Earthquake near Santiago Chile -- Princess Sailings and Passengers

[Coral]

I was quite undecided about all of this honestly, until I read that Q & A. Princess I realize is dealing with an unfamiliar disaster senerio, but come on, let's get real Princess. Some of these answers are just really denials and references to mistakes that Princess made (at the passengers expense I might add). IMHO!

 

I totally agree. It made Princess look like they really are not prepared for emergency crisis (but they did have people in Santiago 24/7 just in case a plane did land)......!

 

Someone posted earlier that there are some great companies out there who have learned - any communication such as a phone call to say "we don't know how this is going to play out but we are working on it and will let you know as soon as we know something" is better than "we are sailing on time, regardless, good luck getting there".

[yelp]

(My post accidentally double-posted again - deleting this post... Sorry :( )

[Princess Chatterer]

If you haven't seen this - this is Princess's response (day by day timeline) to how they acted. They responded to CC:

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=3728

 

Here is a question and answer: http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=3729

 

Sunday is where I think Princess failed to fully understand the seriousness of the Santiago airport situation and I know how long the lines at that airport can be, even on a normal day.

 

Princess knew or should have easily known on Sunday, because we all knew via press reports, that the Santiago terminal was smashed, the electronic systems were out and there were reported serious fuel problems. Also Princess knew for fact that the airport would be closed for the the next 72 hours or three days. On Monday and this is the KEY the horrible airport situation was crystal clear, even to Princess because that's when the aviation authorities announced that "Phase One March 3 - 5 International flights will arrive and depart from 8:00 PM to 8:00 AM. All international arrivals during Phase One will transit another Chilean airport to clear immigration and customs before arriving in Santiago. Phase Two: Beginning March 6 All international flights would not have to transit another Chilean airport" but would have to make an arrival reservation.

 

Here's what Princess says:

 

"Sunday, February 28

 

CNN and our ground contacts in Chile began to report that the airport would be closed 72 hours and open on March 2 Reports indicate the highway and the port are damaged but operational As the vast majority of our passengers fly in on the day of sailing (March 2), we believed at this point that most flights would operate Some flights are reported as landing

We prepared updated statements for incoming calls, advising of the 72-hour closure of the airport but that we understand that flights are still operating on March 2."

 

When Princess said above that they believed that "most flights would operate" on Tuesday they were just wishfully thinking because there was no evidence I've seen anywhere to suggest that this would or could even be true for International flights with only a few LAN domestic flights and emergency relief flights to be allowed in as an exception. Actually I believe Princess really did know Sunday that Tuesday was going to be a total arrival disaster because that's when Princess decided to hold the ship over in Valpo through Wednesday BUT, for whatever reason, Princess didn't make that one day ship holdover announcement until Monday around noon California time.

[Atomica]

I totally agree. It made Princess look like they really are not prepared for emergency crisis (but they did have people in Santiago 24/7 just in case a plane did land)......!

 

Someone posted earlier that there are some great companies out there who have learned - any communication such as a phone call to say "we don't know how this is going to play out but we are working on it and will let you know as soon as we know something" is better than "we are sailing on time, regardless, good luck getting there".

 

I also agree. I love Princess and think they offer a marvelous cruise, but I'm certainly glad my sailings have never had issues, because it seems as though the response will be to dig in their heels and say 'too bad'.

 

The one thing that blew me out of the water in the Q&A was the assumption that people are still going to go to the time, expense and effort to fly to places like Ushuaia and embark for what essentially becomes a four-day cruise. Are you kidding?

 

Princess continually re-iterating that it's not their fault the earthquake occurred, yet telling the passengers they're still responsible for finding their own way into a city still recovering from a natural disaster is a bit flippant.

 

Memo to Princess: it's not your passenger's fault they can't get there, or that they're stuck on your ship and can't leave!

[Cruise Junky]

I think I liked them far more as a company before reading that Q & A :eek:

[yelp]

For the people who have been telling us to not be frustrated with Princess and have been lecturing us about it, read these specific parts:

 

CC: Why such a breakdown in communication? The near-unanimous word is that Princess simply did not get in touch with impacted cruisers, then basically continued to tell them the cruise would leave on time implying it was up to passengers to get to Santiago. This goes for travel agents, too, who had to go hunting for information to give to their clients.

 

Princess: I think we've addressed this.

 

CC: A lot of people feel like the line made it seem like it was the passengers' obligation to get to Santiago, despite the lack of flights ... despite the State Department travel alert ... despite the lack of communication from the line. Princess basically determined that if passengers cancelled "prematurely," this was grounds for forfeiture of cruise fare, and it was on insurance company to refund the associated costs. How do you respond to this?

 

Princess: I think we've addressed this in the questions above.

 

More:

 

CC: What is Princess' responsibility to travelers who booked their air through its air-sea program?

 

Cruise Critic Note: Quite a few members are saying there was absolutely no communication for days (a general comment whether they booked through air-sea or not) ... then they were finally told they were on their own and had to work with the airlines. One member told us he booked through air-sea at the cost of $1,644 dollars … then had limited communication and was told it was up to him to rebook. He did, through Buenos Aires, so now he'll be on the cruise for four nights (12th to the 16th).

 

After being told they were on their own by reps, the Princess statement from March 2 reads: "For those passengers with Princess Air, we're working with the availability given by the airlines to attempt to book flights when they become available."

 

Princess: The miscommunication on this point is that in emergency situations, we typically recommend that passengers stay in touch with their airline directly as well, to get immediate updates. In extraordinary circumstances the carriers themselves are in the best position to provide the most up-to-date information as they are making very dynamic decisions. At the same time, we do have a responsibility for passengers who book air with us is to try to help them find alternative flight options so they can catch the cruise. In this instance, however, our air department was having problems finding air availability. We were finding alternate flights, only to then discover the flight had been cancelled. Now that we've agreed the ongoing itinerary, our air department is in contact with each passenger to revise their flights into another port.

 

CC: Why are these air-sea clients being told to take care of their own flights? Isn't the point of buying an air/sea package to minimize risks?

 

Princess: I think we've covered this above.

 

CC: Since it's been so difficult, near to impossible, for travelers to get to Santiago, why hasn't Princess just cancelled the March 2 voyage, acted as a hotel for people stranded (either at the end of the previous cruise or who had arrived early for the March 2 sailing), and offered refunds?

 

Princess: I think we've covered this in the timeline.

 

CC: Why did Princess continue to state until March 1 that the ship would sail as scheduled (March 2) ... didn't the line think this would be misleading? More importantly, why was Princess telling passengers to work to make it to Santiago when the U.S. State Department is "strongly urging U.S. citizens to avoid tourism and non-essential travel to Chile"?

 

Cruise Critic Note: One member arrived in Santiago on Wednesday at 1:30 p.m. and found out there … in the airport … that the cruise wouldn't depart until Thursday (they knew about the first delay, the 6 p.m. Wed. push back). "We are paying for hotel and travel vouchers that we wouldn't have had to purchase if Princess had met their obligation to be at the pier in Valparaiso for us to embark by 6 p.m."

 

Princess: I think the timeline mostly addresses this question.

 

CC: According to postings on Cruise Critic's boards, some people were told by Princess reps to fly to other ports -- say Punta Arenas -- to meet the ship. Obviously the ship is not calling there anymore, so what about passengers impacted on those grounds?

 

Princess: We did not advise passengers to fly to alternate ports until March 2 when we had agreed the final itinerary. If this happened, it was a mistake.

 

Cruise Critic Note: Members are saying that the line is earning double in some sense from these cabins ... or are there enough empty cabins -- which wouldn't have been occupied anyway -- to accommodate everyone who wants to stay onboard?

 

CC: Why hasn't Princess offered affected passengers a free future cruise or full refund?

 

Princess: Again, it's not our custom to provide total refunds to passengers in circumstances that are out of our control such as natural disasters. We rely on the fact that the large majority of our passengers purchase some sort of travel coverage to protect their vacation in the event of the unexpected.

 

CC: Why such a breakdown in communication? The near-unanimous word is that Princess simply did not get in touch with impacted cruisers, then basically continued to tell them the cruise would leave on time implying it was up to passengers to get to Santiago. This goes for travel agents, too, who had to go hunting for information to give to their clients.

 

Princess: I think we've addressed this.

 

CC: A lot of people feel like the line made it seem like it was the passengers' obligation to get to Santiago, despite the lack of flights ... despite the State Department travel alert ... despite the lack of communication from the line. Princess basically determined that if passengers cancelled "prematurely," this was grounds for forfeiture of cruise fare, and it was on insurance company to refund the associated costs. How do you respond to this?

 

Princess: I think we've addressed this in the questions above.

[sultan_sfo]

There were 3 categories of cruisers:

 

Those with Princess Air and Princess Insurance. They will receive full credit + some extra if they missed the cruise.

 

Those with Other Insurance: It would be foolish for Princess to declare a refund. Those Other Insurance should be made to pay first.

 

Those with No Insurance.

 

For the latter 2 categories, I expect there will be a negotiated reimbursement of some amount after the dust settles -- any non-reimbursed amounts for those with insurance and a reasonable fraction for those who insist on cruising without insurance despite all the exhortations.

 

And for those who disdain Princess Air -- please read Princess Response carefully.

[WCAB]

Princess has always been my favorite cruise line. I now see that they are a fair weather friend. Any problems become the sole responsibility of the cruiser. It kind of makes me feel that all the good cheer they gush while you are on board is just so much hype. Sort of an image that is not quite genuine.

 

I am hoping that Princess will show some recognition that they did not handle this in the best way and try to make amends with those that tried so hard to get to the port and were prevented because of a lack of air travel or prohibitive due to inflated cost for the airline travel.

 

I too do not think that Princess should have encouraged people to get there at any cost. They just had no way of knowing what danger they might be exposing the passengers to. Princess should have erred on the side of caution and canceled this cruise. They then could have put their energy into getting the current passengers home.

[Coral]

I think I liked them far more as a company before reading that Q & A :eek:

 

Ditto!

[Princess Chatterer]

Come on Princess. Stop playing hardball with totally innocent passengers. Quit digging your public relations hole deeper and deeper and deeper. We want to continue to be Princess cheerleaders but you are making things extremely difficult for us right now with your very arrogant attitude.

[rdsqrl]

Come on Princess. Stop playing hardball with totally innocent passengers. Quit digging your public relations hole deeper and deeper and deeper. We want to continue to be Princess cheerleaders but you are making things extremely difficult for us right now with your very arrogant attitude.

Ditto.

Your spokemen are making it tough for us to keep on feeling the love. Man up, Princess, and do the right thing. Or else keep your yaps shut, because with every question you answered in that little Q&A, you drained a little more goodwill out of the well -- and it ain't bottomless.

I believe I have mixed enough metaphors and used enough imagery for one night. . . I'm off now.

Oh, and Coral, it was me who pointed out the better customer service of other companies. Maybe we should send Alan Buckelew to new employee training at Nordstrom!

[4cats4me]

Princess,

You are really not thinking this one through very well.

This makes me want to jump ship [no pun intended either]

and go to another cruise line.

 

It's called coroporate greed.

[Coral]

Ironically - there is almost a Catch 22 involved here. They thought they would be ok with sailing on time because most of their passengers fly in the day of the cruise. In this situation, it is probably these passengers who probably made the cruise on time.

 

As veteran cruisers, we all know how important it is to fly in a day early or 2 or 3 days just so we don't run into any travel delays - especially when traveling long distances like South America!

 

I have never heard Princess advocate coming in early for a cruise to make sure that you make the ship.

[cruise4cm]

Reading Princess's "answers" in Yelp's post made me even more convinced that Princess should give a refund or a credit for future cruise, not just because they should, but because it's the smart thing to do business-wise!

Princess, I was a 3/2 Star Princess customer who you misled and who you miscommunicated with (I've documented ALL of my conversations with Princess, and because there was no way to get to Santiago, I almost went to Punta Arenas because Princess people told me to!), but I will travel with you again if you make this right!

[ebth2306]

Does anyone know why this is considered a "voluntary" cancelation? I have the platinum insurance and it sounds like I won't get a refund even WITH insurance.

 

Anyone have any FACTS to share?

 

Elizabeth

[donna5]

Does anyone know why this is considered a "voluntary" cancelation? I have the platinum insurance and it sounds like I won't get a refund even WITH insurance.

 

Anyone have any FACTS to share?

 

Elizabeth

 

With princess upgraded you can cancel for any reason and at least get a credit on future cruise. You will have to call berkely and ask them exactly what you are going to get.

[abbydancer2003]

This is all very interesting.

 

First, I feel bad for those of you who didn't make the cruise. We planned extensively for our cruise in February and I would have been devastated to miss it (and the day before I thought I might because my passport was stolen - but the US Embassy was very efficient and by 10am I had a new passport). One of my friends was supposed to be on the ship, and I feel bad for her.

 

However, I do think Princess is in a no-win here. They could have canceled the cruise, but then they'd have people already in Santiago/Valparaiso who would be very unhappy.

 

So, who pays? This was a force of nature - the cruiseline is in fact not responsible and neither are the passengers. I understand that people couldn't make the ship, but that too was not the cruiseline's fault. Why, then, is it their responsibility to pay for it?

 

If you change the situation - say you miss the ship because of weather - would you expect them to pay for it then? That's what insurance is for, I guess.

 

With the communication problems (a valid complaint IMHO) Princess should offer everyone some some compensation - not a full refund, but certainly a significant OBC or a discount on a future cruise.

 

This is really a lose lose situation. I really don't know what the right answer is.

 

By the way, how many of you have actually been through a major earthquake? There's a lot of chaos, communication breakdowns and service interruptions. It takes a few days for things to settle down. (I know this from experience - San Francisco in 1989 - a lot of confusion and misinformation).

 

My sympathies to those who had to miss their cruise, I hope you do get something from Princess to make up for the frustration of the last few days.

[Tweed]

We were due on the 2/3 sailing travelling from the UK, we have been loyal Princess customers for some time and maybe stupidly have booked on the Caribbean Princess leaving Sunday.

 

With no chance of getting to Santiago we can celled on Monday and despite having insurance are prepared for a battle to get full refunds, we have even had to fight to get our OBC transferred to the new cruise!

 

This was a situation outside everyone's control, even Princess, do THEY not have insurance to cover this risk.

 

Despite Princess having our email address, home & cell phone number, in the UK we have had NO contact from this company. Do companies in the US not understand communication or customer service!!

 

It still appears on the webcam that the Star is still in Valparaiso.

[Princess Chatterer]

"More than 120 aftershocks of 5.0 magnitude or greater have hit Chile since Saturday's earthquake, USGS geophysicist Don Blakeman said."

 

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/03/05/chile.earthquake/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn

[brfan]

There were 3 categories of cruisers:

 

Those with Princess Air and Princess Insurance. They will receive full credit + some extra if they missed the cruise.

 

Those with Other Insurance: It would be foolish for Princess to declare a refund. Those Other Insurance should be made to pay first.

 

Those with No Insurance.

 

For the latter 2 categories, I expect there will be a negotiated reimbursement of some amount after the dust settles -- any non-reimbursed amounts for those with insurance and a reasonable fraction for those who insist on cruising without insurance despite all the exhortations.

 

And for those who disdain Princess Air -- please read Princess Response carefully.

 

The bolded part could create an interesting scenario. My understanding of insurance, and I could be wrong, is that the insurance company expects that the insuree try to obtain compensation/refund from the company (Princess) and if that failed they will pay the insurance (or the difference in what the Princess pays out and the total insured fare). If Princess is expecting the insurance company to pay first then that could create a deadlock and the passenger (insuree) will end up getting nothing or at least waiting months or years to get anything.

[Princess Chatterer]

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Maps/region/S_America.php

[ebth2306]

I just got off the phone with Princess Vacation Protection (Berkley Insurance). A major natural disaster is NOT a covered reason for their plan (but Jury duty is go figure!). So all we will get is a future cruise credit that is non-refundable, non-transferrable. MEANING, the fare for this expensive cruise (2 weeks which we NEVER do) that was interrupted by a massive earthquake will sit in their coffers until I can figure out how the hell to get 2 weeks off again....it will never happen. The credit is also only good for the fare and not on board charges.....this gets worse by the minute. I thought since I had their platinum insurance I was OK but it just goes to show how badly this is being handled when even their insured passengers are getting screwed!

 

OH and customer relations is still horrible! The person I talked to told me that the credit was an act of good will by princess!! I said no it isn't it is part of the insurance I paid for!! Good will would be letting me using for on board credit or taking others with me to use it up....THAT would be good will!

 

Elizabeth

[billet]

I just got off the phone with Princess Vacation Protection (Berkley Insurance). A major natural disaster is NOT a covered reason for their plan (but Jury duty is go figure!). So all we will get is a future cruise credit that is non-refundable, non-transferrable. MEANING, the fare for this expensive cruise (2 weeks which we NEVER do) that was interrupted by a massive earthquake will sit in their coffers until I can figure out how the hell to get 2 weeks off again....it will never happen. The credit is also only good for the fare and not on board charges.....this gets worse by the minute. I thought since I had their platinum insurance I was OK but it just goes to show how badly this is being handled when even their insured passengers are getting screwed!

 

OH and customer relations is still horrible! The person I talked to told me that the credit was an act of good will by princess!! I said no it isn't it is part of the insurance I paid for!! Good will would be letting me using for on board credit or taking others with me to use it up....THAT would be good will!

 

Elizabeth

 

Go figure - if you were at home and an earthquake struck your home and made it uninhabitable you are covered. I am glad you had Platinum to cover any eventuality but I am sorry to hear how limited it really seems to be. Please keep us updated on what the final outcome is on getting full compensation and good luck!

[MrPete]

Go figure - if you were at home and an earthquake struck your home and made it uninhabitable you are covered. I am glad you had Platinum to cover any eventuality but I am sorry to hear how limited it really seems to be. Please keep us updated on what the final outcome is on getting full compensation and good luck!

 

I'm not surprised. Berkley didn't even cover us for a blizzard, where the airports were forced closed.

 

"Get to the ship". "Catch up to the ship".

 

:rolleyes:

[Princess Chatterer]

My daughter worked as a claims adjuster for a national property and casualty insurance company. The attitude of her boss was deny, deny, deny. She quit after seeing so many of their insured unjustly suffering so much because of the company's refusal to pay valid claims.