Make sure your luggage floats

[bitob]

Check from Cunard arrived today

 

 

[Victoria2]

On 11/12/2023 at 2:06 PM, 3rdGenCunarder said:

Glad you got a good resolution. It certainly wasn't easy. I wonder what the outcome was for people who didn't put in the effort you did.

I am by no means a legal beagle, but we both have a brain and a tongue in our heads. Between us and our agent, we would have followed a similar route. Our only difference is we would have held the port responsible and not had any expectations from Cunard other than their statuary stance.

[bitob]

It is not a question of who was responsible.  Clearly the stevedores dumped the luggage.

But we are Cunard's valuable clients.  Cunard passengers have no legal relationship with the Port.  There is no contract to sue upon and suing would have been absurd.  The Port, however, has a relationship to Cunard.  The fact that Cunard left us to our own devices is abominable.

 

They should have facilitated our claims being handled by the Port.  Cunard did nothing.  Zip.  I spent hours trying to ascertain what happened to our luggage, finding someone at Cunard to answer questions and finding a person at the Port to help me locate the one piece of luggage that was recovered.  All they did was set up a claims email that NEVER RESPONDED.

 

My expectations have to do with customer service, caring about passengers, and helping valuable clients when something unexpected occurs.  Cunard gets an F in my book.

[SusanLINY]

I am finding that customer service across the entire cruise industry is appalling. I have to shut my brain off to some degree to accept this. Going forward, I am changing the way I pack after reading this. All my "good stuff" is going to into a roller board I can walk on with.

[Victoria2]

They should have facilitated our claims being handled by the Port.  Cunard did nothing.  Zip.  I spent hours trying to ascertain what happened to our luggage, finding someone at Cunard to answer questions and finding a person at the Port to help me locate the one piece of luggage that was recovered.  All they did was set up a claims email that NEVER RESPONDED.

 

My expectations have to do with customer service, caring about passengers, and helping valuable clients when something unexpected occurs.  Cunard gets an F in my book.

 

We had cause to make an official complaint to Cunard May'16.

 

A case number was raised and we waited for the company to get back to us. They did, and with an apology for the time taken to respond, the reason being they were investigating the complaint.

 

I can't say I was particularly pleased with their answer but at least they acknowledged our position with an apology.

 

My complaint was acknowledged and they replied. What we would like/expect a big conglomerate to do, PR wise and what actually happens can be far apart. The claim re floating bags was lodged and eventually the company responded with the amount set down in the T&Cs.

Although I agree some TLC from Cunard would have helped, I am not surprised at Cunard's stance.

[exlondoner]

Admittedly under a different legal system, but what if this horrid thing had happened when embarking at Southampton? There you hand your cases to port employees, who load it onto the ship. Presumably that is when it becomes Cunard’s responsibility, if they drop in down a stair well or something. But before that?

[3rdGenCunarder]

1 hour ago, exlondoner said:

Admittedly under a different legal system, but what if this horrid thing had happened when embarking at Southampton? There you hand your cases to port employees, who load it onto the ship. Presumably that is when it becomes Cunard’s responsibility, if they drop in down a stair well or something. But before that?

 

Both Cunard and the port have liability insurance and I suspect the insurance companies are fighting it out over which entity is at fault. For disembarkation, Cunard loads the cages inside the ship. Were they loaded properly? The port removes the cages from the ship. Were they picked up (usually a forklift) and carried properly? The weather was horrible that day, so they might hide behind that ("act of God"). Does anyone know if the full cages went into the water with their contents or did the cages dump their contents?

Edited November 14, 2023 by 3rdGenCunarder

[exlondoner]

8 minutes ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

 

Both Cunard and the port have liability insurance and I suspect the insurance companies are fighting it out over which entity is at fault. For disembarkation, Cunard loads the cages inside the ship. Were they loaded properly? The port removes the cages from the ship. Were they picked up (usually a forklift) and carried properly? The weather was horrible that day, so they might hide behind that ("act of God"). Does anyone know if the full cages went into the water with their contents or did the cages dump their contents?

But my point is, when you disembark, you have clearly entrusted your luggage to Cunard. But, when you embark, it is rather different. They don’t touch the luggage until it is onboard the ship. Unless of course it doesn’t get there, when they’ve had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Edited November 14, 2023 by exlondoner

[3rdGenCunarder]

1 minute ago, exlondoner said:

But my point is, when you disembark, you have clearly entrusted you luggage to Cunard. But, when you embark, it is rather different. They don’t touch the luggage until it is onboard the ship. Unless of course it doesn’t get there, when they’ve had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

 

It's the same thing in either direction. On land, the port is responsible and on the ship Cunard is responsible. That moment of transition between the two is a sort of "no man's land." When someone took one of my cases on Brooklyn, I asked one of the port staff called the ship to see if everything had been taken off the ship. The ship said it had and that was the end of their help. The port helped me track down my case and got it back to me. 

[Victoria2]

19 minutes ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

 

Both Cunard and the port have liability insurance and I suspect the insurance companies are fighting it out over which entity is at fault. For disembarkation, Cunard loads the cages inside the ship. Were they loaded properly? The port removes the cages from the ship. Were they picked up (usually a forklift) and carried properly? The weather was horrible that day, so they might hide behind that ("act of God"). Does anyone know if the full cages went into the water with their contents or did the cages dump their contents?

 

I would doubt anyone is going to come forward and say 'sorry chaps, hands up, t'was us, we misloaded a cage' if indeed they did.

 

The mills ground very slowly but they did eventually grind. Whatever goes on behind closed doors, the port seems to have taken responsibility and the terms and conditions have been met by Cunard, again, however slow the process was.

 

 

 

Edited November 14, 2023 by Victoria2

[bitob]

2 hours ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

 

Both Cunard and the port have liability insurance and I suspect the insurance companies are fighting it out over which entity is at fault. For disembarkation, Cunard loads the cages inside the ship. Were they loaded properly? The port removes the cages from the ship. Were they picked up (usually a forklift) and carried properly? The weather was horrible that day, so they might hide behind that ("act of God"). Does anyone know if the full cages went into the water with their contents or did the cages dump their contents?

Cages went in

[Covepointcruiser]

I remember back in The 60’s it was not unusual for luggage to end up in the water.   Claims were always filed with the Stevedores.    We had the air tight and water tight American Tourister luggage and one survived a dump in the water.

[3rdGenCunarder]

13 hours ago, Covepointcruiser said:

I remember back in The 60’s it was not unusual for luggage to end up in the water.   Claims were always filed with the Stevedores.    We had the air tight and water tight American Tourister luggage and one survived a dump in the water.

 

I remember the old Westside piers in NYC had conveyor belts (like the ones used to load baggage into planes) and the stevedores just tossed bags onto it. There was always a net underneath, but it never looked terribly sturdy. 

 

[escrick]

Just want to thank Victoria 2 for demonstrating compassion as well as common sense on this topic.  Accidents are rarely intentional—they happen—the fact that there were no injuries or lives lost is no help to BitBob at this stage.  I hope that the compensation will be adequate and the nightmare of an experience will fade from memory.

[Victoria2]

34 minutes ago, escrick said:

Just want to thank Victoria 2 for demonstrating compassion as well as common sense on this topic.  Accidents are rarely intentional—they happen—the fact that there were no injuries or lives lost is no help to BitBob at this stage.  I hope that the compensation will be adequate and the nightmare of an experience will fade from memory.

Thank you, I think! 🙂

[NE John]

The main issue here is more of the lack of empathy that the OP received from Cunard. Proactive communication from Cunard would have home a long way to help the pax who lost luggage and valuables in the luggage. 
It costs nothing to show that a company cares while businesses can lose valuable customers by showing none. The real “compensation” here would be Cunard leading the way in resolving this problem. 

[SusanLINY]

5 hours ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

 

I remember the old Westside piers in NYC had conveyor belts (like the ones used to load baggage into planes) and the stevedores just tossed bags onto it. There was always a net underneath, but it never looked terribly sturdy. 

 

 My grandma's train case went for a dip!

[escrick]

Victoria 2,  It was a complement.  Perhaps  I can understand why Cunard was slow to reply.  In a litigious society every word used matters and, of course, words can be misinterpreted.  But, a little empathy  can help a lot.  I think I am complicating and over thinking the incident,  sorry.

[bitob]

It’s over

 

Resolved claim with chase sapphire reserve

 

 

[Victoria2]

3 hours ago, escrick said:

Victoria 2,  It was a complement.  Perhaps  I can understand why Cunard was slow to reply.  In a litigious society every word used matters and, of course, words can be misinterpreted.  But, a little empathy  can help a lot.  I think I am complicating and over thinking the incident,  sorry.

Thank you without reservation.🙂

 

You're not overthinking. It was a horrible thing to have occurred and even though I didn't think Cunard responsible, some TLC without any acceptance of liability along with communication would have gone a long way to help.

 

If nothing else, this should make folk want to read the very small print and be aware of the company's  limited liabilities.

 

 

[NE John]

I would enjoyed to have seen “the sausage made” between Cunard, the port operators/steveodores, the City of NY (they lease the port to the operators), and the Port Authority (owners of the land) in resolving this situation and coming up with a number for compensation.