X lie to customers about the overnights

[Bo1953]

Not if you're the OP, he may not be able to afford to lose those hundreds of $ on his deposit and then take one of your options ;). Moving his booking may also not be an option as some pax are only able to cruise once every couple of years due to finances, holiday schedules etc. Give people the option of cancelling if they so wish - X have made changes to his itinerary and now the reason for those changes, so let the OP decide whether he wants to accept or cancel and receive his money back!

 

In which case, I recommend that 'every' potential cruiser in the UK and Europe do last minute bookings (after pay in full dates) to be sure they will like any/all itineraries then losing 'big bucks' become a non-issue, maybe cost of booking last minute will become the issue.

 

Maybe I Am not looking at this correctly, I Am sure I will be corrected just in case... TIA

[Bo1953]

The key difference is the right to cancel without penalty for major changes, where there normaly would be cancellation penalties.

 

the issue is that for cruise the definitions boundry of major/minor is not well established and each cruise line uses different examples.

 

There main relevent law in the UK that the cruise lines interpit are the package holiday regulations that cover cruise.

 

eg

Single port change, minor

two port changes, grey area.

two ports to two sea, major.

 

Some other changes are established by how they apply to other package holidays like the departure and delays.

 

the actual regulations are

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1992/3288/contents/made

 

they cover other things like changes to fares after booking which make things like fuel surcharges very difficult to enforce.

 

 

Celebrity also has this clause.

1.11 Can I make changes to my booking after it has been

confirmed?

Should you wish to make any changes to your confirmed

holiday, you must notify us in writing as soon as possible.

Whilst we will endeavour to assist you, we cannot guarantee

we will be able to meet any such request. For guests wishing

to make a significant amendment to their booking outside of

56 days from departure, such as changing the ship, sail date,

flights or brand, please note that a booking transfer fee is

applicable.

 

So those effected by the itinerary changes but canot cancel without penalty should be able to change their booking to another cruise and in many cases X have been know to wave any change fees.

 

Sounds like it is 'Government' that makes this permissible, NOT X, better get those pesky consumer friendly regulations changed so X can do something other to benefit those who want protection and not want them in other situations.

 

Just a vision, new glasses are in order for me though. :D

[Chunky2219]

I'm amazed that this thread has made it to six pages of discussion about how many angels will fit on the head of a pin.

 

Thinking about it, of our last four cruises, we've had three port changes and an overnight.

 

One change was to dodge bad weather and we ended up with a cruise of nothing but sunshine. One change was to avoid a port workers strike in Norway, which was changed back after they decided to turn up for work after all. And one was the substitution of Corner Brook in Canada, which if we visited again I definitely wouldn't be bothered to even get off the ship.

 

But none of the changes broke our hearts or spoiled things. If there's somewhere you really, really want to see then a six hour touch and go on a cruise ship isn't going to cut it anyway.

 

As for the overnight, it was in Sydney and was absolutely terrific. I, for one, would welcome more overnights with time to actually do something in port and less sea days fighting for elbow room in the buffet.

 

Just a thought.

 

 

.

[PoppyandNana]

I'm amazed that this thread has made it to six pages of discussion about how many angels will fit on the head of a pin.

 

Thinking about it, of our last four cruises, we've had three port changes and an overnight.

 

One change was to dodge bad weather and we ended up with a cruise of nothing but sunshine. One change was to avoid a port workers strike in Norway, which was changed back after they decided to turn up for work after all. And one was the substitution of Corner Brook in Canada, which if we visited again I definitely wouldn't be bothered to even get off the ship.

 

But none of the changes broke our hearts or spoiled things. If there's somewhere you really, really want to see then a six hour touch and go on a cruise ship isn't going to cut it anyway.

 

As for the overnight, it was in Sydney and was absolutely terrific. I, for one, would welcome more overnights with time to actually do something in port and less sea days fighting for elbow room in the buffet.

 

Just a thought.

 

 

.

 

One of the more absurd, IMHO, was a HAL itinerary to the Caribbean from Ft. Lauderdale. You embarked by 4pm on day one as usual. However, the ship doesn't leave the port until 5pm the following day. Can't imagine why.

[Big Chief]

Here's a revelation for you.

 

Itinerary and ports can CHANGE at anytime for whatever reason Celebrity chooses to use.

 

It's in your cruise contract.

 

If losing one port (not even losing an overnight - just a matter of hours!) on a 10+ day cruise is THAT important to you, then perhaps a land-based vacation going to the ports YOU select would be more suitable.

 

You'll have complete control of your vacation and you can go wherever you like, whenever you like.

 

When does one "receive" the cruise contract? If one were to book a cruise over the telephone with a travel agent, how does somebody "read" or agree to the contract? I realize the contract of carriage is "buried" deep in the Celebrity web site, but not everyone books online.

[macaroni]

I'm amazed that this thread has made it to six pages of discussion about how many angels will fit on the head of a pin.

 

Thinking about it, of our last four cruises, we've had three port changes and an overnight.

 

One change was to dodge bad weather and we ended up with a cruise of nothing but sunshine. One change was to avoid a port workers strike in Norway, which was changed back after they decided to turn up for work after all. And one was the substitution of Corner Brook in Canada, which if we visited again I definitely wouldn't be bothered to even get off the ship.

 

But none of the changes broke our hearts or spoiled things. If there's somewhere you really, really want to see then a six hour touch and go on a cruise ship isn't going to cut it anyway.

 

As for the overnight, it was in Sydney and was absolutely terrific. I, for one, would welcome more overnights with time to actually do something in port and less sea days fighting for elbow room in the buffet.

 

Just a thought.

 

 

.

 

Staying overnite in Sydney is not a problem..we all would love that...it's an overnite in the Caribbean that is the issue. You can't compare the 2...plus we all understand weather issues....but to change for no reason after bookings were made, non refundable airfare purchased...and I can't decide whIch overnite cruise I select..celebrity decides...is the issue.

[commodoredave]

......

 

It really does not pay to be too concerned about the itinerary. The only time we were given the option to cancel because of the change was our very first cruise and that was the most minor change of all.

 

Let's hope X doesn't drop Southampton from our Trans-Atlantic and replace it with Halifax!! Now that would be worth getting concerned about.

[cle-guy]

Yes it does.

 

For those of us in N.A. we can cancel prior to final payment and get a refund. For those in Europe they can't unless the Cruise line changes the contract. By suggesting the change was for security reasons they are not giving those that want to cancel a way to get out.

 

I think Celebrity should allow those that want to cancel the right to cancel regardless of where they live.

 

But wouldn't Celebrity's UK contract (which varies in various parts often very, very minor ways) terms themselves which define major and into changes with it as minor being 2 port changes, major being 3 port changes or more (this language is NOT in the X NA contracts, it's only in the X European contracts).

 

The cruise line contract in Europe says that they may change itineraries without compensation, unless it is a major change, which they define as more than 2 changes of port. The same contract also spells out cancellation policy and any ramification to any deposits paid.

 

Calling it security or calling anything else, is not within the defined terms in the contract, they simply need to keep port changes to 2 or fewer to maintain the contract. Once they make a 3rd change, then options open for Europeans with regard to compensation claims.

[wallie5446]

Well I wonder what kind of comments we are going to get about MSC cancelling the entire Fall and Winter sailing to move a ship to homeport in Cuba this December!

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=6434

[RickT]

I for one feel for the OP, I am not at all interested in the changes and cancelled a similar sailing (which I am allowed to do). To say I wouldn't be pleased at having an itinerary change forced upon me and a reason that isn't true as the justification would be an understatement.

 

Hopefully the OP is allowed to cancel (or change) their cruise due to Celebrity's decision.

[K.T.B.]

Well I wonder what kind of comments we are going to get about MSC cancelling the entire Fall and Winter sailing to move a ship to homeport in Cuba this December!

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/news/news.cfm?ID=6434

 

Big difference form what's being discussed here, but I would suspect that its American passengers would be less than happy about it. Rightfully so.

 

However, changing a destination is a far cry from changing a homeport.

 

On my last cruise, we were supposed to board at Long Beach, CA, but it had to be changed to San Pedro instead because of high waves. Things like that happened UNEXPECTEDLY and most people who cruise are VERY understanding of it. What Celebrity is doing is NOT unexpected (for them) and is part of an attempt to please the few while alienating the many. (Basing this on comments on this board by people who have a cruise that's been altered.) If, for example Celebrity had to cancel a port for a safety reason (say the port was deemed unsafe for years until its repair) and decided to give cruise overnights instead, THAT is different than just cancelling a port on a whim.

 

Celebrity has people over a barrel, so to speak. Basically most of their passengers have two options: Like it or lump it. That's definitely not a great way to run a business where they say passenger happiness is important to them.

[cle-guy]

Big difference form what's being discussed here, but I would suspect that its American passengers would be less than happy about it. Rightfully so.

 

However, changing a destination is a far cry from changing a homeport.

 

On my last cruise, we were supposed to board at Long Beach, CA, but it had to be changed to San Pedro instead because of high waves. Things like that happened UNEXPECTEDLY and most people who cruise are VERY understanding of it. What Celebrity is doing is NOT unexpected (for them) and is part of an attempt to please the few while alienating the many. (Basing this on comments on this board by people who have a cruise that's been altered.) If, for example Celebrity had to cancel a port for a safety reason (say the port was deemed unsafe for years until its repair) and decided to give cruise overnights instead, THAT is different than just cancelling a port on a whim.

 

Celebrity has people over a barrel, so to speak. Basically most of their passengers have two options: Like it or lump it. That's definitely not a great way to run a business where they say passenger happiness is important to them.

 

And if Celebrity made such a major change, they would also have to offer full refunds - because the origin and/or destination ports changed, therefore under the European regulations, the cruise is fully refundable - and I suspect in the US as well, though all are refundable till final payment.

 

There are a good number of new passengers who have been made happy by Celebrity with this change, and clearly some who are not happy about it. Check the other thread about if people would be happy for an adjusted itinerary for Cuba, about 2/3 are OK with itinerary swap there.

[RDC1]

And if Celebrity made such a major change, they would also have to offer full refunds - because the origin and/or destination ports changed, therefore under the European regulations, the cruise is fully refundable - and I suspect in the US as well, though all are refundable till final payment.

 

There are a good number of new passengers who have been made happy by Celebrity with this change, and clearly some who are not happy about it. Check the other thread about if people would be happy for an adjusted itinerary for Cuba, about 2/3 are OK with itinerary swap there.

 

Keep in mind that this is Celebrity's definition of significant, which may or may not be in agreement with UK courts opinion of significant under the 1992 PTR.

 

Especially since the law says

 

where the organiser is constrained before the departure to alter

 

This is clearly not a case where Celebrity is constrained to make the changes. There is no outside force limiting their behavior, making the changes necessary.

 

This is strictly a voluntary act because they have decided that they want to offer over nights

[RDC1]

Can anyone really argue that a change in the ports visited is "an essential term of the contract, such as the price"? I am sure that Celebrity's European lawyers have decided that it cannot be.

 

As I have said before, we have had port changes on every Celebrity cruise we have booked through Celebrity UK. Our first cruise was in 2006 and the change for that cruise was not only the most minor but also the furthest out pre-cruise. That was the only cruise for which we were offered a refund if we wished to cancel because of the change.

 

My guess is that sometime between 2005 and 2007, Celebrity had the law clarified for them by their lawyers.

 

Itinerary can also be considered to be an essential term.

 

What is unique in this case is that the change is not being forced on Celebrity by any outside force (weather, safety, port congestion, etc.). Those can all be considered to be valid under the law.

 

This is strictly a case of Celebrity making the changes for a large number of cruise, strictly because they now want to offer over nights.

 

Celebrity should have and still should allow those that booked prior to the change to cancel without penalty.

[cle-guy]

Keep in mind that this is Celebrity's definition of significant, which may or may not be in agreement with UK courts opinion of significant under the 1992 PTR.

 

Especially since the law says

 

where the organiser is constrained before the departure to alter

 

This is clearly not a case where Celebrity is constrained to make the changes. There is no outside force limiting their behavior, making the changes necessary.

 

This is strictly a voluntary act because they have decided that they want to offer over nights

 

I would have to assume that in the 23 years since the court's opinion, there must have been at least 1 test of the enforceability of a Company's defined terms versus the Court's defined terms by SOMEONE in Europe. The fact that 23 years on X is holding the line in regards to the current issue, lends further credence to that assumption.

[cle-guy]

Itinerary can also be considered to be an essential term.

 

Itinerary is likely an essential term in the contract, subject to the further definitions and restraints contained within the same contract. They have taken the time to state in the contract that itineraries can be modified without need for compensation, unless origin and or destination change, or for EU bookers, unless there have been more than 2 modifications to the ports.

 

The contract and all of its T&C's need to be taken into account as a whole, one can not cherry-pick certain language and disregard other language.

[insidecabin]

I would have to assume that in the 23 years since the court's opinion, there must have been at least 1 test of the enforceability of a Company's defined terms versus the Court's defined terms by SOMEONE in Europe. The fact that 23 years on X is holding the line in regards to the current issue, lends further credence to that assumption.

 

Not up on german legislsation but I do know it goes a lot further than UK on some things(eg final payments) and canges may also be included.

 

I think this change(1 port) might struggle in the UK.

 

Cruise lines have been know to make multiple changes to get round the 2 port situation which would be an issue.

 

Once the cruise starts the rules change so there is room to hide(fail to notify in a timely manor) changes but this is much harder to prove.

 

eg: I think there is probably evidence that Princess new about some changes on the round britain cruise and failed to tell passengers,

Celebrity have been informing passengers of similar changes so are clean on that.

 

Today I noticed on the X UK site

 

 

Maintenance Alert

Itinerary updates

A small selection of our cruise itineraries are currently being updated. While the dates and destination of all embark and disembarkation will not change, some ports of call throughout the cruise may be subject to change. Please contact 0844 493 2043 for more information.

[RDC1]

I would have to assume that in the 23 years since the court's opinion, there must have been at least 1 test of the enforceability of a Company's defined terms versus the Court's defined terms by SOMEONE in Europe. The fact that 23 years on X is holding the line in regards to the current issue, lends further credence to that assumption.

 

I cannot think of a similar case where a cruise line has made such wholesale changes to sold cruises and not offered customers with the ability to cancel without penalty. Can you?

 

The situations in the past have either been for safety reasons, weather, maintenance, etc. They have tended to be one off activities and could clearly be argued that they are for reasons outside of the control of the provider. I suspect that since the language has been in place for quite a while, that its original intent was for dealing with exactly those type situations. Even though Celebrity is trying to use it for coverage in this situation.

 

 

So no I would not be surprised if there has not been a test of this situation.

I actually doubt that there has been.

 

The case of a provider unilaterally making changes is exactly what the 1992 PTR was designed to prevent.

 

So tell me do you know of anything similar being done by a cruise line (voluntary changes to a large number of itineraries where a port is dropped) that might have been tested by a case under the law?

 

One other note, I recall reading at one time that the individuals rights under the PTR could not be signed away by the terms of a contract with the service provider. Cannot find that exact reference at the moment, but will continue to see if I can find the reference.

 

It really comes down to if anyone that is on one of those cruises is really willing to push it.

 

Again the point is not about Celebrity's right to make changes for what ever reason, it is that they should have allowed those that were booked to cancel without penalty, within a reasonable timeframe, once they were notified of the changes.

Edited July 3, 2015 by RDC1

[Oz_Steve]

Actually it might make substantial difference under European Law. There is substantial difference in how the law addresses the consumer protections based upon the reason for the change. Since these changes are clearly being made so far in advance then the consumer protections come down to the interpretation of significant change and if Celebrities view that a single port does not constitute significant change. A case where the changes are clearly made by the cruise line for competitive reasons is far more likely to find a favorable result for the passengers, then one made for safety reasons. Especially with the cruise line putting out various reasons.

 

The issue is not if Celebrity can make the changes, the issue is that they should allow those passengers that booked such cruises prior to the change to be able to cancel without penalty.

 

Ironic that the consumer protection laws were written with the intent of preventing this kind of situation where the provider changes or fails to deliver the services based upon the "brochure". The law clearly allows for minor changes outside of the providers control. But this is a change that is clearly in their control.

 

This would make for an interesting case in establishing the legal definition of minor vs significant change as far as cruises are concerned which do not really appear to be well defined.

 

This is the paragraph from the UK law that indicates why the spend so much time focusing on what makes a significant change in the cruise contract.

 

Significant alterations to essential terms

 

12. In every contract there are implied terms to the effect that—

 

(a)where the organiser is constrained before the departure to alter significantly an essential term of the contract, such as the price (so far as regulation 11 permits him to do so), he will notify the consumer as quickly as possible in order to enable him to take appropriate decisions and in particular to withdraw from the contract without penalty or to accept a rider to the contract specifying the alterations made and their impact on the price; and

(b)the consumer will inform the organiser or the retailer of his decision as soon as possible.

 

Interesting point. I find the email from Celebrity to be rather curious as well. They have now stated publicly that they are cancelling a port for 'safety reasons'. In the future should anyone get hurt in an incident in Belize Celebrity could find themselves on a sticky wicket regarding liability.

 

Just because a contract says what it says doesn't mean it is enforceable. It probably just means it hasn't been tested in court by someone with the resources to do so. That is the point of consumer protection laws, to stop companies doing what the hell they like knowing that they can't effectively be challenged because people don't have the resources to do so. If clauses in those contracts were found to be in contravention of statutory protections they would be struck down. Some countries have a government agency that may investigate this for you.

[RDC1]

Not up on german legislsation but I do know it goes a lot further than UK on some things(eg final payments) and canges may also be included.

 

I think this change(1 port) might struggle in the UK.

 

Cruise lines have been know to make multiple changes to get round the 2 port situation which would be an issue.

 

Once the cruise starts the rules change so there is room to hide(fail to notify in a timely manor) changes but this is much harder to prove.

 

eg: I think there is probably evidence that Princess new about some changes on the round britain cruise and failed to tell passengers,

Celebrity have been informing passengers of similar changes so are clean on that.

 

Today I noticed on the X UK site

 

 

Maintenance Alert

Itinerary updates

A small selection of our cruise itineraries are currently being updated. While the dates and destination of all embark and disembarkation will not change, some ports of call throughout the cruise may be subject to change. Please contact 0844 493 2043 for more information.

 

The difference is that most changes by cruise lines have been in response to things considered outside of their control and are one off changes.

 

These clearly are not being forced on Celebrity. That is to say under the law that Celebrity is not constrained to make the changes.

[cle-guy]

I cannot think of a similar case where a cruise line has made such wholesale changes to sold cruises and not offered customers with the ability to cancel without penalty. Can you?

 

The situations in the past have either been for safety reasons, weather, maintenance, etc. They have tended to be one off activities and could clearly be argued that they are for reasons outside of the control of the provider. I suspect that since the language has been in place for quite a while, that its original intent was for dealing with exactly those type situations. Even though Celebrity is trying to use it for coverage in this situation.

 

 

So no I would not be surprised if there has not been a test of this situation.

I actually doubt that there has been.

 

The case of a provider unilaterally making changes is exactly what the 1992 PTR was designed to prevent.

 

So tell me do you know of anything similar being done by a cruise line (voluntary changes to a large number of itineraries where a port is dropped) that might have been tested by a case under the law?

 

Here's one from P&O Crusies

Celebrity changed its final Century sailing itinerary 3 times after it went onsale (this caused me to cancel that one)

Azamara has done it

All the modified Sillouhette sailings from last summer till January of this year

 

I dont; pay attention to any other lines than Celebrity to be honest, so these were just a few I was able to recall from memory.

 

And none seem to have caused any lawsuits to be filed and tested.

[RDC1]

Here's one from P&O Crusies

Celebrity changed its final Century sailing itinerary 3 times after it went onsale (this caused me to cancel that one)

Azamara has done it

All the modified Sillouhette sailings from last summer till January of this year

 

I dont; pay attention to any other lines than Celebrity to be honest, so these were just a few I was able to recall from memory.

 

And none seem to have caused any lawsuits to be filed and tested.

 

The P&O changes were safety reasons, unrest in Egypt.

 

The final century sailing was a one off. Not sure if they allow passengers to cancel without penalty or not.

 

I though the Silouhette changes was due to maintenance reasons (propulsion problems) outside of the control of Celebrity.

 

So it comes down to fairly recent actions of Azmara (relatively few passengers). Are you sure they did not offer the ability to cancel?

Cannot find any mention in the Azmara making changes in a number of their sailings. Only one off changes for various reasons. No mention of them not allowing passengers to cancel without penalty. Only discussions about inability to transfer current fares to a different cruise.

Edited July 3, 2015 by RDC1

[Cindy]

I've had a port dropped on Princess before, taking us from four down to three. It was announced either right before or right after final payment. The general consensus was that it was to save fuel by eliminating the long run over to Cayman on the Galveston itineraries.

 

Princess is my next cruise, so I've been paying some attention to their board for the first time in a while. There are a couple threads about changes to itineraries. One is for later this year, and it has people in an uproar. Even though a port wasn't eliminated, everything was rearranged and the port hours were cut dramatically. The passengers are especially upset because their day in Istanbul is now on the first day of a major religious holiday and everything is closed.

Edited July 3, 2015 by Cindy

[RJHNorthyorks]

If you book on line strongly advise that you speak to Celebrity as Itineraries have not been fully changed in the website

[RDC1]

I've had a port dropped on Princess before, taking us from four down to three. It was announced either right before or right after final payment. The general consensus was that it was to save fuel by eliminating the long run over to Cayman on the Galveston itineraries.

 

Princess is my next cruise, so I've been paying some attention to their board for the first time in a while. There are a couple threads about changes to itineraries. One is for later this year, and it has people in an uproar. Even though a port wasn't eliminated, everything was rearranged and the port hours were cut dramatically. The passengers are especially upset because their day in Istanbul is now on the first day of a major religious holiday and everything is closed.

 

When was the cruise where they dropped Caymen and which ship? Have to see what happened there. Did they allow cancellations?

 

On the upcoming cruise they shifted the schedule, did not drop any ports.

 

Again these are one off, individual cruises.

 

Not like the current actions by Celebrity where they have made a changes to a number of cruises, a change in scheduling practice, not forced by any events such as maintenance, safety, weather, port congestion, etc.