NCL Slammed in Washington Post Column for Poor Customer Service

[accmiller]

Like I said, I wouldn't tell you what to do with your money and if you are willing to take responsibility for your choices that is all I ask. The people in this article are not taking responsibility for their choice and that is what has many posters up in arms. I know where you are coming from. DH and I took the majority of our cruises without passports and still do not have them for the kids. For us the risk was not worth the cost of the passports, just like you feel about travel insurance. Like you we are willing to bear the risk and take responsibility for our choice if something happened. Not judging you and not telling you how to spend your money....just thankful to see someone who realizes it is their responsibility for the choices they make. As you can see from this article, some feel it is the responsibility of the cruiseline to take the loss for its customers choices. IMHO that's just wrong.

 

What is the cost? Am I missing something?

 

Just allow them to move to another week.

 

Problem solved.

 

Or is Norwegian now selling out ever cruise they have. If so I need to buy some stock. Sold out and a very loyal following no matter what their business practices.

[Da-Painter]

Just curious. Do you take medical insurance for trips abroad?

 

No, and to make some shiver, I do not buy extended warranties on products I buy in stores either. Different strokes for different folks.

[Starry Eyes]

So just because travel insurance is offered it makes it the equivalent of medical insurance???

 

If I need my broken arm repaired there is a real cost incurred. Asking a cruise line to change weeks is not.

I rather doubt that was the point of the question. One possible (and in my opinion, important) component of travel insurance is medical and evacuation coverage. If one's regular health insurance does not cover (or does not cover adequately) international medical costs, the resulting bill could be very, very high. Certainly, breaking your arm will result in some costs; many people could bear those costs. Far worse if one is in a sever accident with, say, multiple broken bones and a head injury; one might need care for months (in ever) before one could again fly home on a commercial flight without special medical care. Can you imagine that bill? Few families could afford that; it dwarfs the cost of a simple cancellation. It could also be a devestating medical event like a heart attack or stroke. The other poster may have asked about medical coverage because they have thought about (or maybe even faced) such expenses.

 

The cruise does face a cost if they let somebody change weeks. They could not resell that cabin, so they lost on board profit. If they let the family take a cabin another week, that is a cabin they cannot sell....yes, it does cost the cruiseline.

[Starry Eyes]

No, and to make some shiver, I do not buy extended warranties on products I buy in stores either. Different strokes for different folks.

I do not buy travel insurance for cancellations; I am willing to bear that risk. I do not buy extended warranties; I am willing to bear that risk. Those two are a neat parellel, as the potential replacement cost/risk is known and may be tolerable to many people.

 

OTOH, I make sure I always have health insurance, whether home or abroad. Most years I have very low medical expenses, but anything can happen at any time. The potential costs could be staggering. Some people's regular insurance covers them abroad; I wish mine did. For those of us without built in coverage, some people are comfortable going uninsured; others are not. Do as you please.

[Starry Eyes]

What is the cost? Am I missing something?

 

Just allow them to move to another week.

 

Problem solved.

 

Or is Norwegian now selling out ever cruise they have. If so I need to buy some stock. Sold out and a very loyal following no matter what their business practices.

Do you think this family would have been happy if the line said we have another cruise with a vacancy the next day? Nope, too soon. The next week? Nope, too soon as they are dealing with so much right then. Next month, they might counter, but those cruises might already be sold; can they go last minute if somebody else cancels...nope, they are across the country.

 

They try to sell out every cruise every week. If there are still last minute vacanicies, they may fill them with special deals to big gamblers; they try to make that money back a different way.

 

These folks were gamblers in a different way. They gambled by declining insurance; they lost. They want somebody else, anybody else to bear that loss.

[Starry Eyes]

You are missing the point. No one is saying they should get their money back. Just let then go on a different week. The airline didn't have a problem with it. But like the travel writer said, Norwegian is hoping to make more money selling travel insurance and they can't do that if they allow people to change cruise dates due to a death in the family.

Actually the airline, I believe, only offered to waive the change fee. If they paid $500 per person and the flight in two weeks is now $1000 per person, they still may have an expensive issue. You know what would have helped with that...yup, insurance!

[nana541]

Sorry for their loss, I too lost a son and it's a journey no family should have to take.

But.... They "Declined" insurance and the Cruiseline should not need to offer any thing but condolences .

 

 

PS I love Chris Elliott but his advocating this story is wrong...

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Edited August 12, 2014 by nana541

[accmiller]

I rather doubt that was the point of the question. One possible (and in my opinion, important) component of travel insurance is medical and evacuation coverage. If one's regular health insurance does not cover (or does not cover adequately) international medical costs, the resulting bill could be very, very high. Certainly, breaking your arm will result in some costs; many people could bear those costs. Far worse if one is in a sever accident with, say, multiple broken bones and a head injury; one might need care for months (in ever) before one could again fly home on a commercial flight without special medical care. Can you imagine that bill? Few families could afford that; it dwarfs the cost of a simple cancellation. It could also be a devestating medical event like a heart attack or stroke. The other poster may have asked about medical coverage because they have thought about (or maybe even faced) such expenses.

 

The cruise does face a cost if they let somebody change weeks. They could not resell that cabin, so they lost on board profit. If they let the family take a cabin another week, that is a cabin they cannot sell....yes, it does cost the cruiseline.

 

It costs them money if both weeks would be sold out which I highly doubt. Now it will cost them even more money because wary consumers will see the games they play and spend their money elsewhere.

[accmiller]

Do you think this family would have been happy if the line said we have another cruise with a vacancy the next day? Nope, too soon. The next week? Nope, too soon as they are dealing with so much right then. Next month, they might counter, but those cruises might already be sold; can they go last minute if somebody else cancels...nope, they are across the country.

 

They try to sell out every cruise every week. If there are still last minute vacanicies, they may fill them with special deals to big gamblers; they try to make that money back a different way.

 

These folks were gamblers in a different way. They gambled by declining insurance; they lost. They want somebody else, anybody else to bear that loss.

 

 

Oh yes, this ship is fully booked every week. Please give me a break.

[Warm Breezes]

What is the cost? Am I missing something?

 

Just allow them to move to another week.

 

Problem solved.

 

Or is Norwegian now selling out ever cruise they have. If so I need to buy some stock. Sold out and a very loyal following no matter what their business practices.

 

Yes you are missing something. Go back and read my post #57. The same thing happened to us with a death in the family the night before our cruise. In our case Carnival received payment for our room that most likely sailed empty since we cancelled early that morning. We received a refund from our insurance company whom we paid to take the responsibility for our risks of having to cancel. Carnival also received our money for the cruise we booked the following year to replace this one we lost. Therefore, Carnival got paid for 2x for both cruises we had booked, but only one we had actually sailed on due to that death in our family.

 

In the case of the people in the article they also had a death immediately before their scheduled cruise that they ended up cancelling. NCL had received the payment for their room which also most likely sailed empty due to the last minute cancellation. These people did not receive a refund from their insurance company like we did because they did not pay the insurance company to take on their responsibility for their risk of having to cancel. If they choose to cruise on NCL again, then they should pay NCL for that cruise, just like we paid Carnival for our 2nd cruise. NCL is not responsible for giving them another cruise for free. If NCL were to rebook them, it would as if they are giving them that second cruise for free....that would be the cost to NCL.

 

Two cases. In our case we purchased insurance to pass on the responsibility of our risk and CCL received payment for the 2x we booked. In the other peoples case they did not purchase insurance to pass on the responsibility of their risk....but that does not mean the responsibility should be passed on to NCL. It becomes the customers responsibility when they decline insurance. If they choose to book again, like we did, then they should pay for that booking like we did. NCL should get paid 2x for 2 bookings just like Carnival did with us. NCL should not have to pick up the cost of one of those bookings just because the customer turned down insurance. That is exactly what you are asking them to do and IMHO that is not right.

Edited August 12, 2014 by Warm Breezes

[accmiller]

Yes you are missing something. Go back and read my post #57. The same thing happened to us with a death in the family the night before our cruise. In our case Carnival received payment for our room that most likely sailed empty since we cancelled early that morning. We received a refund from our insurance company whom we paid to take the responsibility for our risks of having to cancel. Carnival also received our money for the cruise we booked the following year to replace this one we lost. Therefore, Carnival got paid for 2x for both cruises we had booked, but only one we had actually sailed on due to that death in our family.

 

In the case of the people in the article they also had a death immediately before their scheduled cruise that they ended up cancelling. NCL had received the payment for their room which also most likely sailed empty due to the last minute cancellation. These people did not receive a refund from their insurance company like we did because they did not pay the insurance company to take on their responsibility for their risk of having to cancel. If they choose to cruise on NCL again, then they should pay NCL for that cruise, just like we paid Carnival for our 2nd cruise. NCL is not responsible for giving them another cruise for free. If NCL were to rebook them, it would as if they are giving them that second cruise for free....that would be the cost to NCL.

 

Two cases. In our case we purchased insurance to pass on the responsibility of our risk and CCL received payment for the 2x we booked. In the other peoples case they did not purchase insurance to pass on the responsibility of their risk....but that does not mean the responsibility should be passed on to NCL. It becomes the customers responsibility when they decline insurance. If they choose to book again, like we did, then they should pay for that booking like we did. NCL should get paid 2x for 2 bookings just like Carnival did with us. NCL should not have to pick up the cost of one of those bookings just because the customer turned down insurance. That is exactly what you are asking them to do and IMHO that is not right.

 

So you think it is good to pay twice for a cruise just because the cruise line says so?

 

Like the article says. Norwegian does this so it can increase its revenue through selling insurance. That is great for them that you are okay with that. No one is saying give them a free cruise just allow them to take the cruise they paid for on a different date.

[Starry Eyes]

Oh yes, this ship is fully booked every week. Please give me a break.

They certainly try to sail full. Obviously there are last second cancellations that cannot be filled. Short of that, they do have ways of filling cabins. Selling cruises is afterall the entire basis of their business!

 

By my logic, if there is only one empty cabin on a sailing next month, the cruise should put a rather high price tag on that cabi; if somebody really wants to sail that ship that week, they need to pay up. That is supply and demand....Basic stuff. If that one cabin is still empty in the final dyas, the price might be cut or it may be comped to a profitable sort.

 

By your logic, if there is only one empty cabin on a sailing next month (or next year, for that matter), they should not bother to try to sell it....they should not even reward a big gambler with it...instead they let you or I or some other family sail free. After all, if they do not fully book every ship every week, they should give them away well in advance of the cruise:eek:.

[Warm Breezes]

So you think it is good to pay twice for a cruise just because the cruise line says so?

 

Like the article says. Norwegian does this so it can increase its revenue through selling insurance. That is great for them that you are okay with that. No one is saying give them a free cruise just allow them to take the cruise they paid for on a different date.

 

But it wasn't the same cruise. It would be 2 different bookings on 2 different dates. It was 2 different bookings that I agreed to pay for within the terms of Carnivals contract....which included a refund policy that shrunk the closer the sail date came. I knew that when I booked my cruise, as would anyone else who read the contract or asked. I purchased travel insurance partially for this clause in my contract to protect me from losing that money in case I need to cancel. I also purchased it to cover any medical losses. I am the customer and I need to be aware of what I am purchasing. It is called personal responsibility. I paid the cruise line 2 times because I agreed to when I booked with them 2 times for 2 different dates. One just left without me because I was heading home for a funeral. Not because the cruiseline said so.

 

I also do not purchase my insurance through the cruise line so they do not make money off me there. As a consumer I do my research and know I can get a better deal elsewhere. Again I took responsibility for my decisions.

 

The point you are missing is that they paid for a cruise on a certain date. They could not go on that date because of a death in the family but the ship still sailed with that room that they booked and agreed to pay for when they purchased tickets on that sailing. It happens to many people, including us. If they had purchased insurance through the cruiseline or anyone else, like we did, they would have been refunded by the insurance company not NCL. NCL would still have gotten paid for that cruise just like Carnival did with us. We paid Carnival and the insurance company paid us. If they were to choose to try to sail again then that they would pay for different cruise on a different date. Not the same cruise that they missed. NCL would get paid for that cruise just as Carnival did for ours. They aren't responsible for giving it away free.

Edited August 12, 2014 by Warm Breezes

[pokerpro5]

Trip interruption insurance is a horrible value.

 

This family was correct to decline it.

 

They are not correct to complain about the loss once they were unable to make the cruise, regardless of the reason.

 

The answer here shouldn't be, "You need to buy insurance." The answer should be, "You assumed the risk, which was the right move, but circumstances didn't work out advantageously for you as expected."

 

Same reason I would be happy to bet with you all day if I had a 70% chance of winning, but I wouldn't demand a refund of my losses if you got lucky and beat me.

Edited August 12, 2014 by pokerpro5

[GeezerCouple]

So you think it is good to pay twice for a cruise just because the cruise line says so?

 

Like the article says. Norwegian does this so it can increase its revenue through selling insurance. That is great for them that you are okay with that. No one is saying give them a free cruise just allow them to take the cruise they paid for on a different date.

 

So if you purchase concert tickets with assigned seats, and then you can't get there, do you expect the theatre to give you free seats to the same concert a different night?

(They held those assigned, ticketed seats for *you*.)

 

As for insurance, many people know (and the others are probably learning) that for most purposes, there is BETTER insurance to purchase from insurers OTHER THAN the cruise-line.

(The exact coverages vary, and as with all insurance, the customer should make sure they know exactly what is or isn't covered.)

 

The cruiseline, NCL or otherwise, doesn't get a dime from all of these policies, from many different travel insurers and travel insurance brokers.

 

Others have pointed out that they themselves have sailed (or otherwise traveled) for many years, and haven't paid anything for insurance.

THOSE PEOPLE SAVED A LOT, and THAT money can indeed be used to cover a missed trip someday.

(I'm ignoring the ever-present medical/evac possible costs in this, just the trip costs.)

Now, do you suppose that many of these families who are now whining paid for insurance on lots of previous trips? Probably not.

 

--> So they SAVED a lot by not paying for insurance for what might be many trips.

And now they want someone else (the cruiseline in these cases) to pay for their losses, while they sit on all the money they never paid for insurance for previous trips?

 

Really?

 

GeezerCouple

[Warm Breezes]

Trip interruption insurance is a horrible value.

 

This family was correct to decline it.

 

They are not correct to complain about the loss once they were unable to make the cruise, regardless of the reason.

 

The answer here shouldn't be, "You need to buy insurance." The answer should be, "You assumed the risk, which was the right move, but circumstances didn't work out advantageously for you as expected."

 

Same reason I would be happy to bet with you all day if I had a 70% chance of winning, but I wouldn't demand a refund of my losses if you got lucky and beat me.

 

This is absolutely correct. I do not wish to take the risk of traveling with out travel insurance because we we have had too many close calls and one direct hit. I consider us unlucky when it comes to things that the travel insurance covers and therefore feel it is of a value to us. You are willing to take the risk that you consider too small for you to be concerned about. But you are also willing to be responsible for your decision to take on that risk. The people in this story were more than willing to take on the risk when they turned down the insurance....but they are failing to take personal responsibility for that decision now that something has happened.

Edited August 12, 2014 by Warm Breezes

[mjkacmom]

It costs them money if both weeks would be sold out which I highly doubt. Now it will cost them even more money because wary consumers will see the games they play and spend their money elsewhere.

 

Airlines make their money from the airfare. Hotels make their money from the money paid for the room. Cruiselines make their money from the amount of money spent while onboard.

 

When we travel, I rarely get insurance for flights and hotels. However, cruising is a whole other industry. After final payment, I know that I will get NOTHING back if I cancel, for whatever reason. I'm sure, because of this, most folks who cancel their cruises after final payment have VERY good reasons for doing so, because they all going to lose all of their money.

 

This is why it is a good idea to buy trip insurance when you book a cruise. It is for very unexpected events that will make folks unable to take that cruise they paid for (illness, death, fire...).

 

I will admit that, when we first started cruising, I didn't purchase insurance - because honestly, I had NO IDEA that if I cancelled after final payment, I was owed nothing. I guess I thought I would be out some money, but not all. After hearing about tragic cases like this, you bet I now purchase the insurance!

[Starry Eyes]

Airlines make their money from the airfare. Hotels make their money from the money paid for the room. Cruiselines make their money from the amount of money spent while onboard.

 

When we travel, I rarely get insurance for flights and hotels. However, cruising is a whole other industry. After final payment, I know that I will get NOTHING back if I cancel, for whatever reason. I'm sure, because of this, most folks who cancel their cruises after final payment have VERY good reasons for doing so, because they all going to lose all of their money.

 

This is why it is a good idea to buy trip insurance when you book a cruise. It is for very unexpected events that will make folks unable to take that cruise they paid for (illness, death, fire...).

 

I will admit that, when we first started cruising, I didn't purchase insurance - because honestly, I had NO IDEA that if I cancelled after final payment, I was owed nothing. I guess I thought I would be out some money, but not all. After hearing about tragic cases like this, you bet I now purchase the insurance!

Maybe this was intentional hyperbole, but, if not, let me point out that just after final payment, the cancellation penalties are not 100%. The amount of the penalty depends on a number of factors including holiday vs regular sailing, length of cruise, upper end suite vs other cabins. For example, I am 41 days out, if I must cancel tomorrow (heaven forbid!), I'll lose 50%; at 29 days out it goes to 75%, and at 14 days out it goes to 100%. So if something happens, I have an incentive to inform the cruiseline ASAP, which in turn gives them a shot at re-selling that space. I can accept that cancellation risk, though others should insure against such a loss. For me it is med/evac that warrant coverage; we all have our risk threshold. What is wrong is to assume a risk, pocket the savings, then whine when the gamble backfires.

 

Here is the schedule...

http://www.ncl.com/about/cancellation-fee-schedule

Edited August 12, 2014 by Starry Eyes

[mjkacmom]

Maybe this was intentional hyperbole, but, if not, let me point out that just after final payment, the cancellation penalties are not 100%. The amount of the penalty depends on a number of factors including holiday vs regular sailing, length of cruise, upper end suite vs other cabins. For example, I am 41 days out, if I must cancel tomorrow (heaven forbid!), I'll lose 50%; at 29 days out it goes to 75%, and at 14 days out it goes to 100%. So if something happens, I have an incentive to inform the cruiseline ASAP, which in turn gives them a shot at re-selling that space. I can accept that cancellation risk, though others should insure against such a loss. For me it is med/evac that warrant coverage; we all have our risk threshold. What is wrong is to assume a risk, pocket the savings, then whine when the gamble backfires.

 

Here is the schedule...

http://www.ncl.com/about/cancellation-fee-schedule

 

I guess I'm thinking about a last minute emergency cancellation. There are sometimes I'll book a hotel room I might or might not need (maybe at an amusement park), knowing I can cancel it 24 hours in advance, if the weather looks iffy. If I'm going to lose $5000+ I paid for a cruise, it's going to be for a good reason. I think many people cancel at the last minute for serious issues - why get insurance, if cruiselines made exceptions for every sad story? I paid for it, didn't gamble, and "lost" (nothing bad happened, we went on our cruise, I was out the money for the insurance).

[Starry Eyes]

I guess I'm thinking about a last minute emergency cancellation. There are sometimes I'll book a hotel room I might or might not need (maybe at an amusement park), knowing I can cancel it 24 hours in advance, if the weather looks iffy. If I'm going to lose $5000+ I paid for a cruise, it's going to be for a good reason. I think many people cancel at the last minute for serious issues - why get insurance, if cruiselines made exceptions for every sad story? I paid for it, didn't gamble, and "lost" (nothing bad happened, we went on our cruise, I was out the money for the insurance).

We are totally on the same page overall. I am not sure you "lost" as you had peace of mind the whole time; that has value. I have not used my travel medical or my homeowners or my auto or my disability insurance or obviuosly my life insurance for multiple years; I am so glad I not needed it. If that is "losing", I'll take it!

 

Once in a while, I'll read a review of a hotel where somebody slams the hotel for not helping them when plans changes after they booked a non-refundable, non-changable rate:rolleyes:. Far better to select a higher cancellable rate if plans might change, like you have, for example.

Edited August 12, 2014 by Starry Eyes

[pieshops]

Trip interruption insurance is a horrible value.

 

This family was correct to decline it.

 

They are not correct to complain about the loss once they were unable to make the cruise, regardless of the reason.

 

The answer here shouldn't be, "You need to buy insurance." The answer should be, "You assumed the risk, which was the right move, but circumstances didn't work out advantageously for you as expected."

 

Same reason I would be happy to bet with you all day if I had a 70% chance of winning, but I wouldn't demand a refund of my losses if you got lucky and beat me.

 

Not sure how you are coming up with this.

 

We have bought insurance about 10 times at approx 300 a pop, so that is 3000 spent.

 

We have had to cancel 2 times days before and including the airfare for the 4 of us, hotel, and cruise (haven) we received about 30,000 back - not a bad investment for me.

 

Better then being out 30,000

[sjbdtz]

You are missing the point. No one is saying they should get their money back. Just let then go on a different week. The airline didn't have a problem with it. But like the travel writer said, Norwegian is hoping to make more money selling travel insurance and they can't do that if they allow people to change cruise dates due to a death in the family.

 

What is the cost? Am I missing something?

 

Just allow them to move to another week.

 

Problem solved.

 

Or is Norwegian now selling out ever cruise they have. If so I need to buy some stock. Sold out and a very loyal following no matter what their business practices.

 

 

Yes, you are missing the point. The point is that in your scenario not only will the cruiseline have had an empty cabin for the week the family is not going (along with foregoing any ancillary revenues associated), but will then have to give up a cabin on a future date as well.

 

 

You're further missing the real point (and so did your travel writer):

 

 

NCL OFFERS insurance for sale. It is not mandatory.

Other companies (which don't profit NCL) also offer similar insurance and would have protected the family WITHOUT enriching NCL.... so the premise that there's a cause & effect relationship between hard-line response and offering insurance is a non-starter.

 

 

 

.

[nana541]

Yes, you are missing the point. The point is that in your scenario not only will the cruiseline have had an empty cabin for the week the family is not going (along with foregoing any ancillary revenues associated), but will then have to give up a cabin on a future date as well.

 

 

 

 

 

You're further missing the real point (and so did your travel writer):

 

 

 

 

 

NCL OFFERS insurance for sale. It is not mandatory.

 

Other companies (which don't profit NCL) also offer similar insurance and would have protected the family WITHOUT enriching NCL.... so the premise that there's a cause & effect relationship between hard-line response and offering insurance is a non-starter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

Some people aren't ever going to get it....just find it convenient to blame the "big bad greedy corporate monsters" .... These people purchased their cruise for a specific date, specific cabin and finalized the payment and at that time "declined" insurance offered by NCL and chose not to go to an outside vendor (think: InsuranceStore.com or insuremytrip.com) neither of which share any profits with the cruiseline and they offer affordable policies that would have protected this family.

 

Chris Elliott's website is indeed sponsored by Travel Insurance Providers and he has done extensive reporting on the importance or protecting your expensive vacation. The cruise line is in the business of selling vacations, not insurance.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums mobile app

[garycarla]

Major medical insurance is something many people need or should get.

 

Trip interruption/cancellation insurance is really not such a good deal. You are not insuring the money lost, but insuring the good time you hope to have. After all, you have already spent the money. Money that you apparently can afford.

 

In fact, not going on a paid for cruise for most people will SAVE them money. Drinks, tours, daily service fee, photos, dinners, gifts, parking, etc.

[SuiteCruiser]

Major medical insurance is something many people need or should get.

 

Trip interruption/cancellation insurance is really not such a good deal. You are not insuring the money lost, but insuring the good time you hope to have. After all, you have already spent the money. Money that you apparently can afford.

 

In fact, not going on a paid for cruise for most people will SAVE them money. Drinks, tours, daily service fee, photos, dinners, gifts, parking, etc.

 

Agreed, and though I used an example of me buying insurance, I, like you, self insure. I have good insurance through my credit card that covers the medical bit for no cost, but one time I did buy the insurance for a pricey all inclusive and we ended up having to use it as a hurricane hit. So, 100% of the time that I've bought it,it's been used.