Why Doesn't Royal Caribbean Treat Their Customers Well?

[Erie Dave]

But the bottom line is that you got a cruise that consisted of the number of days that you actually paid for, correct? What do you think should happen (that is, should RCI do anything) if someone pays for a 7 day cruise and the cruise is cut short by 2 days? A 5 day cruise is not the same as a 7 day cruise, IMO. You have paid for food, accommodations, and entertainment for 7 days; you should be able to expect that. If the weather means that the ship has to skip a port or that you didn't get to see a glacier, fine; you were still on the ship enjoying the cruise. If a cruise is shortened, you are not on the ship enjoying the cruise. I truly believe comparing missed ports or unviewable sights to shortening the length of a cruise is an apples to oranges situation.

 

In your case, of course RCI didn't owe you anything because they delivered what they promised (and what you expected), which was a 7 day (I assume; sorry if it was a different length) cruise. BTW, did you receive a refund for your missed excursions?

 

beachchick

 

And a few weeks ago, those on the Voyager got what they paid for also. That is not exactly the point here. The point is that these things are out of the control of the cruise line. A $100 credit on a 5 day cruise is significant. Offering a 50% refund when 0% is owed is also significant. Maybe the topic of this post should be "Why doesn't RCI treat its customers AS WELL AS I THINK THEY SHOULD" because that is really what is being discussed here.

[ricko1]

Thanks a lot for the information. Will give it shot.. ricko1 :)

[live2beontheseas]

We were to supposed to sail a 7 night cruise during September last year and had our cruise shortened from leaving on Sunday to leaving on Tuesday. Not only did RCCL offer a full redund if we didn't want to go, but if you did sail you got a $500 onboard credit and 50% off a future cruise. That was way more then I ever expected. Can't believe from that offer that RCCL is that bad. Maybe because the current sailing is only a few days and for the most part not all that expensive, it why the credit is so small. Just a thought.

[mbisson]

Originally Posted by jtutak

How about the people that got a day or two longer cruise. Should they pay more, they got more than they payed for???

 

I think they should have to pay the people who lost a day of their cruise.

 

;)

 

I know there's something wrong with this logic but with coffee spurting out my nose, I just can't figure out what it is. Thanks for the laugh.

 

-Monte

[waterrats]

Also remember that this credit is per stateroom. It doesn't take into account your cetegory, how much you actually paid, or how many people are in the stateroom. Just be thankful if you are on this cruise the you only booked two people in stearage with the anchor.

[CruzinPat]

If we take the emotion out of this discussion and break it down to dollars and cents, RCI and all other cruiselines are a for-profit business and the laws of supply and demand apply. So... if the bookings during hurricane season significantly drop because of many disgruntled passengers or weather related bad experiences and the ships sail relatively empty, would there be incentives/guarantees made upfront for possible itinerary changes and/or shortened cruises to get more passengers to take this risk? You betcha! If the supply is greater than the demand then the consumer is in control!

[waterrats]

In any case, I stand to lose a ton less than most cruisers. We cruise in September when the weather is hot and the rates are low. Summer cruisers stand to lose alot as they are the highest rates of the year with September, part of October, January, and part of February the lowest.

[xpcdoojk]

If we take the emotion out of this discussion and break it down to dollars and cents, RCI and all other cruiselines are a for-profit business and the laws of supply and demand apply. So... if the bookings during hurricane season significantly drop because of many disgruntled passengers or weather related bad experiences and the ships sail relatively empty, would there be incentives/guarantees made upfront for possible itinerary changes and/or shortened cruises to get more passengers to take this risk? You betcha! If the supply is greater than the demand then the consumer is in control!

 

Thank you for a post I would take credit for!:) :D ;)

 

jc

[lagbunch8]

If we take the emotion out of this discussion and break it down to dollars and cents, RCI and all other cruiselines are a for-profit business and the laws of supply and demand apply. So... if the bookings during hurricane season significantly drop because of many disgruntled passengers or weather related bad experiences and the ships sail relatively empty, would there be incentives/guarantees made upfront for possible itinerary changes and/or shortened cruises to get more passengers to take this risk? You betcha! If the supply is greater than the demand then the consumer is in control!

 

 

Unless you have people that treat RCCL like a religion and won't tolerate any actual "criticism" of the company. If those people feel privileged that RCCL would take these people's money from them and maybe they will get what they paid for--not that they are owed anything from RCCL mind you. Then the company will do just fine.

[kenandlaura06]

Originally Posted by jtutak

How about the people that got a day or two longer cruise. Should they pay more, they got more than they payed for???

 

 

 

I know there's something wrong with this logic but with coffee spurting out my nose, I just can't figure out what it is. Thanks for the laugh.

 

-Monte

 

Glad I could make you laugh! :)

[pcur]

Criticize away, and move to another cruise line, because as DH always says, "More room for me!!!".

 

We have never had any complaints about the way we are treated, and we have been on several cruises over the years that have been rerouted, had ports cancelled (never the whole cruise), left port early because of a hurricane.

 

We are always so happy to be cruising that changes, etc. are nothing to twist up our undies about.

[mbisson]

Unless you have people that treat RCCL like a religion and won't tolerate any actual "criticism" of the company. If those people feel privileged that RCCL would take these people's money from them and maybe they will get what they paid for--not that they are owed anything from RCCL mind you. Then the company will do just fine.

 

Wow-Don't know that any of the people posting here are that stupid, so I'm not sure that they exist elsewhere either.

 

-Monte

[scarletdove1969]

thanks for making me laug....this was actually funny to read. If I were to book a cruise during hurricane season I WOULD DEFFINATELY take the insurance with the company or even from somewhere else if need be. Most people who take a cruise this time of year and expect everything to go peachy are insane. I would not chance my kids nor myself in hurricane season. I know for a fact that more than $100 per stateroom was offered and beings it was only a 4 day cruise I think thats more than generous of RCCL

[beachchick]

And a few weeks ago, those on the Voyager got what they paid for also. That is not exactly the point here. The point is that these things are out of the control of the cruise line. A $100 credit on a 5 day cruise is significant. Offering a 50% refund when 0% is owed is also significant. Maybe the topic of this post should be "Why doesn't RCI treat its customers AS WELL AS I THINK THEY SHOULD" because that is really what is being discussed here.

 

Actually, I think that's exactly the point. The Voyager pax got the length of cruise they expected. No, it wasn't the destination they booked (and that would really be the pits, IMO), but they had no cause to expect compensation for missed days--there weren't any (as far as I know). They booked a 5 night cruise; they got a 5 night cruise.

 

In this case, the cruise itself is shortened, which is an entirely different situation. As I mentioned in another post, I'm aware that RCI has, technically, CYA'd themselves. (However, those contract clauses do not actually mention "shortened" cruises, which is itself another issue.) In any case, paying for a cruise of X number of days and getting a cruise of X number of days doesn't warrant compensation; paying for a cruise of X number of days and getting a cruise of X minus Y number of days does, but only of the percentage of the cruise missed. It doesn't matter whether it's weather related. A shortened cruise merits that basic refunded percentage.

 

beachchick

[rsinj]

I agree with the OP whilst fully appreciating the need to change schedules and if advance notice is given that your cruise is to be cut short then a full refund should be offered. Its only good PR and it gives people the option.

 

Nice of you to offer PR advice to the cruiseline. However, I don't think they are in need of any assistance as they are doing just fine filling the ships.

 

Read your contract - they offer what they are obligated to provide, if not more - as you, the cruiser are expected to uphold your end of the contract.

 

 

Howard

[mic328]

Two years ago we were supposed to go to Bermuda. Well good old Fabian was going to hit Bermuda straight on. We all were assuming that the Cruise was going to get rerouted. The only problem was the night before we were supposed to leave, we called RCCL and they kept telling us that we were still going to Bermuda (we all knew there was no way we were going there), all cruise ships were rerouted. The only thing we wanted to know was where we were going. We ended up going to Canada. This was in September. RCCL didn't tell us this until late that evening (the night before the cruise), We were the lucky ones we at least had time to unpack the snorkel gear and put in the sweatshirts. When we arrived at the dock there were hundreds of passengers that had no idea that we were rerouted, now if they had been watching the news they would have known something was going to be changed. Our TA called us late but at least we knew where we were going, we weren't happy, we still thought that we were going to go someplace warm and sunny, instead we got Cold Canada. All in all We had a blast on this cruise, The nights were freezing but the days were sunny and warm. It was different but we made the best of it. Some passengers complained the entire time. We all had a great time. If we were rerouted again I don't think that I would be as upset as I was when I found out about Canada because we all had a ball. They did give us a 50.00 certificate for our next cruise, I guess that's better than nothing. It would have been nice to go to a warm sunny Island but at that time (Hurricaine season) the ocean wasn't very happy!:D

[mic328]

Love it!!!:p

[jaxon41]

Once again, we see that just last year, px in the same situation were fairly compensated. Elsewhere, it has been posted that RCCI has a new CEO, supposedly. HMMMM?? Also, on another thread, a poster doubts that insurance covers losses when the ship sails, but shortens the number of days at sea.

 

I will have to look at my contract -- but to have a contract that says if you pay for 5 days and only get 3, tough luck, would seem to be against public policy. If they do not put a jurisdictional clause in the contract which gives jurisdiciton outside the US, I'd think consumer protection laws might come in to play. If I order from pea pod 3 boxes of groceries, and they only deliver 2 and charge me for three, do you think they can get away with that? There are many here who think they should be able to, as long as they couldn't carry the third box to the truck because of a hurricane. The analogy about the hotel being blown away was a good one -- some here think you should have to pay for the entire stay even if the hotel is not habitable because of a hurricane.

 

The change of itinerary case is a pr problem; I think this is more than that.

[waterrats]

Two years ago we were supposed to go to Bermuda. Well good old Fabian was going to hit Bermuda straight on. We all were assuming that the Cruise was going to get rerouted. The only problem was the night before we were supposed to leave, we called RCCL and they kept telling us that we were still going to Bermuda (we all knew there was no way we were going there), all cruise ships were rerouted. The only thing we wanted to know was where we were going. We ended up going to Canada. This was in September. RCCL didn't tell us this until late that evening (the night before the cruise), We were the lucky ones we at least had time to unpack the snorkel gear and put in the sweatshirts. When we arrived at the dock there were hundreds of passengers that had no idea that we were rerouted, now if they had been watching the news they would have known something was going to be changed. Our TA called us late but at least we knew where we were going, we weren't happy, we still thought that we were going to go someplace warm and sunny, instead we got Cold Canada. All in all We had a blast on this cruise, The nights were freezing but the days were sunny and warm. It was different but we made the best of it. Some passengers complained the entire time. We all had a great time. If we were rerouted again I don't think that I would be as upset as I was when I found out about Canada because we all had a ball. They did give us a 50.00 certificate for our next cruise, I guess that's better than nothing. It would have been nice to go to a warm sunny Island but at that time (Hurricaine season) the ocean wasn't very happy!:D

 

Mic - congrats on your enjoyment on your cruise last year. We too did not go to the destinations that we booked. We were suppose to do an Eastern Caribbean cruise and ended up only in Cozumel and Ocho Rios with 7 sea days. We absolutely loved it. I know it wasn't as bad as your itinerary change but you did exactly what we would have done. Party it up and enjoy your cruise. You didn't have much to complain about as far as getting a credit because you paid for 7 nights and they delivered 7 nights just a different itinerary.

 

As far as cruiselines go at getting information out to the people answering the phone, they fail. Last year, I called the morning of our cruise and the people on the phone said that there were no itinerary changes. Then we find out that the ship was loading with over 100 palletts of supplies for Grand Cayman. Princess knew all along about an itinerary change and didn't want to inform its passengers. Cruiselines need to better get info out to its customers. Its all over these boards that cruiselines have poor customer survice.

[mtchg]

..it is true, that RCI's main competitor, Carnival offers much better compensation this season. That's just fact.

 

With insurance, it is all moot..but the original poster's fact's are correct.

 

Mitch

[Pragmatic666]

As far as cruiselines go at getting information out to the people answering the phone, they fail. Last year, I called the morning of our cruise and the people on the phone said that there were no itinerary changes. Then we find out that the ship was loading with over 100 palletts of supplies for Grand Cayman. Princess knew all along about an itinerary change and didn't want to inform its passengers. Cruiselines need to better get info out to its customers. Its all over these boards that cruiselines have poor customer survice.

I can't believe I'm reading this. Hurricanes are Acts of God, or to use more PC language, Force Majeure. Businesses under such conditions have to go into crisis management mode. Given the nature of hurricanes, any decision made even a couple days beforehand could end up being grievously wrong. Do you tell people, "No problem, the cruise is going as scheduled," only to have a storm change course and put people in harm's way. Or, do you cancel the cruise only to discover that there was no real danger? In either case, people are going to bitch.

 

The comments about the Caribbean Princess taking supplies to Grand Cayman but not allowing passengers ashore only demonstrate how self-centered today's cruise passenger has become. Hello, the island was nearly erased by Ivan, they had no facilities to take care of their own let alone thousands of passengers, and desperately needed the supplies the cruise lines brought to the island. Most people supported the effort and accepted the inconvenience as a necessary sacrifice to help people who were in dire straits. Those who complain about those efforts display a stunning lack of compassion for the fellow man. For shame.

[waterrats]

The comments about the Caribbean Princess taking supplies to Grand Cayman but not allowing passengers ashore only demonstrate how self-centered today's cruise passenger has become. Hello, the island was nearly erased by Ivan, they had no facilities to take care of their own let alone thousands of passengers, and desperately needed the supplies the cruise lines brought to the island. Most people supported the effort and accepted the inconvenience as a necessary sacrifice to help people who were in dire straits. Those who complain about those efforts display a stunning lack of compassion for the fellow man. For shame.

 

Let me clarify that noone that I ran into on the ship, myself included bitched, complained, commented about not being able to go ashore in Grand Cayman. All I mentioned was that Princess flat out knew that there was an itinerary change (evidenced because the ship was loaded with palletts of supplies for Grand Cayman) and when calls to Princess the morning of the cruise, they still weren't telling passengers about the change. I have young ones at home and it would be nice for them to know where the ship is going as of the sailing time. if things change afterwards, then we can let them know later. I mentioned poor dissemination of information, no complaining other than lack of info from the cruise lines. People need to not read put additional words into text. I now wonder how someone will change this post into something else. Hmmmm!!!!!!! Anyone???

[pcur]

Once again, we see that just last year, px in the same situation were fairly compensated. Elsewhere, it has been posted that RCCI has a new CEO, supposedly. HMMMM?? Also, on another thread, a poster doubts that insurance covers losses when the ship sails, but shortens the number of days at sea.

 

I will have to look at my contract -- but to have a contract that says if you pay for 5 days and only get 3, tough luck, would seem to be against public policy. If they do not put a jurisdictional clause in the contract which gives jurisdiciton outside the US, I'd think consumer protection laws might come in to play. If I order from pea pod 3 boxes of groceries, and they only deliver 2 and charge me for three, do you think they can get away with that? There are many here who think they should be able to, as long as they couldn't carry the third box to the truck because of a hurricane. The analogy about the hotel being blown away was a good one -- some here think you should have to pay for the entire stay even if the hotel is not habitable because of a hurricane.

 

The change of itinerary case is a pr problem; I think this is more than that.

 

Well, "...for any reason, at any time and without prior notice, cancel, advance, postpone or deviate" ....."not be liable for any loss whatsoever"....that sounds pretty much like RCI can NOT deliver, and the contract also says Miami's court of law is where you go for lawsuits.

 

Passenger safety: that's the key phrase, as described in many a post in this thread and others about RCI not delivering. Anything they DO give is pretty much gravy, considering the wording in the contracts we all sign.

[waterrats]

Anything they DO give is pretty much gravy, considering the wording in the contracts we all sign.

 

I have a strange question then. How can they hold you to this contract if the ship sails late? You haven't signed it yet. You sign it at the port.

[Erie Dave]

Payment in full is considered acceptance of the contract.