Royal Caribbean strands 145 passengers in San Juan when Irene forces early departure

[donaldsc]

http://travel.usatoday.com/cruises/post/2011/08/stranded-passengers-san-juan-royal-caribbean-hurricane-irene/416548/1

 

""There was no way to notify our guests of this change in departure time."

 

Huh??? Why not?

 

Yet another reason to get to the departure city a day early or certainly 3 hours before departure time. I have no sympathy for the people who missed the cruise.

 

DON

[Feelin' Nauti']

No. They don't want to set a precedent of covering stuff like this. People will expect carnival to cover stuff that they in the future won't. People should have trip insurance if they expect to be compensated for stuff like this. Plain and simple. Thats why the product exists.

Of the 145 guests left behind, 15 of them had purchased their airfare through RC and were given hotel accommodations Sunday and Monday night, and flown to Aruba on Tuesday to catch up with their seven-day cruise. The other 130 stranded passengers, who booked their flight independently, were left on their own. RC abandoned them!!!

And you think this is right? :eek:

Can you imagine the people standing at the dock, finding their ship gone and no one there to help??? :cool: How would you like to be in their shoes?

 

Talk about a lousy business. :rolleyes:

Shame on RC.

[pcur]

Its called planning AHEAD. They KNEW a hurricane was coming up the coast. It can't be the first time a hurricane was close to a port and a port had to be closed early. They should know to predict these things as a company, and at the very least if their is potential that they have to leave early to let their customer know of the possibility.

 

IT'S NOT THE passengers fault, so people who try to blame them stop. Some of you guys protect the company way to much, get real.

 

All I am saying is I am VERY disapointing on how RCI is treating the people who were stranded, by basically saying its not their fault and their not going to compensate. They should of flown all 145 people to Aruba not just 15.

 

Seems to me the same applies to the passengers: they KNEW (or should have known) about the hurricane. It's been on RCCL's web site and in the news since last weekend. Passengers have a responsibility to keep up with this kind of thing, too, not just expect the cruise line to take care of them outside of the cruise contract.

 

I am booked with my girlfriend on the FOS in a few weeks. We discussed yesterday our back-up plan in case of weather problems. We already are going in a day ahead, as usual, and I always get on the ship as early as possible.

 

I was in St. Martin when a hurricane was coming that way. The ship started blowing it's horn a LOT, and everyone hightailed it back on board. We left 4 hours earlier than planned.

 

You GOTTA have a heads-up attitude when you cruise during hurricane season.

[GatorMomInNC]

Yes, and those 150 passengers probably would have spent $500-$1500 each on board on liquor, excursions, spa treatments, sodas, pictures, tips for the crew. So why not get them on the ship? I think at best it would have been a wash for RCL and much better PR.

 

There's obviously some high emotions in this thread thus far. I'd counter that it doesn't matter whether you're from Canada or Florida or how many hurricanes you have or haven't lived through - an issue like this is clearly of concern to many folks whom cruise with any kind of regularity.

 

Ultimately, Royal Caribbean has very little requirement to do anything with regard to their legal obligations. Remember folks, the RCCL brands even have fine print in their passenger contracts that state that "the seaworthiness of the vessel is neither implied nor guaranteed". They literally have legalese that goes as far as to say they don't guarantee that your ship is safe for sea or will actually go anywhere, and (naturally) they have no liability or legal responsibility for any such occurrences in any event.

 

So yes, I think as some other posters have mentioned, "you are responsible for everything, and the cruise line is responsible for nothing" pretty much sums it up when it comes to the passenger contract.

 

That said - there's a BIG difference between following the fine print and saying "Gotcha - too bad!" versus going above and beyond, stipulating that while there is no obligation in the contract, as a gesture of goodwill and to emphasise with the plight of guests whom have saved up for their cruise, flown many miles, and arrived only to find themselves stranded.... there's a big difference in doing the "right thing" versus doing "what is legally required" (i.e. the "Gotcha").

 

While RCI may think that their legalese saved them, let's say, $600 per passenger x 150 passengers (cost of a hotel night and inter-island flight) - they may find that the guesstimated $90,000 saved was a false economy.

 

On the other hand, CCL may find that the guesstimated $180,000 they incurred was relatively inexpensive vis a vis the positive PR and publicity they are receiving, not too mention the goodwill from not only those 300 passengers, but the friends and relatives of those passengers whom are told about how they were looked after, and in fact the tens of thousands of folks that will now be reading about it on CruiseCritic and making their own conclusions as to which line takes better care of their passengers.

 

Sometimes the "right thing" is not always the "legally obligated thing" and I for one give kudos to CCL for the stellar, and for lack of a better word, classy handling of this unfortunate situation for their 300 guests.

 

I use the words guests - because that's exactly how CCL treated them. CCL went out of their way to accommodate their folks, with the priority on getting them back on track, and back on their ship - with the minimum of fuss, the maximum support, and no financial cost to the client.

 

In so far as RCI not reimbursing the cruise fare paid by folks who arrived in time per their passenger contract for their cruise, and were unable to join... That is unconscionable no matter what legal loopholes RCI may feel allow them to do this.

 

And yes, no matter what, this should serve as a warning to folks to always, always travel with a good comprehensive travel insurance policy.

[ez2logon]

My brain froze at the notion of reading the full 11 pages of this post, so possibly this has already been brought up.

 

I'm not flying to *Memphis* for another week. yet, the moment the words Tropical Storm Irene (a week or 2 back) became part of the forecast vocabulary, I got paranoid about THAT trip. If I had had a cruise planned during that timeframe, I so would have spent the extra 100 or 2 to come in a day or more early just so this wouldn't happen.

 

"Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency o my part".

 

This storm formed on Saturday, not 2 weeks ago...

What we are talking about here is empathy---the ability to put yourself in another persons shoes. Apparently it's a lost art with many.

[GatorMomInNC]

Right, I'm sure that is what you would do. :rolleyes: And then say, "Okay, thanks, I'll be sure to use your company in the future. Have a nice day!"

 

I guess I would refer to the sale contract I signed before. And after spending thousands of dollars I guess I would BUY INSURANCE against possible loss especially when I read the small print on said contract (and read horror stories on Cruise Critic about similar situations.) Since the situation has just occured I would at least take a few breaths before I condem RCCL to Hadies....

[spcopps]

No. They don't want to set a precedent of covering stuff like this. People will expect carnival to cover stuff that they in the future won't. People should have trip insurance if they expect to be compensated for stuff like this. Plain and simple. Thats why the product exists.

 

First let me say, we always buy travel insurance. The issue I have is this, IF passengers miss ship due to their fault (rather it be a traffic accident or severe weather) they can pay to meet up at the next port. I don't understand if it is due to the SHIP leaving early (regardless of rather it is RCI or port authorities fault) why RCI shouldn't be held to the same standards. Seems like RCI's stand is "we are the company, we have your money, so what are you going to do about it". I just have a feeling this decision was based partly on saving money due to the "errors" that were made when releasing their profits." I am not bashing RCI, this is the way large companies work, I just think it is poor customer service.

[BeachChik]

They may not have had to help those people but they may regret that decision in the long run. Bad press spreads like wildfire. It was one of the stories on my local news that they left people behind and didn't help. Even had a phone interview of one of the passengers that had been left behind.

 

The lady interviewed said she was going to be out several thousand dollars to rearrange her families flights. And that even though they were told royal would not provide compensation that she was going to fight them when she got home to see if they would do anything.

[Cruise Junky]

No. They don't want to set a precedent of covering stuff like this. People will expect carnival to cover stuff that they in the future won't. People should have trip insurance if they expect to be compensated for stuff like this. Plain and simple. Thats why the product exists.

 

Technically, you're right. But so much of the travel industry is goodwill. RCL just gave the big middle finger to goodwill while Carnival embraced it. This combined with the Celebrity Century debacle last year, I think RCL has seen the last of our vacation $$$$

[FLSteve11]

Ah, but to extend your analogy, Steve, the landlord was forced by weather to close the building, knowing it would be unsafe not only for you as a customer, but also for all the employees (for example, the snow was coming down so quickly the roof was expected to collapse at 8:30 pm. the landlord was doing the right thing and might have saved lives by closing the building. the analogy breaks down because the landlord cannot sail his building away from the danger as cruise lines can.

 

I think Royal should treat well those passengers who arrived after the ship left, but before the scheduled cutoff. Although the events were weather and port related, the passengers need to be able to count on Royal Caribbean.

 

I don't think anyone has a problem with the fact that RCI had to leave because they closed their port. That was not their decision, and with a hurricane coming it's the right one. The issue people have is the (seemingly callous) disregard they have for their customers who did not make their ship because they left early. (With the analogy, the business left you standing in the parking lot in the snow far away from home and is keeping your money) What they HAVE to do, and what they SHOULD do are two different things. It's a poor example of customer service, even if it's not technically their fault, they should extend some effort to help those customers whose money they took and not just say "our system is too poor to contact you, and we don't have to do anything else for you, too bad" while pocketing thousands.

[BeachChik]

This storm formed on Saturday, not 2 weeks ago...

What we are talking about here is empathy---the ability to put yourself in another persons shoes. Apparently it's a lost art with many.

 

So true.

[Pushka]

certainly 3 hours before departure time. I have no sympathy for the people who missed the cruise.

 

DON

 

The ship left 4 hours early.

[GatorMomInNC]

I'm not sure that is correct. There coverage map shows they cover PR:

 

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=verizon+coverage+map&hl=en&client=safari&sa=X&rls=en&biw=1884&bih=948&tbm=isch&prmd=ivns&tbnid=hMxuG2GJjkQEGM:&imgrefurl=http://www.rentcell.com/coverage-map-airtouch.htm&docid=8aIgL1WUq20udM&w=740&h=300&ei=PMpVTtGCD9S80AG7h9mlDA&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=427&page=1&tbnh=62&tbnw=153&start=0&ndsp=60&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0&tx=95&ty=31

 

One of the biggest cell providers, Verizon, does not exist in PR.

[Pushka]

Seems to me the same applies to the passengers: they KNEW (or should have known) about the hurricane.

 

I am travelling through Europe for a month before the cruise next year. I cannot rely on having internet access. RCL will have my phone details and that should ALWAYS be the primary form of communication - unless you have a real conversation with someone, relying on the internet as a means of confirmed communication is not on. And I suspect that will hold up in court.

[Feelin' Nauti']

Carnival picked up the tab for the hotel rooms for two nights to all the guests left behind, and offered to fly them to the next port, Barbados. About half of the passengers took them up on the offer.

Kudos to Carnival for stepping up to the plate on this one.

[GatorMomInNC]

Seriously? You have no sympathy for these people who spent so much money, were probably looking forward to this cruise for months, and then had this happen to them? Because you don't think they were cruise savvy enough and proactive enough to get to the ship several hours before the departure time? Some of them were probably first time cruisers who are forever soured not just on RCCL but on cruising in general.

 

I have to say, and I'm not being sarcastic or mean, but that truly makes me sad for you that something - whatever it is - your self-righteousness or unwavering loyalty to RCCL - trumps your humanity.

 

Yet another reason to get to the departure city a day early or certainly 3 hours before departure time. I have no sympathy for the people who missed the cruise.

 

DON

[pspercy]

Seem to remember RCCI got shown up pretty bad after a cancellation last year of a cruise in Europe due to volcanic ash etc, basically abandoned some people.

[Silverman]

The whole thing about this is....RCL should have done the right thing and they failed!!!!! It doesnt matter if they had insurance or not. I dont know anything about the insurance but does it cover "Acts of God" in that clause??? I can just hear those phone calls now. Sorry there is nothing we can do about it. This just another reason I wont be ever sailing with RCL. Ill take my money elsewhere.

[YYC F/A]

Yes, and those 150 passengers probably would have spent $500-$1500 each on board on liquor, excursions, spa treatments, sodas, pictures, tips for the crew. So why not get them on the ship? I think at best it would have been a wash for RCL and much better PR.

 

Precisely - beat me too it. Just thinking the same thing.

 

It's reasonable to expect that the cost to get many of the affected folks to the ship would be largely offset by the the onboard revenue generated versus lost.

 

The gain from the goodwill, positive press and public relations (versus an alternative where their could be some significant negative press) being immeasurable.

[Atticus Saskatoon]

I feel that if you choose to travel in an 'iffy' season, you should be prepared, and take responsibility for knowing what is happening and reacting accordingly. That said, I also feel that the cruise line has some responsibility to attempt to contact their passengers, if possible. Unfortunately, we do not have all of the information. And yes, as was previously mentioned, travel insurance if you are at all concerned!:confused:

[Texas Teen]

I understand Serenade of the Seas having to leave early. The port ordered them to leave early and they had to avoid Irene.

 

HOWEVER, the 150 passengers should be compensated. The passengers that were left behind arrived ON TIME. They were told when they booked that they had to be there 90 minuites before sailing, and that departure was at 8:30pm. They were not told the ship was leaving early.

 

The passengers paid for food and accomodations on the ship, and aren't getting it even though they arrived on time and did nothing wrong! The passengers should be compensated and flown to the next port by Royal since Royal is the one who left them behind even though they arrived on time. It would be different if they were late, but they weren't late.

[Pushka]

Australia recently had an episode of volcanic ash from the Volcano in South America. Planes were grounded all around the country and could not fly. Not the airlines fault at all. But they put affected people in hotels for free, and for those who hadnt started their travel, processed the refund for the flight within 2 days!

 

I just hope some of these "nya nya na nya nya" people suffer something similar and maybe then they wont be so smug.

[pcur]

I am travelling through Europe for a month before the cruise next year. I cannot rely on having internet access. RCL will have my phone details and that should ALWAYS be the primary form of communication - unless you have a real conversation with someone, relying on the internet as a means of confirmed communication is not on. And I suspect that will hold up in court.

 

I'm not trying to give you, or anyone else, a hard time. However, I have been all over Europe myself, and there are internet cafes everywhere. Just like checking in for a flight, or seeing if your airline has changed the flight time, passengers should check with RCCL if there is even a HINT of a problem known beforehand. It's a phone call, or an instant chat on their web site. I've used the feature many times, and they are super quick about answering questions.

 

As far as sympathy or empathy or walking in another's shoes: I have. We were involved in one of RCCL's WORST situations (in my 39 years of cruising with them, anyway) in Barcelona several years ago. They literally abandoned several hundred of us in Barcelona after the ship couldn't dock until 12 hours later. We survived.

 

But, what I learned is never, EVER, rely on anyone else to take care of you when you are traveling. Check and doublecheck your reservations and status. Always have a Plan B. Make lemonade.

[foxesden1]

Seem to remember RCCI got shown up pretty bad after a cancellation last year of a cruise in Europe due to volcanic ash etc, basically abandoned some people.

 

Yes, I also recal that, they seem to have a history of dropping the ball, in the last inning..

[Gollan]

Since the early departure was weather-related, Royal Caribbean is contractually entitled to keep the stranded passengers' money. It is free money, though offset to some extent by the loss of onboard purchases. I'm interested to know if they make or lose money overall for stranded passengers.

 

Does cruise insurance typically cover a hurricane-related stranding?