Expat Cruise

Well, I just learned something new the hard way. If one person gets insurance and the other one doesn't. And the one that has insurance can't go due to a family emergency (daughter just diagnosed with cancer and 86 year old sister's health declining rapidly) and the other one decides to go, the one that goes has to pay a 100% single supplement = $3000.

I can give you a way to get around this added fee. But it will only really work if you are close to the port you are leaving from. And Princess will not like this but nothing they can do about it. It is not easy to do and you may not want to fight the battle.

You both check into the cruise she boards and then after boarding makes the medical claim reason for leaving the cruise before it sales. She may be charge a small service fee but the insurance should cover the cruise cost. It is not a prefect way but it can work.

Am I correct that this was a post from 2105?

Yes the thread was started in 2015 when they (Star) did a 48 day tour to AU. The home port for the ship is Hong Kong, but they move to other ports in SE Asia for 2 to 3 months. The ship is now based in Manila until May 2018. My comments are from a cruise March 5 to March 10th, which had the same types of problems and issues that was reported in 2015.

Management and the owners have not improved in the last three years it seems the ship has gone farther down hill. My post is current news for a on going problem ship and cruise line which is one of the main reasons for these boards. First hand information about cruises, ships, lines, and ports.

I would never travel on a passport with less than 6 months left on it. Many countries will not allow entry if less than 6 months. And even if they do not have a set policy, a immigration officer in the port can rule no entry. Even if you cruise is a few weeks away you set can get it done. It will involve a rush fee and proof of travel but in the long run well worth it.

Don't risk your whole cruise for a few dollars.

Would still go the ADA route because it will get Disney's attention. Even if they know they would win they do not want the negative press. We all know "Hands Up Don't Shoot" which no law enforcement report ever prove to true.... But the truth doesn't matter... the PR image is what Disney will protect.

And while the OP was wrong, Disney should have provide better customer service so for that alone they need to feel some pain.

OP

If I was you I would be talking to a good lawyer about this under the american disability act of 1990 and the act for service dogs I'm sure you have been wronged here. Yes like others have said you should have read and understood all the information, but Disney needs to also be responsible here. And if a lawyer comes forward with any claim involving the ADA Disney will very quickly change the way they are handling this.

Many would just let this go I would not even if it means never using Disney Cruises again. Note to other members here be very careful what you post because the laws around this act to protect people are very strong, even a wrong post by a board member here can result in civil or criminal actions.

You also need to factor in another cost. The value of your time. When you get on the ship the cruise line collects your passport, and then processes with the local agents several thousand visas when you factor in the crew is also processed. Getting your own visa can cause issues, like my passport has 30 plus pages of visas stamps, if you have a visa and they miss it they will do a ship's visa and you end up paying twice.

Another true case happen to my wife and I last year. She travels on a Philippine Passport, I'm on a United States passport. The cruise line saw the cruise under my name and processed two visas, but she does not need a visa as Philippines is visa waved. The issue was trying to get the false visa canceled and a refund to my ships account. It took 3 meetings and about 2 1/2 hours. If they miss your visa in your passport do you really want to waste hours of your trip dealing with guest services?

Yes having the ship do it does cost more but with the limited time we have on the ship, maybe paying a little more is worth it to save possible problems.

And yet they haven't gone bankrupt yet.

It is because of their target market. The Asian market is far less demanding than the Western markets. Things American would never stand for is allowed. They make a lot of money by dealing in a market most major cruise lines will not go into. That is not to say the whole Asian market is second or third class but the group Star targets is.

Also even if the cruise business loses money the main company is making big money with other land base operations, so the cruise line is a smaller less important part of the overall business.

Not a real cruise line or cruise ship. Everything wrong with how to run a cruise line can be found here

then why do all fine restaurants have a corkage fee? They have figured out that if they don't get the corkage fee they don't get anything because people who like wine don't want to pay ridiculous mark ups on wine and just won't drink. Princess has figured this out they allow unlimited wine at 15$ a bottle.

Royal controls the market, it is not like you can go to another restaurant off the ship. And if you did it would help Royal. Royal wants you to purchase from them, again with purchases they make more then a corkage fee.

Customs is a law, RCL is a policy lots different.

Corkage is pure profit. We don't pay $100 for bottles on board that we can get for $20 at home. Most restaurants have figured that out that's why they take the corkage fee.

It is not about Customs, US Customs does not limit how much you can take out of the country, only what you bring back. Most other countries follow this model. Corkage and wine sales are profit centers, it is about profit. If you want to pay $20 for a bottle of wine and no markup, stay home.

I know the rule, but we have put wine in our checked bags the last 4 years and this has never happened. Wine placed in checked bags has been delivered to the cabin and we have sailed on peak spring break week. never been called to the naughty room for wine, for a paring knife yes, but never wine. Even had a nonhidden bottle of cheap rum delivered to cabin. They poured out the half full bottle, but delivered the unopened bottle so I know they opened the bag. Its hit or miss. I wish Royal would let us pay a corkage so we could bring all the wine we want on board just like most restaurants let you bring your wine for a corkage fee. Even at $25 dollars a bottle I would pay it, its cheaper for my great wine rather the bottles the list on their wine menu.

Just because sometimes wine makes it through does not change the fact that if they scan and hold your bags you can be called to the security room. Your argument is like saying I came through customs with $20,000 cash and did not tell them and had no problem.... It only effects you when you are caught.

You answered your own question about corkage fees, Royal makes more money selling you the wine. If they could make more charging a corkage fee they would do that. It is all about profit. The same reason Royal does not allow outside groups to sell tours on board the ships, it would cut into Royals profit.

If we check the wine, how long do we have to get them out of the naughty room? DH won't carry them onboard. And I don't want to wait in line on embarkation day. Do they leave the naughty room open after embarkation day?

It is more a question of how long do you want to wait for your luggage. If you are called to the naughty room it will be to open your luggage. So if you wait I hope you have lots of clothes in your carry on bag.

Because on my cruise contract it lists the ship, sailing date, and my dining choice, which is Dynamic Dining Choice. I've never said the menu choice is in the contract, as well as the advertised materials having to be accurate to the product purchased.

OK, even if everything you said is 100% correct.... so what? Royal is going to see it from their side and then your options are as I already said, try to prove you are right, pay a very large fee to a lawyer, and spend the next several years in court. Yes I see how it is a win for you....

People talk about the contracts here and what Royal must do. But really Royal can do almost anything they want. They can change every single port and say it is weather and what can the passengers due?

The only recourse here is to fight with the credit card company (dispute) or go to court. Most passengers do not have the time or money to do this. Royal has a fulled paid staff trained to handle these cases. So really most of the views posted here in the end mean very little.

Royal does something that you believe is a $1000 loss to you. So yes you can try to go to court and 5 to 7 years later, and $50,000 dollars later you win. Really does not seem like a win to me.

Personally I dont see the issue, leave the autos on, pay extra IF you won't. Follow the dress code, how hard is it, and many people say I'm a bit of a rebel.

So as long as others agree with you they are correct and no issue. But if the opposite then they are wrong and you are right..... Thank you for clearing things up....

Not so fast it also says "other conditions also apply......" nothing is sealed here.... While you may not want to hear it in these case, like so many other cases the UK is subservient to the United States.

Never like DD dinning happy to see it dying. Its a win win...

I would never consider opting out of the gratuities. So I did save a little change by prepaying my gratuities at the old rare instead of paying daily on the ship at the new rate.

Again you saved nothing because you could have wanted until the cruise and paid exactly the same thing. These are not required payments or charges. Like the guy who is so happy he gets a big tax refund check at the end of the year.... The only thing he did was overpay all year so the Government can give you back your same over payment.

Okay well you are arguing with my bank statement that has a transaction to RCL Cruises Ltd in Weybridge, England.

Yes that is the name and company Royal uses in England, but they process through the US account, and if you used the Royal website in any way it was through services located within the United States under US Law.

I just went ahead and prepaid my gratuities yesterday and saved the few bucks I would have had to pay extra in late May when we cruise. We will pass the savings on to our Jr. Suite Steward in cash during the week to show our appreciation.

You really did not save anything because only a suggested amount. You can pay the old rate, new rate, any rate in between, or pay nothing. It always has been your choice and still is.

 

Actually no. RCL Cruises Ltd is headquartered in Surrey in the United Kingdom, and that's who I pay, not its owner, Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd who you are right is headquartered in Florida, but that's not who UK customers pay. UK customers pay the UK subsidiary through their UK payment processor.

All royal credit card operations Worldwide are handled through the US. But go ahead try to fight it and you will waste your time.

Peace will come in the Middle East before this is settled. Every side believes they are right, even when they are wrong.

But I'm right ;)

RCL Cruises Ltd is who my booking is with, a UK based company who is wholly owned by Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd, and as such has to abide by UK and European consumer rights laws. A majority of the advertising for Q class revolves around Dynamic Dining, and such not providing it would be a major change to the ADVERTISED product.

And the UK law is meaningless in this case as the servers and credit card processing is all United States. In these case booking on the UK site will not help you. The terms you agreed too, game over.

"The Company is headquartered in Miami, Florida U.S.A., and most of the Company Websites reside on servers in Miami-Dade County or Broward County, Florida U.S.A. You agree that these terms of use shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida without regard to its conflict of law provisions. "

Is your cruise contract different in the UK from the one in the US?

Royals cruise contracts are not the same Worldwide. But if you pay Royal for the cruise you are dealing with a US credit card merchant account and under the rules for that account. Also if you read the contract it says all disputes will that result in court action will be settled in Miami Florida.

From the Royal standard website contract (Worldwide)

GOVERNING LAW

The Company is headquartered in Miami, Florida U.S.A., and most of the Company Websites reside on servers in Miami-Dade County or Broward County, Florida U.S.A. You agree that these terms of use shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida without regard to its conflict of law provisions.

You consent to the exclusive jurisdiction and venue of the courts in, and agree that any action at law or in equity arising out of or relating to these terms shall be filed only in, the state or federal courts located in Dade County, Florida. You hereby consent and submit to the personal jurisdiction of such courts for the purposes of litigating any such action. If any provision of these terms shall be unlawful, void, or for any reason unenforceable, then that provision shall be deemed severable from these terms and shall not affect the validity and enforceability of any remaining provisions. This is the entire agreement between us relating to the subject matter herein and shall not be modified except in writing, signed by both parties.

******

You can get around these terms sometimes but not easy.

Sorry

Hey guys, ok it does appear that over the weekend I apparently posted I claimed to know the real reason behind empress being delayed. This in fact was not me posting this but a family member who thinks it is funny to get into my account (including others) which are automatically signed in have a look at my activity and write and post garbage. All I can do is apologise sincerely for this and will ensure this won't happen again. I have no information on the real reason empress is held up only what I have shared with you guys before in earlier posts.

The source I did have for empress has no further information since before the ship left Cadiz so I don't have the information I apparently claimed.

All I do have at present is what is going around, that the ship is being prepared for Cuba with a cigar lounge and that another rumour that the ship will be renamed Cuban empress is not true and was part of an April fools joke by another website. Once again I apologise for the problems that have been caused by what is neglect on my part.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

Issues seem to happen. But I would go back and remove the false information if you have not already done so. I have never tried to remove a complete post, so if you cannot you can edit down and replace the false information with anything like "removed"

Yawn

Wow that blows me away what a command of your argument.