NCL Not Refunding Cruise Next Vouchers . NCL Cancelled the cruise

[DCGuy64]

6 hours ago, Thequietone said:

The voucher was accepted as payment by NCL. That then forms a contract with them. They cancel the cruise, they break the contract. Expiry dates of the voucher used have nothing to do with it.

I also have an email from them confirming the repayment and an exact breakdown of the refund.

Quote;

Hi ,

 

Apologies for not getting back to you yesterday. It was the last day of the month and we were a touch snowed under.

 

The £91.25 is your 25% on your cruise next vouchers. The vouchers have yet to be returned to your account ( they are working as fast as they can, so do bear with us )

 

So £91.25 + cruise vouchers yet to be returned.  £195 + £170 = £456.25.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tim

 

I rest my case

 

Great, sounds like it's all resolved now, congratulations! 

[Thequietone]

10 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

Great, sounds like it's all resolved now, congratulations! 

 

11 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

Great, sounds like it's all resolved now, congratulations! 

Not at all they sent me this email at the start  , then they didn't credit my account. This was the start of them not refunding me.

 

This is when my problems began.  When they didn't do what they said they would do.

 

 

[hallux]

8 hours ago, Thequietone said:

In the UK we have two simple and effective systems. Credit Card charge back and Small Claims Online. Very simple.The offending company has to prove that they did not break the contract. If they did they pay back plus the claim fee interest and expenses. Sure fire for victims of alleged corporate bullying.

Then stop trying to make your case with us and put in the effort to make your case through one of those processes.  We can't effect change on this for you, those processes can.

 

The NCL policy and the contracts you keep referring to do not clearly spell out what happens with expired CND's in situations where the cruise line is forced to cancel the trip.  I believe this ambiguity would or should work in your favor but your effort needs to go into reaching out to those resolution processes or a consumer advocate.

[SeaShark]

9 hours ago, Thequietone said:

In the UK we have two simple and effective systems. Credit Card charge back and Small Claims Online. Very simple.The offending company has to prove that they did not break the contract. If they did they pay back plus the claim fee interest and expenses. Sure fire for victims of alleged corporate bullying.

 

If the two simple and effective systems are so "sure fire", then why are you not simply using one of them instead of trying to argue with and convince strangers on an Internet chat forum instead?

 

You are putting a lot of time and effort into THIS forum when you have a simple and effective answer...scratch that...when you have TWO simple and effective answers at your disposal.

 

Why not go with simple and effective? Occam's razor would indicate that those simple and effective solutions are not providing the desired result...

[Thequietone]

On 7/7/2020 at 8:58 AM, Budget Queen said:

Good grief you had 4 years to use the Cruise Next.     Did you request an extension BEFORE it expired?   
 

 

Hi, Yes the voucher was valid, otherwise NCL would not of accepted it. They cancelled my cruise. I just want back what I gave them. Not Rocket science. Simply really . Are you OK with that ?

[Budget Queen]

3 hours ago, SeaShark said:

 

If the two simple and effective systems are so "sure fire", then why are you not simply using one of them instead of trying to argue with and convince strangers on an Internet chat forum instead?

 

You are putting a lot of time and effort into THIS forum when you have a simple and effective answer...scratch that...when you have TWO simple and effective answers at your disposal.

 

Why not go with simple and effective? Occam's razor would indicate that those simple and effective solutions are not providing the desired result...

Absolutely-   Continued.  One sided- skewed argument.    They are talking to themselves.      Not very effective.   

[Diane123boys]

I am late to this thread , perhaps you have gotten satisfaction.  The same thing happened to me with a cruise booked October 2020 I used CNC that would have expired at the beginning  of the cruise month 

now the difference may be that it was not canceled by NCL. But by me ... long story short ... stop trying to deal with NCL reps... most don’t have any good interpersonal skills 

you must deal with the cruise next

office .. they and only they have the power to reextend beyond the original extension... Cruise Next ... stop with the customer service reps 

 

 

 

[Thequietone]

Really appreciate that. I agree the staff just seem hopeless with no customer services skills. No one seems to grip the problem or sort it out. They are telling me because it has been extended once they can not re extended the voucher. I have explained it is NCL that cancelled the cruise not myself. I will write to the Cruise Next office. Thank you for that.

[hallux]

3 hours ago, Thequietone said:

I will write to the Cruise Next office.

Which is something I suggested in post #58, last Tuesday...

[Thequietone]

Thank you always good to have a few different opinions and ideas

[EllieinNJ]

Please come back and tell us what was your outcome. 

[Thequietone]

With pleasure . I am supposed to be receiving a call today from a Sales Manager, Alan. Hopefully we can box this off. Who knows?

[G-DawgMN]

22 hours ago, hallux said:

Then stop trying to make your case with us and put in the effort to make your case through one of those processes.  We can't effect change on this for you, those processes can.

 

The NCL policy and the contracts you keep referring to do not clearly spell out what happens with expired CND's in situations where the cruise line is forced to cancel the trip.  I believe this ambiguity would or should work in your favor but your effort needs to go into reaching out to those resolution processes or a consumer advocate.

 

 

 That is what I said about 20 posts ago. TQ's efforts would be much better spent in actually solving their problem and not posting here that everyone is wrong.

 I'm assuming the laws are different in the UK that the US, since the "contract" for Cruise Next certs in the US state that there is no cash value.

 

 

[DCGuy64]

I'd be very interested to see what the rules are regarding a cruise line's unilaterally cancelling a cruise without warning and a cruise line's inability to cruise at all based on a government policy forbidding ANY cruises from happening. It may not matter to the OP, but I have a hunch that the Terms & Conditions s/he agreed to stipulate this in some fashion. As I see it, it would be one thing if NCL just up and decided to cancel a cruise and then said "tough luck," but quite another if the cruise line was legally enjoined from sailing. OP keeps insisting that the cruise line cancelled and is therefore liable, but I don't think that's the case. I wish him/her good luck but I wouldn't hold my breath that s/he is going to get the desired outcome.

[Thequietone]

16 minutes ago, KSSS2013 said:

 

 

 That is what I said about 20 posts ago. TQ's efforts would be much better spent in actually solving their problem and not posting here that everyone is wrong.

 I'm assuming the laws are different in the UK that the US, since the "contract" for Cruise Next certs in the US state that there is no cash value.

 

 

Assuming could be dangerous

[G-DawgMN]

3 minutes ago, Thequietone said:

Assuming could be dangerous

 

 Not really.....different countries=different laws. I know that the UK normally has better consumer protections on travel than in the US.

 

[Thequietone]

Will update all with the outcome soon . Cash refund, CruiseNext voucher or small claims court judgement. The Ball is in NCL's hand's now. They have the choice on which outcome they want.🙂

[Thequietone]

1 minute ago, KSSS2013 said:

 

 Not really.....different countries=different laws. I know that the UK normally has better consumer protections on travel than in the US.

 

We do indeed. If a bad business trys to scam an individual or another company try get their just desserts plus all costs. They are strict and tough in the UK on crooked and unfair practice.

[Thequietone]

18 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

I'd be very interested to see what the rules are regarding a cruise line's unilaterally cancelling a cruise without warning and a cruise line's inability to cruise at all based on a government policy forbidding ANY cruises from happening. It may not matter to the OP, but I have a hunch that the Terms & Conditions s/he agreed to stipulate this in some fashion. As I see it, it would be one thing if NCL just up and decided to cancel a cruise and then said "tough luck," but quite another if the cruise line was legally enjoined from sailing. OP keeps insisting that the cruise line cancelled and is therefore liable, but I don't think that's the case. I wish him/her good luck but I wouldn't hold my breath that s/he is going to get the desired outcome.

 

18 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

I'd be very interested to see what the rules are regarding a cruise line's unilaterally cancelling a cruise without warning and a cruise line's inability to cruise at all based on a government policy forbidding ANY cruises from happening. It may not matter to the OP, but I have a hunch that the Terms & Conditions s/he agreed to stipulate this in some fashion. As I see it, it would be one thing if NCL just up and decided to cancel a cruise and then said "tough luck," but quite another if the cruise line was legally enjoined from sailing. OP keeps insisting that the cruise line cancelled and is therefore liable, but I don't think that's the case. I wish him/her good luck but I wouldn't hold my breath that s/he is going to get the desired outcome.

I think you may be surprised at the outcome. Will update you when I get it.

[SeaShark]

20 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

I'd be very interested to see what the rules are regarding a cruise line's unilaterally cancelling a cruise without warning and a cruise line's inability to cruise at all based on a government policy forbidding ANY cruises from happening. It may not matter to the OP, but I have a hunch that the Terms & Conditions s/he agreed to stipulate this in some fashion. As I see it, it would be one thing if NCL just up and decided to cancel a cruise and then said "tough luck," but quite another if the cruise line was legally enjoined from sailing. OP keeps insisting that the cruise line cancelled and is therefore liable, but I don't think that's the case. I wish him/her good luck but I wouldn't hold my breath that s/he is going to get the desired outcome.

 

The portion of the contract that covers this very thing can be found back in Post #158.

[luv2kroooz]

18 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

I'd be very interested to see what the rules are regarding a cruise line's unilaterally cancelling a cruise without warning and a cruise line's inability to cruise at all based on a government policy forbidding ANY cruises from happening

The cruise lines have not been forced to shutdown by any country as far as I am aware. These are voluntary shutdowns.

 

But even if they were forced, the rules are no different from the airlines.  Passenger contracted with carrier to perform service. Carrier did not or was prohibited from performing service. Carrier has materially breached contract and has no claim to funds or revenue it did not or could not earn. In the US, the consumer is protected under services not or unable to be provided. Whether the cruise lines offer refunds, the credit card company does a charge back, or if it is litigated, the eventual result is the same. There is no claim to funds that were not earned/services not provided. The cruise lines and airlines can disclaim this in their contracts, but those clauses don't hold water.

 

 

[luv2kroooz]

6 minutes ago, SeaShark said:

 

The portion of the contract that covers this very thing can be found back in Post #158.

Post #158 covers a govt mandated shutdown and is not relevant to the current situation...supported by the fact that no cruise line in the world has implemented the quoted policy in post 158.

[Thequietone]

The UK consumer protection laws are much stricter than in the USA. Also the purchase of CruiseNext vouchers was made on a UK Credit card, so even more protection for us.

 

Trying to deal with NCL and achieve settlement is what we have to prove we did in UK Law. We have to prove this also to the credit card company .

If after our efforts nothing prevails and the company do not refund or compensate,then the Law forces NCL to pay plus expenses. The Credit Card companies are duty bound to refund also. Goods purchased,ie an extended CruiseNext voucher accepted by the company and a service not delivered due to not fault of the purchaser.

 

I just do not understand why NCL are being so ridiculous. 

[DCGuy64]

11 minutes ago, luv2kroooz said:

The cruise lines have not been forced to shutdown by any country as far as I am aware. These are voluntary shutdowns.

 

But even if they were forced, the rules are no different from the airlines.  Passenger contracted with carrier to perform service. Carrier did not or was prohibited from performing service. Carrier has materially breached contract and has no claim to funds or revenue it did not or could not earn. In the US, the consumer is protected under services not or unable to be provided. Whether the cruise lines offer refunds, the credit card company does a charge back, or if it is litigated, the eventual result is the same. There is no claim to funds that were not earned/services not provided. The cruise lines and airlines can disclaim this in their contracts, but those clauses don't hold water.

 

 

Thank you for the explanation. What's a good resource I could consult to see what my options might be if this were to happen to me? Would I need to sue the cruise line?

[Thequietone]

10 minutes ago, luv2kroooz said:

Post #158 covers a govt mandated shutdown and is not relevant to the current situation...supported by the fact that no cruise line in the world has implemented the quoted policy in post 158.

Agree 100%