river cruising in times of drought and flooding - are consumer rights good enough?

[notamermaid]

It has been an exceptional year of problems with river cruising. An unprecedented drought has hit Europe. While we cannot look back yet, sadly, we can look ahead. Problems will happen again. Flooding or drought, mainly.

 

Many of you have experienced worry about your cruise taking place. Wondering whether to cancel yourself. Anxiously waiting for that dreaded email...

 

The list goes on and on.

 

Many of you have expressed their dissatisfaction with communication, as well.

 

Here is an article that addresses this. Is it time to review  your rights as a customer of river cruise companies? Do we need a "bill of rights" to be better protected and prepared?

https://www.travelweekly.com/Richard-Turen/Is-it-time-for-river-cruise-bill-of-rights?ct=river

 

notamermaid

 

[RDC1]

It is a case of people needing to be informed consumers, and make their decisions about the risks and protects offered by the company they select. Instead of being surprised that weather conditions can and will impact river levels.

 

One could require companies during the booking process to require guests to read and acknowledge receipt of a notice about potential weather impacts on river cruising.

 

The reality is that if the companies were to warranty the itinerary, then the cost of river cruising would need to be much higher to cover the risk. Doing such would certainly reduce the number of river cruises/companies available.

 

Just as if one were to buy insurance that warrantied the itinerary, the cost of such insurance would be rather expensive for river cruises.

 

One could certainly require the cruise lines to offer such itinerary insurance.

 

Probably the best way to address it, would be for companies to maintain and provide statistics concerning the percentage of cruises impacted by year and have to provide those statistics for a multiyear period during the booking process.

[hbr777]

I don't think itinerary insurance makes a lot of sense. But cruise lines need to let people out of traveling if the original trip has become mostly a bus tour, or on a whole different river. For that there should be no insurance burden required on the part of the traveler. This isn't an "act of God" that no one knows about. This is something that the cruise lines know about, and take a gamble that people will not complain.

 

If the river has no water, you have to let the customer cancel. Period.

[FuelScience]

 

I'm cruising with German firm Nicko in the spring, and they attached the following describing passenger rights. I'm assuming that these rights apply to me even though I'm not a resident of the EU. Given the "business-friendly" atmosphere in the US right now, it's highly unlikely that we'd get similar protections. I think that all US residents can hope for is some sort of industry standard that cruise lines might be pressured into accepting for fear of losing customers if they weren't pledged to abide by the standard. The full text of the law can be found at the link at the bottom of the message (scroll down to section 651).

 

FuelScience

-----------------------------------------------

The travel services we are offering you constitute a package tour in the sense of the (EU) Directive 2015/2302. This means that you can claim all the EU rights that apply to package tours. The company, nicko cruises Schiffsreisen GmbH, Mittlerer Pfad 2, 70499 Stuttgart, Germany bears full responsibility for the entire package tour. Also, nicko cruises Schiffsreisen GmbH, Mittlerer Pfad 2, 70499 Stuttgart, Germany has the legally required hedging protection for the reimbursement of your payments and, if transport is included in your package tour, to ensure that your return transport is secured in the event of its insolvency.

The most important rights according to (EU) Directive 2015/2302

 

• Travellers shall receive all essential information before the conclusion of the package tour agreement.
• One company shall always be responsible for the proper provision of all the tour services contained in the agreement.
• Travellers shall receive an emergency telephone number or information about a contact point with which they can get in touch with the tour organiser or the travel agency.
• Travellers can transfer the tour – within a suitable period of notice and in certain circumstances with additional costs – to another person.
• The price of the package tour may only be increased if certain costs (for example fuel costs) increase and if this is explicitly provided for in the agreement, and in all cases, these changes cannot take place within 20 days of the start of the cruise. If the price increase exceeds 8 % of the package tour price, the traveller may withdraw from the agreement. In the same way a tour operator reserves the right to increase the price, the traveller has the right to a reduction in price if the corresponding costs decrease.
• Travellers can withdraw from the agreement without paying a withdrawal fee and shall receive full reimbursement for all payments if one of the essential elements of the package tour, with the exception of the price, is changed. If the company responsible for the package tour cancels the tour before the tour starts, the travellers shall have the right to claim repayment of costs and under certain circumstances to compensation.
• If exceptional circumstances arise before the start of the package tour, the travellers may withdraw from the tour without payment of a withdrawal fee, if for example there are serious security problems at the destination that could be expected to have a negative effect on the tour.
• In addition, travellers can withdraw from the agreement at any stage before the start of the tour, by paying an appropriate and reasonable withdrawal fee.
• If after the start of the package tour essential elements of the package tour cannot be carried out according to the agreement, the traveller shall be offered appropriate alternative arrangements without additional costs. The traveller may withdraw from the agreement without payment of a withdrawal fee (in the Federal Republic of Germany this right is known as "termination") if services are not provided according to the agreement and this has considerable effects on the provision of the contractual tour services, and the tour organiser has omitted to find a remedy.
• The traveller has a claim to a reduction in price and/or compensation if the tour services are not provided or not provided properly.
• The tour organiser shall assist the traveller if the traveller finds him or herself in difficulties.
• In the event of insolvency of the tour organiser or – in some member states – the travel agency, payments are reimbursed. If the insolvency of the tour organiser or, if relevant, the travel agency occurs after the start of the package tour and if transport is part of the tour, return transport of the travellers is guaranteed. nicko cruises Schiffsreisen GmbH, Mittlerer Pfad 2, 70499 Stuttgart, Germany has agreed to an insolvency hedging with Zurich Beteiligungsaktiengesellschaft. The travellers may contact the Zurich Beteiligungsaktiengesellschaft (Platz der Einheit 2, 60327 Frankfurt am Main; Tel: +49 (0)69 7115-0; Fax: +49 (0)69 7115-3358; E-mail: service@zurich.de), if they are refused services due to the insolvency of nicko cruises Schiffsreisen GmbH, Mittlerer Pfad 2, 70499 Stuttgart, Germany.

Website on which the regularly updated translated version of the German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch) is to be found:
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/

[suspaul]

9 minutes ago, hbr777 said:

I don't think itinerary insurance makes a lot of sense. But cruise lines need to let people out of traveling if the original trip has become mostly a bus tour, or on a whole different river. For that there should be no insurance burden required on the part of the traveler. This isn't an "act of God" that no one knows about. This is something that the cruise lines know about, and take a gamble that people will not complain.

 

If the river has no water, you have to let the customer cancel. Period.

 

Inlike the way you think.  Yes this is truly unfortunate and could not have been predicted however we too are leaving in 20 days and the forecasts don’t look good.  We’ll be on the Danube, one way or another, and personally we’d like to cancel at this point but guess we will continue to ‘wait & see’ as so many have done and are doing.  We have no desire to do a bus tour, if so we’d have selected that as a travel option 1.5 years ago when we booked this river cruise.

thanks for letting me vent, it is frustrating.  

[RDC1]

23 minutes ago, hbr777 said:

I don't think itinerary insurance makes a lot of sense. But cruise lines need to let people out of traveling if the original trip has become mostly a bus tour, or on a whole different river. For that there should be no insurance burden required on the part of the traveler. This isn't an "act of God" that no one knows about. This is something that the cruise lines know about, and take a gamble that people will not complain.

 

If the river has no water, you have to let the customer cancel. Period.

As the saying goes there is no such thing as a free lunch.

 

Are you will to pay considerably higher fares, which the companies would have to charge, if they changed their business practices to allow cancellation, instead of them providing alternative arrangements?

 

Someone would have to pay for the risk management for the potential losses due to weather related issues.  The three ways to do that are 1. cruise line absorbs and charges higher fares 2. Cruise line insures for potential risk and includes the cost in fares or 3 . Passenger buys insurance for risk and fares remain the same.

 

Change the terms to lower risk to customer and increase risk to cruise line means impact to current business model.

[RDC1]

25 minutes ago, FuelScience said:

 

I'm cruising with German firm Nicko in the spring, and they attached the following describing passenger rights. I'm assuming that these rights apply to me even though I'm not a resident of the EU. Given the "business-friendly" atmosphere in the US right now, it's highly unlikely that we'd get similar protections. I think that all US residents can hope for is some sort of industry standard that cruise lines might be pressured into accepting for fear of losing customers if they weren't pledged to abide by the standard. The full text of the law can be found at the link at the bottom of the message (scroll down to section 651).

 

FuelScience

-----------------------------------------------

The travel services we are offering you constitute a package tour in the sense of the (EU) Directive 2015/2302. This means that you can claim all the EU rights that apply to package tours. The company, nicko cruises Schiffsreisen GmbH, Mittlerer Pfad 2, 70499 Stuttgart, Germany bears full responsibility for the entire package tour. Also, nicko cruises Schiffsreisen GmbH, Mittlerer Pfad 2, 70499 Stuttgart, Germany has the legally required hedging protection for the reimbursement of your payments and, if transport is included in your package tour, to ensure that your return transport is secured in the event of its insolvency.

The most important rights according to (EU) Directive 2015/2302

 

• Travellers shall receive all essential information before the conclusion of the package tour agreement.
• One company shall always be responsible for the proper provision of all the tour services contained in the agreement.
• Travellers shall receive an emergency telephone number or information about a contact point with which they can get in touch with the tour organiser or the travel agency.
• Travellers can transfer the tour – within a suitable period of notice and in certain circumstances with additional costs – to another person.
• The price of the package tour may only be increased if certain costs (for example fuel costs) increase and if this is explicitly provided for in the agreement, and in all cases, these changes cannot take place within 20 days of the start of the cruise. If the price increase exceeds 8 % of the package tour price, the traveller may withdraw from the agreement. In the same way a tour operator reserves the right to increase the price, the traveller has the right to a reduction in price if the corresponding costs decrease If the company responsible for the package tour cancels the tour before the tour starts, the travellers shall have the right to claim repayment of costs and under certain circumstances to compensation.
• If exceptional circumstances arise before the start of the package tour, the travellers may withdraw from the tour without payment of a withdrawal fee, if for example there are serious security problems at the destination that could be expected to have a negative effect on the tour.
• In addition, travellers can withdraw from the agreement at any stage before the start of the tour, by paying an appropriate and reasonable withdrawal fee.
• If after the start of the package tour essential elements of the package tour cannot be carried out according to the agreement, the traveller shall be offered appropriate alternative arrangements without additional costs. The traveller may withdraw from the agreement without payment of a withdrawal fee (in the Federal Republic of Germany this right is known as "termination") if services are not provided according to the agreement and this has considerable effects on the provision of the contractual tour services, and the tour organiser has omitted to find a remedy.
• The traveller has a claim to a reduction in price and/or compensation if the tour services are not provided or not provided properly.
• The tour organiser shall assist the traveller if the traveller finds him or herself in difficulties.
• In the event of insolvency of the tour organiser or – in some member states – the travel agency, payments are reimbursed. If the insolvency of the tour organiser or, if relevant, the travel agency occurs after the start of the package tour and if transport is part of the tour, return transport of the travellers is guaranteed. nicko cruises Schiffsreisen GmbH, Mittlerer Pfad 2, 70499 Stuttgart, Germany has agreed to an insolvency hedging with Zurich Beteiligungsaktiengesellschaft. The travellers may contact the Zurich Beteiligungsaktiengesellschaft (Platz der Einheit 2, 60327 Frankfurt am Main; Tel: +49 (0)69 7115-0; Fax: +49 (0)69 7115-3358; E-mail: service@zurich.de), if they are refused services due to the insolvency of nicko cruises Schiffsreisen GmbH, Mittlerer Pfad 2, 70499 Stuttgart, Germany.

Website on which the regularly updated translated version of the German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch) is to be found:
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/

 

While that certainly provides the rights under the EU directive.  It does not include the full text where certain conditions limit those rights.  In the full text of the directives the term

 

For example:

 

Travellers can withdraw from the agreement without paying a withdrawal fee and shall receive full reimbursement for all payments if one of the essential elements of the package tour, with the exception of the price, is changed.

 

This certainly works if the company changes an essential element in advance.  It does not necessarily protect you from weather related impacts, when the cruise lines intends to go forward with the trip and is only prevented from doing so at the time of departure by weather conditions. 

 

If you look at the last item

 

If after the start of the package tour essential elements of the package tour cannot be carried out according to the agreement, the traveller shall be offered appropriate alternative arrangements without additional costs.

 

Certainly river cruise companies are offering alternative arrangements without additional cost.  It is a point of debate if those can be considered to be appropriate or not.  If one disagrees then they can certainly file for damages and hope the court agrees with them. Some companies are also including some compensation, such as a future credit, which the EU law also allows.   It really comes done to what the courts determine is appropriate alternative arrangements and what if any compensation is required with such alternatives. The directive certainly makes frequent use of the phrase unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances.  

 

So while the document looks good from one point of view, it comes down to what the company does in such a situation. Have you asked them if they will allow cancellation if the water level prevent the cruise from completing the full itinerary?  Will they provide notice in advance of such a change?  If you show up and find out that the itinerary has changed will they allow you to cancel and get refunded all unused days? 

 

What is your reasonable and appropriate withdrawal fee if you choose to withdraw prior to the start of the tour? Since that is clearly stated as one of your rights?

[pully8]

Perhaps the best days of European river cruising as we know it are finished?

More land based options and less relaxing cruising?

Lack of water in the rivers to enable the ships to sail reliably and misleading or deceptive marketing and conduct by some operators will influence the choice of engaged prospective travellers. 

Regardless of legislation  people will not tolerate  paying a premium price and receiving unacceptable treatment for long. 

The market will change and sort this out.

[Host Jazzbeau]

4 hours ago, hbr777 said:

I don't think itinerary insurance makes a lot of sense. But cruise lines need to let people out of traveling if the original trip has become mostly a bus tour, or on a whole different river. For that there should be no insurance burden required on the part of the traveler. This isn't an "act of God" that no one knows about. This is something that the cruise lines know about, and take a gamble that people will not complain.

 

If the river has no water, you have to let the customer cancel. Period.

 

The airlines do offer something like this.  You have a choice of buying non-refundable tickets or refundable tickets.  Have you priced them?  Refundable coach costs as much as non-refundable Business Class.  Would you have been willing to book in the first place at such prices?  Not many would.  And get ready: the river cruise lines are taking such big losses this year [between cancellations and the extra costs of these itinerary changes] that future prices are sure to go up, even without free cancellation options.

[notamermaid]

Thank you everyone for your thoughts so far.

 

Here is a bit for information from travelweekly what they have found out from cruise companies about how they have dealt with the situation: https://www.travelweekly.com/River-Cruising/Persistent-dry-spell-challenging-river-cruise-lines?ct=river

 

I cannot understand why Viking will not give out any info in that context and on the subject.

 

A note on CroisiEurope:  the article only mentions their Elbe cruises. It could well be because very few of the other itineraries have been affected much as the company only has ships in the fleet that are 110m in length or shorter.

 

notamermaid

 

[hbr777]

11 hours ago, Host Jazzbeau said:

 

The airlines do offer something like this.  You have a choice of buying non-refundable tickets or refundable tickets.  Have you priced them?  Refundable coach costs as much as non-refundable Business Class.  Would you have been willing to book in the first place at such prices?  Not many would.  And get ready: the river cruise lines are taking such big losses this year [between cancellations and the extra costs of these itinerary changes] that future prices are sure to go up, even without free cancellation options.

A worthwhile comparison would be if you buy a non refundable first class plane ticket LA to NYC and then the airline tells you it cannot get you there. Or can only get you there partly on a train. By doing that it has changed the entire bill of carriage.  Sure, the airline could tell you to pound salt but at the detriment of customer service. Word spreads. That is what is great about word of mouth - it works both ways. The river companies can raise their prices, sure, go for it. But as word gets around about the river levels and how some companies have handled it, it will take some bloom off the rose.

[nordski]

5 hours ago, notamermaid said:

Thank you everyone for your thoughts so far.

 

Here is a bit for information from travelweekly what they have found out from cruise companies about how they have dealt with the situation: https://www.travelweekly.com/River-Cruising/Persistent-dry-spell-challenging-river-cruise-lines?ct=river

 

I cannot understand why Viking will not give out any info in that context and on the subject.

 

A note on CroisiEurope:  the article only mentions their Elbe cruises. It could well be because very few of the other itineraries have been affected much as the company only has ships in the fleet that are 110m in length or shorter.

 

notamermaid

 

 

Thanks for posting.

 

You can fault Viking for not replying but I thought all of those responses were too vague to be of much use.

 

For example, if anyone has medical issues that might be a factor in long bus trips, I’m not certain how you could make a wise decision.

[notamermaid]

1 hour ago, nordski said:

 

Thanks for posting.

 

You can fault Viking for not replying but I thought all of those responses were too vague to be of much use.

 

For example, if anyone has medical issues that might be a factor in long bus trips, I’m not certain how you could make a wise decision.

Yes, for real decision making the answers are too vague. Apart perhaps from choosing a smaller ship. But even that is not clearly a thought that could follow from this.

 

For medical issues one would need clear answers in writing. Best done by email. But one needs to think of such a scenario first and for that I regard it as desirable for the river cruise companies to alert their customers to this more via TA's or more prominently in the information that is available before booking.

 

A couple of weeks ago I received the German TA catalogue for CroisiEurope's river cruises. A whole page at the beginning of the catalogue with the part headline "... what you need to know" directly addressed such matters. Water-related issues, rafting, mobility restrictions, bussing. It was all there in general words and very clear to understand. They do not wait with it till the small print at the back. Kudos to them.

 

notamermaid

 

 

[nordski]

21 minutes ago, notamermaid said:

Yes, for real decision making the answers are too vague. Apart perhaps from choosing a smaller ship. But even that is not clearly a thought that could follow from this.

 

For medical issues one would need clear answers in writing. Best done by email. But one needs to think of such a scenario first and for that I regard it as desirable for the river cruise companies to alert their customers to this more via TA's or more prominently in the information that is available before booking.

 

A couple of weeks ago I received the German TA catalogue for CroisiEurope's river cruises. A whole page at the beginning of the catalogue with the part headline "... what you need to know" directly addressed such matters. Water-related issues, rafting, mobility restrictions, bussing. It was all there in general words and very clear to understand. They do not wait with it till the small print at the back. Kudos to them.

 

notamermaid

 

 

 

Agree totally with your post.

 

If Danube and Rhine cruisers weren’t on this website, and being kept well informed by posters such as you, then I think there might be a world of surprises awaiting. And there will be those not quite as flexible or more prone to anxiety compared to others.

 

We are at a stage where we now think very carefully about the rivers we will cruise, but again the various companies are not particularly forthcoming about the relative possibility of disruption.

 

It’s also informative to learn what possible itineraries can be created to avoid the possible bottlenecks. But again that information seems best accessed here.

 

And CroisiEurope certainly seems to be setting the standard as to communicating with their potential customers. Thanks again for pointing that out.

[pully8]

If the trend is for more unreliability with the river levels, perhaps the pricing needs to change to reflect the reality that cruises are going to be mystery trips?

 

[RDC1]

On 11/12/2018 at 5:11 PM, pully8 said:

Perhaps the best days of European river cruising as we know it are finished?

More land based options and less relaxing cruising?

Lack of water in the rivers to enable the ships to sail reliably and misleading or deceptive marketing and conduct by some operators will influence the choice of engaged prospective travellers. 

Regardless of legislation  people will not tolerate  paying a premium price and receiving unacceptable treatment for long. 

The market will change and sort this out.

One of the reasons I have done my last two river cruises with a company that specializes in land tours (Gate1).  The experience is similar to Viking, the cost is much lower, and if it turns into a land tour I know what I am getting (I also do land tours with them). The price of their river cruises is similar to their cost of their land tours in Germany, France and Austria.

 

The problem is most river cruise passengers are unaware of the risk and buy into the pretty commercials. How many travel articles have you seen in any of the travel magazines and web sites covering the problems this year with European river cruises?

River cruise companies buy a lot of advertising and it would appear that the travel media companies are avoiding the negative press.

[RDC1]

13 hours ago, hbr777 said:

A worthwhile comparison would be if you buy a non refundable first class plane ticket LA to NYC and then the airline tells you it cannot get you there. Or can only get you there partly on a train. By doing that it has changed the entire bill of carriage.  Sure, the airline could tell you to pound salt but at the detriment of customer service. Word spreads. That is what is great about word of mouth - it works both ways. The river companies can raise their prices, sure, go for it. But as word gets around about the river levels and how some companies have handled it, it will take some bloom off the rose.

Been there done that.  Had to fly to LA then get bused to San Diego when my flight to San Diego got delayed and it was too late to land there.

 

Airlines quite frequently will change routing that are far less convenient if they have to cancel a flight or if you get delayed and miss your scheduled flight.  For that matter they will change their schedule  and all of a sudden you might find that your flight now leaves two hour earlier and you are now changing planes twice, instead of the nice non-stop you thought you had.

[Host Jazzbeau]

55 minutes ago, RDC1 said:

Been there done that.  Had to fly to LA then get bused to San Diego when my flight to San Diego got delayed and it was too late to land there.

 

Airlines quite frequently will change routing that are far less convenient if they have to cancel a flight or if you get delayed and miss your scheduled flight.  For that matter they will change their schedule  and all of a sudden you might find that your flight now leaves two hour earlier and you are now changing planes twice, instead of the nice non-stop you thought you had.

 

Exactly.