Oasis Cancelled Cruise Credit NOT FAIR!!

[Milwaukee Eight]

50 minutes ago, JupiterTwo said:

 

No, the logic is that he should keep his first FCC to use again, and get the same compensation as someone who paid cash and got that back too, which was a wholly paid for future cruise.

 

Steve 

And again, not sure I understand what loyalty or the number of Cruises have to do with this??

 

M8

[JupiterTwo]

14 minutes ago, Milwaukee Eight said:

And again, not sure I understand what loyalty or the number of Cruises have to do with this??

 

M8

 

And again, it was the reason OP stated for having the credits in the first place that were redeemed.

 

Given that he used credits that were a reward for loyalty (he says), he feels that the make-good for canceling the cruise was less for a loyal (frequent) cruiser than it was for a cash-paying cruiser (loyalty frequency unknown), the implication being that using an RCI credit voucher puts one at more risk of a diminished make-good payout than one who ignores the credits and goes cash no matter what.

 

OP says use the Royal credits at your own risk. Of course, this is balanced by one's estimate of how frequently RCI cancels cruises, and the odds that one's canceled cruise was one that was paid in part by credits.

 

If you're still confused, go back and look at the Chipotle example to see the cash flow.

 

Steve

[reallyitsmema]

2 minutes ago, JupiterTwo said:

 

And again, it was the reason OP stated for having the credits in the first place that were redeemed.

 

Given that he used credits that were a reward for loyalty (he says), he feels that the make-good for canceling the cruise was less for a loyal (frequent) cruiser than it was for a cash-paying cruiser (loyalty frequency unknown), the implication being that using an RCI credit voucher puts one at more risk of a diminished make-good payout than one who ignores the credits and goes cash no matter what.

 

OP says use the Royal credits at your own risk. Of course, this is balanced by one's estimate of how frequently RCI cancels cruises, and the odds that one's canceled cruise was one that was paid in part by credits.

 

If you're still confused, go back and look at the Chipotle example to see the cash flow.

 

Steve

 

He did not say anything about loyalty other than in a joke to the Chipotle example.  

[Jarmo]

OP, this is not meant to be mean, but it seems you disagree with 2 + 2 = 4.

[JupiterTwo]

9 minutes ago, reallyitsmema said:

 

He did not say anything about loyalty other than in a joke to the Chipotle example.  

 

He actually implied it earlier, in posts #9 and #12.

 

Steve

[Casino Comp Chick]

11 hours ago, Wine-O said:

It seems to me it comes out as a "wash."  Guest #1 adding his original FCC to the apology FCC = 2000 FCC.  That's the same that Guest #2 gets.  🍷

Only if you are using common core math. 2️⃣0️⃣0️⃣0️⃣➕1️⃣0️⃣0️⃣0️⃣➗4️⃣✖️8️⃣➖1️⃣6️⃣ 🚫 🆓

🤣

[Milwaukee Eight]

7 hours ago, JupiterTwo said:

And again, it was the reason OP stated for having the credits in the first place that were redeemed.

I went back and read the OP’s post a few more times. Where does he say he got the FCC for being a long time cruiser and/or loyalty. I know FCC are passed out for various things but I am not aware where one gets a FCC for being loyal. I know Pinnacles get a “free” Cruise after reaching certain milestones but didn’t think it had a $ value assigned. 

 

Educate me please. 

[Clarea]

2 minutes ago, Milwaukee Eight said:

 ....  I know Pinnacles get a “free” Cruise after reaching certain milestones but didn’t think it had a $ value assigned. 

 

Educate me please. 

 

The Pinnacle "free" cruise is capped at $2400 for the first two free cruises (700 and 1050 points) and $3600 for subsequent "free" cruises.

[Milwaukee Eight]

2 minutes ago, Host Clarea said:

 

The Pinnacle "free" cruise is capped at $2400 for the first two free cruises (700 and 1050 points) and $3600 for subsequent "free" cruises.

Thanks. Is it a FCC?

[Clarea]

3 minutes ago, Milwaukee Eight said:

Thanks. Is it a FCC?

 

Not sure what it is exactly, but it's handled the same way, as a price reduction to the cruise cost.

[Milwaukee Eight]

7 hours ago, JupiterTwo said:

 

He actually implied it earlier, in posts #9 and #12.

 

Steve

I went back and read the two posts above. I read the OP’s post as FCC was a refund of cash. Nothing to do with number of cruises or loyalty. 

 

Confused.....

 

in my opinion

Edited August 29, 2019 by Milwaukee Eight

[Milwaukee Eight]

8 minutes ago, Host Clarea said:

 

Not sure what it is exactly, but it's handled the same way, as a price reduction to the cruise cost.

Other than milestones, what/why/when does one get a FCC based on number of cruises or loyalty?

 

i understand the dilemma and agree the two seem to be treated differently, Cash vs FCC, in this case. No argument there. 

Edited August 29, 2019 by Milwaukee Eight

[Clarea]

5 minutes ago, Milwaukee Eight said:

Other than milestones, what/why/when does one get a FCC based on number of cruises or loyalty? ...

 

None that I can recall other than the Pinnacle "free" cruises.

[uksimonusa]

12 hours ago, scorpluvsdolphins said:

I’m to be on the Mariner Friday, free from the casino. If they cancel it, do I get to choose another weekend for free?  

 

You'll probably go out on Friday but may not return until Tuesday or Wednesday, when the depth of PC has been checked and the port made safe, so an extra day or two for free, PLUS with Coco Cay closed looks like a lot of time on the ship 😅

 

Edited August 29, 2019 by uksimonusa

[shopaholic6]

I’m lost 🤪🤪

[papaflamingo]

Whew....this is tough.   I see both positions.  However I tend to agree with the OP.   What if someone had a $1000 FCC and used it to cover the entire cost of a $1000 cruise.  Cruise gets cancelled and everyone gets their cruise cost back plus a credit of equal value towards another cruise.   BUT the person who used the $1000 FCC only gets the FCC back?  No value toward another cruise? How is that fair.

If the OP "paid" for the cruise with $500 FCC and $500 cash, they should get all that back (they did) PLUS the equivalent of what they "paid" for the  cruise, like everyone else.  So, an amount equal to $1000 FCC ($500 cash plus additional $500 FCC).  Seems fair to me.  

[kittentanz]

I have FCC.  I accepted FCC because I am a Loyal RCL customer and I thought that because I am and the credits would be used on a future cruise that I would accept them in lieu of a refund for problems on an former cruise.  The loyal part comes in on the fact that I HAVE FCC.  People who are not "Royal Customers" would not have FCC.  My Loyalty or not really does not play into this other than as a high level customer I would expect a better treatment. 

 

Steve has it right:  at the end I, as a FCC user, am less compensated than a Customer who paid cash.  And that is unfair..  please see the spreadsheet 

 

 

it is plain that at the end the cash cruiser is more compensated.. for those who can read a spreadsheet.. not to be snarky..😊  And just be aware that if you are offered FCC instead of cash where cash was appropriate take the cash! As the promise of FCC being used "like cash" in RCL is not true!

[Queen of Oakville]

I think the fairness of this all depends on the circumstances under which the FCC was accepted.

 

I recently accepted FCC for problems with use of the drink package for my minors without onboard spending privileges.  I was given FCC for each passenger on the sailing.  I thought the FCC was more than fair, was never requested, and exceeded my troubles.  Under this scenario - I would have no issue with the way OP's situation was handled.

 

If I had accepted FCC for something such as a cancelled excursion - in that case, I would have not been happy with the FCC unless it was in addition to a full refund.

 

Good to know what the OP's experience has been and will take this under advisement when accepting a FCC in lieue of a cash refund.

 

If an FCC is solely for my hassle and frustration, then  I have not issue with how Royal has handled this.  If the FCC was to reimburse me for expenses paid, then this sucks.

 

 

 

 

And now I'm hungry and I wanna go to Chipotle.  Burritos for lunch, anyone?

Edited August 29, 2019 by Queen of Oakville

[mayleeman]

The problem is better analyzed by using more descriptive terms. It involves a few steps, so please forgive the length of this post.

 

RC has FCC of two sources, it seems. One is for compensation instead of a refund for cash spent (e.g., what you get out of your NRD less $100 if you cancel prior to final pymt). Call it "refund FCC".  The second type appears to be FCC given as good will--money in addition to your refund for a cancelled cruise in some value usually calculated as equal to or a portion of your cash outlay.  Call this "bonus FCC". 

 

Here, it seems that the OP took FCC in lieu of cash as a refund at some point in the past, making it kind of a hybrid but really it is direct compensation for cash the OP previously spent.

 

The problem is that in calculating his new "bonus FCC" for the Oasis cancellation, it sounds like RC is treating OP's original "refund FCC" as if it were a "bonus FCC" (i.e., a gift from RC).

 

We can probably understand that RC should not have to double its gifts by both refunding "bonus FCC" and then giving additional "bonus FCC" in that amount. "Bonus FCC" added to "bonus FCC" could be done, but it doesn't really make sense. Refunding the gift once seems sufficient. 

 

Now, if I read it right, the OP is saying whatever he deserves to be granted should be based on his initial cash outlay that led to his original "refund FCC" rather than solely on his Oasis cash outlay, but RC treated it as if he used a "bonus FCC".

 

If the premise is correct, I think the OP has a point--the "refund FCC" should be treated as cash for the new calculation because it represents his cash, not a gift.

 

If the premise is wrong, and if the original FCC was really a goodwill gift rather than a refund, he has nothing to complain about because he is out nothing if RC does not choose to give him a double gift rather than simply returning his gift. Most critics seem to think this is the case, but he emphasizes that he had a choice.

 

Bottom line, RCC probably cannot account easily for this, or follow it through several transactions. They should, and use of a differential terminology would help.

 

 

Edited August 29, 2019 by mayleeman

[Queen of Oakville]

11 minutes ago, mayleeman said:

The problem is better analyzed by using more descriptive terms. It involves a few steps, so please forgive the length of this post.

 

RC has FCC of two sources, it seems. One is for compensation instead of a refund for cash spent (e.g., what you get out of your NRD less $100 if you cancel prior to final pymt). Call it "refund FCC".  The second type appears to be FCC given as good will--money in addition to your refund for a cancelled cruise in some value usually calculated as equal to or a portion of your cash outlay.  Call this "bonus FCC". 

 

Here, it seems that the OP took FCC in lieu of cash as a refund at some point in the past, making it kind of a hybrid but really it is direct compensation for cash the OP previously spent.

 

The problem is that in calculating his new "bonus FCC" for the Oasis cancellation, it sounds like RC is treating OP's original "refund FCC" as if it were a "bonus FCC" (i.e., a gift from RC).

 

We can probably understand that RC should not have to double its gifts by both refunding "bonus FCC" and then giving additional "bonus FCC" in that amount. "Bonus FCC" added to "bonus FCC" could be done, but it doesn't really make sense. Refunding the gift once seems sufficient. 

 

Now, if I read it right, the OP is saying whatever he deserves to be granted should be based on his initial cash outlay that led to his original "refund FCC" rather than solely on his Oasis cash outlay, but RC treated it as if he used a "bonus FCC".

 

If the premise is correct, I think the OP has a point--the "refund FCC" should be treated as cash for the new calculation because it represents his cash, not a gift.

 

If the premise is wrong, and if the original FCC was really a goodwill gift rather than a refund, he has nothing to complain about because he is out nothing if RC does not choose to give him a double gift rather than simply returning his gift. Most critics seem to think this is the case, but he emphasizes that he had a choice.

 

Bottom line, RCC probably cannot account easily for this, or follow it through several transactions. They should, and use of a differential terminology would help.

 

 

 

@kittentanz  If this correctly addresses your situation and you chose to pursue this further with RC - I think using terms such as "Refund FCC" and "Bonus FCC" as @mayleeman explains will help convey your issue to RC.  The explanation you used throughout this tread is somewhat confusing, and I can't see Royal siding with you if they don't understand what you are upset about.

[reallyitsmema]

2 minutes ago, Queen of Oakville said:

 

@kittentanz  If this correctly addresses your situation and you chose to pursue this further with RC - I think using terms such as "Refund FCC" and "Bonus FCC" as @mayleeman explains will help convey your issue to RC.  The explanation you used throughout this tread is somewhat confusing, and I can't see Royal siding with you if they don't understand what you are upset about.

 

The FCC that he used on his booking was because of an issue on a prior cruise.  Calling it a refund or bonus FCC is only going to confuse whoever he contacts at Royal Caribbean to help him solve this issue.  It also has nothing to do with loyalty, there was an issue on his prior cruise and they gave him a FCC.

 

He needs to write a clear email to Michael Bayley's office and leave out all the additional drama that is causing the confusion with this issue.  He needs to explain that his FCC was not based on his total cruise fare and needs to be recalculated.  All the other minutia needs to be left out of this or he has no chance of getting what he feels he is due.

[kittentanz]

I will try to contact him..  There really is no drama involved.  It just seems that it is a penalty to use future cruise credits to purchase a ticket on a future cruise.  As I stated in the beginning, it is unfair that a returning customer is being put in an inferior position to a possibly new, cash only purchase.  I just happen to be a Diamond level cruiser.. and I will now be very leery of accepting RCC instead of cash and will negotiate accordingly..  I will still enjoy RCL but, I have to say my posterior is chapped somewhat..

[smplybcause]

19 hours ago, scorpluvsdolphins said:

I’m to be on the Mariner Friday, free from the casino. If they cancel it, do I get to choose another weekend for free?  

 

 

I doubt they will cancel it. But you'll probably have a longer cruise not coming back until Wed from the current forecast. Pack accordingly!!

[ace1zoe2]

I agree with the OP. We had something similar happen.

 

Had a currently booked cruise (#1) for 10/2019 purchased at $2300 total along with 4 other couples all booked at the same time for the same price.

 

Booked a cruise for 6/2020 (#2) with non-refundable cash deposit of $900 ($450pp for 13 nights). Later decided to change itinerary to sail with friends in 7/2020. Canceled this cruise (#2) with a $100pp penalty and received $700 FCC.

 

Had the FCC credit of $700 applied to the other cruise (#1) booking. Instead of showing it as a credit or a payment RCI issued a new confirmation with a total price of $1600. This was from the original $2300 cost less $700 FCC (which was refunded in lieu of the $700 refund on the cash deposit payment I had made on the canceled cruise.).

 

Few months down the road there was a price drop of  $500 on cruise (#1). Everyone called in got there reduction thru our TA. I called TA, they emailed me back and says RCI says your price is cheaper than the sale price so no reduction. It took 6 emails, 4 TA phone calls to RCI trying to explain. After another 2 phone calls from me to TA and TA to RCI before they finally understood...

 

I PAID $700 in cash for that FCC that they applied to the original balance of the cruise I booked which made my cost $2300 not $1600. Finally after checking with multiple people they agreed and I was given the new pricing. Then my $700 FCC was applied to that price. Otherwise I was paying $700 (cash) more than the other 4 couples all booked in the same category cabin and booked the same day.

 

There have been one or two more $25-$50 price drops but it wasn't worth the headache to go thru all that again for that small of an amount. $700 was a different story.

 

If the OP original cruise was canceled then his FCC should have been reinstated for future use or refunded in cash in my opinion.

 

Cindy

[Milwaukee Eight]

Does Royal offer Cash for issues onboard?  I thought it was with FCC. Never knew them to offer cash. Wouldn’t that be OBC instead and very different?  

 

Now that the loyalty issue is resolved.....