windows were tempered glass, the type used in cars, where instead of shattering into shards that could be like razor edges, they break into very small "pebble" type fragments. Those could certainly be dangerous, depending upon just where they hit someone and at what speed, but this isn't matching the description I've read of the incident - and exactly "what happened to her" is obviously not completely clear. However, it is a horrible tragedy! I suppose it's good that the damage and harm to people wasn't worse, but that's no consolation to this woman and her relatives and others close to her. GC

For some reason, I have a vague memory that someone here on CC mentioned that only something like 5% of cruise passengers use CruiseCritic. Regardless of the accuracy of that figure, it's doubtless a very small minority of "all cruise passengers", and that's unfortunate. OTOH, some people enjoy planning, some don't mind, and some seem to be vaguely allergic to the concept. 😉 What it would be nice if NCL did is if they emphasized there is a choice to fly in at least one day in advance, or to specify your flights so at least there's not a really short connection. Yes, it costs extra. Some people won't be interested, but some others might be, IF they only knew of the possibility... before they encountered either a lot of worry, a close call, or flat out missing the sailing... We were very fortunate to discover CC before our first "recent" cruise in 2013. How I discovered CC is lost to history, but I do like to plan, so I no doubt started searching for cruises again online, and saw lots of possible resources besides just the specific cruise lines. AND... we learned about travel insurance here on CC, and *good thing*! We had a medical emergency a few days before planned departure, and our rather expensive cruise was totally cancelled with 100% penalty. But we had learned about TripInsuranceStore here, and bottom line, at least we got every cent back. 😀 (It was somewhat comforting during that medical stress to be able to mumble to each other, "At least we won't have to pay for the cruise a *second* time!!" I seriously think we may have not taken any more "special trips" had we not had that insurance. Thank goodness!!) It's obviously impossible for "new cruisers" or "new any-activity" to know "all the choices possible", but it just seems the cruise line could avoid upsets, and also time wasted when upset passengers call with an air problem on "day of", etc. GC

And in some cases, I would expect such a list to lead to a list of those who become "excluded" from suspicion, for a variety of reasons. Then any efforts can focus on those more likely to have committed the act in question. And that also allows some names to be cleared, rather than just not included in the list to begin with, but perhaps still suspected. GC

Is it possible that OP is using his/her real name (and city) as their User ID? If so, not only does that make it easy for anyone to learn more about them, but it suggests that they are not being very cautious about keeping personal information private and secure more generally. If that's the case, who knows where the information has been "shared"... So that credit card number may already have been "in play" out in the world, unfortunately. Or, of course, it might have been stolen on the ship. However, if every crewmember is really logged everytime they enter a cabin/suite, then... I find that a rather risky way to steal credit information. A crew member wouldn't get too many chances to do that without a pattern appearing. But still, it could certainly happen... I'm posting this in part as a general reminder to everyone that there are so many ways that the dishonest can "get" this type of information, as well as a double check for OP. So be prudent in where/whether you leave documents lying around, and also be prudent about how you protect your online (or mail/paper) information. Also, so much of that information is already "out there" on the dark web, etc., that the best thing is to keep credit reports locked (so no new cards can be opened in *your* name), and keep passwords secure so that others can't use the accounts that exist. It's tricky these days, but there are steps one can take to make this risk less likely. And if possible have the credit card vendor text you if the card is used (or used for more than $10 or such), so you can catch it quickly and try to stop further use. Yes, it's annoying, but less annoying that having major losses! 😡 GC

What does this mean? It sounds... ominous? weird? ...?? Thanks! GC

To be more clear, MJA will transport you from the hospital where you are an "inpatient" at least 150 miles from home, to the hospital of your choice in the USA (for USA-based clients). That could be your home hospital or some specialty hospital (but then, getting home would be "on you" after that). You would need to be stable enough to travel, which makes sense, although it's with full air ambulance if required. When we travel (e.g., pre-COVID!), we get an annual plan which then covers our major trips as well as any short notice visits to friends/family or for business, when we don't need regular travel insurance, but we'd prefer to have any extended hospital stay be at home, where the medical staff know us, if we are able to be transported, etc. They do have "per trip" coverage as well. And we strongly recommend TripInsuranceStore.com - but CALL them, as the fine print can really matter; they can discuss your specific situation, which might not be clear from limited online summaries. GC

And I wish it could RIP.

We do agree on one thing, and that is about the deeper principles of take it or leave it.... when there is some actual and serious principle at stake. (To avoid our wandering into the quicksand of politics or religion, etc., I won't go into detail, but I'm sure, as a student of history, you fully understand, and your point is well taken -- very seriously!) I've done my small parts of civil disobedience in past years/decades, and I've paid whatever penalty needed to be paid. Sometimes the rules were changed as a result of the actions, sometimes not. But the principles in those cases were not situations were those involved could just "make a different choice", etc. Far from it, and *that* was the point. I will stop here. Either this is understood, or it is not. Enjoy all of your travels. GC

That's exactly right! And NCL happens to define the "packages" as "full package" or the "one drink package" or the "two drink package" or the "three drink package", etc.. The "full" package is paid in advance; the lower categories are paid per drink. And the passengers agree when making the reservation that IF they want the "full" package, both first and second passengers in the cabin must get it. Otherwise, they are each free to get whichever lesser packages they desire. They also agree to a whole bunch of other rules. No one is "forcing them to agree to any of the rules". They can simply not do business with NCL. Easy. Others may choose to do business with NCL under this arrangement. Free choice of the marketplace. GC

Good... So since DH and I are light drinkers, we should pay less for that drink package, and X should pay a bit more because they are medium drinkers, and then you, Sir, must be a heavy drinker ( 😉 ), so you pay the most for this package, or maybe there's another level up, the "Blotto drinker" level; they'd pay more, right? Uh, that's a slippery slope to the 'per drink' price, but who is doing the counting? Honor system? Right. We already know how that works. But I asked *seriously* - why is the buffet example different from the "drinks" example? If the buffet is "all in the group must pay", then don't be in the group if you don't want to pay (or eat). Or travel alone (to the restaurant). For the drinks package, same thing. And if you object to the entire arrangement, well... don't choose NCL. IF you were both FORCED to "sail NCL" and had no choice otherwise, that would be different. But that's not the situation. I'm sure there are other NCL "rules" that various members of NCL travelers don't like, but... they agree to the terms because "the rest of the trip makes it worthwhile to them". I'm sure that inside, you know very well what is right and what is wrong, but you like the attention here or you like to argue or you are a troll or... or.... but regardless, if you sail NCL, you agree to their rules as part of the contract. Full Stop. GC

How does this approach work with the buffet situation mentioned earlier? Is it really "okay" to load up a second plate *and* then give that second plate to a friend who just wandered in with them, straight to the table, without paying. Would you consider that the restaurant is "FORCING" either of you to pay if you both paid for the meals you intended to consume, when you "could have" slid that plate over to them...? GC

Is there a reason for the specific "6:30" time you mention? We always get "our time" dining, no matter what cruise line, unless there's no choice whatsoever (rare, but it happens). We prefer a two-top, and we show up when we are ready to eat. Simple! On our last cruise, 2 weeks in NZ/Australia, on the 2nd or 3rd night, we had a dynamite waiter. Really special. So after that, we always asked for a table with him, and of course we were willing to wait a bit if necessary, as we did not call in advance. It was sort of the "best of old and new": a table for two at our choice of time that particular evening, AND a server who got to know our preferences and was incredibly pleasant, etc. It didn't take very long for him to see us coming (he may have been alerted a bit sooner by the maître d'?), and our preferred breads (one regular, one gluten free) and sparkling water, etc., were already being brought over, etc. That was our first trip with HAL. We weren't sure what to expect, but we were *very* pleased. And as classical music lovers, the quality of that chamber group in Lincoln Center was a real delight! What a nice surprise that was. 🙂 GC

Very interesting... we never thought of that... We love the same three restaurants, but had such a disappointing meal during our one time at Toscana that we never went back. IF we were having trouble figuring out where we would want to eat some evening and couldn't think of anything, we might give it another chance. However, that is certainly not the case, especially as one important benefit of having a suite is the ability to "order in" from a Specialty, if it's booked full or if we are just exhausted after a busy day ashore. 😉 This thread is making me hungry...... GC

You absolutely are not! 😉

That may well be. But.... what about HIS "hope"? There are often times when people disagree about "what to do". There is nothing special here. There must be at least something else they can all do together other than cruising. Then, at other times, everyone can do what they prefer - possibly including cruising - with one or some of the others, or not. Some time ago, there was another discussion about "trying to convince someone to cruise"... It got the predictable responses... It would be quite different if someone had never cruised, and especially if they had an inaccurate understanding of what it's like. That can be a bit trickier, but the decision is still up to *that* individual, and I still have difficulty thinking about any "pressure". However, if someone knows what it's like, and after 50 years (!) of cruising, surely that is a completely different situation. Have respect for his autonomy, and don't waste everyone's time (including his time!) pressuring him. That is very unlikely to be "fun time spent together", to put it mildly. He knows quite well what cruising is like and he... does NOT want to do it. Note: If there is any concern that this is a symptom of some larger potential problem, as suggested by Essiesmom, that is worth investigating, for his more general welfare. GC