Norwegian Cruise Line Changes Service Charge Policy

[LMaxwell]

Ah, I see you notice what one of the dilemmas is for passenger(s) that don't want to pay the DSC. To help you see the difference between EU/UK and the US contract versions - There's no "Whom / When / Where" in the US one, compare to the UK/ EU. I think you'll understand how brilliantly evil this is against someone that removing it just because they don't want to pay. And if you see the copy of the form on the closed thread, you notice all the red flag problems of it and the procedure/manner to get it back. The only other helpful thing I can say on the matter is - only those that genuinely had an service issue will probably get it back faster than others.

 

Sent from my SGH-T399 using Tapatalk

 

Fill out form. Scan form. Email form. Wait prescribed time.

 

That's it and that's all.

 

The rest of what you say is your guessing or your wishes, but it certainly is not the truth.

[sparks1093]

I misspoke. It is $300/person for 7 day cruises and $150/person if less than 7 days. It's right on the website FAQ.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yes, but I have seen many say they were able to put less down than the recommended amount (such as my friend who was on a 7 day cruise and only put down $152).

[Moby0215]

Yes, but I have seen many say they were able to put less down than the recommended amount (such as my friend who was on a 7 day cruise and only put down $152).

 

 

Were you in the same room? Did you use a credit card? I can see them possibly allowing less of a cash deposit if service charges are prepaid. However that certainly isn't there policy as it is clearly stated on the website of $300/person. Of which that is what was required of me when I used a cash account. That being said I didn't ask to put less. By the way, where did the amount of $152 come from. Sounds very arbitrary. Lol

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SteveH2508]

Ah, I see you notice what one of the dilemmas is for passenger(s) that don't want to pay the DSC. To help you see the difference between EU/UK and the US contract versions - There's no "Whom / When / Where" in the US one, compare to the UK/ EU. I think you'll understand how brilliantly evil this is against someone that removing it just because they don't want to pay. And if you see the copy of the form on the closed thread, you notice all the red flag problems of it and the procedure/manner to get it back. The only other helpful thing I can say on the matter is - only those that genuinely had an service issue will probably get it back faster than others.

 

Sent from my SGH-T399 using Tapatalk

 

I agree - I think it is a smart move on NCL's part - I disagree with those who remove the SC just because they can. I am guessing that corporate want to introduce some consistency of enforcement of the 'unresolved service issue' element of the refund process. It also gives them a better overview of service issues on particular ships and serial SC removers.

[insidecabin]

Might as well throw in continental europe T&C.s

 

http://www.ncl.eu/helpful-information/booking-conditions/#!/helpful-information/booking-conditions/booking-conditions-2015-16/

 

which refers to the FAQ(brochure / on-line) or welcome aboard books forming part of the contract.

 

 

wording in the welcome aboard is similar to UK, discretionary, change on board.

Edited September 17, 2015 by insidecabin

[LMaxwell]

Were you in the same room? Did you use a credit card? I can see them possibly allowing less of a cash deposit if service charges are prepaid. However that certainly isn't there policy as it is clearly stated on the website of $300/person. Of which that is what was required of me when I used a cash account. That being said I didn't ask to put less. By the way, where did the amount of $152 come from. Sounds very arbitrary. Lol

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I thought it was a typo until I saw it twice.

[maywell]

I agree - I think it is a smart move on NCL's part - I disagree with those who remove the SC just because they can. I am guessing that corporate want to introduce some consistency of enforcement of the 'unresolved service issue' element of the refund process. It also gives them a better overview of service issues on particular ships and serial SC removers.

 

The form itself doesn't give a better overview of service issues nor does it give an impression(to me any way - other people seem to think so) of keeping track of serial removers (there's an important thing missing off the form that I assume will be connected on the backend - I hope).

 

What all of does though in a sick twisted way, is make the wait time period go from minutes with Guest Services on the ship by making then remove it before hitting the credit card/ cash/debit/OBC before disembark under the old way; to now days/weeks after disembark and dealing with some corporate office out in the middle of nowhere. Pretty much what NCL did was, they use the loophole language in the contract that was used against them by DSC-removers, into an advantage for themselves. The advantages they have right now with this, is nothing short of amazing...

 

Sent from my SGH-T399 using Tapatalk

[sparks1093]

Were you in the same room? Did you use a credit card? I can see them possibly allowing less of a cash deposit if service charges are prepaid. However that certainly isn't there policy as it is clearly stated on the website of $300/person. Of which that is what was required of me when I used a cash account. That being said I didn't ask to put less. By the way, where did the amount of $152 come from. Sounds very arbitrary. Lol

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

She was in a room with our kids but had her own separate account. She had saved $152 for the cruise and by golly that is what she brought to spend (and ended up with a $41 refund too):). I have read of many people putting down a lesser amount so I don't think it was an anomoly.

[LMaxwell]

What all of does though in a sick twisted way, is make the wait time period go from minutes with Guest Services on the ship by making then remove it before hitting the credit card/ cash/debit/OBC before disembark under the old way; to now days/weeks after disembark and dealing with some corporate office out in the middle of nowhere. Pretty much what NCL did was, they use the loophole language in the contract that was used against them by DSC-removers, into an advantage for themselves. The advantages they have right now with this, is nothing short of amazing...

 

It has nothing to do with punishing people, and everything to do with having a larger chunk of money "on float" which can be very advantageous to a corporation for a number of reasons; inflate numbers to boost stock, likewise to secure more loans or capital, and even though the interest earned may not be huge in a short time frame, it's a BIG pot of money so "not huge" is relative here.

 

You think it is amazing because it's punitive. How is that amazing? It's even punitive to people with legitimate issues, right? So how is that a positive compared to the industry? The only amazing aspect is from a business aspect; making money off OPM. Which isn't amazing, it's just smart accounting. You actually applaud punishing people who have had bad service? That seems to be your position.

 

I'd think NCL is going to be VERY wary to contest claims lest they tick off some lawyer out there that goes after them and they stop the practice altogether and go back to the old way. Put emotion aside, for once, and just count the dollars and cents here. More coming in, held for longer time, more on float, more interest earned. NCL isn't going to want to actually go and tick people off and ruin their good thing.

 

 

If NCL DID act emotionally or out of a position of spite, or evil, or whatever bizarre emotion you want to claim, my suggestion would be for everyone to sell their stock immediately and the board have a vote of no confidence because there is a lunatic at the helm.

 

If NCL truly wanted a non-removeable service charge, they could implement one, but they haven't. And that's down to dollars and cents, not down to emotions. Corporations don't act emotionally. Accountants are not emotional.

Edited September 17, 2015 by LMaxwell

[insidecabin]

I think this change has the side effect of changing the reduction in the amount paid to a post cruise compensation payment.

[swedish weave]

It has nothing to do with punishing people, and everything to do with having a larger chunk of money "on float" which can be very advantageous to a corporation for a number of reasons; inflate numbers to boost stock, likewise to secure more loans or capital, and even though the interest earned may not be huge in a short time frame, it's a BIG pot of money so "not huge" is relative here.

 

You think it is amazing because it's punitive. How is that amazing? It's even punitive to people with legitimate issues, right? So how is that a positive compared to the industry? The only amazing aspect is from a business aspect; making money off OPM. Which isn't amazing, it's just smart accounting. You actually applaud punishing people who have had bad service? That seems to be your position.

 

I'd think NCL is going to be VERY wary to contest claims lest they tick off some lawyer out there that goes after them and they stop the practice altogether and go back to the old way. Put emotion aside, for once, and just count the dollars and cents here. More coming in, held for longer time, more on float, more interest earned. NCL isn't going to want to actually go and tick people off and ruin their good thing.

 

 

If NCL DID act emotionally or out of a position of spite, or evil, or whatever bizarre emotion you want to claim, my suggestion would be for everyone to sell their stock immediately and the board have a vote of no confidence because there is a lunatic at the helm.

 

If NCL truly wanted a non-removeable service charge, they could implement one, but they haven't. And that's down to dollars and cents, not down to emotions. Corporations don't act emotionally. Accountants are not emotional.

 

Your coments are spot on !!! The lawyer comment triggered a thought about how lucrative it would be for a lawyer to challenge the idea of NCL holding onto the DSC for an extended length of time instead of using it for the employees benefit. After all, the money supposedly belongs to the employees instead of NCL.

 

A multi-million dollar slush fund would be very attractive, and NCL's method of extending the time they can hold onto it should be of concern.

Edited September 17, 2015 by swedish weave

[abe3]

If you do go this route, may I suggest the issue is NCL and not the crew? Raising DSC twice in 2 months, poor communication, etc.

 

 

Not poor communication. They communicated that they raised it so I don't think thats poor communication but they just raised it twice.

Edited September 17, 2015 by abe3

[legion3]

Just want to say thank you to Laura S for not deleting this thread yet. I came on here to learn about cruises and I appreciate all the advice, reviews, and pictures from everyone. This will be my last post ever. I proved my point that people will remove their DSC not bc they have a legit service problem but because they liars and cheaters and cheapos. They will say anything and do anything to hurt the crew so they can pocket just a few dollars. I will write a letter to FDR or who ever and let them read these post. Hopefully they will make it HARDER for them to get their refund.

I wish most everyone a happy life and happy future cruises.

 

Candi

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

 

Its way more than a few dollars.

 

Wish NCL did this:

 

 

Service Per Guest, Per Day

Dining Room Services $6.10

Stateroom Services $3.90

Alternative Services: distributed to kitchen, entertainment, guest services and other hotel staff members. $2.00

Total Gratuities $12.00

[SteveH2508]

 

<snip>

 

Do the kids club counselors get it?

 

<snip>

 

They have never been part of the DSC pool.

[legion3]

They have never been part of the DSC pool.

 

Why? Because they get paid a decent (er) wage?

[SteveH2508]

Why? Because they get paid a decent (er) wage?

 

Maybe their salary is better, but mainly it is because not all passengers use their services. Similar logic as to why the casino staff and bar staff are not in the DSC pool - not all pax gamble or drink.

[abe3]

Why? Because they get paid a decent (er) wage?

 

 

Not everyone has kids on the cruise.

[legion3]

Not everyone has kids on the cruise.

 

On NCL not everyone eats in the MDR.

[abe3]

On NCL not everyone eats in the MDR.

 

 

You eat elsewhere or not at all on the cruise?

[SteveH2508]

On NCL not everyone eats in the MDR.

 

Then they eat in the buffet or O'Sheehans or the grills on deck - these are still staffed by crew in the DSC pool.

 

Next spurious justification please.

[NLH Arizona]

Maybe their salary is better, but mainly it is because not all passengers use their services. Similar logic as to why the casino staff and bar staff are not in the DSC pool - not all pax gamble or drink.

 

You are correct, also like the butlers and servers when in the specialty restaurants, since not everyone uses them.

[legion3]

You eat elsewhere or not at all on the cruise?

 

Yes I eat elsewhere on NCL. Other lines not so much so, but then again if they had the number of choices NCL has...

 

Have the UDP - the older more comprehensive one - that will likely lead to eating every night elsewhere.

 

Hate the buffet and NCL's MDR's are not that great or I should say have not been that inspiring to eat at.

[jb456]

On NCL not everyone eats in the MDR.

 

A family of 4 get up on a port day and walk right off the ship. Eat lunch and supper in port board the ship and head straight to their cabin for the night. Put the kids down to bed spend some time on their balcony before they go to bed.

 

Still charged $34 for the day when all they used that day was room cleaning. Easy to see how flawed NCL's dsc system is and what side is making free money off guests.

Edited September 17, 2015 by jb456

[maywell]

Then they eat in the buffet or O'Sheehans or the grills on deck - these are still staffed by crew in the DSC pool.

 

Next spurious justification please.

Don't forget breakfast, lunch and/or snacks; if one doesn't use the room service, specialty restaurant such as the Atrium cafe or brought there own food from port(s) - pretty much have to pay some DSC in the complimentary places.

 

Sent from my SGH-T399 using Tapatalk

[legion3]

Then they eat in the buffet or O'Sheehans or the grills on deck - these are still staffed by crew in the DSC pool.

 

Next spurious justification please.

 

None to offer. Nevertheless...