Oosterdam RAW SEWAGE DISASTER HOLLAND AMERICA DOES NOT CARE ABOUT THEIR GUESTS!

[urqu3]

Yes, the toilet would flush and then sometimes within 10 minutes sometimes within a few hours it would fill back up again, I think it had to do with when other rooms flushed. But make no mistake it was multiple times a day and every morning when we woke up and every afternoon when we went back to the cabin. 

[colin v]

Oh the things you can think of when you don't have the problem staring you in the butt...so to speak.

 

1. Bring a bucket of it to Guest Services 
2. Drop some off in the Neptune Lounge
3. Bring a bucket of it to the MDR
4. Rinse your bucket out in the Pool
5. I'd have more photos of me with that filth all around the ship than my iphone would hold.

 

They may not listen to one unhappy couple but they would listen to 1000.

 

A private, sterile bathroom is a bare minimum one would think. There is 0 chance of enjoyment, no matter what was spent on a vacation, with a pre-loaded toilet.

 

 

 

[Mary229]

16 minutes ago, taxmantoo said:

I am pretty sure he paid more than $1000 and it seems to me that nothing short of a full refund would be acceptable in this case, regardless of who he complained to.  HAL missed another opportunity to show compassion and earn a bit of goodwill.

We don’t know that.  It was a free upgrade and it may have been a casino discount.  I am sailing on that same ship, South America on a casino rate and I am embarrassed to say out loud how little I paid. 

[Mary229]

18 minutes ago, urqu3 said:

If you read the original post I clearly said we paid $9600 for the cruise! 

 

I missed that.  Sorry.  I am sympathetic with your situation just need that clarity.  You have to understand your original post was disgusting and unnecessary so it made it difficult to read 

Edited August 24, 2023 by Mary229

[cruisemom42]

3 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

I missed that.  Sorry.  I am sympathetic with your situation just need that clarity.  You have to understand your original post was disgusting and unnecessary so it made it difficult to read 

But absent them, I feel 99% sure some HAL cheerleaders would insist it never happened. Just as many continue to split hairs in a vain attempt to rationalize HAL’s (lack of appropriate) response.

[urqu3]

My original post was disgusting but it was not unnecessary! I want to be sure everyone understands 

what we dealt with! if you think looking at a picture is bad just think about being there and smelling that multiple times a day! My wife was nauseous every time she stepped into the bathroom!

[Mary229]

1 minute ago, cruisemom42 said:

But absent them, I feel 99% sure some HAL cheerleaders would insist it never happened. Just as many continue to split hairs in a vain attempt to rationalize HAL’s (lack of appropriate) response.

Not me, I had a sailing in 2017 where I separated from HAL for a while. The itinerary was wonderful as was enrichment and entertainment but the ship was a mess. I don’t understand why they let maintenance sink to these levels and once notified take immediate action. 

[Mary229]

2 minutes ago, Turtles06 said:

Why should it matter what the OP paid? A working toilet is a necessity. In another of your posts, you chastised the OP for posting what you called “disgusting” photos, yet you seem to suggest that how HAL handled this “disgusting” situation might vary depending on what the cabin cost. I certainly hope I’ve misunderstood you on that. 

Look he could have been on a free cruise though he clarified that for me.  In case of a free cruise $1000 a person might be equitable.  You need to review casino threads if you think that is not possible. I never stated HAL handled the situation well, never implied that, never made comment anywhere like that 

Edited August 24, 2023 by Mary229

[Sunseeker810]

I am a casino traveler.  Don't think for one moment that we are worth less that a full paying customer.  Lots of times we may end up paying a lot more that a standard fare.

And, are we not entitled to working facilities? 

[Guest ldtr]

1 hour ago, Turtles06 said:

Why should it matter what the OP paid? A working toilet is a necessity. In another of your posts, you chastised the OP for posting what you called “disgusting” photos, yet you seem to suggest that how HAL handled this “disgusting” situation might vary depending on what the cabin cost. I certainly hope I’ve misunderstood you on that. 

I think part of the issue is that technically they had a working toilet. It was flushing and they could empty it when it back flowed. I suspect that is part of HALs calculation. 

 

One could just leave the toilet closed. Flush it any time they went into the bathroom and then lift the lid use and flush again.

 

If it would not flush it would be a different story.

 

In this case it was a bit disgusting but usable. A bit less disgusting if flushed before opening.

 

About the same as using any public toilet from a sanitary point of view.

Edited August 24, 2023 by ldtr

[cccole]

I have been following this because of our January 2024 cruise on the Oosterdam on Deck 4.  Hopeful that the situation will be addressed in dry dock.  The cabin in question, 4085, is still available, and it is not being discounted.

 

There are many posts regarding HAL offers of compensation.  I have not seen that OP was ever offered anything but FCC.  Is that correct?  Not $1000 pp cash but FCC.  $1000 is an unacceptable offer from HAL, IMO, whether pp or total, and FCC...just ridiculous.  JMO.  Cherie

[Mary229]

10 minutes ago, Sunseeker810 said:

I am a casino traveler.  Don't think for one moment that we are worth less that a full paying customer.  Lots of times we may end up paying a lot more that a standard fare.

And, are we not entitled to working facilities? 

Sure, but when it comes to compensation what you paid will determine the compensation.  If someone paid full price for a Pinnacle Suite you would agree they deserve more compensation than a person who paid a discounted rate for an inside cabin, right?  The response was shady but now we are moved onto compensation where the OP still has a case.  

[chengkp75]

Looking at the deck plans, I'm starting to suspect that the toilet lines on deck 4 don't go down into the ceiling space of the public areas on deck 3, so the main lines run in the ceiling of deck 4, and the toilets on deck 4 actually flush up.  Yes, this is possible with the vacuum system, and fairly common on various ships.  Since the OP's cabin (and they mentioned that others along the deck were having similar problems) is therefore at the lowest point of the system (except where the main line along the deck connects to the piping going down to the engine room), low vacuum could result in "product" filling their vertical pipe, and slowly leaking back into the toilet.  But, a properly operating discharge valve on the toilet should prevent the back flow, even with low vacuum.

[mexico8]

I would also be very unhappy with the OPs situation.   We are booked on the Oosterdam in November and I think I would be leaving the ship if the same thing happened to our toilet.   (We are not in that same cabin.)

 

 I hope that HAL come through and work out an equitable offer to the Op.

 

Wendy

[Turtles06]

12 minutes ago, ldtr said:

I think part of the issue is that technically they had a working toilet. It was flushing and they could empty it when it back flowed. I suspect that is part of HALs calculation. 

 

I should have been clearer. I don’t think a toilet that fills up with other people’s excrement and stinks up your bathroom is a “working toilet.”

[MISTER 67]

2 hours ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

It just occurred to me that the Navigator app has a feedback/comment option. Does anyone here have experience with using the app for a problem? Do complaints get routed to the appropriate person any better/faster than dealing with Guest Relations?  

I used that feedback on our last cruise as I complained about the food in both the MDR and the Lido Buffet. Our maitre d called us in our cabin and tried to deal with our concerns, this was the last day of the cruise and he stopped by our table at dinner to see how we were doing, it just so happened that the meal we had that night was the best of the cruise with a very tasty and ample sized prime rib. That was still not enough to make us completely happy and we will not be cruising with HAL in the future as we had issues with service and have not been happy with the entertainment since before the pandemic. 

[badtwin]

I suspect the OP will also not be cruising with HAL in the future  - entirely justified - which may be another factor in HAL's response.  If there is no chance of the cruiser returning, there is less incentive to try to make amends.

 

Not saying that is right but rather that HAL makes business decisions.  How many of us are going to change our cruise plans after reading this discussion?.  The hater hate and the cheerleaders cheer and some of us just look for an itinerary and price we like.

 

 

[Mary229]

3 minutes ago, badtwin said:

I suspect the OP will also not be cruising with HAL in the future  - entirely justified - which may be another factor in HAL's response.  If there is no chance of the cruiser returning, there is less incentive to try to make amends.

 

Not saying that is right but rather that HAL makes business decisions.  How many of us are going to change our cruise plans after reading this discussion?.  The hater hate and the cheerleaders cheer and some of us just look for an itinerary and price we like.

 

 

I think the OP should seek legal advice instead of forum assistance.  His first place to start should be his travel agent, he clearly needs an intermediary.  

[cccole]

6 minutes ago, badtwin said:

I suspect the OP will also not be cruising with HAL in the future  - entirely justified - which may be another factor in HAL's response.  If there is no chance of the cruiser returning, there is less incentive to try to make amends.

 

Not saying that is right but rather that HAL makes business decisions.  How many of us are going to change our cruise plans after reading this discussion?.  The hater hate and the cheerleaders cheer and some of us just look for an itinerary and price we like.

 

 

The problem is that those with final payment ahead of them or planning a cruise in the future on Oosterdam or another HAL ship may take this into consideration.  I know I am.  The aft wrap Neptune suites are not cheap.

 

Good customer service goes a long way to encourage repeat business and new business.  No excuses for HAL, and I know you are not excusing them.  There are choices.  Cherie

Edited August 24, 2023 by cccole

[kazu]

15 minutes ago, badtwin said:

I suspect the OP will also not be cruising with HAL in the future  - entirely justified - which may be another factor in HAL's response.  If there is no chance of the cruiser returning, there is less incentive to try to make amends.

 

You make a good point.  I sent a well documented letter to O after our cruise - including pictures and was completely sluffed off.  I made the mistake of saying we would be hesitant to cruise with them again after our experience.

 

O looked forward to “welcoming us onboard again”.  Nada, bumpkins.  Meanwhile a number of cruisers who were returning to O got severely reduced cruise offers (none of which would have appealed to us anyways) as compensation.

 

[Mary229]

11 minutes ago, kazu said:

 

You make a good point.  I sent a well documented letter to O after our cruise - including pictures and was completely sluffed off.  I made the mistake of saying we would be hesitant to cruise with them again after our experience.

 

O looked forward to “welcoming us onboard again”.  Nada, bumpkins.  Meanwhile a number of cruisers who were returning to O got severely reduced cruise offers (none of which would have appealed to us anyways) as compensation.

 

After my 2017 experience I complained well, directly to the line with documentation, then through my travel agent too and I was offered a compensatory cruise at a very good price to try them again.  
 

Then earlier this year there was an incident which I kept in the discrete, direct appeal category (not DH who was vocal).  I was offered adequate compensation, not DH though I am taking him on the cruise.  One of my experiences did not rise to the level of the current OP’s but the 2023 problem was difficult.  They at least worked with me while on ship and finally after 60 days of continued conversation we were properly compensated.  

 

I have bothered to study about complaining well and it has been very helpful in my pursuits of compensation.  
 

PS my experience on O wasn’t even worth pursuing - I was never going back. 
 

@urqu3 you need an intermediary.  Get some counsel 

Edited August 24, 2023 by Mary229

[urqu3]

When HAL answered my first email and said they would increase the $600 fcc to a $1000 fcc

I answered back telling them that I had no use of a fcc because I actually do have another cruise scheduled with HAL and to use the fcc within a year was impossible for us. What I did say I would accept in order to just put this whole  thing behind us was a $3300 HAL gift card. We figured it was some compensation and for HAL they would be guaranteed that that amount would go right back to them. That is when they stopped responding to me! So for all of you that are asking what do I want,

That's what I want and I think that is more than fair!

[Mary229]

Just now, urqu3 said:

When HAL answered my first email and said they would increase the $600 fcc to a $1000 fcc

I answered back telling them that I had no use of a fcc because I actually do have another cruise scheduled with HAL and to use the fcc within a year was impossible for us. What I did say I would accept in order to just put this whole  thing behind us was a $3300 HAL gift card. We figured it was some compensation and for HAL they would be guaranteed that that amount would go right back to them. That is when they stopped responding to me! So for all of you that are asking what do I want,

That's what I want and I think that is more than fair!

Do you have an agent?   Keep talking.  It took my the 30 days on ship and an additional 60 days of discussion.  I think you have a case but you may need a third party 

[kazu]

2 minutes ago, urqu3 said:

When HAL answered my first email and said they would increase the $600 fcc to a $1000 fcc

I answered back telling them that I had no use of a fcc because I actually do have another cruise scheduled with HAL and to use the fcc within a year was impossible for us. What I did say I would accept in order to just put this whole  thing behind us was a $3300 HAL gift card. We figured it was some compensation and for HAL they would be guaranteed that that amount would go right back to them. That is when they stopped responding to me! So for all of you that are asking what do I want,

That's what I want and I think that is more than fair!

 

If you have a cruise booked with HAL and still plan to go and if it is outside the time frame that HAL set - rather than say it is impossible - may I suggest you ask them to extend the expiry.  Let them know of your booking and your #.  It might help.

I think it is easier for them to do a FCC or OBC so why not negotiate on that and a longer expiry date?  Just a thought.  

 

If you plant your feet too firmly on the ground, some just turn around and walk away.  You could easily do another email replying with something like, 

 

“after due consideration”…

 

Just a thought and only trying to help.