Why is this allowed to happen?

[leaveitallbehind]

Another ageist heard from.

 

Maybe the better word would be "consideration" instead of "sympathy"? ;)

[dsrdsrdsr]

The unfortunate thing in this case is the couple are very elderly.

 

However, it does also state that their granddaughter had played some part in placing their passports and medication in their suitcases.

 

The passengers are at fault here, not the cruise line. Nobody packs their passport and medicines in their suitcase when travelling to a foreign country.

 

If they had been flying, then they wouldn't have boarded the aircraft without a passport and if their cases had gone astray they would have been left without their medication.

 

In this day no age if I am travelling abroad I always ensure I have my passport in my handbag, especially with heightened security.

 

At the end of the day, total responsibility of passenger and nothing to do with cruise line.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

This is all true, and yes, the company is entitled to say "it's your own fault, we've got your money, so stuff you". But is it good customer service? Do you expect better for your $2,700?

[CruiseGal999]

Maybe already discussed here, but 1st I've heard of it:

 

https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2018/01/27/left-dock-and-looking-for-refund-and-some-compassion-from-cruise-line/mszHE2cq2Po5k9ZY9EnPvL/amp.html

 

Heartbreaking. How does something like this happen? PAX mistakes notwithstanding, why is there not a process in place to ensure an elderly couple who has saved and waited for their trip of a lifetime is not left stranded in a cruise terminal? And I get policy, and I know this has happened to others by other cruise lines, but can anyone cruise NCL again after hearing of a story like this?

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

YES ... I would certainly sail NCL again. NCL did NOTHING wrong. This couple KNEW they needed their passports. Confusion, crowds, etc. notwithstanding ... this couple KNEW they HAD to have their passports in their hand at check in. I am sure the granddaughter told them the same. Very very sad ... but it is the customer's fault. Who sits for 3 hours and doesn't push push push for their luggage? Repeatedly ask Cus. Svc. what's the status. That's beyond naive.

[luvscruising2007]

This is very sad. But policy is policy. Most of us have some type of check list and make sure we have everything we need. I feel the family should have been more involved with this elderly couple.

NCL and the porters were handling many passengers. How often do we read here that someone's luggage was lost. In a way this is much the same thing. I would bet that those on board didn't understand the urgency of the situation and the couple's luggage was not a priority.

Also, I wonder if the couple actually were pro-active or passive aggressive. Probably the later, as are many older people, like myself.

[sfaaa]

OP, easy fix. You can go buy them a free cruise and right this wrong.

[pseudoware]

YES ... I would certainly sail NCL again. NCL did NOTHING wrong. This couple KNEW they needed their passports. Confusion, crowds, etc. notwithstanding ... this couple KNEW they HAD to have their passports in their hand at check in. I am sure the granddaughter told them the same. Very very sad ... but it is the customer's fault. Who sits for 3 hours and doesn't push push push for their luggage? Repeatedly ask Cus. Svc. what's the status. That's beyond naive.

 

"How can anyone cruise NCL again" is unworthy of any rational response.

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

 

Really? And if I choose to no longer sail NCL, I guess that also makes me irrational?

 

When has it become so wrong to expect more from service providers to whom we pay our hard earned money? What spell have they cast on you cruise line sycophants that they could do no wrong, or have no room to do better?

 

Did anyone see the part about them telling the pax "no problem" with getting their passports from their luggage, and they can just wait? I guess that's the pax fault for believing that.

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[LondonTowner]

This is all true, and yes, the company is entitled to say "it's your own fault, we've got your money, so stuff you". But is it good customer service? Do you expect better for your $2,700?

Normally security and check in staff in a cruise terminal are not cruise line employees. I would not expect the cruise line to take responsibility for my silliness in putting my passport and medication in my suitcase. I hint that they were lucky that somebody even tried to locate their cases.

 

There seems to be a huge blame culture these days. People have to accept their own mistakes. The cruise line is a busuiness not a charity organisation and are there to make money, so I don't think they have to make any refund to the passengers.

[sparks1093]

You have to also realize that the cruise line has nothing to do with the luggage until it is on board the ship. Longshoreman porters - working in part for tips - are paid to verify that the proper stateroom tags are attached and then place the luggage onto rather large carts. With 2,500 passengers there would be at least 5,000 suitcases they are handling in a relatively short period of time - a few hours at best. They would not likely be too willing to depart from that effort to try to search through the 50 or 60 pieces of luggage on dozens of carts to try to locate a single suitcase. And even if they did, it would be looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack.

 

Once on board, a similar situation would occur where the crew is handling that same 5,000 pieces of luggage, and while they are likely sorting it to general ship locations and ultimately specific decks, finding that one piece of luggage would be difficult in that same limited period of time. Especially when there is no way of knowing when it came on board - maybe one of the first, or maybe one of the last.

 

In other words not knowing the location of the luggage at the time and with the difficulties in finding a single piece among 5,000 others, it may not have been possible to locate the passport and get it to the passengers in time to facilitate their boarding. This would not in any way be the responsibility - or not likely within the control - of the cruise line.

 

Additionally, the couple involved apparently have cruised before and were aware of the need for proper documentation to board. Not sure why their passports were in a suitcase to begin with and not with them. As to having a drivers license, that is of no value without a birth certificate, so that would be moot.

 

It also is not the cruise line that makes the policy as to boarding documents, but the government. They would not have allowed them to board with a drivers license to then show the passport later after their luggage arrived. While this is a very sad situation and they are a very sympathetic couple, they alone were responsible for their situation and I'm not sure what the cruise line could have - or should have - done to resolve their problem. I also don't think they were under any obligation to refund their money for the fact they were denied boarding. If they did that for them, then they would be subject to having to do it for all.

 

I realize this sounds harsh, but it is not intended to be. It is intended only as an objective view of the situation.

 

Here's the thing- if finding the bags were that difficult then the CSR in the terminal should never have reassured them that the bags could be located and the couple shouldn't have been left for so long with no follow up. To me that is where the break down in customer service and it is for that that I feel that a refund is likely due to these passengers (presupposing of course that what I just wrote is actually what happened, but it does have the ring of truth to me).

[CruiseGal999]

Really? And if I choose to no longer sail NCL, I guess that also makes me irrational?

 

When has it become so wrong to expect more from service providers to whom we pay our hard earned money? What spell have they cast on you cruise line sycophants that they could do no wrong, or have no room to do better?

 

Did anyone see the part about them telling the pax "no problem" with getting their passports from their luggage, and they can just wait? I guess that's the pax fault for believing that.

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

Sure ... they (NCL cus svc or port agents) certainly 'could have' done better. But, so could have the couple. They could have been proactive and not sit and wait and wait and wait.

 

There was almost 2,500 passengers ALL getting to the same place ... onto the ship. What ... a couple of dozen employees (either port or cruise line) to assist, help, organize, direct, etc. 2500 passengers. NO, no one did anything wrong. They just didn't go to super human, overly excessive levels of service.

[sparks1093]

Another ageist heard from.

 

If you must call names it doesn't bother me a bit but I'm much closer to 60 than I am 59.

[sfaaa]

 

There seems to be a huge blame culture these days. People have to accept their own mistakes. s.

 

You got that right. Besides, the 'victims' and their supporters here can always sue NCL for wrong doing or negligence. Why haven't they? Because they have no case.

[ldubs]

Sure ... they (NCL cus svc or port agents) certainly 'could have' done better. But, so could have the couple. They could have been proactive and not sit and wait and wait and wait.

 

There was almost 2,500 passengers ALL getting to the same place ... onto the ship. What ... a couple of dozen employees (either port or cruise line) to assist, help, organize, direct, etc. 2500 passengers. NO, no one did anything wrong. They just didn't go to super human, overly excessive levels of service.

 

I'm sure they provided the minimum acceptable level of service. A little superior service might have been in order.

[fishywood]

Really? And if I choose to no longer sail NCL, I guess that also makes me irrational?

 

If your decision is based solely on that hyperbolic rant masquerading as a travel column, well....

 

When has it become so wrong to expect more from service providers to whom we pay our hard earned money? What spell have they cast on you cruise line sycophants that they could do no wrong, or have no room to do better?

 

All service providers should be expected to continue to improve. But not to (1) perform a miraculous search of several thousand pieces of luggage for the single one in question; or (2) disregard government regulations regarding verification of the right to travel when said miracle does not occur. And just throwing up their hands and cutting a check whenever a customer presents them with an unsolvable situation and asks the company to disregard the terms of the contract that they (the customer) agreed to is a complete disservice to the 99.9% of current and future customers who rely on the company to at least conform to their known business model. And if you expect that business model to sustain itself so as to provide more rather than less customer service in the future, such exceptions to the model cannot be made even in extremely rare circumstance.

 

 

 

Did anyone see the part about them telling the pax "no problem" with getting their passports from their luggage, and they can just wait? I guess that's the pax fault for believing that.

 

This fact is being relayed by an obviously biased source based on a month-delayed recollection of events by the passenger who all but admits to being confused and frightened by the entire circumstances. Who knows what to believe? Though I do suspect the columnist exaggerated the effect of the day on their state of mind to further enhance his exaggeration of NCL's alleged malfeasance....

[myfuzzy]

As I said before , they were told to sit and wait...until their luggage was located. At that age, trust is what it is all about. My parents and their parents were raised on a word and a handshake, didn't question. That's gone today, its a shame us older generation still "believes" that there is good in the world. However......Some people are not aggressive enough to get the answers they need to settle a situation. Someone..from the terminal staff should have been coordinating with someone on board to locate their luggage....I KNOW its two different work entities....one big union..other international crew, but, they should have worked together to find this luggage. IF they checked in three hours before sailing, that luggage should have been on board in a holding area ready to be distributed to that area, not in one big heap for the whole ship. I had been in customer service for 40 years, and I know, I never take NO, I don't know, there's nothing I can do for an answer. I tell them here is the problem, here is how you can solve it....ball is in your court, can we settle this.

 

I was thinking ....set up a go fund me page and send them on another cruise.....this time with a chaperone........

[RandallFlagg]

Well, I think the customer in this case was certainly at fault. As I said on the other thread, I just didn't like the way the 87 year old couple was treated (as reported of course).

 

The thing that bothers me is this: This elderly couple (of which I am, also) should have known what was required of them and what wasn't. They made a LARGE mistake.

 

People here (most long time cruisers) defend the cruise line and I get it. I truly do. On the other hand - Refunding this couple's money would have saved the line FAR more money than it will now cost them. Tens of thousands will read this unfortunate story. They will tell their friends (who might be thinking of a cruise) and, in turn, they will tell THEIR friends and on and on and on.

 

So yes, while the cruise line is "technically" right for refusing to refund a paltry amount, in the interest of PR, they will now stand to lose much more business. It's bad business practices, and nothing short of it. If I were in charge at that line I would make it a point of making things "right" with this elderly couple. It would pay off big time for the cruise line.

 

Now the question is asked (by these same experienced "cruisers") that if it happened to a 30 something or a 22 year old person should the cruise line refund THEIR passage? Absolutely not. But that's not the story we are talking about here, is it? No. It's about an elderly couple who made a mistake and is now out, what to them, is a great deal of money.

 

Do the right thing NCL.....not because YOU need the money (the cruise industry is a 14 billion dollar a year industry) but because it will, in the long run, foster great relationships and increase your business.

[sfaaa]

 

I was thinking ....set up a go fund me page and send them on another cruise.....this time with a chaperone........

 

 

Now this is a much more rational and logical suggestion than simply pointing fingers at NCL and says it should take the hit and pay up. Worth some consideration.

[RandallFlagg]

Now this is a much more rational and logical suggestion than simply pointing fingers at NCL and says it should take the hit and pay up. Worth some consideration.

 

 

"Take the hit"....are you serious!?!?! Do you REALLY think that $2,500 is anything more than pocket change to NCL? Seriously!?!?

[myfuzzy]

The thing that bothers me is this: This elderly couple (of which I am, also) should have known what was required of them and what wasn't. They made a LARGE mistake.

 

People here (most long time cruisers) defend the cruise line and I get it. I truly do. On the other hand - Refunding this couple's money would have saved the line FAR more money than it will now cost them. Tens of thousands will read this unfortunate story. They will tell their friends (who might be thinking of a cruise) and, in turn, they will tell THEIR friends and on and on and on.

 

So yes, while the cruise line is "technically" right for refusing to refund a paltry amount, in the interest of PR, they will now stand to lose much more business. It's bad business practices, and nothing short of it. If I were in charge at that line I would make it a point of making things "right" with this elderly couple. It would pay off big time for the cruise line.

 

Now the question is asked (by these same experienced "cruisers") that if it happened to a 30 something or a 22 year old person should the cruise line refund THEIR passage? Absolutely not. But that's not the story we are talking about here, is it? No. It's about an elderly couple who made a mistake and is now out, what to them, is a great deal of money.

 

Do the right thing NCL.....not because YOU need the money (the cruise industry is a 14 billion dollar a year industry) but because it will, in the long run, foster great relationships and increase your business.

 

I cannot argue your point. Well said and appointed, BUT, as for bad PR. What is the percentage of cruise passengers across the world vs how many are signed up her on Cruise Critic. This CC webpage is just a fraction of a drop in the bucket, so whatever "bad" PR they would get, wouldn't make a difference.

[sfaaa]

"Take the hit"....are you serious!?!?! Do you REALLY think that $2,500 is anything more than pocket change to NCL? Seriously!?!?

 

Is it your money? What right do you have to demand NCL to pay up?

[RandallFlagg]

I cannot argue your point. Well said and appointed, BUT, as for bad PR. What is the percentage of cruise passengers across the world vs how many are signed up her on Cruise Critic. This CC webpage is just a fraction of a drop in the bucket, so whatever "bad" PR they would get, wouldn't make a difference.

 

Frankly, I think that there are thousands of times MORE passengers on Cruise Lines that don't know this place exists. But that's me.

 

Not to mention that people who take numerous cruises every year aren't going to change their habits due to the troubles of an elderly couple. I get that. However, how do you explain this story to the couple in their late 40s-early 50s who were seriously thinking about taking their FIRST cruise? Something tells me that, upon reading this story, they just lost that couples business.

 

So it's no biggie today, but speaking as a man who retired from the Military and went to work for one of the largest grocery wholesalers in the United States, PR is EVERYTHING and even the "appearance" of a wrong-doing, for whatever the reason will 99% of the time, come back to bite the "offender" on the butt. Never fails.

[RandallFlagg]

Is it your money? What right do you have to demand NCL to pay up?

 

Geez. Get a life, will you? I am not demanding they do a damned thing. I could care less. So they lose hundreds of thousands of dollars - I'm not a shareholder. Makes no difference to me what they do. Just offering an opinion.

 

What, your Son a big wig with NCL?

[myfuzzy]

Frankly, I think that there are thousands of times MORE passengers on Cruise Lines that don't know this place exists. But that's me.

 

If I hadn't been following CC for the past 16 years, I would never know what goes on ...on the cruise ships or what happens with the cruise line...so I also would think that of the "thousands of times MORE passengers" that sail. So how could tell "the story" of this poor couple.

 

How about the times people bring "NO NO" items that are taken upon embarkation and held until the end of the cruise and complain that their cruise was "ruined" because they couldn't have their precious item.....that was clearly stated in the list of prohibited items, now they want to sue the line for being "inconvenienced.....Talk about bad PR.

Edited January 29, 2018 by myfuzzy

[myfuzzy]

However, my big beef, with that article..is the photo of the elderly couple....boy talk about pathetic. what a way to get sympathy

[RandallFlagg]

Frankly, I think that there are thousands of times MORE passengers on Cruise Lines that don't know this place exists. But that's me.

 

If I hadn't been following CC for the past 16 years, I would never know what goes on ...on the cruise ships or what happens with the cruise line...so I also would think that of the "thousands of times MORE passengers" that sail. So how could tell "the story" of this poor couple.

 

How about the times people bring "NO NO" items that are taken upon embarkation and held until the end of the cruise and complain that their cruise was "ruined" because they couldn't have their precious item.....that was clearly stated in the list of prohibited items, now they want to sue the line for being "inconvenienced.....Talk about bad PR.

 

I don't know exactly how many people read the Boston Globe everyday, but I would have to assume that it is "at least" 3 million, perhaps more.

 

If the AP picks up the story (human interest) it could ostensibly reach 10-20 million. If ANY of the cable news services picks it up (again, human interest) it could reach (literally) hundreds of millions. If only a third of those people who hear of this couples' unfortunate brush with NCL (and no matter the outcome, people will ALWAYS hold the business accountable) then that is, at the very least, a million people who "may" have considered taking a cruise who will now remember NCL when they are going past the Kiosk at COSTCO and will book with ANYONE other than NCL. The same with their local TA's.

 

So it is not really a stretch to figure that a $2,500 cruise refund (or the lack of it) could, in the long run, cost NCL MUCH more than that. Look, I'm not defending the couple. But one thing I have learned over the years is that, rightly or wrongly, when it comes to the perceived "mistreatment" of Grandma and Granddad by the evil "corporation" (no matter who it is) usually doesn't end well for the "corporation". I mean seriously, why else would THEIR story have ended up in the Boston Globe?

[RandallFlagg]

However, my big beef, with that article..is the photo of the elderly couple....boy talk about pathetic. what a way to get sympathy

 

Gotcha...However, it took a reporter and a photographer being there to take the picture, didn't it? If I am an official at NCL - I'm on the phone with those folks TOMORROW.