Coverage when cruise line voluntarily cuts some ports & shortens cruise?

[Turtles06]

Let me start by saying I'm a firm believer in buying travel insurance, and that we don't cruise without it.  (Usually Travel Guard's Gold policy.)  My question pertains to whether there are policies that would cover the stunt that Norwegian Cruise Line just pulled on the thousands of passengers about to embark on the Getaway's transatlantic -- a last minute decision to cut two days off the cruise and eliminate two of four ports (the best two) in order to take the ship to a long-scheduled dry dock two days early (from the info NCL has provided to date, there are no mechanical issues and NCL is doing this for its own convenience). 

 

If you haven't seen the long thread about this on the NCL board, here's a brief summary: the Getaway was scheduled to leave NY on April 27 for a 12-night TA, ending in Southampton on May 9.  On the afternoon of April 19, Good Friday/first evening of Passover no less, only a week before the sailing, NCL emailed passengers to tell them they were shortening the TA to 10 nights and dropping two of the four ports (Bruges and Le Havre).  As you might expect, the passengers (I'm not on that cruise) were irate; not only were they getting stuck with a shorter and far less desirable cruise that many would never have booked in the first place, but NCL was NOT allowing anyone to cancel without penalty.  All that NCL was giving was a 25% refund to cover the shortened cruise and $300 pp to change air line tickets.  (After considerable push back over the past two days, NCL is now allowing pax to use the $300 pp for hotel or rail expenses and not just airline fees.  It's also offered a future cruise credit in the amount of 25% of the base fare paid.)

 

So here's the financial issue:  unless NCL does more, many folks are going to have out-of-pocket expenses that exceed $300 pp.  People are scrambling to find hotel rooms for a couple of nights in London or elsewhere in Europe at the very last minute.  Unless they can fly home on the (new) day of disembarkation, they will also have food and transportation expenses for the two days that they would have been on the ship, etc.  They may have to pay more for a new flight home, etc. Many had non-refundable tours booked in the ports that NCL is skipping.  I'm sure some folks will have other expenses that I haven't listed.

 

And here's the travel insurance issue:  Given that people will be incurring these expenses because the cruise line acted for its own convenience (that is, no weather issues, no mechanical issues, no other Acts of God) -- are there policies that would reimburse the passengers here for their out-of-pocket expenses?  Under what provision?  Trip interruption, perhaps?  If so, for what "covered reason"?

 

This NCL mess really has me thinking about this...

 

Would love to hear people's thoughts and info.  Thanks!

Edited April 21, 2019 by Turtles06

[GeezerCouple]

8 minutes ago, Turtles06 said:

Let me start by saying I'm a firm believer in buying travel insurance, and that we don't cruise without it.  (Usually Travel Guard's Gold policy.)  My question pertains to whether there are policies that would cover the stunt that Norwegian Cruise Line just pulled on the thousands of passengers about to embark on the Getaway's transatlantic -- a last minute decision to cut two days off the cruise and eliminate two of four ports (the best two) in order to take the ship to a long-scheduled dry dock two days early (from the info NCL has provided to date, there are no mechanical issues and NCL is doing this for its own convenience). 

 

If you haven't seen the long thread about this on the NCL board, here's a brief summary: the Getaway was scheduled to leave NY on April 27 for a 12-night TA, ending in Southampton on May 9.  On the afternoon of April 19, Good Friday/first evening of Passover no less, only a week before the sailing, NCL emailed passengers to tell them they were shortening the TA to 10 nights and dropping two of the four ports (Bruges and Le Havre).  As you might expect, the passengers (I'm not on that cruise) were irate; not only were they getting stuck with a shorter and far less desirable cruise that many would never have booked in the first place, but NCL was NOT allowing anyone to cancel without penalty.  All that NCL was giving was a 25% refund to cover the shortened cruise and $300 pp to change air line tickets.  (After considerable push back over the past two days, NCL is now allowing pax to use the $300 pp for hotel or rail expenses and not just airline fees.  It's also offered a future cruise credit in the amount of 25% of the base fare paid.)

 

So here's the financial issue:  unless NCL does more, many folks are going to have out-of-pocket expenses that exceed $300 pp.  People are scrambling to find hotel rooms for a couple of nights in London or elsewhere in Europe at the very last minute.  Unless they can fly home on the (new) day of disembarkation, they will also have food and transportation expenses for the two days that they would have been on the ship, etc.  They may have to pay more for a new flight home, etc. Many had non-refundable tours booked in the ports that NCL is skipping.  I'm sure some folks will have other expenses that I haven't listed.

 

And here's the travel insurance issue:  Given that people will be incurring these expenses because the cruise line acted for its own convenience (that is, no weather issues, no mechanical issues, no other Acts of God) -- are there policies that would reimburse the passengers here for their out-of-pocket expenses?  Under what provision?  Trip interruption, perhaps?  If so, for what "covered reason"?

 

This NCL mess really has me thinking about this...

 

Would love to hear people's thoughts and info.  Thanks!

 

I've been wondering about this, after seeing comments about the schedule change.

 

I am not a travel insurance expert, and I did *not* stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but we've had a fair amount (too much) experience with travel insurance claims. (But note that each insurer/policy is *different*.)

 

I would expect that any non-refundable/pre-paid costs that were "lost" would be covered, such as excursions in the missed ports, but I need to look at our particular policy again about all of this.

 

Trip interruption coverage might be useful; again, time to revisit how the policy is worded.

Trip interruption coverage includes (for *our* policies) 150% of the covered trip costs, in part due to the recognition that last-minute flights home might cost more (perhaps a LOT more!) than the originally paid for fares.  Plus, one has the pre-paid/non-refundable costs, plus new costs (air, plus the extra hotels/meals, etc.), so it's more than "just" a refund as it would be with a full cancellation.

 

One insurer (not remembering which one) does have some coverage that might work:  That's where one gets "cash" if the cruise line alters the designated ports *prior* to sailing (if I'm remembering that section correctly; we've never had that type of policy).

 

In this NCL case, in terms of changing to much more costly last-minute flights, another choice (this is not an insurance issue per se) would be to spend two extra nights, and just keep the original flights.

Again, I am speculating, but I would think these two nights' expenses would be covered by travel insurance.  If so, at least one could enjoy two days in <wherever one goes>.

 

We had a trip interruption claim a few years ago when I landed in hospital overseas.  It was in a city we had planned to be in for only 2 nights.  Suddenly, we were (mostly it was just DH at first) staying much longer at that hotel, regardless of what other plans had been made for that week.  Travel insurance picked up the extra 5(?) nights stay there, including all expenses, and that was a hefty total, as it was an expensive hotel (we'd chosen 2 nights as a short splurge; alas, we did not "enjoy" the extra nights, obviously; we didn't even "enjoy" the first two nights, as I got sick shortly after arrival!).

This would seem somewhat similar to the need to replace the cruise nights with hotel nights.

 

Other than that one type of policy that pays cash for advance "changed ports", I'm not aware of any coverage for "disappointment", such as what can be a very real, "But THIS port was why we took this cruise".  Unfortunately, that's always a risk, even if it's due to weather or perhaps an emergency of some sort.

 

Maybe others have had claims that dealt directly with something like this?

(And maybe Steve, from TripInsuranceStore.com will be dropping by with some helpful information...?)

 

GC

[Turtles06]

10 minutes ago, GeezerCouple said:

We had a trip interruption claim a few years ago when I landed in hospital overseas.  It was in a city we had planned to be in for only 2 nights.  Suddenly, we were (mostly it was just DH at first) staying much longer at that hotel, regardless of what other plans had been made for that week.  Travel insurance picked up the extra 5(?) nights stay there, including all expenses, and that was a hefty total, as it was an expensive hotel (we'd chosen 2 nights as a short splurge; alas, we did not "enjoy" the extra nights, obviously; we didn't even "enjoy" the first two nights, as I got sick shortly after arrival!).

This would seem somewhat similar to the need to replace the cruise nights with hotel nights.

 

I hope you are okay now!

 

Here's the big difference between your claim and what the NCL passengers are going through.  Your trip was interrupted/delayed because of a medical issue, something that is typically a "covered reason" on all reputable travel insurance policies.

 

Even assuming that what is happening to the NCL passengers fits within the definition of a trip interruption or a trip delay, the interruption or delay still has to be caused by a "covered reason" in order for a policy to pay.  While the NCL passengers will have additional expenses, those expenses will have been caused by the voluntary act of a cruise line.  So the insurance question is this: is the voluntary act of the travel provider (the cruise line) which cuts a cruise short for its own convenience and causes these expenses a "covered reason"?     

 

Again, not weather, not mechanical, not medical, not other Acts of God.  

 

 

[klfrodo]

22 minutes ago, Turtles06 said:

 

.

 

So the travel insurance question about the out-of-pocket losses remains as stated in my original post.

 

 

 

 

I would imagine it would be covered under Trip Interruption.

 

Sure, there might be some additional out of pocket expenses. People would need to clarify this with their insurance company before taking it up on their own though. It would be best if they could either record the conversation, get the response in writing via e-mail, or at the minimum take very detailed and exacting notes during the conversation.

There was one instance where the cruisers arrived back to port late and missed their flights. They took it upon themselves to rent a car and drive all night so they could be back to work the next day. Insurance denied their claim because it wasn't pre-approved. Insurance would have paid hotels and meals gladly, but not rental car.

Edited April 21, 2019 by klfrodo

[Turtles06]

3 minutes ago, klfrodo said:

I would imagine it would be covered under Trip Interruption.

 

But what would the "covered reason" be?  It's not enough to have a trip interrupted; for insurance purposes, the interruption has to be for a reason that the policy covers -- that is, caused by something that the policy covers.  (Typically: medical, weather, mechanical, other Acts of God.)  Here, NCL did this for its own convenience.  So that's the question  -- anyone know of a policy that will pay when a cruise line simply chooses to do shorten a cruise and eliminate some ports?

[gogators!]

On an insurance note, we have "cancel for any reason insurance."  75% of the sailing cost.  Looking into this on Monday AM.  We will cruise with a different cruise line!

[6rugrats]

That would be very disapointing, and NCL should allow people to cancel.

 

I know that the Nationwide Cruise policy I purchased for my last cruise, paid each insured passenger $1250 for a change of itinerary (had to happen at least one week before cruise departed).  This type of policy isn't available to residents of all states.  This policy also provided coverage for nonrefundable tours missed because of this port change.

 

Not exactly what you are asking (trip interruption or delay), but that amount of money would have lessened the pain.

Edited April 23, 2019 by 6rugrats

[Pitzel]

Yes — Nationwide offers a cruise policy that will pay you if your itinerary changes before you sail OR if ports or port times change once you are sailing. As long as you have coverage before something happens that disrupts your trip (like a hurricane or pier damage), you will be paid cash if you have documentation of the change.

[riffatsea]

Just checked the Nationwide plan and found out it is not available if traveling to Cuba.

We will just have to wait and see about the new rules and if all the Cuba cruises will be cancelled.