Royal Caribbean kicked me off cruise ship for having a migraine

[reney313]

My personal opinion....since that's what we're doing here:

 

1. The onboard physician was acting prudent and appropriate to request her disembarkation and trip to the ER. He is not her regular doctor. My theory is that he did "believe" her and that it was likely the pre-migraine symptoms. But what if it wasn't? If I were a doctor with a ship getting ready to sail, I would have done the same. And it wouldn't be because I was covering my butt. It would be because I would care that the patient stayed alive. If it were truly a stroke and I took her word for the migraine knowing that those same migraine sufferers have a higher chance of a stroke with the same symptoms and we sailed an hour later and she died of a stroke 2 hours later, I would blame myself for that life. To me, this is Royal's right and I agree with the action. Sucks for the OP the timing of the migraine.

 

2. All that said and disregarding the contract, the right thing is for RCI to provide a cruise credit for a future cruise for the amount they paid. RCI made the decision to debark them and she was not unfit for travel. She was having a migraine which is something that fit people have every second in the US. They practiced good judgment to have her checked out, but they still didn't provide the service. Sure, insurance should cover it and she does have insurance. But, RCI could just resolve it. I don't think they should refund, but should provide 100% credit for future. What is the harm of that?

 

I know a lot of people think that a credit would open up to abuse. But really, how many people have an ailment between checking in and sail away that they send to to an ER? Seriously? I don't see a lot of people wanting to abuse that! I sure wouldn't....those that can't sail and need to cancel after final payment aren't able to make it to the ship, then board, and then fake a sickness. To be honest, if someone has GI issues the days leading up to the cruise, I wish RCI would offer a cruise credit during winter months. I think many would take the offer vs. boarding and spreading it--but that's another topic.

 

I'm happy that I don't deal with many of you as a consumer. It is a fine line between profit and customer service, but it can be done. I think this is a gray line. Both sides have some responsibility to the series of events leading to the OP not receiving what they paid for. In light of that, providing some relief is the ethical thing to do. (IMHO, of course :))

Edited February 9, 2014 by reney313

[galavant3]

OR

 

 

Suppose you book your family on a cruise, and can only fly in on Embarkation Day. This being the first time your 7 year old has ever flown, you find out the hard way she gets air sick. Still feeling the effects of the air sickness, plus the excitement of going on a cruise, while waiting to check in, she vomits. The cruise line determines her unfit to sail, because of possible Noro symptoms, and denies boarding to the entire family.

 

Did the cruise line break the contract, or are they simply looking out for the health and welfare of the rest of the ship?

 

Do they owe you compensation? According to the Cruise Contract, they don't.

 

That is what Travel Insurance is for.

 

Whether or not the OP is showing signs of something contagious, that is what Travel Insurance is for.

 

Furthermore, if she really thinks that sounding off on CC is going to cost RCCL dime one, she is sorely mistaken. For every person who claims to cancel a reservation, or claims to spend no more money with RCCL because of what they did to the OP, there are probably just as many who will be more likely to go with RCCL for looking out for the rest of the passengers.

 

I had a horrible experience checking in for my last cruise. After things finally got resolved, I couldn't even get priority boarding out of them.

Did they owe me anything? Absolutely not!

Will it make me swear off RCCL for my future cruises? Probably not.

 

Sometimes things just happen and we have to get over it and move on with our life.

 

Well said. Very interesting topic especially in light of the recent noro issues.

[richstowe]

I have thought about this quite a bit and worried that I would be put off a ship. I have had stress induced vasomotor rhinitis for more than 2 years now. My nose does not drip out the front like it does for some people. Instead, whenever I eat or drink anything, or even brush my teeth, I get a post nasal drip that triggers a coughing fit. The nerves in my mouth and throat are hypersensitive. Sometimes the coughing can be so bad I get light headed and have to sit down in case I pass out. I have a prescription for pills that are supposed to numb the throat and lungs and minimize the coughing. I only take them when I have to eat out in public since I don't like the side effects. My family is used to me coughing all the time. When I board a ship I avoid eating or drinking anything so that I don't cough during check in, muster etc. I take my pill about 1/2 hour before dinner and can sometimes get all the way through the meal without hacking. DH and I always get a table for 2 as I understand how people will possibly think I am ill and don't want to make anyone uncomfortable.

I have to see my doctor soon to get a new prescription since I have used up all my refills, so I will have her write a letter so that I can carry it with me on our upcoming trips. I would be most unhappy to be put off the ship by a doctor who knows nothing about my condition.

If I were you , I wouldn't cruise RC . According to many here, you have a pre-existing issue and Royal will be well within it's rights to kick you off with no compensation.

Oops sorry, out of the goodness of their heart they will generously credit you for any missed excursions.:rolleyes:

BTW, perhaps you should just send them your money and not bother booking a cruise.

[markeb]

My personal opinion....since that's what we're doing here:

 

1. The onboard physician was acting prudent and appropriate to request her disembarkation and trip to the ER. He is not her regular doctor. My theory is that he did "believe" her and that it was likely the pre-migraine symptoms. But what if it wasn't? If I were a doctor with a ship getting ready to sail, I would have done the same. And it wouldn't be because I was covering my butt. It would be because I would care that the patient stayed alive. If it were truly a stroke and I took her word for the migraine knowing that those same migraine sufferers have a higher chance of a stroke with the same symptoms and we sailed an hour later and she died of a stroke 2 hours later, I would blame myself for that life. To me, this is Royal's right and I agree with the action. Sucks for the OP the timing of the migraine.

 

 

I can agree with everything you've written, except that the physician administered a drug that carries a contraindication for use in patients experiencing any vascular abnormality, be it a heart attack, stroke, etc. He clearly believed her and considered the risk of stroke to be extremely low, and in fact if she had been having a stroke, the treatment for the migraine would have likely exacerbated the stroke.

 

I also agree with those who say RCI has no legal responsibility under their contract to do anything. But, it's sometimes better for business to do the right thing (see the compensation offered to passengers on the Explorer) rather than simply what is legally required.

[RDC1]

I'm not a lawyer, but if it were me, I'd first of course try to get insurance to pay. If they refused the claim I'd file a suit in small claims court in my home county for the full price of the cruise and any additional unrecovered costs. I've done this successfully once before, although not against a cruise line.

 

RCI would have to appear in our local court - likely with hired outside counsel. Often they'll settle at that point to avoid the expense of hiring counsel & showing up for a court case with counsel & any witnesses they need to fly in.

 

If they decide they're willing to go to court, the judges & the rules in small claims court are significantly different so that the consumer representing themselves are not at a major disadvantage against a company with attorneys.

 

Assuming that what the OP has said is truthful, I'd get up and explain the sequence of events, and focus on a couple key things:

 

* I was referred to an ER and denied boarding based on the ship's Doc's stated fear that I was having a stroke.

 

* During the ship's Doc's examination, he administered Imitrex, which is ABSOLUTELY wrong if stroke is suspected, but correct if the doctor's diagnosis is migraine.

 

* Denying boarding due to worry about stroke while instead clearly treating me for migraine - which was confirmed by the onshore Doc - unfairly and improperly denying me and my spouse the cruise for which we had paid in full.

 

My costs to do this are a little over $100, RCI'S will be a LOT more. I'd be more than willing to spend that, invest a few hours for prep & court and take my chances with the small claims judge.

 

 

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

 

I do not believe that using small claims court overrides the language in the contract dealing with where legal challenges must be filed. All the cruise line will need to do is to produce the contract. The applicable sections are paragraphs 9, 10 and 12d.

 

The weakest part of the case from RCI point of view would be fitness to travel. However the contract does state

 

"d. Special Needs. Any Passenger with mobility, communication or other impairments, or other special or medical needs that may require medical care or special accommodations during the cruise or CruiseTour, including but not limited to the use of any service animal, must notify the Carrier of any such

condition at the time of booking"

 

Which since the OP has a medical history of migraines which as she states results in slurring and other impairments means that she should have notified the cruise line at the time of booking.

 

So you have on one hand her statement that it is a long temr medical condition, but she did not notify the cruise line of that condition.

 

Thus you have the situation where she gets a migraine. A member of the crew observes that she is impaired. She goes to the medical center (implied by the post she resisted going. The doctor observes the conditions, but does not have any medical history on the patient, has not way to verify the patients story since the cruise line was not notified in advance of this condition.

 

So you have an observed impairment, a level of resistance to go to the medical center, lack of advance notification of the medical condition.

 

Seems pretty clear to me. If the OP claims a long term will understood medical condition she is in violation of 12d, if she doesn't then she matches some classic stroke symptoms. Since the Doctor doesn't have medical history he needs to assume the worst case, especially since the ship is scheduled to leave soon.

 

Now the real questions are:

 

1. Could they have rejoined the ship if there had been time to be cleared at the emergency room? or at the first port? If it was just medical clearance of the current symptoms, then you would suspect that this would have been a possibility.

 

2. Did the cruise line consider this a contract violation because of the lack of notification and the episode including impairment and as barred them from rejoining.

 

3. Did the cruise line take the view because of the attitude/actions of the OP because they were not cooperative with the crew or medical staff?

 

4. If there had been advance notification, with the appropriate medical information supplied to the cruise line would the results have been different? There certainly would not have been a violation of paragraph 12d.

 

The real lesson from this is that if you have a long term medical condition that could flair up on a cruise and result in impairment send in the information when booking.

[RDC1]

I can agree with everything you've written, except that the physician administered a drug that carries a contraindication for use in patients experiencing any vascular abnormality, be it a heart attack, stroke, etc. He clearly believed her and considered the risk of stroke to be extremely low, and in fact if she had been having a stroke, the treatment for the migraine would have likely exacerbated the stroke.

 

I also agree with those who say RCI has no legal responsibility under their contract to do anything. But, it's sometimes better for business to do the right thing (see the compensation offered to passengers on the Explorer) rather than simply what is legally required.

 

I don't read the OP posting the same way you do.

 

From the original OP posting

 

"The medic insisted that I might be having a stroke, and wouldn't listen to me or DH telling them that this was the same set of symptoms that I have with EVERY migraine, and have had for at least the last 20 years. She insisted that I had to go to the infirmary. I finally allowed them to take me there, figuring that I'd tell the doctor I was in migraine prodrome, show him my migraine meds, and he'd know that there was nothing to worry about.

 

It didn't work that way. They gave me my Imitrex, but wouldn't listen when we told them that all I needed to do was lie down in a dark room for a couple of hours. They kicked BOTH of us off the ship and confiscated our shipcards so that we couldn't get back on. "

 

This implies to me that the situation was in conflict. She resisted going to the infirmary. Note that she said they game me MY IMITREX. That implies that it was her perscription, not issued by the ship. I suspect, but can not be certain that in the course of events she or her husband turned over possession of her medication to the medical staff. Probably to bolster their case that it was a long term medical condition for which she was receiving treatment. Since it was probably a valid prescription written for her, they really could not block her from taking it, even if they thought it was contraindicated. If she was arguing about her condition then all they really could do is to send her off ship.

 

Since none of us was there we really do not know for sure.

[2specialkidsforme]

First, I am so glad to hear that you are okay and it was indeed a migraine rather than a stroke. Thank goodness.

 

Second, your travel insurance will pay. What policy do you have? When you have a claim - you do the work yourself, not your travel agent. Contact who you have the insurance with and explain what happened and that you need a claim form. Because the doctor made you go to the ER under the suspicion of a stroke, then this is not a pre-existing condition If they sent you due to the migraine, yes then pre-exisiting.

 

All of the paperwork is there from the ship doctor -you might have to contact NCL to get it. But with that paperwork and filling out your claim form, you will get compensated. They will make you submit your hospital bill after you have submitted it to your primary insurance because they will also cover whatever your insurance did not cover.

 

Good luck - please do not give up on recovering your compensation that you are due. We have had to use the insurance twice so I am positive that you do have to contact them and initiate the claim and fill out the forms yourself.

[richstowe]

I do not believe that using small claims court overrides the language in the contract dealing with where legal challenges must be filed. All the cruise line will need to do is to produce the contract.

In many jurisdictions judges have decided that these types of contracts are unenforceable as they are hopelessly one-sided .

These decisions have been made against car rentals, software licences and various utility's who shove a take-it-or-leave-it contract in front of consumers.

Even contracts between individuals may be overturned or modified .Think pre-nups.

This is not to say all judges or most judges will completely ignore these contracts, just that they are not as iron clad as some think.

Further, small claims court judges are much more willing to show flexibility when interpreting the law.

 

Having said all this, RC has a barrage of lawyers ready and more then willing to battle pesky consumers.

Edited February 9, 2014 by richstowe

[markeb]

I don't read the OP posting the same way you do.

 

From the original OP posting

 

"The medic insisted that I might be having a stroke, and wouldn't listen to me or DH telling them that this was the same set of symptoms that I have with EVERY migraine, and have had for at least the last 20 years. She insisted that I had to go to the infirmary. I finally allowed them to take me there, figuring that I'd tell the doctor I was in migraine prodrome, show him my migraine meds, and he'd know that there was nothing to worry about.

 

It didn't work that way. They gave me my Imitrex, but wouldn't listen when we told them that all I needed to do was lie down in a dark room for a couple of hours. They kicked BOTH of us off the ship and confiscated our shipcards so that we couldn't get back on. "

 

This implies to me that the situation was in conflict. She resisted going to the infirmary. Note that she said they game me MY IMITREX. That implies that it was her perscription, not issued by the ship. I suspect, but can not be certain that in the course of events she or her husband turned over possession of her medication to the medical staff. Probably to bolster their case that it was a long term medical condition for which she was receiving treatment. Since it was probably a valid prescription written for her, they really could not block her from taking it, even if they thought it was contraindicated. If she was arguing about her condition then all they really could do is to send her off ship.

 

Since none of us was there we really do not know for sure.

 

She has a later post where she states they gave her the Imetrix and wouldn't let her take her own.

 

Again, we have one side of the story. If her version is accurate, the physician administered a drug he shouldn't have without first ruling out a stroke, which he probably can't onboard. I think that under the circumstances it's hard to imagine that ANYONE would be behaving "rationally" in a situation where you're in pain, probably being exacerbated by the stress, and what I suspect is a sudden, unexpected realization that they are seriously considering sending you off the ship and off your 40th anniversary cruise. I'd be resisting, arguing, and probably getting verbally abusive myself!

[DebJ14]

If I were you , I wouldn't cruise RC . According to many here, you have a pre-existing issue and Royal will be well within it's rights to kick you off with no compensation.

Oops sorry, out of the goodness of their heart they will generously credit you for any missed excursions.:rolleyes:

BTW, perhaps you should just send them your money and not bother booking a cruise.

 

I always buy 3rd party insurance that covers pre-existing conditions , so if they do kick me off I will recoup all but the insurance premium. However, if I have a doctor's letter with me I will be in a better position to protest their actions. I do take precautions (not eating and drinking anything) to keep my problem under control so that people around me are unaware.

 

I have a bad back and like the OP find muster drills painful, but I just suck it up and power through them. Sitting down just drew attention to her. I had migraines from the age of 7 to age 54, so I understand exactly what the OP was feeling. On other ships I have had migraines at embarkation, but I didn't give in until the drills were over. I would get back to the cabin as fast as possible and then I would be in the bathroom vomiting and be in agony until I could fall asleep in the quiet, darkened cabin. DH always stood guard until the steward came to do his thing and just told the steward I was sleeping and that we didn't need anything. Then DH would either call room service for himself or run up to the Lido to get something to eat. I would be 100% the next morning and be on my merry way. None of the oral meds ever did me any good because I always threw them up before they were able to take effect.

 

Someone else posted on here about migraines and diet and I have to agree. I found out at the age of 54 that gluten was causing my migraines, peripheral neuropathy and mouth ulcers. I have celiac disease, but most of my symptoms were outside of the digestive tract and I was misdiagnosed for decades. The celiac caused severe vitamin and mineral deficiencies. Once I was prescribed B12 and Magnesium the migraines vanished. I still take them daily. I have not had a migraine in 7 years. To me the inconvenience of the diet is so worth it. Now, if I could only get rid of this vasomotor rhinitis and get back my sense of smell and taste I would be good to go.

Edited February 9, 2014 by DebJ14

[LindaO]

Well... OP... Come back and tell us what did you do?

 

Did you hire a lawyer and they have told you not to comment on Social Media? If so.. just come back and post that.

 

Did you email or write the CEO & EXO? And you are waiting for a response?

 

Or did you just post to 'get back'?

 

If we don't hear from the OP can we just let this thread die????

[RDC1]

In many jurisdictions judges have decided that these types of contracts are unenforceable as they are hopelessly one-sided .

These decisions have been made against car rentals, software licences and various utility's who shove a take-it-or-leave-it contract in front of consumers.

Even contracts between individuals may be overturned or modified .Think pre-nups.

This is not to say all judges or most judges will completely ignore these contracts, just that they are not as iron clad as some think.

Further, small claims court judges are much more willing to show flexibility when interpreting the law.

 

Having said all this, RC has a barrage of lawyers ready and more then willing to battle pesky consumers.

 

While small claims courts sometimes do strange things I am hard pressed to see even a small claims court granting personnel jurisdiction in a case like this. Even if they override the contract the rules for establishing jurisdiction are pretty clear. You might be able to pull it off if you lived in the same state as the Port the ship left from, since that could establish enough of a business activity in that state, but most likely not any state that the cruise line does not port, and even that would not be easy. Small claims courts have taken jurisdiction sometimes in cases against airlines, car rental and other firms because the individual used the services of those firms in that particular state.

[S.A.M.J.R.]

The passenger accepted the contract that stated she was fit to cruise. Obviously, being taken off the ship for medical reasons can't be construed as "fit to cruise".

 

Under the same contractual situation, the passenger was informed what the consequences of cancellation of the cruise were for specific time points prior to cruising. Cancellation on the day of sailing forfeits the entire fare.

 

These are things that are made clear to cruisers. Legally speaking, the contract was breached by the passenger being unfit to travel.

 

It's not "fair" that she forfeits her fare for the cruise, but RCI does have legal standing to not refund it. If she was honest with her insurance company about her condition, she should be reimbursed by them.

I'll agree RCI probably has legal standing to keep the money. That doesn't mean I think it's the right thing to do.

[LetsGetWet!]

In many jurisdictions judges have decided that these types of contracts are unenforceable as they are hopelessly one-sided .

These decisions have been made against car rentals, software licences and various utility's who shove a take-it-or-leave-it contract in front of consumers.

Even contracts between individuals may be overturned or modified .Think pre-nups.

This is not to say all judges or most judges will completely ignore these contracts, just that they are not as iron clad as some think.

Further, small claims court judges are much more willing to show flexibility when interpreting the law.

 

Having said all this, RC has a barrage of lawyers ready and more then willing to battle pesky consumers.

Yep, you said essentially what I was going to say in reply.

 

And yes, they do have a barrage of lawyers, but do they REALLY want to spend $5000 or $10000, which can happen quickly, in order to keep from providing coupons for a future cruise which will cost them MUCH less in real dollars, and be MUCH better from a PR perspective in addition?

[LetsGetWet!]

While small claims courts sometimes do strange things I am hard pressed to see even a small claims court granting personnel jurisdiction in a case like this. Even if they override the contract the rules for establishing jurisdiction are pretty clear. You might be able to pull it off if you lived in the same state as the Port the ship left from, since that could establish enough of a business activity in that state, but most likely not any state that the cruise line does not port, and even that would not be easy. Small claims courts have taken jurisdiction sometimes in cases against airlines, car rental and other firms because the individual used the services of those firms in that particular state.

You may be right, or you may end up not being right. I think its likely to pull it off if you're in the same state they port from - or ANY state they port from - as they've established a local business presence themselves in the jurisdiction. If you're in a state with no RCI ports, and no RCI offices of any kind, then the odds are admittedly less. In my case, they DO port in my state - and I think that the prior cases against airlines, car rental firms and similar are pretty good precedent in that case.

[richstowe]

While small claims courts sometimes do strange things I am hard pressed to see even a small claims court granting personnel jurisdiction in a case like this. Even if they override the contract the rules for establishing jurisdiction are pretty clear. You might be able to pull it off if you lived in the same state as the Port the ship left from, since that could establish enough of a business activity in that state, but most likely not any state that the cruise line does not port, and even that would not be easy. Small claims courts have taken jurisdiction sometimes in cases against airlines, car rental and other firms because the individual used the services of those firms in that particular state.

Depends on the jurisdiction.

Where I live ,what's important is where the consumer lives. By selling a product to a person living in the courts jurisdiction, the company is bound to observe all its laws.

Secondly in other jurisdictions, while RC may not be established there, the TA might.

 

(I apologize for this game of playing pseudo lawyer. In the end this is not about what RC can or can't do legally. It's about what they should do).

[A2Mich]

If I remember correctly, it doesn't matter in what jurisdiction the plaintiff files against RCI. Most cruise lines also stipulate that any and all legal action brought against them must be in the jurisdiction of their home office. I'm pretty sure that with at least RCI and Carnivore , that legal action must be filed in Miami, Dade County, Florida. Doesn't matter if the plaintiff is from Timbuktu...legal action must be filed in Miami. Miami, Dade County, and State of Florida laws will prevail.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

[Big_G]

Yep! As I pointed out earlier, that's all we have - and exactly what happens on DOZENS of threads here - and on every online forum - every single day.

 

I fail to understand why that surprises anyone and makes them feel they need to point it out regarding a particular thread. DUH! :)

 

Sent from my Galaxy S4 via Tapatalk

 

I fail to see why you think anyone is surprised and why you can't grasp that someone would question the OP's point of view. It's Cruise Critic. DUH! ;)

[LetsGetWet!]

If I remember correctly, it doesn't matter in what jurisdiction the plaintiff files against RCI. Most cruise lines also stipulate that any and all legal action brought against them must be in the jurisdiction of their home office. I'm pretty sure that with at least RCI and Carnivore , that legal action must be filed in Miami, Dade County, Florida. Doesn't matter if the plaintiff is from Timbuktu...legal action must be filed in Miami. Miami, Dade County, and State of Florida laws will prevail.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

I guess you didn't read the whole thread before answering - similar contract clauses from airlines, rental car companies etc. have been held invalid, so there's certainly a chance they could be held invalid against RCI also.

 

Now in the case of "Carnivore", I'd be much more careful in taking them on in the first place! :D

Edited February 9, 2014 by LetsGetWet!

[travelplus]

On January 11th, we were supposed to sail on Grandeur of the Seas out of Baltimore to celebrate our 40th anniversary. Instead, we got kicked off the ship at dockside because I came down with a migraine. I started having migraines at age 6, so I've had over 50 years of experience with them. By now, I know when I'm having a migraine and when I'm not. One of my major triggers is flashing lights, particularly bright, intense lights like strobe lights.

 

We got there in plenty of time, there about 10:30 when last check-in time was 3:00. Got into the stateroom, unpacked, had lunch, arranged for a shore excursion to replace one that was cancelled, etc.

 

Then they had the lifeboat drill. I didn't know that when they blow the ship's horn for the signal, they also have strobe lights going off in the corridor. Had there been notice either on the TV or in print, I would have had my husband check to see if it had stopped flashing, or had him lead me out while I covered my eyes. But since they didn't, I came out of my cabin and got one right in the face, no more than 10 feet away. IMMEDIATE migraine onset. And as bad luck would have it, there was a medic (? She never said one way or the other.) right there at the muster station. When I'm coming down with a migraine, I slur and stammer. This is a common-enough symptom that it has a name, dysphasic aura.

 

The medic insisted that I might be having a stroke, and wouldn't listen to me or DH telling them that this was the same set of symptoms that I have with EVERY migraine, and have had for at least the last 20 years. She insisted that I had to go to the infirmary. I finally allowed them to take me there, figuring that I'd tell the doctor I was in migraine prodrome, show him my migraine meds, and he'd know that there was nothing to worry about.

 

It didn't work that way. They gave me my Imitrex, but wouldn't listen when we told them that all I needed to do was lie down in a dark room for a couple of hours. They kicked BOTH of us off the ship and confiscated our shipcards so that we couldn't get back on.

 

They sent me in an ambulance to the ER, where the doctor took one look at me, had me do the very basic neuro test (squeeze hands, smile, check eyes), gave me an EKG, agreed that with my history of migraines, I knew what I was talking about, and discharged me. In and out in half an hour. (When was the last time you got through the ER like THAT on a Saturday afternoon?)

 

Meanwhile the cruise people packed up our stuff and called a taxi for DH. SonIL#2 got there first and took him to the hospital. When DH walked into the room, I was ready to leave. So we came home. Nothing else to do. The ship had sailed as soon as they got DH off of it.

 

We did get a refund of our shore excursions and wine package and stuff like that, but not the cost of the cruise itself. Our only recourse is to file with the travel insurance people.

 

For the last month, our travel agent has been fighting for us to get some sort of recompense from Royal Caribbean, but this afternoon we got a forward from her:

 

 

It will be a cold day in Hawaii before we step foot on a Royal Caribbean ship again. In the morning, I'm calling my local TV stations' Investigative Teams. We will also be consulting legal advice. You know that old saying, a satisfied customer tells one person, an unsatisfied customer tells 10? Royal Caribbean has not considered that in these days of widespread internet access, that number might be closer to 10,000.

 

And whatever you do on your next cruise, DO NOT admit to having a minor ailment. Or you might be the one dumped off in a strange city, unable to rejoin your ship, for no reason other than a headache or touch of indigestion.

 

Wait a minute this to me sounds like they violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. You were having a migraine headache that would have passed in an hour or so. Just think about people who have sea sickness, the Noro Virus(which is worse than other illnesses), those with disabilities such as Autism. They are not thrown off the ship just for letting the cruiseline know what they have.

 

I have a visual impairment and I e-mailed Special Services about it and they can provide large menus, Table for 2 etc just by asking and letting them know in advance.

 

How could Royal Caribbean think you would be a danger to others by having a migraine headache. You went to your stateroom and lied down until it passed and took the proper medications. Is the Medical Team some "In training" Doctors who don't know how to take care of these minor ailments.

 

Even the nurse at the community college where I attended would do a better job than Royal Caribbean and would not just call 911 for something that would pass.

 

I hope you write to Royal Caribbean and Adam Goldstein agoldstien@rccl.com and tell them how you were treated expecting to go on vacation etc.

 

In fact I think a cruise and the fresh air would do you better than being sent home for your condition. I've suffered with severe sinus infections and the airline did not refuse me transport. I know exactly how you feel. Sometimes those sinus infections were so painful I had to lie in bed as I sometimes felt dizzy. Now I drink Coffee and use saline spray and don't have anymore issues.

 

I'm sorry you had to experience this. I can empathize with you. Please keep us posted on the outcome and I hope you will get a full refund plus another Cruise on Royal's expense.

[wolfganghowell]

As a fellow migraine sufferer, I empathize. Thankfully mine have decreased with age (Hey look, I found something good about getting older!). I take Maxalt when needed - guess I better ask about Imitrex next time!

 

This year my mother was rushed to the ER presenting all the symptoms of a stroke - babbling language, inability to communicate, utter confusion. After 3 days and a battery of neuro tests, the conclusion was that it was a massive migraine. She was incapacitated and unable to speak for close to 2 days. It was terrifying. She is 85 and had never had a migraine in her life. So….saying the OP was fit to travel even though it was a migraine may not always be the case.

 

However, I do feel there is more to the story. Her motivation is to sign up for CC with the intention of badmouthing RCI. Since she mentions she is pursuing legal action, any decent attorney would tell her to stop fighting her battle via social media. In her original post, she made no mention of an additional medical condition (fibromyalgia) and neglected to say that she was unable to participate in the muster drill. So…she presented to RCI staff that she was physically unable to stand for a basic drill and also was having difficulty communicating due to slurred speech. I too get the feeling that the situation may have become argumentative, which only made it worse.

 

I'm another one going with the cruise line on this - it was a tough judgement call. But having seen top medical professionals be confounded by my mother's strange event, as well as my personal knowledge of migraines (I too have to remind photographers that I can't do a lot of photos with flashes.), they really had to make the safe call of refusing passage. I too remember the tobacco in a can incident. It's one little detail left out of someone's "they done me wrong" story that nails it every time.

 

It's a rotten thing to have happened but truly the issue is with the travel insurance company, not RCI. Their contract covers them on this and there is no legal case. I'm suspicious too why the OP refuses (and probably won't be back) to explain why the insurance has not been done. It's confusing for many of us here - it seems like the insurance could and should cover it. Is she wanting additional monies from RCI for pain and suffering? I do feel she should be reimbursed for the cruise but I think that responsibility is with the insurance company.

[A2Mich]

I guess you didn't read the whole thread before answering - similar contract clauses from airlines, rental car companies etc. have been held invalid, so there's certainly a chance they could be held invalid against RCI also.

 

Now in the case of "Carnivore", I'd be much more careful in taking them on in the first place! :D

 

 

I have been following and reading this entire thread since the beginning. I also understand that various things have been declared/ruled as invalid. I was just trying to point out that any and all legal action must be brought in Florida, as other people have mentioned that various jurisdictions have found otherwise or may interpret the contract differently. I was just trying to point out that it doesn't make a hill of beans of difference what the state of New York found as invalid in American Airlines passenger contract (I was being hypothetical here). The point being is that the laws applicable to the City of Miami, in Dade County, in the State of Florida is what will determine what is fair/unfair, valid/invalid, legal/illegal.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

[LetsGetWet!]

I have been following and reading this entire thread since the beginning. I also understand that various things have been declared/ruled as invalid. I was just trying to point out that any and all legal action must be brought in Florida, as other people have mentioned that various jurisdictions have found otherwise or may interpret the contract differently. I was just trying to point out that it doesn't make a hill of beans of difference what the state of New York found as invalid in American Airlines passenger contract (I was being hypothetical here). The point being is that the laws applicable to the City of Miami, in Dade County, in the State of Florida is what will determine what is fair/unfair, valid/invalid, legal/illegal.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

 

NOT if I file suit in Texas small claims court and the judge disallows the motion I'm sure RCI would file demanding a change of venue due to the contract language. If the judge rules that Texas has valid jurisdiction due to the fact that RCI conducts business within the state of Texas, than he/she can certainly compel RCI to answer and defend the suit in his court, or simply enter judgment against them should they refuse.

[A2Mich]

NOT if I file suit in Texas small claims court and the judge disallows the motion I'm sure RCI would file demanding a change of venue due to the contract language. If the judge rules that Texas has valid jurisdiction due to the fact that RCI conducts business within the state of Texas, than he/she can certainly compel RCI to answer and defend the suit in his court, or simply enter judgment against them should they refuse.

 

 

OK. I see what you mean now. Makes more sense when you state it that way!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

[travelplus]

The Guest Contract as others have said allow for Royal to refuse transportation to anyone they deem unfit for travel. What if the OP contacted the Special Need's Department and informed them about their condition beforehand so that only one person would attend the drill?

 

I have a know for a fact that the Special Needs Department would work with you. They may ask for a fax from your doctor which states about your condition and then they would forward it to the medical staff onboard along with the plan of action such as taking your prescription.

 

I think the OP would have not been disembarked had she contacted the Royal Special Needs Department beforehand to make them aware of her condition. Had she done it it would have been a different experience.

Edited February 9, 2014 by travelplus