Silhouette Trip Report (Yes, that Israel one!) October 2015 (Very Long)

[Rosethorn40]

That is really good advice. Thank you.

 

I had not assessed what I thought fair compensation would be, but reflecting upon that now, I would say it has altered as time has gone on.

 

When I was told, literally minutes before leaving for the airport, I would have wanted the full costs including flights and hotel reservations so that I could find an alternative at the last minute

 

Once I had boarded, seen the disappointment of all the passengers and the less than agreeable response of Celebrity to that disappointment, I would say, anything, even an hour's worth of internet to research the alternative ports, may have been acceptable

 

Now I have returned, I am able to be more reflective and work out what I missed out on, but even this has three aspects to it.

1. I am still appalled by Celebrity's clear intention of covering their backs and deliberately providing consumers with a far inferior product with no returns policy. But as I said, I have two choices here, either boycott them or accept that this is just what large corporations do, and accept it. I have already chosen to go with the latter. After all, I despise Rupert Murdoch, but without his television company, my TV entertainment would be far worse.

2. The choice of replacement ports. This is a judgement call. I do believe they should have gone to Egypt or maybe Croatia to add a bit more interest, but I do not believe the decision to turn it into a Greek Island cruise was a bad one, just because I didn't like it.

3. The third and most important aspect was they key reason for booking - Israel. No-one booked this cruise for any other reason than its visit there. If I believed my safety was an issue I would let it go immediately and move on, but instead, I disagree wholeheartedly with the reasons for the decision (my Trip Report details why), so I therefore believe they should replace that experience adequately.

 

So, on reflection, and I will approach Celebrity using your advice, I believe a return economy flight to Tel Aviv would be fair. I wouldn't expect them to provide hotel accommodation, even though some might. The cost from the UK would be around $300.

 

NB: The funny thing is, if they had provided that to me by way of on-board credit they would have got it back within half an hour in their casino :o

 

That seems more than a fair and reasonable request. I sincerely hope you get it. I also hope you make it to Israel in the near future, and the trip exceeds your expectations.

[richstowe]

I hope that you will receive some additional compensation and $300 OBC seems like a very reasonable token from Celebrity. If I was in charge you would get it for sure..

 

If implemented for every passenger that could be about $860,000, the Shareholders might have something to say about that.

As you are aware DYKWIA , giving this amount of OBC does not mean it would cost them anywhere near that amount . There is a very healthy profit margin on spa services , drinks , casino etc . I'm not sure the $300 suggested figure was meant to be PP or per cabin . Either way dealing with upset customers both on and off the ship , loss of future sales and bad PR has to be worth something .

 

It is true that some people will never be satisfied but in this case I believe the vast majority would have been .

[DYKWIA]

As you are aware DYKWIA , giving this amount of OBC does not mean it would cost them anywhere near that amount . There is a very healthy profit margin on spa services , drinks , casino etc . I'm not sure the $300 suggested figure was meant to be PP or per cabin . ...

 

Unless people cash out in the Casino at 5% charge

 

 

I think Celebrity need to rethink some of next year's cruises to that part of the world- it is naive to think everything will resolved in that region within 12 months.

 

After what has happened this year who will book an itinerary with Turkey and Israel until much much closer to the time.

Edited November 2, 2015 by DYKWIA

[RocketMan275]

4. My personal cruise does however exist in a grey area. Although a UK citizen, I use a US Travel Agent, so I will await further information about where I stand because of this.

5. I am not aware of US Consumer Rights regarding travel, if there are any, so if anyone can point me in the right direction it would be appreciated.

 

Question: Did you book through a US Travel Agent to save on cruise fares?

 

Since you did book through a US Travel Agent, there is a very high probability that you're pretty much screwed. Your cruise is probably governed by the US Cruise Contract since you chose to book through a US Travel Agent. This contract is here:

 

http://www.celebritycruises.com/media/en_US/pdf/cruise_ticket_contract/Celebrity-Cruise-Ticket-Contract.pdf

 

You need to review sections 9, 10, and 11. In summary:

- you agreed to litigate all claims in the US District Court Miami-Dade, Florida.

- you agreed to binding arbitration since you suffered no personal injury.

- you will have to establish Celebrities negligence in order to prevail.

- the cruise contract specifically excludes terrorism and civil commotion.

 

The provisions of UK and EU law are probably irrelevant but check with your attorney.

[BrendaJ]

compman9 - I commend you for an excellent, eloquent summary of the situation, and a very good attitude on enjoying a less than ideal itinerary.

 

I agree with those that say cruising is risky if you're counting on a particular port (I've had the misfortunte of missing ports I was really looking forward to). I do believe that Celebrity was trying to avoid what may have been a dangerous area, and that they are probably legally advised to avoid putting passengers into even a slightly risky situation (the bad PR if even one passenger is injured on a tour is a nightmare for them, I'm sure). I assume they tried to give their passengers the best replacement itinerary possible, knowing that fitting a large ship into a port schedule at the last minute is not always easy.

 

However, Celebrity failed when they did not inform passengers as soon as they knew they would be changing the itinerary (although it's hard to know when they made a final decision in that regard). To make a change like that, passengers should have been offered a chance to cancel, since visiting Israel was definitely the reason most passengers booked, and the cruise was priced at a premium for that reason.

 

I believe that the most appropriate compensation would be for Celebrity to give every passenger on-board the esimated difference between the cost of this itinerary, and the cost of a basic Med/Greek cruise. I did a quick calculation on next year's October itineraries on price per night for a balcony cabin for cruises that visit Athens that also visit Haifa, vs. cruises that visit Athens without visiting Haifa. The difference in average price was around $33 per night ($462 for a 14 night cruise), adjusting of course for cabin categories. I think that would be fair compensation for a balcony passenger. Of course, if the government of Israel had closed the port, or G8 countries had warned their citizens to avoid travel to Israel, then that much compensation would not be required, in my opinion. The smartest thing would have been to give all passengers on-board credit, as that would cost the cruise line much less than a cash refund.

 

All in all, I think many of us will consider this a lesson learned, and we will think twice before booking a cruise just for a particular port of call, knowing ports can be cancelled for a variety of reasons.

 

compman9 - I do hope you receive some type of compensation for the cruise (even though I am a shareholder) :). I also hope and your fellow passengers do get to see Israel another time.

[Suzy Smith]

OP, for your own serenity and peace of mind, I think you should just let this go and look forward to your future cruises (always bearing in mind that you may not get to all the ports currently shown on the itineraries). You are clearly very upset, but you must know that these things happen. We have not been on as many cruises as you have but we have experienced cruises cancelled because of charters, ports dropped from the itinerary ahead of sailing and changes to ports during the cruise itself. If this is the first time you have missed a port, you have been very fortunate. You have to bear in mind that you did not purchase a trip to Israel, but a cruise on Silhouette - and that is exactly what you got. Celebrity are entitled to cancel ports and you have every right to disagree with their decision, but ultimately they do not need the passengers' approval, it is totally their call.

 

We took a Holy Land cruise four years ago. Two ports in Egypt were cancelled ahead of departure and we were not sure that we would get into Ashdod, as the cruise before us couldn't dock there because of rocket attacks, so the uncertainty of Middle East ports is nothing new. I know you are unhappy with the alternative ports, but not everyone will share your opinion. When we realised that the Egypt ports were likely to be cancelled, there was a lot of chat on our roll call about what the alternatives were likely to be, but no two cruisers had the same opinion on what would be acceptable alternative ports.

 

You are also assuming that visiting Israel was the reason all of the pax booked this cruise, but that is probably not the case. We booked our 2011 cruise because it included two ports in Egypt and two ports in Israel that we had not visited before, but to us they were just new ports, not "must see" destinations. A cruise is essentially a holiday on a ship, not a trip to a specific destination, and if visiting Israel is important to you, a cheap flight from Gatwick to Tel Aviv is a simple way for you to get there.

 

In your situation, I would try to move on rather than "nursing your wrath to keep it warm" (to misquote Robbie Burns). You booked in the US and probably paid less than those who booked in the UK, and IMO a possible $300 OBC is simply not worth the time, energy and emotion that you are expending on this.

 

I hope your future cruises come closer to meeting your expectations.:)

Edited November 2, 2015 by Suzy Smith

[compman9]

Question: Did you book through a US Travel Agent to save on cruise fares?

 

Since you did book through a US Travel Agent, there is a very high probability that you're pretty much screwed. Your cruise is probably governed by the US Cruise Contract since you chose to book through a US Travel Agent. This contract is here:

 

http://www.celebritycruises.com/media/en_US/pdf/cruise_ticket_contract/Celebrity-Cruise-Ticket-Contract.pdf

 

You need to review sections 9, 10, and 11. In summary:

- you agreed to litigate all claims in the US District Court Miami-Dade, Florida.

- you agreed to binding arbitration since you suffered no personal injury.

- you will have to establish Celebrities negligence in order to prevail.

- the cruise contract specifically excludes terrorism and civil commotion.

 

The provisions of UK and EU law are probably irrelevant but check with your attorney.

 

That is very interesting, thank you.

 

It is very sad that US citizens consumer rights are so skewed in favour of mammoth corporations.

 

Hopefully this lack of rights do not apply to me. If they do, I will continue to use public forums to promote consumer rights and will approach my members of UK parliament and European Parliament. I am also considering beginning a website that highlights such grievances to put pressure on these vacation firms to provide their customers with a fairer deal

[compman9]

OP, for your own serenity and peace of mind, I think you should just let this go and look forward to your future cruises (always bearing in mind that you may not get to all the ports currently shown on the itineraries). You are clearly very upset, but you must know that these things happen. We have not been on as many cruises as you have but we have experienced cruises cancelled because of charters, ports dropped from the itinerary ahead of sailing and changes to ports during the cruise itself. If this is the first time you have missed a port, you have been very fortunate. You have to bear in mind that you did not purchase a trip to Israel, but a cruise on Silhouette - and that is exactly what you got. Celebrity are entitled to cancel ports and you have every right to disagree with their decision, but ultimately they do not need the passengers' approval, it is totally their call.

 

We took a Holy Land cruise four years ago. Two ports in Egypt were cancelled ahead of departure and we were not sure that we would get into Ashdod, as the cruise before us couldn't dock there because of rocket attacks, so the uncertainty of Middle East ports is nothing new. I know you are unhappy with the alternative ports, but not everyone will share your opinion. When we realised that the Egypt ports were likely to be cancelled, there was a lot of chat on our roll call about what the alternatives were likely to be, but no two cruisers had the same opinion on what would be acceptable alternative ports.

 

You are also assuming that visiting Israel was the reason all of the pax booked this cruise, but that is probably not the case. We booked our 2011 cruise because it included two ports in Egypt and two ports in Israel that we had not visited before, but to us they were just new ports, not "must see" destinations. A cruise is essentially a holiday on a ship, not a trip to a specific destination, and if visiting Israel is important to you, a cheap flight from Gatwick to Tel Aviv is a simple way for you to get there.

 

In your situation, I would try to move on rather than "nursing your wrath to keep it warm" (to misquote Robbie Burns). You booked in the US and probably paid less than those who booked in the UK, and IMO a possible $300 OBC is simply not worth the time, energy and emotion that you are expending on this.

 

I hope your future cruises come closer to meeting your expectations.:)

 

Hi Suzy

 

It is very kind of you to let me know you think I should let it go. I won't, but thank you anyway.

 

If you had read my Trip Report, you will have found that I am no longer upset, but instead rather pragmatic and realistic.

 

I agree with your point about the alternative ports, but I can assure you that everyone aboard would have preferred a hot Egypt than a cold and blustery run of Greek ports.

 

As for it being an assumption that most passengers booked because of the Israel stops, well I am afraid I can confirm you completely wrong n this one. Not only did nearly 500 people pay thousands of dollars to leave the ship to ensure they could visit Israel, but not one person I spoke to or know of on the cruise, booked for any reason other than it went to Israel. Indeed, why would anyone pay around $500 more for a Med cruise described as a Holy Land cruise if they didn't want to go to Israel :confused:

[RocketMan275]

That is very interesting, thank you.

 

It is very sad that US citizens consumer rights are so skewed in favour of mammoth corporations.

 

Hopefully this lack of rights do not apply to me. If they do, I will continue to use public forums to promote consumer rights and will approach my members of UK parliament and European Parliament. I am also considering beginning a website that highlights such grievances to put pressure on these vacation firms to provide their customers with a fairer deal

 

If these "consumer rights" are so important to you, then why didn't you use a EU or UK travel agent?

 

Do us all a favor and drop your crusade for improved consumer rights. Such crusades do not improve the situation and only result in increased costs.

Edited November 2, 2015 by RocketMan275

[portcbob]

I Like the idea of the poster who stated compensation should be paid to all passengers in relation to the difference in price between the 2 cruises. Israel and Greek Isles. I think that would be very fair indeed and Celebrity should seriously consider doing this in my opinion. Not only a good public relations gesture but overwhelmingly fair.

 

Cheers Bob.

[SeaCBear]

This has been a very interesting discussion, on many levels.

 

I don't know anything about HAL lawsuit, but I do want to point out that there is a huge amount of incorrect information and erroneous assumptions repeated frequently regarding the McDonald's coffee lawsuit that you reference below. The 79 year old plaintiff in that case was very seriously burned (the photos here show the horror - but they are very graphic), and only asked for $20,000 to cover her stay in hospital and numerous skin grafts. McDonald's offered her $800. You can read more here, if you're interested, or watch the NY Times

.

 

I'm sorry, I know this is very off topic, and no - I'm not related to the case in any way. :) I just feel this poor woman was very poorly treated by the media, and the story lingers on more than 20 years later with very little understanding of the truth.

 

Anyway, I'll go back to lurking now.

 

I never wrote that I didn't believe that the man hurt aboard the HAL ship wasn't due some compensation for his injury. Based on the tiny scrap of information I have, I believe it was due to a malfunction on a sliding door, hence HAL should be held responsible. I also have no idea how severe his injury was, and any lasting, permanent damage he has. I do think 21 million is excessive, as I think 2.65 million for spilling a cup of coffee on yourself is too much, but that's way off topic.

Edited November 2, 2015 by SeaCBear

[POA1]

Thank you. We appreciate the update.

[compman9]

If these "consumer rights" are so important to you, then why didn't you use a EU or UK travel agent?

 

Do us all a favor and drop your crusade for improved consumer rights. Such crusades do not improve the situation and only result in increased costs.

 

I appreciate your bluntness, but I am not one that ventures onto messageboards to abuse people, so I won't join in

[ar_go]

Thank you compman9!!

 

We were also on this cruise. You have wonderfully articulated, in exquisite detail, many of the same experiences we had on this cruise, and many of the same conclusions we have reached.

 

Our main opinions are these:

 

1. Anyone who felt unsafe in Israel could have stayed on the ship and enjoyed the beautiful pools and other shipboard pleasures. The ship itself was never in danger. We did not chat with a single person on the cruise who voiced personal safety concerns.

 

2. More interesting ports such as Venice and/or Croatia could have been substituted instead of too many Greek islands in the low cost off-season. Although those islands are quite beautiful in the summer, we did not pay for a cruise there in chilly late October. We also did not pay a bargain rate or garner any special perks for this cruise.

 

3. Celebrity should have informed the passengers much sooner instead of relaying a fait accompli to a captive audience. We were informed about the itinerary change in an email the evening before departure, when we were already in Rome.

Celebrity would have had to make major changes in the itinerary long before they informed the passengers. Moreover, I recall a news report in the week or so before our sailing, that a Royal Caribbean ship skipped Jerusalem (Ashdod) and went to Haifa. Even that would have been acceptable.

The strategy for the cruise itinerary change appeared to us to be a cancellation-avoidance game, while taking advantage of the usual legal fine print in the cruise contract. Indeed, officers at various Captain's Club events referred to that cruise contract as if seemingly they had been briefed on how to interface with passengers.

 

4. The entire staff impressively rose to the difficult occasion and went over the top with upbeat cheerfulness and accommodation.

 

5. We found dining to be across the board exceptional, and the ship was comfortable and well laid-out.

 

Interestingly, we received the same gift of six chocolate-coated strawberries after voicing our concerns to Celebrity. Sad, almost ludicrous, recompense.

 

Another problem: We booked directly with Celebrity by phone and found ourselves in a lower category room (obstructed veranda) than we believed we purchased and which was clearly indicated on our cruise documents. They said sorry, they were sold out.

 

Compman 9 - We differ from your opinion in one major way. While you managed to beautifully rise above it all and book three future trips, I went to the Future Cruises office and tentatively picked out another cruise, but we ultimately found we could not bring ourselves to book it.

[kitty9]

2. The choice of replacement ports. This is a judgement call. I do believe they should have gone to Egypt or maybe Croatia to add a bit more interest, but I do not believe the decision to turn it into a Greek Island cruise was a bad one, just because I didn't like it.

 

Celebrity couldn't have substituted Egypt for a port of call because of Visa requirements. There was no way for those who are required to have an Egyptian visa to get one in a day. Plus, Egypt has been cancelled by some cruise lines because of perceived danger in that area.

[Suzy Smith]

I agree with your point about the alternative ports, but I can assure you that everyone aboard would have preferred a hot Egypt than a cold and blustery run of Greek ports. :confused:

You really would have preferred Egypt?:confused: I can see you are determined to live dangerously - it's probably less safe there than in Israel at the moment!:D

[specialdiet]

Good trip report and interesting followup.

 

I think the pragmatic approach is exactly the right one to take here. They may be advertising a dream, but we all should know they aren't guaranteeing it.

 

Some perspective, having been on the sailing a couple years back where Millenium broke down in Ketchikan, Alaska and everyone was flown out. In their legalese, that was beyond 'minor' so cruise fare refunds were given etc., but it still didn't help the folks from Australia here for their "trip of a lifetime" where most of the cost was airfare that they didn't get back.

 

In handling that situation too, communication tended to be right at the last minute even though in retrospect it was obvious certain things were known well ahead of time.

 

I think this is a practical matter related to how they can(not) deal with a large number of customer demands for changes. Dealing with 2000 angry customers a week ahead of time, most thinking it's reasonable to change things to meet their very specific individual needs is a lot harder than telling them the boat is going to leave in an hour, get on or not.

 

They don't have the capacity to handle the first scenario, which if they tried would lead to all kinds of inequities, all of which would be dragged out on Cruise Critic, and this bad blood would stretch out forever.

 

Bottom line, don't count on on being treated like an individual when you're travelling with thousands of others, face the possibility of being disappointed, and if you're fortunate enough to have the capability, hedge your bets. Celebrity made the right decision for Celebrity.

[RocketMan275]

I appreciate your bluntness, but I am not one that ventures onto message boards to abuse people, so I won't join in

 

I don't think it's proper to claim you're being abused when you've been quite willing to abuse the cruise line for allegedly unfair business practices.

 

Here are some facts:

- You are a UK citizen who chose to use a US based travel agent instead of using a UK based travel agent.

- The usual reason for a UK citizen to use a US agent is to save money.

- If you had used a UK travel agent, you would have been given the option of cancelling this cruise and receive a full refund. (See post #45).

 

Looks to me like you chose to take a gamble by forgoing the protections of booking through a UK agent to save a few pounds. You lost the gamble and now you want compensation. Isn't that a bit like forgoing the purchase of insurance and then wanting compensation?

[Rosethorn40]

This has been a very interesting discussion, on many levels.

 

I don't know anything about HAL lawsuit, but I do want to point out that there is a huge amount of incorrect information and erroneous assumptions repeated frequently regarding the McDonald's coffee lawsuit that you reference below. The 79 year old plaintiff in that case was very seriously burned (the photos here show the horror - but they are very graphic), and only asked for $20,000 to cover her stay in hospital and numerous skin grafts. McDonald's offered her $800. You can read more here, if you're interested, or watch the NY Times

.

 

I'm sorry, I know this is very off topic, and no - I'm not related to the case in any way. :) I just feel this poor woman was very poorly treated by the media, and the story lingers on more than 20 years later with very little understanding of the truth.

 

Anyway, I'll go back to lurking now.

 

Yes, she was seriously burned, because the cotton velor sweatsuit she was wearing soaked in the coffee (And all the heat), rather then most of it rolling off of her, and because she was wearing pantyhose that melted on to her skin. Her award was reduced to $660,000 by a judge that had a little common sense. During the appeal process she & her lawyer settled with McDonalds for a figure believed to be less than $600,000.

 

I personally disagreed with the jury that thought she was responsible for 20% of the accident (She did after all spill the coffee on herself) and McDonalds was responsible for the other 80%. However, I wasn't on the jury, so my opinon matters naught.

[richstowe]

You really would have preferred Egypt?:confused: I can see you are determined to live dangerously - it's probably less safe there than in Israel at the moment!:D

Exactly . If Israel is deemed unsafe by Celebrity, Egypt is in the not a chance department . In the reality vs perception discussion , Egypt was considered unsafe when Israel was considered safe . Egypt is still considered unsafe, perhaps unfairly but this isn't about fairness .

[Redtravel]

I understand that you were not happy with the port changes. However, I respect Celebrity for not going to Israel at this time. Israel is too risky. Last year I was in Jerusalem Old City when a bomb went off st Station 5 of the Cross. A woman was killed. I could hear the blast and watched the military mass that ran through the city. It was a scene that I would never want to see again. I was on a land tour that claimed that everything was safe. It wasn't safe. I vowed last year that I would never return to Israel unless it was on a cruise ship. I reckoned that if Israel was unsafe, a cruise would cancel its stops in Israel. Celebrity did the right thing. Better safe than sorry. Try again another time. Israel is worth seeing when it is safe.

I was on the previous Silhouette cruise to yours. We did stop in Israel. Hired a private guide. Having visited last year, we asked not to go to the Old City. Our guide told us that we must go to the Wall every time we visit Israel. We rode into the Old City in a van and visited the Wall. Military ceremony was taking place at the Wall. 15 minutes and we were gone. Oddly enough, it was spooky. The streets in the Old City were empty.

I was annoyed at your comments.

[Rosethorn40]

To OP

 

I have to admit that I have read both this thread, and your earlier one with a lot of interest. I'm not really sure why. I just started reading the Celebrity boards after I booked my first cruise with them. Maybe I was trying to get a feel for the tone one might expect if posting an opinion. Maybe it was because I was wondering how Celebrity navigated customer satisfaction with safety and liability issues (I was in customer service, now I'm in risk).

 

Anyway, my opinion has been all over the place from day to day. Some days I was firmly with the risk avoidance crowd, and other days I felt a lot of empathy for your situation.

 

But one thing I can say, I've admired the way you have stuck to your guns. You don't feel like you were treated fairly, and I am now agreeing with you. You didn't get what you paid for. Sure, many of the reasons may have been beyond Celebrity's control, but they could have done more in the goodwill department, that probably would have been at a reasonable cost to them. It costs more to attract a new customer, then it takes to retain an old one. You may sail with Celebrity again, but there are many others, perhaps not so vocal, who will quietly go elsewhere.

[need2bespoiled]

That is very interesting, thank you.

 

It is very sad that US citizens consumer rights are so skewed in favour of mammoth corporations.

 

Hopefully this lack of rights do not apply to me. If they do, I will continue to use public forums to promote consumer rights and will approach my members of UK parliament and European Parliament. I am also considering beginning a website that highlights such grievances to put pressure on these vacation firms to provide their customers with a fairer deal

 

Good luck your promotion of consumer rights. You have the NY Times on your side.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/business/dealbook/arbitration-everywhere-stacking-the-deck-of-justice.html?_r=0

 

Happy sailing,

Jenna

[Haworth]

We were on this cruise, see previous posts, we booked the cruise with flights and transfers direct with Celebrity UK, this surprisingly being the best overal package price.

We were informed of the change, by e mail, at 17.05 the night before the cruise.

 

There was never any offer of a full refund.

[DYKWIA]

?......Egypt is still considered unsafe, perhaps unfairly but this isn't about fairness .

 

Not sure I agree, the recent Sinai tragedy is pointing to an "external influence".

 

We all now have the benefit of hindsight when looking at the Silhoutte Cruise to Israel.