Norwegian Sun Passengers Steamed Over Altered Cruise -- But Do They Have a Case?

[Cuizer2]

Sounds like the passengers were wrong and NCL wasn't. That's the way the article should have been written.

 

That would be called an editorial. There is a difference between reporting something and commenting on something.

[JimSS]

NCL could have delivered the message more effectively. With that said the rules are in thte contract and maybe if they would have relaxed a bit then and made the best of the situation maybe everyone would have had a better time. Life is too short and so are most cruises!

[soazlaney]

Poor "hard done " by NCL Sun passengers. We feel their pain.... :rolleyes:

 

Just look at what the "poor souls" had to endure! A cruise, breakfasts, lunches, dinners, midnight buffets, in between snacks and meals, room service, entertainment, a cabin, a private bathroom and shower, a TV, a bed to sleep in, a deck chair to lounge in, a swimming pool, towels for the pool, a shopping area, restaurants, bars, nightclubs, casino. Now that is "roughing" it.

 

NCL should have just lowered the life boats for those passengers that were THAT unhappy with ...... see above.....:rolleyes: ......

 

"Attention all unhappy passengers.....life boats have been lowered for your departure, boarding is now in progress. Please DO take all your personal belongings with you".

 

I hope you don't mind my quoting you, but you have expressed my opinion better than I ever could have. thanks

[Flydude1063]

We sailed with NCL several years ago to Alaska. It was the last trip of the season, weather was awful....not their fault, but to sail all the way and not get to see a glacier was just to much. They started back to the glacier, and turned around with out a word from the bridge. There were several other glaciers that they could have tried to take us to...nothing. Once people realized that there would be no glacier, there were long lines to complain. Not even a free drink! This situation was at least an effort to compensate.

 

Long lines to complain about not seeing a glacier? LOL...ok. I did indeed laugh out loud at that one. People are truly amazing sometimes.

[Becky and Calvin]

Reading this story I believe that passengers were compensated fairly, eventually. Things could have been managed much better. We have booked our third cruise this winter and the ports of call were one of the main factors in our decision. Missing an anticipated port due to weather is more understandable than if it is (and was) a mechanical or maintenance issue. These occurrences can be anticipated and NCL should have prepared their employees to respond faster and more efficiently. Hopefully NCL uses this experience as a training scenario so that inconvenienced passengers feel more valued in the future.

 

Thanks

[Focused1]

NCL more than compensated these folks for the inconvenience of missing these ports. Sounds like the winers and complainers further ruined the cruise for others accepting the reality that ports can be missed due to a variety of reasons. Get a life and don't waste our taxpayer monies further complaining to federal entities that have far more important oversight work to do than investigating this trivial matter.

[newmexicoNita]

of course it was fair and I am glad I wasn't on the ship at the time, I would have been more upset with my fellow cruisers than the management. Not being there, no one can judge how NCL handled the concerns, that could be where the problem lies, but I wonder how many of those whiney passengers have had itinerary changes in the past? There was a time when we didn't even get the port charges refunded. It has happened to us on 3 different lines, the only time we have gotten a refund happened to be on NCL.

 

Nita

[newmexicoNita]

Eventho I agree that NCL stands for Norwegian Cheap Line, it was the lack of communication skills that appears to be the problem. No way should the cruise fare be refunded, but this is what happens when the ship is run from Miami instead of on board.

 

If you don't think they complainers have ground to expect more, why are you calling NCL, Norwegian Cheap line? What was cheap about the compensation? Lack of communication has nothing to do with being cheap.

 

For those of you who think the problem should have been fixed sooner, in the ideal world you are right, but the problem was rather new and the choices were, do what was done or cancel the sailing altogether, if you were a passenger which would you have chosen?

 

to the person who mentioned how Carnival reacted to the last problem, the situation was very different.

 

And to all the cry babies, it is a good thing you are not one of my little kids (little kids are what you are) cause I would have turned you over my knee and paddled you a good one. Be thankful for what you have.

[Kapulanikai]

Just what is the world coming to. Hey, we can't land at the port so let's sue and carry on like we're in Cairo and get NCL to sell the ship and divide the profits with the passengers who yell the loudest. We were on the Sun just over a year ago and a GI bug tore through the ship preventing us from seeing the King penguins in the Falkland Islands. Our compensation was $26.13 p/p for the missed port. End of story. NCL cruises are fast becoming a cruise line for the discontented who are on the phone to NCL before they sail complaining about too many gays, too little food, no place for the friends of Bill to meet and on and on it goes. Mature, grow up and get a life!

[atlasali]

On one cruise due to rough seas, we missed the private island...too rough to tender. We were disappointed, but it never even occurred to me to complain nor to ask for compensation. We were on a ship with entertainment, food (someone cooking for me), beverages, activities, and someone doing all the cleaning for me. How is that not wonderful?

 

Read the terms of your contract. NCL was more than fair.

 

The only secure, guaranteed vacation is a "staycation" at your own home. Oh wait, that isn't secure either: power can go out, furnace / air conditioners and appliances can break, water mains can rupture.

[legaljen1969]

I see that most people do think the compensation was fair. I agree. I can certainly sympathize with the disappoinment in not making it to the ports you had paid for. That is disappointing but not the end of the world.

As to those who keep talking about how if a ship ports in the US it should abide by US laws- I am having a very hard time seeing how these ships have not abided by our laws. Nothing about changing the itinerary is unconscionable. The terms are clearly laid out.

I agree that some of the "fine print terms" should either be higher in priority on the policies or in bold print or something else to distinguish these issues- but they are there. I see nothing unlawful about changing itineraries to make sure the guests are safe or have a good cruising experience.

It's probably no picnic for the cruise line to get things changed around either. It's not like they just did this for the fun of it.

[legaljen1969]

Sobersailer123- you must not be too disappointed with NCL if you have sailed with them 10 times.

[legaljen1969]

So, I decided to check out mybadcruise.com. The author's first paragraph talks about how NCL's promise was to provide everything passengers need for the "perfect cruise vacation."

 

I don't know about anyone else, but I have found that the "perfect cruise vacation" is different for different travelers. We (husband and I) often travel with my parents, brother, sister in law and two nieces. For my parents, the perfect cruise consists having a balcony cabin where they can sit and enjoy the sound of the ocean and see the ports when we pull in, enjoying dinners with the family, getting away from the stresses of their everyday lives. My parents want spacious accomodations and luxurious surroundings.

 

For my husband and for me it is having time off from work, enjoying some beers or other cold drinks and relaxing poolside, getting off and exploring whatever port we visit or taking an organized tour that gives us an overview of the port, doing a little gambling, listening to musicians in the lounges, playing bingo or whatever other fun and entertaining game might go on, quiet reading, spending a little time on the beach, spending relaxed time with the family, having someone else do the daily chores (like having chefs cook dinner in the dining rooms, cabin stewards who make our beds and straighten up the bathrooms), going somewhere we haven't been before and just having nothing to worry about for a week. We aren't picky if we have ocean view, balcony, inside cabin. It's just about getting away from the every day.

 

For my brother, sister in law and niece- it is having room service, a nice clean cabin, a beach with fun stuff for the kids to do, gourmet dining, action based excursions (like a zip line tour in Ocho Rios, kayak rides, etc.). It is a good kids program or having someone to watch the kids while they enjoy at least one evening to themselves (usually either my husband and I OR my parents watch the girls if they are not in the kiddie program). My brother and SIL want lots of service, and for everything to be spotless.

 

Some people want a booze cruise. Some people want luxury cruising. Some people want party party in a port. Some people want a beach. Some people want exotic destinations. My point? The "perfect cruise" is different for everyone. Some aspects of a cruise may be perfect for me and a disaster for you. Maybe for you, it is perfect and for me it is not so wonderful. Even the exact same experience could be met with different reactions. NCL can't predict anyone's perfect vacation. They try to be all things to all people, and some people just can't be pleased.

[cruisecrazyk]

It is too bad the ones who wanted to complain so loud ruined it for others. NCL gave them much more than the cruise contract states they have to. The complainers have no case. Stuff happens and you just have to go with the flow. It is no wonder other countries hate Americans. We can be very rude to people and can act so spoiled. It makes me sad.:confused:

[DADONTHERUN]

NCL, RCI and Carnival have all been more that generous in their responses to giving passengers refunds, ship board credits, and free cruises. If you read your cruise contract - which most people don't - you will more than likely see that most cruise lines have the option the deviate from from the advertised intinerary for various reasons including but limited too acts of god, civil unrest, etc. I was on an RCI cruise that was supposed to go to Tortola, BVI but instead opted for another day at sea. While I was not happy about this as I wanted to see Tortola, I also realised that RCI was under no obligation to compensate me based upon my cruise contract. So we had a great day at sea and made the most of my/our cruise experience. Recent civil unrest in Mexico caused several lines to not stop in Mazatlan - kudos to those companies for keeping the interests of their passengers at the forefront of their concerns. What did got was dependent on which line they were on as some had an extra day in CABO, Manzanillo, or Ensenada. Had I been on any of those cruises with what was going on in town, i know I would've stayed on board had they actually stopped. So bottom line, READ your CONTRACT and have a great cruise.

[DeirdreTours]

I wasn't on this cruise, but i can't believe that 400 passengers would take over the theater unless things were really badly handled by the crew. On paper, it looks like the compensation was fair, but I just don't believe that so many people would be so profoundly upset if they had been treated reasonably. Reading between the lines, I think passengers were more upset by how they were treated than by the ports missed (although, i too would be pretty upset to have Samana and Great Stirrup Ca subbed in for actual real ports).

[commission1]

Itinerary Changes

"In the event of strikes, lockouts, stoppages of labor, riots, weather conditions, mechanical difficulties or any other reason whatsoever NCL has the right to cancel, advance, postpone or substitute any scheduled sailing or itinerary without prior notice. NCL shall not be responsible for failure to adhere to published arrival and departure times for any of its ports of call. NCL may, but is not obliged to, substitute another vessel for any sailing and cannot be liable for any loss to passengers by reason of such cancellation, advancement, postponement or substitution."

 

It is very important to be reasonable and not to distort a post because of your own agenda, please. Would a cruise line advertise a cruise to aruba then take you to alaska? Please, Please, probably not, however the issue is the cruise lines have a right to, now that is a problem in my opinion, your opinion may be different.

 

If you feel like I do, contact your senator and congress person, tell them you want laws of cruise lines that use usa ports changed to protect the consumer.

 

In addition if I paid a fortune to for an alaska cruise to see glaciers and I did not see any, i would be extremely disapointed, it certainly would not be a laughing out loud moment. Compassion for people who were disapointed with their cruises.

[dalgirl]

On our first cruise with NCL on the Dawn we went through a tropical storm which made it impossible to tender in Samana. The captain sailed as far out of the storm as possible, ensuring the safety of all passengers, gave us back the port charges, excursion fees, and free mimosas - we also got extra time in the BVI. At the end of the cruise he was hailed as a hero by all passengers for the fine job he did in the storm. Things happen, bad weather, mechanical issues, even civil unrest in ports (Athens, Egypt, Honduras) and you should be prepared for some disappointment. Cruising is a service business and I think that NCL gave the passengers a good consolation prize and excellent service. And please, do not gripe to the crew, they don't deserve rudeness from passengers:rolleyes:

[newmexicoNita]

Itinerary Changes

"In the event of strikes, lockouts, stoppages of labor, riots, weather conditions, mechanical difficulties or any other reason whatsoever NCL has the right to cancel, advance, postpone or substitute any scheduled sailing or itinerary without prior notice. NCL shall not be responsible for failure to adhere to published arrival and departure times for any of its ports of call. NCL may, but is not obliged to, substitute another vessel for any sailing and cannot be liable for any loss to passengers by reason of such cancellation, advancement, postponement or substitution."

 

It is very important to be reasonable and not to distort a post because of your own agenda, please. Would a cruise line advertise a cruise to aruba then take you to alaska? Please, Please, probably not, however the issue is the cruise lines have a right to, now that is a problem in my opinion, your opinion may be different.

 

If you feel like I do, contact your senator and congress person, tell them you want laws of cruise lines that use usa ports changed to protect the consumer.

 

In addition if I paid a fortune to for an alaska cruise to see glaciers and I did not see any, i would be extremely disapointed, it certainly would not be a laughing out loud moment. Compassion for people who were disapointed with their cruises.

 

you are forgetting one thing: the cruise lines are not totally governed by US laws as the ships are registered outside the country. Now, with that being said, of course you can't pass a law, even if they were governed by the country that states they can not change itineraries, what would you expect them to do, refund all your money, if, for some reason the itinerary needs changing.

 

I just think people need to grow up and stop this: It's all about me, me, me.

 

Most of us cruise for serveral reasons, 1-the chance to see many places in a short time, the fun or the ocean, good food, making new friend, relaxation, a chance to experience something new plus other reasons.

 

I do not feel any compassion for those who didn't get to see a couple of islands they thought they would: Do I feel sorry for them? Sure, but not true compassion. Feeling compassion for them would be, if there was a horrible storm and most of the passengers got sick, if there was a pirate jacking or if there was some other tragedy. I had compassion for those stuck on the Carnival cruise recently with almost no food and no air conditioning. Most of us, who have cruise more than a few times have missed ports or had them substituted. We get over it very quickly.

 

Nita

[commission1]

you are forgetting one thing: the cruise lines are not totally governed by US laws as the ships are registered outside the country. Now, with that being said, of course you can't pass a law, even if they were governed by the country that states they can not change itineraries, what would you expect them to do, refund all your money, if, for some reason the itinerary needs changing.

 

I just think people need to grow up and stop this: It's all about me, me, me.

 

Most of us cruise for serveral reasons, 1-the chance to see many places in a short time, the fun or the ocean, good food, making new friend, relaxation, a chance to experience something new plus other reasons.

 

I do not feel any compassion for those who didn't get to see a couple of islands they thought they would: Do I feel sorry for them? Sure, but not true compassion. Feeling compassion for them would be, if there was a horrible storm and most of the passengers got sick, if there was a pirate jacking or if there was some other tragedy. I had compassion for those stuck on the Carnival cruise recently with almost no food and no air conditioning. Most of us, who have cruise more than a few times have missed ports or had them substituted. We get over it very quickly.

 

Nita

Well we agree to disagree, in my opinion of course you can pass laws on anyone that does business in/with the USA. Of course the type of refund depends on the reason for not making the ports, example if NCL knew before the cruise left the first port in the usa that they would need to change the itineary because of a mechancial issue, well in my opinion I have a big problem with that, in my opinion the contract needs to be changed to protect the consumer. I think the value casual cruiser has a different perspective than a long time cruiser. Conditioning may play a big part. The contract and changes to it have much more to do than just the complaints on this cruise, this is for the future, contact your congress person and senator.

[Planer's Edge]

Yes, we need to get the government more involved with every facet of our lives.

 

Right!!!!! :rolleyes:

 

PE

[vols_159]

Itinerary Changes

"In the event of strikes, lockouts, stoppages of labor, riots, weather conditions, mechanical difficulties or any other reason whatsoever NCL has the right to cancel, advance, postpone or substitute any scheduled sailing or itinerary without prior notice. NCL shall not be responsible for failure to adhere to published arrival and departure times for any of its ports of call. NCL may, but is not obliged to, substitute another vessel for any sailing and cannot be liable for any loss to passengers by reason of such cancellation, advancement, postponement or substitution."

 

It is very important to be reasonable and not to distort a post because of your own agenda, please. Would a cruise line advertise a cruise to aruba then take you to alaska? Please, Please, probably not, however the issue is the cruise lines have a right to, now that is a problem in my opinion, your opinion may be different.

 

If you feel like I do, contact your senator and congress person, tell them you want laws of cruise lines that use usa ports changed to protect the consumer.

 

In addition if I paid a fortune to for an alaska cruise to see glaciers and I did not see any, i would be extremely disapointed, it certainly would not be a laughing out loud moment. Compassion for people who were disapointed with their cruises.

 

 

if congress gets involved they will waste thousdans of tax.payers hard earned dollars and if they make a law.. then u will c cruise prices double or triple..

[cruisn4bruisn]

First off, I think Planer's Edge says it best with "A bad day at sea is better than a good day at work."

I try to look at this objectively from both sides and I see things done wrong on each side.

From what we have read from other posts about the contract, they obviously do not owe the passengers anything from a contract standpoint. From a business standpoint however, if they want these people to sail again, it is in their best interest to throw them something. I've got many years of hospitality experience and I've learned one true rule, PERCEPTION IS REALITY. Now of course this does not work on 100% of constumers but for many you can turn a not-so-good situation into a good one or at least keep people from rioting. This is where NCL made the mistake. Obviously I wasn't there and we seem to be hearing mostly from people that were pissed off on the boat and things may get exagerated once you are already mad so how the crew handled it may be subjective for them. Unless they heard "full refund" they were going to get irate and say the crew didn't care anyways. With that said, NCL maybe could have been a little more sympathetic to the passengers in their responses. I also know it's hard to bite your tongue when 500 people are screaming at you and saying you suck at your job even though you know you are trying to do the best you can for them. I think NCL may have only been lacking in their sympathy and empathy of the situation for the passengers and swallow your pride and continue to apologize. Other than that NCL gave more than needed and the passengers should have been ok with that.

 

Now, we know that one person can be smart and rational, but people together are usually dumb, panicy, and rationale goes out the window. I understand with the people that missing those ports could have been devistating if that was the whole reason that you went on the cruise but unfortunately your fare did not just pay for the right to those islands and back. Your fare is for food, lodging, and access to the MANY free ammenities that the ship offers. Those did not stop therefore you still got what you paid for in that respect. AND you still had a chance to get off the ship at other stops. Granted I'm sure they are nothing compared to St. Thomas and St. Maarten but if you but you got to stop notheless.

 

It's hard for people since we weren't there and I'm sure I too would have been disappointed but if you let it ruin your vacation, then it's probably not worth the risk of some to take the chance on this happening and just need to stay home.

 

Tough situation but from this standpoint, I think NCL gave plenty and someof those passengers should have been let out at a port.

[newmexicoNita]

Yes' date=' we need to get the government more involved with every facet of our lives.

 

Right!!!!! :rolleyes:

 

PE[/color']

 

yep, you and Vols have it right.

 

Nita

[The Ostrich]

I see nothing wrong with how NCL handled their propulsion problem, either in re-routing the ship or compensating the passengers. In fact, it sounds like they were quite generous, considering every passenger who boards a cruise should know that events may force a cruise line to re-route the ship to ensure maximum safety. However, as more often seems the case with Norwegian than any other cruise line, they faced a near mutiny by their passengers, who acted like jerks. Worse than spoiled children, they apparently never have learned that sometimes you just have to accept reality and move on. For whatever reason, Norwegian attracts more of these jerks than other cruise lines.

 

My guess is that Norwegian attracts a lot of people who read brochures and book the cheapest rate that can find online without ever talking to a knowledgeable travel agent. It is so bad that I have to warn my clients that, when they take a Norwegian cruise, they should expect a high jerk quotient and avoid being infected by them.

 

I laughed out loud to read a passenger quoted as saying he paid a lot of money for a cruise during hurricane season. Not bloody likely! He probably paid $499 per person or less, and then he and wife probably spent the whole trip grazing at the buffet. I know that type of fat-assenger.

 

I don't write about these jerks theoretically. I have seen them myself every time I have been on Norwegian. A long time ago on a non-US flagged Hawaiian trip, they whined about visiting Fanning Island for three solid days, despite the fact that it was clearly written in the itinerary. The complained on another cruise about not having their regular dining room seat, despite the way NCL shouts out its Freestyle dining message in advertising.

 

On the other hand, I was on a Royal Caribbean cruise when weather forced them to cancel the stop in Grand Cayman, which to my wife and I was the main reason for choosing this particular cruise. The Royal Caribbean clientelle, however, was intelligent enough to understand that the ship's crew was just making the best of a bad situation when they brought us to Cozumel a half day early to try to make up for the re-routing. Zero other compensation. No mutiny. No dickwads whining about their vacations being ruined, gathering in the lobby like their actions would magically heal the propulsion system.

 

I don't know what Norwegian can do other than sell only through travel agents who fully prepare clients, except possibly use longer words and more complex sentences in their advertising so as to confuse the many morons who currently end up on their cruises. :cool: