Disappointed in NCL - Won't bend policy for cancer victim

[sdmike]

I was more disappointed in NCL for this than anything else. They had an opportunity to "do the right thing" for a customer that was diagnosed with gall bladder cancer and needed emergency surgery just days before their cruise. NCL cited "policy" and didn't even offer a credit that could be used to sail once (if) the pax got better.

 

We know the ship staff are awesome, and I've been lead to believe that Kevin Sheehan is a down to earth nice guy, but sounds like the hit-and-miss corporate office struck out on this one...even after contacted by the author of the article. How did they NOT know this would end up in the LA Times with them having egg on their face?

 

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-cruise-20131115,0,5836172.column?page=1

Edited November 18, 2013 by sdmike

[triptolemus]

From TFA:

 

"Our cancellation guidelines are quite strict, as is standard for the cruise industry," the company noted. It said that "it would be inconsistent for us to make exceptions when other passengers have canceled and accepted these terms."

Yet I wonder how many other passengers were forced to cancel because of a cancer diagnosis.

I wonder how many people call up every cruise line with all sorts of stories - some true, some not? Where does a cruise line (or any other business) draw the line. How would they verify these stories? Gramma died? Dog died? Lost my job? Wife left me? Arm fell off?

 

These articles and stories always describe how evil the corporation is, but never really suggest any sort of reasonable solution. This article turns out to be a little different than most though. It does point out an existing solution.

 

The rep pointed out that Norwegian offers a travel protection plan starting at $29 a passenger.

I don't mean to be callus and cold about these folks' particular set of circumstances, but do we really need another "thoughts and prayers are with them" post? How about some solutions?

[jlacy1987]

I was more disappointed in NCL for this than anything else. They had an opportunity to "do the right thing" for a customer that was diagnosed with gall bladder cancer and needed emergency surgery just days before their cruise. NCL cited "policy" and didn't even offer a credit that could be used to sail once (if) the pax got better.

 

We know the ship staff are awesome, and I've been lead to believe that Kevin Sheehan is a down to earth nice guy, but sounds like the hit-and-miss corporate office struck out on this one...even after contacted by the author of the article. How did they NOT know this would end up in the LA Times with them having egg on their face?

 

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-cruise-20131115,0,5836172.column?page=1

 

This is exactly why trip insurance is so important. I don't necessarily think NCL is in the wrong, however. Because if they start giving people credits for medical issues, where does it stop? Is it just life-threatening illnesses? Just cancer? At some point they would have to draw a line in the sand and that would also make people mad. It's better to just not do anything, in my opinion, than to play favorites on who would qualify for a credit and who wouldn't.

[gatorsfam]

I was more disappointed in NCL for this than anything else. They had an opportunity to "do the right thing" for a customer that was diagnosed with gall bladder cancer and needed emergency surgery just days before their cruise. NCL cited "policy" and didn't even offer a credit that could be used to sail once (if) the pax got better.

 

We know the ship staff are awesome, and I've been lead to believe that Kevin Sheehan is a down to earth nice guy, but sounds like the hit-and-miss corporate office struck out on this one...even after contacted by the author of the article. How did they NOT know this would end up in the LA Times with them having egg on their face?

 

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-cruise-20131115,0,5836172.column?page=1

 

It is disappointing, but where does this end? Most people that back out of a sailing have a legitimate reason for doing so, and making willy-nilly exceptions is not the answer IMO.

 

I've always struggled with why insurance is an 'add-on' and not baked into the fare, and/or setup something similar to airlines and their change fees, but much more stringent - seems doing so would avoid a lot of these situations.

 

Maybe there are some government requirements such that fare and insurance have to be sold separately - who knows, but it doesn't really help most passengers.

 

Travel insurance is as important as any other piece of your travel plans - it is unfortunate that too many people decide to skip this and self-insure without fully appreciating 1) how cheap it is, and 2) the real financial downside if they need to forgo their vacation

[sdmike]

I don't mean to be callus and cold about these folks' particular set of circumstances, but do we really need another "thoughts and prayers are with them" post? How about some solutions?

 

I agree with you that this is a very complex situation with all kinds of room for precedent and abuse. It seems, however, that a doctor's note and a credit for future sailing would work better than an inflexible no refund policy. Again, where do you draw the line? I don't know.

[Cubechick]

This is exactly why trip insurance is so important. I don't necessarily think NCL is in the wrong, however. Because if they start giving people credits for medical issues, where does it stop? Is it just life-threatening illnesses? Just cancer? At some point they would have to draw a line in the sand and that would also make people mad. It's better to just not do anything, in my opinion, than to play favorites on who would qualify for a credit and who wouldn't.

 

Exactly. It's a terrible situation, but NCL is not in the wrong.

[HokiePoq]

Exactly. It's a terrible situation, but NCL is not in the wrong.

 

 

No, they are not. Sorry for the victim, but when we elect not to have insurance, it is our risk. After a bad experience with trip insurance, we do not have it on any of the cruises listed in my signature. We know that if we cannot make it, it is our risk we chose to take.

[ColinIllinois]

Where ya been Mike? We already went through this last week. ;)

 

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1944370

Edited November 18, 2013 by ColinIllinois

[philip_eunice1]

http://Www.I-should-always-buy-insurance.com

 

Sad story hope all works out ok

 

Morale buy insurance

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[njhorseman]

I've had to cancel several cruises for reasons just as legitimate, involving serious illnesses of parents and of me personally. I can't imagine asking NCL or any cruise line to make an exception to their cancellation policy . That's what trip cancellation insurance is for. If you make an exception for one person, where do you draw the line ?

[sdmike]

Good points for sure, everyone. A black line is certainly easier to draw than a wide gray one. Having dealt with discovery of severe medical issues, my head went to "this family has enough to deal with without losing $4,500", not "where do you draw the line on exceptions".

 

Your points are spot on. It certainly seems that in the short term this negative PR will hurt them more than help, but maybe the the longer term a firm policy is much more important.

 

Still sucks to go through this though :(

[sdmike]

Where ya been Mike? We already went through this last week. ;)

 

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1944370

 

Oh dang...and me being the "please use the search" guy. Sorry folks, I've been really busy with real life and haven't been keeping up.

 

Can I turn back time and undo this redundant thread? :o

[triptolemus]

I also love the fact that this "article" is posted in the LA Times Business Section while the author pretty much editorializes his way through most of it.

 

I can't help but think about the notion of corporate personhood whenever I encounter an incident like this...

demonstrate a little human decency, they almost unfailingly respond with profound corporate indifference.

And my favorite...

 

Yet I wonder how many other passengers were forced to cancel because of a cancer diagnosis.

Yeah, well, uhh... you could try investigating that a little bit and, oh, I don't know, maybe report facts?

 

More editorializing...

 

those people are sociopaths, unable to demonstrate even the most basic sense of moral responsibility.

So what if Norwegian had an empty cabin for the trip? Is that really such a devastating blow for a company that pocketed more than $255 million in profit through the first nine months this year?

and on and on... the article is garbage.

[ColinIllinois]

Oh dang...and me being the "please use the search" guy. Sorry folks, I've been really busy with real life and haven't been keeping up.

 

Can I turn back time and undo this redundant thread? :o

 

Don't worry about it. It actually is an important issue to show people how important stuff like insurance is.

 

Of course, it goes without saying that everyone wishes nothing but good health and long life for the folks involved.

[Bonnie&Jim]

If I have to fork out to get insurance to cover my ass, why didn't they? I'm sorry they are sick, but why would they be given a break? Everyone is counselled to purchase trip insurance, doesn't matter what trip. Maybe people will learn from their story.

 

Bonnie

[mpk218]

This type of thing happens so often . I semi joke with my family (Im getting older ), that if I should die just before they are about to depart on a cruise . Just go and think of me while having a drink on deck . I'll still be ready for planting when ya get back .

 

Buy insurance . Health , death and trip ;)

[kcwingwalker]

This type of thing happens so often . I semi joke with my family (Im getting older ), that if I should die just before they are about to depart on a cruise . Just go and think of me while having a drink on deck . I'll still be ready for planting when ya get back .

 

Buy insurance . Health , death and trip ;)

 

I like your attitude.

 

Hooking up with my DD for our next cruise and if she is late or has to back out at the last minute I'll still go!

[sdmike]

(Im getting older )

 

I see you getting white around the nose there in your pic. :D

[mpk218]

I see you getting white around the nose there in your pic. :D

 

Hahah , Ya but its still wet and cold . Good to go :D

[Brighton Line]

You see this over and over, be it sudden illness or death to changes of the port of call and you have private excursions. Big Bad >Insert Cruise Line< won't bend the rules to help little old Mr/Ms Passenger.

 

Your given the cruise contract to read or have explained to you, you still sign on the figurative dotted line.

 

I just don't get it.

[FF Woman]

I really don't understand why somebody with a pre-existing condition would even think of not buying the trip insurance.

 

A cruise is a good sized investment and I never take the chance of losing it due to some unforeseen circumstance. Do I like to pay the money for it? No. But would I expect the cruise line to give me my money back without having it? No.

 

It's each individual's choice whether to risk it or not. But you have to take the lumps if you choose not to buy it.

[Warm Breezes]

While I have empathy for the family, and for any other family going through illness or death, I can not blame NCL for sticking with their policy. It is called personal responsibility and I have a hard time with people who don't take personal responsibility for themselves, and try to make others responsible for their actions and their loses. We all have the option to purchase insurance. By not doing so, we personally assume the risk of something happening that would cause us to lose our investment. By doing so, the insurance company assumes the personal risk for us...it is why insurance exists.

 

I had a DGM pass away the day before a cruise. I had purchased cruise insurance so I was able to cancel with knowledge we would be reimbursed. I actually applaud the cruise line for enforcing their policy....we see too little of personal responsibility in today's world of personal entitlement. While it would be a "nice" thing for them to do and increase their positive PR, what about every one else who has to cancel for illness and deaths? I'm sure with the amount of people sailing it is a common thing to occur. I just don't understand how anyone would think they are entitled to something they were offered but refused to pay for....and that is exactly what would happen if NCL gave in to their wants. NCL would be insuring their loss of a cruise due to illness by giving them another cruise. Same thing as when the insurance company paid me my money I spent on a cruise we didn't go on due to the death of my DGM. We used the money to purchase another cruise.

[Twelvevman]

My parents missed their first cruise when my father needed emergency quadruple bypass surgery 4 days before the cruise was set to sail. The doctor said after the surgery that if he had walked onto the ship he wouldn't have walked off.

 

They lost the full value of the trip since they did not have insurance.

 

Did they blame the cruise line - NO.

Did they run to the media with a sob story - NO

 

They accepted the loss as they knew the cancelation schedule when they booked the cruise. This article is just another example of people in this country not being willing to take personal responsibility. Everything should be handed to them and if not you whine and cry until you get your way.

 

Sorry...stepping off my soapbox.

[hpecorari]

I was more disappointed in NCL for this than anything else. They had an opportunity to "do the right thing" for a customer that was diagnosed with gall bladder cancer and needed emergency surgery just days before their cruise. NCL cited "policy" and didn't even offer a credit that could be used to sail once (if) the pax got better.

 

We know the ship staff are awesome, and I've been lead to believe that Kevin Sheehan is a down to earth nice guy, but sounds like the hit-and-miss corporate office struck out on this one...even after contacted by the author of the article. How did they NOT know this would end up in the LA Times with them having egg on their face?

 

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-cruise-20131115,0,5836172.column?page=1

 

But that's what insurance is for. One never knows what will happen tomorrow - or the day before a cruise. Insurance is just that....it insures that your costs will be covered. Make an exception for one....how do you limit who and when you'll make an exception for another. And if they do then the one they don't make an exception for cries discrimination.

 

Don't get me wrong, I feel bad about the situation, however, had they had insurance this thread as well as the article wouldn't be around.

 

Harriet

[Demonyte]

I was more disappointed in NCL for this than anything else. They had an opportunity to "do the right thing" for a customer that was diagnosed with gall bladder cancer and needed emergency surgery just days before their cruise. NCL cited "policy" and didn't even offer a credit that could be used to sail once (if) the pax got better.

 

I'd be dissappointed if NCL did anything else than they did in that case. There are always people cancelling their trips for whatever major reason (some even more severe than a surgery, like sudden death) but the cancellation rules are there for a reason and for everything else: insurance.

 

I wouldn't like to pay higher prices that would ultimately follow suit if people could get credit from the cruise line directly just days before the cruise and hence cutting the profits from onboard sales because of the empty cabin (yeah, yeah, not everyone spends a lot of money onboard, but most do). What NCL rep said in the column was 100% correct and all other mass market lines operate like that too - I just can't see what the fuzz is all about (incompetent and scandal-savy LAT writer set aside).