Feeling a bit screwed over by RC, Irma safety/risk issue and no-refund, greed?

[rukkian]

Oh come on, that's your reason? That's easy. Let's say I pay $1000 to go on a cruise. RCI wants my money 2 1/2 months before departure. They change from a 7 day to a 4 day cruise. I feel I should be entitled (I know I'm not based on the contract) to a refund. They give me MY money back. THAT'S where it comes from. Airlines will generally refund your money (even on non-refundable tickets) if they change your departure or arrival time by as little as an hour. Where does that money come from.

 

I'm just amazed that people think it's not a significant change to go from a 7 day to a 4 day cruise.

 

I asked this earlier and no one answered... you are booked to sail on 9/10. Being the good cruiser that you are, your flights are scheduled for 9/9 (I'm not referring to being able to drive to the port). However, a hurricane is on the way. Airports are shutting down on 9/9. The cruise line says "we're going to leave 9/13 instead of 9/10". You call around for hotels but they're all booked (with evacuees). What do you do? Change your air to fly in on a later day? Drive? Where do you stay?

 

This has been answered over and over and over. It is not royals responsibility to get you to the port. It is your responsibility. They did not make the hurricane, and had no control over it. In this case, you turn it into your insurance. If you did not buy insurance, or you did not buy the right insurance, then you pay for the risk you took. If they refund a bunch of money everytime somebody doesn't want to accept the terms of the contract that they signed for, then they have to raise the fees of all cruises to pay for the lost revenue.

 

If they refund your money to cover your lack of planning, then that is lost revenue, no matter how you look at it unless somebody decides to pay your fair and sail (which is highly unlikely). If they change the rules to refund everybody, then that can amount to a lot of money. Lost revenue means less money in, which means they either have to cut service, or replace that revenue somewhere else. They cannot just not pay employees, or pay taxes, or rent, and they have many extra expenses as part of this storm as well. They did cancel some cruises that could not go.

[island lady]

This has been answered over and over and over. It is not royals responsibility to get you to the port. It is your responsibility. They did not make the hurricane, and had no control over it. In this case, you turn it into your insurance. If you did not buy insurance, or you did not buy the right insurance, then you pay for the risk you took. If they refund a bunch of money everytime somebody doesn't want to accept the terms of the contract that they signed for, then they have to raise the fees of all cruises to pay for the lost revenue.

 

If they refund your money to cover your lack of planning, then that is lost revenue, no matter how you look at it unless somebody decides to pay your fair and sail (which is highly unlikely). If they change the rules to refund everybody, then that can amount to a lot of money. Lost revenue means less money in, which means they either have to cut service, or replace that revenue somewhere else. They cannot just not pay employees, or pay taxes, or rent, and they have many extra expenses as part of this storm as well. They did cancel some cruises that could not go.

 

 

Well said. RCI did not create the storm, and IMHO were very generous to offer ANY refunds, FCC, discounts...etc. Try getting that on the airlines when it is when it is weather related. :confused: RCI lost a lot of income also, and is trying to help many of the people in the islands with recovery as well.

 

Instead of fretting about your loss of cruise vacations...I am more worried about the loss many suffered from the damage caused by this monster Irma.

 

Cruise during hurricane season? That is your own choice...me I try to avoid it, but if I should go during that time...I would buy very good insurance.

[dswallow]

Sorry, but they didn't voluntarily modify anything. If your referring to the shortened cruises that occurred because they were supposed to leave during a hurricane how is that voluntary? If you're talking about missed ports in subsequent cruises due to storm damage how is that voluntary? They have 0 liability for your travel costs, that's what insurance is for and if you chose not to purchase insurance then that's on you to cover the costs as you assumed that risk when you declined to purchase insurance.

 

Now, if they were making changes due to some type of mechanical failure or something that they actually had some responsibility for, I could see them having more responsibility, but again this is why you should buy insurance or you have no ground to stand on for complaints about lost funds.

I'm specifically talking about the cruises still being modified - not canceled, but shortened -post-hurricane so that RCL can operate their equipment for "humanitarian" purposes. However worthy what they're doing, they are doing this to the detriment of paying passengers and leaving them financially harmed.

[rukkian]

I'm specifically talking about the cruises still being modified - not canceled, but shortened -post-hurricane so that RCL can operate their equipment for "humanitarian" purposes. However worthy what they're doing, they are doing this to the detriment of paying passengers and leaving them financially harmed.

 

This is still no different, it is because of the storm, and helping out others is not a bad thing imo. They are providing exactly what was agreed to. I would love to know exactly what sailings you are talking about that were shortened (not cancelled) to take supplies and help out.

[dswallow]

This is still no different, it is because of the storm, and helping out others is not a bad thing imo. They are providing exactly what was agreed to. I would love to know exactly what sailings you are talking about that were shortened (not cancelled) to take supplies and help out.

 

Easy enough to see RCL patting themselves on the back for doing it on their web site (see below). I'm fine with them making that choice. But that's entirely their choice, and they need to be responsible for the impact they have on their otherwise paid customers in this sort of instance. Someone coming to town for this cruise has potentially purchased airfare or hotel in a way that's not refundable. Insurance potentially could mitigate some of this, but RCL didn't cancel the cruise, so it's not going to make the traveler whole for RCL's decision to shorten the cruise. Credits are fine as a negotiation, and if someone so chooses to accept, then that can be enough. But in the end, it needs to be a refund and compensation for their related non-refundable costs, if that's what the traveler prefers.

 

 

 

 

Majesty of the Seas: September 18 Bahamas cruise

 

Our humanitarian efforts in St. Maarten and St. Thomas this week have been going exceptionally well, and in order to finalize these efforts, we need to push the departure date of our upcoming Majesty sailing to Tuesday, 9/19. We will still sail to both Nassau and Cococay, Bahamas, except on a 3-night itinerary. We are sorry for the impact that the storm has had on your vacation, and know you support us in helping those in urgent need. Should you choose to sail with us we will provide you with a refund of 25% of your cruise fare paid in the form of a refundable onboard credit, as well as a 25% future cruise credit, for a cruise booked within the next year.

[rukkian]

Easy enough to see RCL patting themselves on the back for doing it on their web site (see below). I'm fine with them making that choice. But that's entirely their choice, and they need to be responsible for the impact they have on their otherwise paid customers in this sort of instance. Someone coming to town for this cruise has potentially purchased airfare or hotel in a way that's not refundable. Insurance potentially could mitigate some of this, but RCL didn't cancel the cruise, so it's not going to make the traveler whole for RCL's decision to shorten the cruise. Credits are fine as a negotiation, and if someone so chooses to accept, then that can be enough. But in the end, it needs to be a refund and compensation for their related non-refundable costs, if that's what the traveler prefers.

 

 

 

 

Majesty of the Seas: September 18 Bahamas cruise

 

Our humanitarian efforts in St. Maarten and St. Thomas this week have been going exceptionally well, and in order to finalize these efforts, we need to push the departure date of our upcoming Majesty sailing to Tuesday, 9/19. We will still sail to both Nassau and Cococay, Bahamas, except on a 3-night itinerary. We are sorry for the impact that the storm has had on your vacation, and know you support us in helping those in urgent need. Should you choose to sail with us we will provide you with a refund of 25% of your cruise fare paid in the form of a refundable onboard credit, as well as a 25% future cruise credit, for a cruise booked within the next year.

 

Insurance would cover the extra day (which is what this is 4vs3) if you got that. It would also be covered if you choose to have RCCI responsible for the getting you to the cruise and getting you home (air 2 sea). Anybody that chooses to not use that service, and then not buy insurance is taking a risk and should not be rewarded for it. Getting essentially 50% back for loosing 25% of the cruise, is more than generous imo.

 

If you decide that you don't want to go back to RCCI, because you 25% of your vacation and received 50% of the cost back, so they could help out some people that have been devastated, which is above and beyond what they have to do, then that is your choice. I actually have a much better opinion of them and how they handled this whole thing, it has made me more to apt to choose them. The humanitatarian efforts they are doing are great imo.

[dswallow]

Insurance would cover the extra day (which is what this is 4vs3) if you got that. It would also be covered if you choose to have RCCI responsible for the getting you to the cruise and getting you home (air 2 sea). Anybody that chooses to not use that service, and then not buy insurance is taking a risk and should not be rewarded for it. Getting essentially 50% back for loosing 25% of the cruise, is more than generous imo.

 

If you decide that you don't want to go back to RCCI, because you 25% of your vacation and received 50% of the cost back, so they could help out some people that have been devastated, which is above and beyond what they have to do, then that is your choice. I actually have a much better opinion of them and how they handled this whole thing, it has made me more to apt to choose them. The humanitatarian efforts they are doing are great imo.

Most people don't like third parties being "humanitarian" at their personal expense, or being told how to have their money held for limited future options.

 

In this case, insurance shouldn't even be involved. these aren't events out of anyone's control. This is RCL deciding to do this. There's cost for them to decide to do this, and they need to pay it, not make others involuntarily pay it.

 

It has nothing at all to do with how I may feel good about their willingness to do this. Them funding it at my expense is my issue. And that's what they're doing... funding their effort at my expense, and even at insurance companies expense, and still not leaving me whole because that still doesn't address other costs one may have that they can't get back. And if i spent $1,000 on airfare, a 25% future cruise credit is NOT compensation for that. Telling me I can still take the trip, and get less for my trip, and/or have to turn part of it into a land vacation, and have my cruise shortened, is not an alternative. Not when this is entirely something the cruise line is CHOOSING to do, and not in any way outside their control.

[rukkian]

Most people don't like third parties being "humanitarian" at their personal expense, or being told how to have their money held for limited future options.

 

In this case, insurance shouldn't even be involved. these aren't events out of anyone's control. This is RCL deciding to do this. There's cost for them to decide to do this, and they need to pay it, not make others involuntarily pay it.

 

It has nothing at all to do with how I may feel good about their willingness to do this. Them funding it at my expense is my issue. And that's what they're doing... funding their effort at my expense, and even at insurance companies expense, and still not leaving me whole because that still doesn't address other costs one may have that they can't get back. And if i spent $1,000 on airfare, a 25% future cruise credit is NOT compensation for that. Telling me I can still take the trip, and get less for my trip, and/or have to turn part of it into a land vacation, and have my cruise shortened, is not an alternative. Not when this is entirely something the cruise line is CHOOSING to do, and not in any way outside their control.

 

You are perfectly fine to feel that way, but they are providing the product you purchased, whether you think so or not, I guess in the end that is what matters. Don't like the terms, don't sign the terms. You are not out $1000 for airfare, at most you are out 1 night in a hotel, and they are giving you a huge break on cost (25% credit, and 25% refundable obc, so your expenses on the ship are covered). If you used air2sea, you would be out nothing except for your 1 day of vacation, which you are being compensated for with 50% of the cruise fare credited back.

 

You seem to keep pushing that somehow RCCI is responsible for your risk that you took by not having them book the airfare, transfers, etc. That is your risk, and you get to take the hit, it is not their responsibility.

[S.A.M.J.R.]

Another circumstance where the person in question wants to make their own travel arrangements and wants the cruise line to be responsible for them. If you really want the cruiseline to be responsible for getting you to and from the ship, then contract with them to do that.

 

This has been answered over and over and over. It is not royals responsibility to get you to the port. It is your responsibility. They did not make the hurricane, and had no control over it. In this case, you turn it into your insurance. If you did not buy insurance, or you did not buy the right insurance, then you pay for the risk you took. If they refund a bunch of money everytime somebody doesn't want to accept the terms of the contract that they signed for, then they have to raise the fees of all cruises to pay for the lost revenue.

OK, neither one of you apparently read my post. I never said Royal should get me to the port. I never said Royal should be responsible for the travel plans I made. I simply asked what YOU would do. Is your answer "stay home and turn it in to insurance"? The cruise never got cancelled. The flights may/may not have been cancelled depending on what time your flight is. I have a hard time believing insurance would pay off. So, once again, what would YOU do?

 

I also specifically said I know Royal doesn't have to refund money because of the contract. That doesn't mean I think it's the "right" thing to do.

[rukkian]

OK, neither one of you apparently read my post. I never said Royal should get me to the port. I never said Royal should be responsible for the travel plans I made. I simply asked what YOU would do. Is your answer "stay home and turn it in to insurance"? The cruise never got cancelled. The flights may/may not have been cancelled depending on what time your flight is. I have a hard time believing insurance would pay off. So, once again, what would YOU do?

 

I also specifically said I know Royal doesn't have to refund money because of the contract. That doesn't mean I think it's the "right" thing to do.

 

I would change the flights if I could, or more than likely just get a hotel room and still do the vacation time I booked. I would love to have the kind of credit they are offering, which I think (as I have said over and over) is more than generous. Insurance will pay for the missed night if you have the right policy.

 

Just because we don't agree with your complaining about your 1 day shortened cruise, does not mean we did not read. I have read everything you have typed. You keep bringing up your $1000 airfare as if RCCI owes you something for that, which is why we keep saying they are not responsible for that.

[ColoradoGurl]

Reading through how RCCL has handled this, if you chose to make you arrangements through RCCLs air to Sea program, you would not have to worry about any of this.

 

If you want a cruiseline to be responsible for your vacation from the time you leave your home till the time you return, they offer that service (at a pretty small premium these days). If you want the cruiseline to be responsible for your vacation from the time you get on the ship till the time you get off the ship, you can do that too. But it's really not fair to expect the cruislines to be responsible for one option when you chose the other.

 

And they already took a huge hit providing free cruise days to those who could not disembark as scheduled.

 

Also from what I've seen, the airlines have been very accommodating, waiving change fees and quickly refunding flights they had to cancel. But if someone had a ticket where they were supposed to fly in 2 days before the storm hit, and the airline would not let you cancel because you did not want to fly in an area that would be under evacuation orders, why wouldn't that person take it up with airline??

 

The key word in your post is in the last sentence "RELATED". If you chose to give your money to somebody else to get to the ship, that travel is not related in any way to the cruiseline - because that's how you set it up.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

 

Good point

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[nealstuber]

And if i spent $1,000 on airfare, a 25% future cruise credit is NOT compensation for that...

 

 

If you spent $1000 on air just to get to a 4 day Majesty cruise, you should probably let someone else do your travel planning.

It's a was a 4 dayer. Folks who are on it are local, or combining it with a vacation in the area anyway. The first 25% should easily cover lodging and meals. The 2nd 25% is gravy if you elect to sail with them again.

 

So they are right to pat themselves on the back. They are not taking any passengers money and using it for humanitarian purposes. They are forgoing twice the money they would have taken in from said passengers plus all income from onboard expenses.

 

To do something good.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[Steelers0854]

Easy enough to see RCL patting themselves on the back for doing it on their web site (see below). I'm fine with them making that choice. But that's entirely their choice, and they need to be responsible for the impact they have on their otherwise paid customers in this sort of instance. Someone coming to town for this cruise has potentially purchased airfare or hotel in a way that's not refundable. Insurance potentially could mitigate some of this, but RCL didn't cancel the cruise, so it's not going to make the traveler whole for RCL's decision to shorten the cruise. Credits are fine as a negotiation, and if someone so chooses to accept, then that can be enough. But in the end, it needs to be a refund and compensation for their related non-refundable costs, if that's what the traveler prefers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Majesty of the Seas: September 18 Bahamas cruise

 

 

 

Our humanitarian efforts in St. Maarten and St. Thomas this week have been going exceptionally well, and in order to finalize these efforts, we need to push the departure date of our upcoming Majesty sailing to Tuesday, 9/19. We will still sail to both Nassau and Cococay, Bahamas, except on a 3-night itinerary. We are sorry for the impact that the storm has had on your vacation, and know you support us in helping those in urgent need. Should you choose to sail with us we will provide you with a refund of 25% of your cruise fare paid in the form of a refundable onboard credit, as well as a 25% future cruise credit, for a cruise booked within the next year.

 

 

 

You say insurance wouldn't make the traveler whole for the change, but in fact any insurance policy purchased would due to the change in itinerary.

 

Please re-read RCLs post that you quoted. You are being refunded to your original form of payment for any unused balance for the day that the cruise was shortened. Thus, only paying for what RCL is providing, in this case a 3 day cruise. In addition, they are offering a credit towards a future cruise.

 

You do realize that people's lives are literally depending on the supplies that these ships are bringing? So in a sense you are more concerned that a vacation was modified vs someone dying due to lack of food and medical supplies?

[bouhunter]

If you spent $1000 on air just to get to a 4 day Majesty cruise, you should probably let someone else do your travel planning.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

LOL....;p

[Steelers0854]

I'm just amazed that people think it's not a significant change to go from a 7 day to a 4 day cruise.

 

 

 

I agree that is a significant change but you do realize that the people that took a 4 days cruise instead of the 7 day essentially got the cruise for free? They received a 50% refund to their original form of payment and a 50% future cruise credit.

[cruzer_3]

I agree that is a significant change but you do realize that the people that took a 4 days cruise instead of the 7 day essentially got the cruise for free? They received a 50% refund to their original form of payment and a 50% future cruise credit.

 

Yeah but it's not really "Free". Rates are not always the same. So you're more than likely going to have to pay more within 30 days to book another cruise. And the other 50% future cruise credit is only for the cruise fare. They keep the taxes/port charges. So you're still paying something. Just saying...

[rukkian]

Yeah but it's not really "Free". Rates are not always the same. So you're more than likely going to have to pay more within 30 days to book another cruise. And the other 50% future cruise credit is only for the cruise fare. They keep the taxes/port charges. So you're still paying something. Just saying...

 

Basically yes, it is very close to being free, and from what I heard, it was not 30 days to book it.

[ColoradoGurl]

OK, neither one of you apparently read my post. I never said Royal should get me to the port. I never said Royal should be responsible for the travel plans I made. I simply asked what YOU would do. Is your answer "stay home and turn it in to insurance"? The cruise never got cancelled. The flights may/may not have been cancelled depending on what time your flight is. I have a hard time believing insurance would pay off. So, once again, what would YOU do?

 

 

 

I also specifically said I know Royal doesn't have to refund money because of the contract. That doesn't mean I think it's the "right" thing to do.

 

**Note that when I say "you" in my response below I'm referring to everyone in this predicament, and I realize S.A.M.... that I quoted is not expecting money refunded, but some people are, so I commented on that along with what I think you, specifically, should do.

 

I think it's kind of a sucky choice to have to make, because not many people want to try and fly into Florida during the storm or clean up, however, that is the option you have if you want to recoup any of your vacation.

 

I started out thinking this was a great deal, then heard all of the stories from people explaining how impossible and difficult it would be to make it to the cruise, or how they would have to pay more money to use the FCC if they choose not to try and get to the current cruise, and I thought Royal was totally out of line.

 

But now that I've read through 800+ posts of debate, I think I have to agree with the very unpopular side of saying, you, the passenger, are out of luck and it's kind of your own fault.

 

If you don't like what Royal is offering, you just have to suck up the loss, and realize it's a risk you took, and that you really should not be expecting Royal to cover your airline and hotel problems, unless that was part of the package you bought through Royal. If you, like most of us, purchased those things separately, and the airlines can't get you where you need to be on a different day, or for a reasonable price, then it's the AIRLINE you should be going after for the refund, not royal. Same for the hotel issues.

 

After looking at arguments for all sides, I have to say that I don't think Royal is in the wrong here, and I don't think they legally owe anyone any money, and even if it makes them look bad customer service wise, it really isn't fair to all the people who paid more money to buy the whole "Air to Sea" bundle, or people who paid a premium on their insurance for "cancel for any reason," and frankly, to those people who actually took the time to read all the terms and knew their risks and insured themselves accordingly. Why should people who chose not to do those things benefit from being made whole in the same way that people who took the time and paid the money did?

 

It would ruin the insurance industry if it proved to be useless every time a customer who didn't buy it, or bought the wrong one, got their money back anyway.

 

I'm not saying I don't feel sorry for those of you who lost your vacation and money, and I would feel cheated with my cruise being shortened too, but now that I understand all sides, I think your choice now is to either suck up the extra hassle (and cost) to accept the deal Royal offered, or wash your hands of it and accept the loss.

 

If I were you, I might try to get to Florida now and jump on the shortened cruise. If that wasn't an option due to cost and other hassles, I'd take the FCC and rebook another cruise. I would pay more for the future cruise, but I wouldn't make price comparisons & treat it as a replacement cruise, I'd just count it as a new vacation that I got a big discount on. And finally, if I couldn't take another cruise this year, and the FCC went to waste, I'd just accept the loss.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Edited September 15, 2017 by ColoradoGurl

[lowsidr]

As the OP I felt the need to check in on this post. I have just had internet restored, water is on but contaminated, no fuel but we regained electricity fully yesterday. I was surprised this thread is still active as when I bowed out to finish preparing for Irma I believe it was at 17 pages. Hunkered down we were east of the eye by about 5-7 miles, it was a nasty ride.

 

Here's how it worked out for me and RCCL. Post storm (Naples), had to drive looking for cell hot-spots. No fuel available anywhere. Once hot-spot found RC's website was not functioning properly, no updates available in regards to Irma just click and freeze, website down or overloaded. On the 12th I was able to contact RCCL to verify if the 13th sailing of the Allure would be a go and if the port would be open, fully functional and staffed. I was told it "should be a go" but to check for updates. When I pressed for a 100% guarantee that if I drove to Port Everglades on the 13th they could guarantee parking and departure I was placed on terminal hold and then disconnected. This happened three times before I gave up and went home. On the morning of the 13th I drove again to the hot-spot. RCCL's website was still down and phone-lines were overwhelmed and unanswered and if you got through to the automated call center terminal holds ended with disconnects without ever speaking to a person. I was finally able to contact an actual RCCL agent with the help of an outside travel agent in the early afternoon (we are 1.5 hour away from the port) via a three-way call. I was told the cruise was still scheduled but when I pressed if the Oasis and Allure had arrived and disembarked yet and if there was parking at the port the agent didn't know. I explained I wasn't sure if I had enough fuel to make it to the port (there is no fuel to be found as I type and when we spoke) but that "if" I could scavenge some could she guarantee that the ship would sail 100% and that if for some reason it couldn't would I be able to find fuel on the east coast to return home? She didn't know, could give no such guarantee and I understood her position so don't flame me on that. She did say that since I was in an affected area an FCC would be issued automatically but no refunds.

 

So it is what it is, the ship did sail on the 13th for a shortened itinerary. I have no idea how many people actually made it on the ship but we were unable due to the fuel issue and possibility of getting stranded on the east coast with an empty tank of gas trying to make it. I'm not exactly happy with how this was handled by RCCL but I am also aware they did what they could and this was an extreme situation for all involved or impacted.

[rukkian]

I think it's kind of a sucky choice to have to make, because not many people want to try and fly into Florida during the storm or clean up, however, that is the option you have if you want to recoup any of your vacation.

 

I started out thinking this was a great deal, then heard all of the stories from people explaining how impossible and difficult it would be to make it to the cruise, or how they would have to pay more money to use the FCC if they choose not to try and get to the current cruise, and I thought Royal was totally out of line.

 

But now that I've read through 800+ posts of debate, I think I have to agree with the very unpopular side of saying, you, the passenger, are out of luck and it's kind of your own fault.

 

If you don't like what Royal is offering, you just have to suck up the loss, and realize it's a risk you took, and that you really should not be expecting Royal to cover your airline and hotel problems, unless that was part of the package you bought through Royal. If you, like most of us, purchased those things separately, and the airlines can't get you where you need to be on a different day, or for a reasonable price, then it's the AIRLINE you should be going after for the refund, not royal. Same for the hotel issues.

 

After looking at arguments for all sides, I have to say that I don't think Royal is in the wrong here, and I don't think they legally owe anyone any money, and even if it makes them look bad customer service wise, it really isn't fair to all the people who paid more money to buy the whole "Air to Sea" bundle, or people who paid a premium on their insurance for "cancel for any reason," and frankly, to those people who actually took the time to read all the terms and knew their risks and insured themselves accordingly. Why should people who chose not to do those things benefit from being made whole in the same way that people who took the time and paid the money did?

 

It would ruin the insurance industry if it proved to be useless every time a customer who didn't buy it, or bought the wrong one, got their money back anyway.

 

I'm not saying I don't feel sorry for those of you who lost your vacation and money, and I would feel cheated with my cruise being shortened too, but now that I understand all sides, I think your choice now is to either suck up the extra hassle (and cost) to accept the deal Royal offered, or wash your hands of it and accept the loss.

 

Personally, this has taught me to be very specific when buying insurance, and/or to go into my cruises accepting that I may lose a large chunk of money. Granted I didn't have to learn the hard way like you did, but hindsight is 20/20 and I'm sorry you're in this predicament, but I don't think Royal really owes you anything more. If anything, try getting your vacation refunded from the airline or the hotel company, because they are just as liable for your hassles as Royal is.

 

If I were you, I might try to get to Florida now and jump on the shortened cruise. If that wasn't an option due to cost and other hassles, I'd take the FCC and rebook another cruise. I would pay more for the future cruise, but I wouldn't make price comparisons & treat it as a replacement cruise, I'd just count it as a new vacation that I got a big discount on. And finally, if I couldn't take another cruise this year, and the FCC went to waste, I'd just accept the loss. I have actually done that before with a vacation. I spent $5000+ and bought insurance, but was outside the window of being able to recoup more than 25% of my money, and the vacation was paid with an account I didn't have anymore, creating more hassles. I decided it wasn't worth my time, and I left all the money on the table. It happens sometimes.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

Very well spoken, and agreed on pretty much every point.

[cruzer_3]

And just to chime in on the subject:

 

I keep seeing comments on "Royal Caribbean didn't create the hurricane"... Yeah well neither did we. It's really easy to bash on those when you aren't in the situation we're in. Royal gave us 2 options which benefit them. And as a company, I can see why they did that. But a good company does whatever it takes to keep their customers happy. And in my opinion Royal did not do that. From my experience with this whole thing, it's been a mission for me personally and Royal has not been very accommodating either. I was supposed to be on 09/10 Allure of the Seas sailing and elected not to go. I rescheduled for Harmony on 09/30, had to pay more and tried to get the same amount of on board credit that I had for the 09/10 Allure sailing. And Royal just doesn't budge or help. I've had various conversations with representatives and supervisors and it was clear to me that they just don't care. The best option would've been to just cancel the cruise all together and give us a refund. But instead, people's money is tied down on their end. I ended up resolving my issue by just rescheduling and paying the difference. However, I'm unhappy about how it was handled and some of us had certain benefits on our modified cruises that won't even be transferred to rescheduled sailings.

 

And for those saying, "oh, but insurance....", I shouldn't need to have insurance for situations like this if RCI just did the right thing. And the right thing was to just cancel all of these sailings and refund everyone's money.

 

And I guarantee if all of you were on our end of this mess, most of you would feel slighted, screwed over, etc.

 

Just my .02 cents on this....

Edited September 15, 2017 by cruzer_3

[rukkian]

And just to chime in on the subject:

 

I keep seeing comments on "Royal Caribbean didn't create the hurricane"... Yeah well neither did we. It's really easy to bash on those when you aren't in the situation we're in. Royal gave us 2 options which benefit them. And as a company, I can see why they did that. But a good company does whatever it takes to keep their customers happy. And in my opinion Royal did not do that. From my experience with this whole thing, it's been a mission for me personally and Royal has not been very accommodating either. I was supposed to be on 09/10 Allure of the Seas sailing and elected not to go. I rescheduled for Harmony on 09/30, had to pay more and tried to get the same amount of on board credit that I had for the 09/10 Allure sailing. And Royal just doesn't budge or help. I've had various conversations with representatives and supervisors and it was clear to me that they just don't care. The best option would've been to just cancel the cruise all together and give us a refund. But instead, people's money is tied down on their end. I ended up resolving my issue by just rescheduling and paying the difference. However, I'm unhappy about how it was handled and some of us had certain benefits on our modified cruises that won't even be transferred to rescheduled sailings.

 

And for those saying, "oh, but insurance....", I shouldn't need to have insurance for situations like this if RCI just did the right thing. And the right thing was to just cancel all of these sailings and refund everyone's money.

 

Just my .02 cents on this....

 

You are still saying that those of us that pay for insurance should pay for you deciding not to. If they refund a bunch of money, then they have to raise rates on others to pay for it, unless somebody else pays your fare. They are out a bunch of money, and that was their risk. You are out some money because you decided not to buy insurance, that is your risk, plain and simple.

 

I feel bad you are out some money, but you decided that you wanted to self insure, and that is what you are now paying the price for. It is not the company's responsibility to pay you for your lack of planning. You decided to book a vacation during hurricane season, and got delivered exactly what you signed the contract saying you would get. You may now regret your decision, but that does not mean others should pay for your lack of planning.

[ColoradoGurl]

And just to chime in on the subject:

 

I keep seeing comments on "Royal Caribbean didn't create the hurricane"... Yeah well neither did we. It's really easy to bash on those when you aren't in the situation we're in. Royal gave us 2 options which benefit them. And as a company, I can see why they did that. But a good company does whatever it takes to keep their customers happy. And in my opinion Royal did not do that. From my experience with this whole thing, it's been a mission for me personally and Royal has not been very accommodating either. I was supposed to be on 09/10 Allure of the Seas sailing and elected not to go. I rescheduled for Harmony on 09/30, had to pay more and tried to get the same amount of on board credit that I had for the 09/10 Allure sailing. And Royal just doesn't budge or help. I've had various conversations with representatives and supervisors and it was clear to me that they just don't care. The best option would've been to just cancel the cruise all together and give us a refund. But instead, people's money is tied down on their end. I ended up resolving my issue by just rescheduling and paying the difference. However, I'm unhappy about how it was handled and some of us had certain benefits on our modified cruises that won't even be transferred to rescheduled sailings.

 

And for those saying, "oh, but insurance....", I shouldn't need to have insurance for situations like this if RCI just did the right thing. And the right thing was to just cancel all of these sailings and refund everyone's money.

 

Just my .02 cents on this....

 

 

I can see why you are upset. I would have felt cheated too, but take yourself out of the equation for a minute and play "Devil's Advocate" (meaning, make an argument for another side, which doesn't agree with yours, but can also be valid).

 

What about those people who still showed up to take the cruise because for them, it was more worth taking a shortened cruise than not taking one at all. Maybe they had a special celebration, and they were dead set on taking that trip, maybe this was the last chance they had to take a family vacation, perhaps they had invested so much time and money into getting to Florida and rode out the storm...how would they feel if they went through all that only to find the cruise line cancelled their cruise because they assumed nobody would want to go, or because they wanted to make sure people could get refunded from insurance?

 

I think Royal tried to offer a middle ground solution that would work somewhat for most people, even though it would be a hassle for everyone in some way, rather than to offer a solution that would be perfect for some, and completely screw over everyone else.

 

Maybe if you look at it that way, they actually DID do the right thing, it just didn't happen to be the perfect solution for you personally.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[cruzer_3]

I can see why you are upset. I would have felt cheated too, but take yourself out of the equation for a minute and play "Devil's Advocate" (meaning, make an argument for another side, which doesn't agree with yours, but can also be valid).

 

What about those people who still showed up to take the cruise because for them, it was more worth taking a shortened cruise than not taking one at all. Maybe they had a special celebration, and they were dead set on taking that trip, maybe this was the last chance they had to take a family vacation, perhaps they had invested so much time and money into getting to Florida and rode out the storm...how would they feel if they went through all that only to find the cruise line cancelled their cruise because they assumed nobody would want to go, or because they wanted to make sure people could get refunded from insurance?

 

I think Royal tried to offer a middle ground solution that would work somewhat for most people, even though it would be a hassle for everyone in some way, rather than to offer a solution that would be perfect for some, and completely screw over everyone else.

 

Maybe if you look at it that way, they actually DID do the right thing, it just didn't happen to be the perfect solution for you personally.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

We'll just agree to disagree.

 

If you want to talk about the perfect solution, then the perfect solution would have been just keep the 4-day shortened cruise for those that still want to go and offer a full refund for those who elect not to go.

 

Again, since this is not happening to you personally, you simply wouldn't understand.

 

It's safe to say that most people in our situation would've preferred a refund. So it's very easy for you guys to just bash on us. And I can take it, whatever. Most people commenting in this thread weren't even effected by this. Like I said, I already resolved my issue by just paying more for another sailing. It is what it is at this point.

[Still Dreaming]

As the OP I felt the need to check in on this post. I have just had internet restored, water is on but contaminated, no fuel but we regained electricity fully yesterday. I was surprised this thread is still active as when I bowed out to finish preparing for Irma I believe it was at 17 pages. Hunkered down we were east of the eye by about 5-7 miles, it was a nasty ride.

 

Here's how it worked out for me and RCCL. Post storm (Naples), had to drive looking for cell hot-spots. No fuel available anywhere. Once hot-spot found RC's website was not functioning properly, no updates available in regards to Irma just click and freeze, website down or overloaded. On the 12th I was able to contact RCCL to verify if the 13th sailing of the Allure would be a go and if the port would be open, fully functional and staffed. I was told it "should be a go" but to check for updates. When I pressed for a 100% guarantee that if I drove to Port Everglades on the 13th they could guarantee parking and departure I was placed on terminal hold and then disconnected. This happened three times before I gave up and went home. On the morning of the 13th I drove again to the hot-spot. RCCL's website was still down and phone-lines were overwhelmed and unanswered and if you got through to the automated call center terminal holds ended with disconnects without ever speaking to a person. I was finally able to contact an actual RCCL agent with the help of an outside travel agent in the early afternoon (we are 1.5 hour away from the port) via a three-way call. I was told the cruise was still scheduled but when I pressed if the Oasis and Allure had arrived and disembarked yet and if there was parking at the port the agent didn't know. I explained I wasn't sure if I had enough fuel to make it to the port (there is no fuel to be found as I type and when we spoke) but that "if" I could scavenge some could she guarantee that the ship would sail 100% and that if for some reason it couldn't would I be able to find fuel on the east coast to return home? She didn't know, could give no such guarantee and I understood her position so don't flame me on that. She did say that since I was in an affected area an FCC would be issued automatically but no refunds.

 

So it is what it is, the ship did sail on the 13th for a shortened itinerary. I have no idea how many people actually made it on the ship but we were unable due to the fuel issue and possibility of getting stranded on the east coast with an empty tank of gas trying to make it. I'm not exactly happy with how this was handled by RCCL but I am also aware they did what they could and this was an extreme situation for all involved or impacted.

 

Thankful you and your family are ok! Thanks for coming back to update. I was browsing through it to find your post, finally just went to the beginning and found all your posts and tada!!

This thread is why traditional dinning is becoming a thing of the past!!