Statendam strands 78 passengers

[airheadfan]

I have friends who were to board the Statendam in Victoria this morning, but on arrival found that the ship sailed past some time during the night. This is an unusual procedure, since Victoria passengers normally have to travel to Vancouver or Seattle to get on a HAL cruise.

 

The passengers received no warning, other than one who was told to arrive at 7:00 am instead of 10:30 am, and found nothing but a security guard.

 

My friends tell me they received no notice and after contacting their TA found that they only had rumors and no hard information. After about 6 hours they were told that HAL will charter Victoria Clipper, take the to Seattle and overnight with a flight to San Diego and another night in a hotel. Hotels covered but nothing for meals which seems rather cheap.

 

The reason was a storm which peaked at noon here today. A NCL ship managed to dock without problems, although there were some wind related injuries on the dock.

 

I am sure there is more to the story, but my friends are astounded that HAL did not notify anyone, did not immediately notify the travel agents, or even have a rep at the dock to explain how they would handle the situation.

 

On my one an only HAL cruise, the cruise portion was very good, but the customer service and travel arrangements were ridiculously poor and incompetent. Looks like nothing has changed.

[DiploTraveler]

I have friends who were to board the Statendam in Victoria this morning, but on arrival found that the ship sailed past some time during the night. This is an unusual procedure, since Victoria passengers normally have to travel to Vancouver or Seattle to get on a HAL cruise.

 

The passengers received no warning, other than one who was told to arrive at 7:00 am instead of 10:30 am, and found nothing but a security guard.

 

My friends tell me they received no notice and after contacting their TA found that they only had rumors and no hard information. After about 6 hours they were told that HAL will charter Victoria Clipper, take the to Seattle and overnight with a flight to San Diego and another night in a hotel. Hotels covered but nothing for meals which seems rather cheap.

 

The reason was a storm which peaked at noon here today. A NCL ship managed to dock without problems, although there were some wind related injuries on the dock.

 

I am sure there is more to the story, but my friends are astounded that HAL did not notify anyone, did not immediately notify the travel agents, or even have a rep at the dock to explain how they would handle the situation.

 

On my one an only HAL cruise, the cruise portion was very good, but the customer service and travel arrangements were ridiculously poor and incompetent. Looks like nothing has changed.

This is quite odd considering the few similar scenarios recently when CCL companies covered transportation and meals. They also refunded the unused portion of the cruise and gave OBC.

 

Keep us posted.

[sail7seas]

<snip>

 

The reason was a storm which peaked at noon here today. A NCL ship managed to dock without problems, although there were some wind related injuries on the dock.

 

 

 

Is that not the very best reason for avoiding the port when Captain judged it too dangerous? What cruise is worth an avoidable injury to anyone?

 

I'm very sorry for their inconvenience, which is very real according to what you state, but better disappointed and inconvenienced than injured or worse.

 

Thank you for giving us a heads up but we probably need to wait to get more facts before we decide exactly what happened.

 

 

[Jemima]

The Statendam's decision to bypass Victoria could well have been last minute if it was due to a storm. The decision could also have been made for them by the port authorities.

[kazu]

This is a very unusual circumstance, especially for HAL. I suspect these passengers will receive some type of nice compensation? Hal is taking care of getting them there so it certainly sounds like they are accepting responsibility - it will be interesting to hear what happens

[Himself]

I was on a HAL cruise a few years ago and there was a port we could not get into because of the fog. They were ordered by the port authorites not to come in because it would be too dangerous.

[eh2zed]

Probably have to wait for the official and actual response before the jury can decide the case. Disappointing of course for the 78 but seems unavoidable.

[IRL_Joanie]

....

 

The reason was a storm which peaked at noon here today. A NCL ship managed to dock without problems, although there were some wind related injuries on the dock.

 

I am sure there is more to the story, but my friends are astounded that HAL did not notify anyone, did not immediately notify the travel agents, or even have a rep at the dock to explain how they would handle the situation.

 

On my one an only HAL cruise, the cruise portion was very good, but the customer service and travel arrangements were ridiculously poor and incompetent. Looks like nothing has changed.

 

I am wondering if the NCL ship is the same NCL Pearl which was reported to have done some damage at Ketchikan after all other ships bypassed same said port because of severe weather?????????? If so............................

 

Sorry that your friends were stranded, but if they had a cell phone or some other PoC they migt have had some notice. Also the weather could have been so bad that the HAL Rep could not even get to the port. I do not know, but am sure there is more to the story and hope you will keep us up to date.

 

Joanie

[CentralCoastGal]

I just returned from an Alaska cruise (9/17-9/24) on the Westerdam. On our first night, the Captain announced there was severe weather in the open seas (hurricane winds & 30-60 ft seas) and he changed the ship's routing to an Inland Passage cruise. The weather remained severe and he ultimately cancelled the ship going to 2 stops, Sitka & Hubbard Glacier and kept to an Inland passage as much as possible. We ended up with a whole day in Ketchikan instead of 1/2 day and an entire day in Victoria (9 am- 9pm) and we cruised the Tracy Arm (absolutely beautiful IMHO) in place of Hubbard Glacier.

 

It was also announced during our cruise that several other ships had either been stranded in port (2 days in Seward), unable to make a port(s) due to weather (Golden Princess who left Seattle same day we did) or some rode out the weather in rough seas (we saw the pictures of the 60-80 ft waves crashing over the bow of the ship). We did have periods where the Westerdam was in the open seas and it was "rock & roll".

 

All in all, the vast majority of the passengers were okay with the Captain's decisions, especially since it was for everyone's safety. Thus, I wouldn't be surprised if weather, again, was the cause of these 78 passengers woes.

[john2003]

We certainly had a very powerful storm come through Victoria today. I was very surprised to see the NCL ship docked given the conditions...trees down, power issues, high seas and ferries cancelled. The dock in Victoria is very exposed so I am sure the ship made a wise decision.

 

How they dealt with the stranded passengers is another issue which I can't comment upon.

[c-legs]

I am wondering if the NCL ship is the same NCL Pearl which was reported to have done some damage at Ketchikan after all other ships bypassed same said port because of severe weather?????????? If so............................

 

 

Joanie

HI,

No, that was NCL STAR-..and it DID suffer some damage attempting to dock...OgdenPoint is a tricky port at the best of times....a dangerous one with weather like today....not as bad as what you experienced on Zuidy last week...but close enough.

 

NCL Pearl ''was '' due to dock in Astoria,Or. today....didnot make it at all and her bridgecam said it all.....Astoria is a short distance along the Cloumbia River mouth intothe Pacific, ;even under ''normal'' circumstances, it too is a tricky place to manoeuvre....with weather like today, the CoastGuard itself would probably seal it off any nvigation....Westerdam was also due in there...I wonder if they managed it.

 

Cheers

p.s...have you recovered from your wild rides last week ?or are you still walking ''side to side'' when going from your room to the kitchen ?:D

[Krazy Kruizers]

HI,

No, that was NCL STAR-..and it DID suffer some damage attempting to dock...OgdenPoint is a tricky port at the best of times....a dangerous one with weather like today....not as bad as what you experienced on Zuidy last week...but close enough.

 

NCL Pearl ''was '' due to dock in Astoria,Or. today....didnot make it at all and her bridgecam said it all.....Astoria is a short distance along the Cloumbia River mouth intothe Pacific, ;even under ''normal'' circumstances, it too is a tricky place to manoeuvre....with weather like today, the CoastGuard itself would probably seal it off any nvigation....Westerdam was also due in there...I wonder if they managed it.

 

Cheers

p.s...have you recovered from your wild rides last week ?or are you still walking ''side to side'' when going from your room to the kitchen ?:D

 

Thank you for your information about Asstoria, etc.

[Krazy Kruizers]

I just returned from an Alaska cruise (9/17-9/24) on the Westerdam. On our first night, the Captain announced there was severe weather in the open seas (hurricane winds & 30-60 ft seas) and he changed the ship's routing to an Inland Passage cruise. The weather remained severe and he ultimately cancelled the ship going to 2 stops, Sitka & Hubbard Glacier and kept to an Inland passage as much as possible. We ended up with a whole day in Ketchikan instead of 1/2 day and an entire day in Victoria (9 am- 9pm) and we cruised the Tracy Arm (absolutely beautiful IMHO) in place of Hubbard Glacier.

 

It was also announced during our cruise that several other ships had either been stranded in port (2 days in Seward), unable to make a port(s) due to weather (Golden Princess who left Seattle same day we did) or some rode out the weather in rough seas (we saw the pictures of the 60-80 ft waves crashing over the bow of the ship). We did have periods where the Westerdam was in the open seas and it was "rock & roll".

 

All in all, the vast majority of the passengers were okay with the Captain's decisions, especially since it was for everyone's safety. Thus, I wouldn't be surprised if weather, again, was the cause of these 78 passengers woes.

 

When you can get into Tracy Arm -- it is beautiful -- we were also fortunate to make it in this year.

[Krazy Kruizers]

I have been watching the weather maps for the last couple of weeks for Alaska and the northwest coast.

 

Those storms have been awful and to have so many in such a short time period is giving the cruise ships a hard time keeping to their original schedules.

 

The captains, port authorities, etc. are all doing their best to keep the ships and passengers safe.

 

Sad that there have been missed ports, itinerary changes -- but safety comes first.

[eh2zed]

First the 2 day delay in Seward and now this.

[Linda VH]

The OP NEVER said that they thought the ship SHOULD have docked but they were not informed. Are you kidding - should have had their cell phone - I seriously doubt that 78 passengers didn't have their cellphones. They could not get info even from their TA and there was no HAL rep on the dock to let them know what was happening. They waited six hours! I think we can agree that someone dropped the ball.

[Pete Jackson]

Ah, late season Alaska cruising. Gotta love it!

 

At least nobody was hurt (involving HAL) and the folks are all quite safe.

[IRL_Joanie]

...

 

Cheers

p.s...have you recovered from your wild rides last week ?or are you still walking ''side to side'' when going from your room to the kitchen ?:D

 

LOL, Yes I have recovered somewhat:D But not walking wide. More like rolling wide and side to side as I was on a scooter. NOW THAT Made for a wild ride!!LOL

 

Hated having to go to the kitchen yesterday:( Kept wanting to pick up the phone and ask for In Room Dining:)

 

Thanks on the NCL Ship Correction in Ketchikan. I will go to their boards and look under the Star for reports.

 

Joanie

[SJSULIBRARIAN]

It's always good to wait until the final report comes out as to exactly what happened and what the cruise line did or did not do as evidenced by the recent thread on the Princess boards re: the ship leaving without passengers who were on a ship sponsored shore excursion out of Skagway.

[Copper10-8]

It's always good to wait until the final report comes out as to exactly what happened and what the cruise line did or did not do as evidenced by the recent thread on the Princess boards re: the ship leaving without passengers who were on a ship sponsored shore excursion out of Skagway.

 

 

Excellent!:)

[Krazy Kruizers]

It's always good to wait until the final report comes out as to exactly what happened and what the cruise line did or did not do as evidenced by the recent thread on the Princess boards re: the ship leaving without passengers who were on a ship sponsored shore excursion out of Skagway.

 

 

Right -- and within a few days we will hear what exactly happened and how HAL solved the situation.

[Krazy Kruizers]

First the 2 day delay in Seward and now this.

 

 

It sure has been a rocky last week and days for the Alaskan season this year.

[Pete Jackson]

What happens if the Victoria stop was a required stop to satisfy the PSA? That may explain the eagerness of NCL to get in.

 

Hopefully, the government has a policy to forgive or at least minimize the fines if the planned foreign stop was waved off for safety reasons.

[trophy_23]

What happens if the Victoria stop was a required stop to satisfy the PSA? That may explain the eagerness of NCL to get in.

 

Hopefully, the government has a policy to forgive or at least minimize the fines if the planned foreign stop was waved off for safety reasons.

 

I don't think it was a stop just to satisfy that, as the ship was in Vancouver the day before, not southbound from Alaska, as far as I knwo. But I was wondering the same thing if it were earlier in the season and the ship was Seattle bound from Alaska, I assume they would just give them a pass due to weather?

[rafinmd]

Am I correct that the original itinerary was Vancouver to Florida? If so, is the ship making a stop at a distant foreign port after San Diego? Otherwise, as I understand it, that could cause a problem with those who missed the ship in Canada and were to board in San Diego.

 

Also, was HAL selling Victoria as an alternate embarkation port or did the 78 request an itinerary deviation? I assume that if they chose to board in Victoria after the voyage began in Vancouver they could expect to be more on their own than if the ship changed plans for the original port of embarkation.

 

Roy