Cruise Bill of Rights and/or Government Regulation

[cruisemom42]

48 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

I believe ilikeanswers has continuously challenged my posts in this thread.

 

Then I think you are misreading the posts! 😆

 

Seems like what we are all saying is that having some frivolous complaints is no reason not to pay attention to the complaints that have merit....

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

Then I think you are misreading the posts! 😆

 

Seems like what we are all saying is that having some frivolous complaints is no reason not to pay attention to the complaints that have merit....

And I basically also said that in post #96.

[cruisemom42]

13 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

And I basically also said that in post #96.

 

I give up!!  

[clo]

22 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

And you believe that is reason enough to ignore valid complaints? Are you not worried that ignoring valid complaints could lead to the cruise industry mistreating the customer? 

Absolutely. If all ya want to do is complain, that's fine but it's not going to affect change. When I've stopped shopping at a store, they - at management level - will know why. I'm close to doing this with an MD.

[ilikeanswers]

12 hours ago, Joebucks said:

When you buy a cruise, you are getting the cruise. If you don't go on the cruise, yes I would fully expect a refund per the terms you agreed to. Cruise companies might as well shut down now if they are going to held legally liable if anyone of their "advertised amenities" goes down for whatever reason. 

 

What's more dangerous than anything else, is the increasing entitlement of "I am the center of the universe. Everything must conform to my maximum satisfaction." 

 

I think you are taking it to another extreme and it feels like a bit of  catastrophising. As Ldubs pointed out there are situations that have quantifiable difference. A South American cruise including Antarctica vs one excluding Antarctica is not only financially different but experientially different. People generally don't choose an Antarctica cruise on a whim. It is like buying a car and paying extra to have a sun roof installed. If you recieved the car sans sun roof I doubt you would accept that with the same attitude of I bought a car I received a car. 

[sparks1093]

4 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

I think you are taking it to another extreme and it feels like a bit of  catastrophising. As Ldubs pointed out there are situations that have quantifiable difference. A South American cruise including Antarctica vs one excluding Antarctica is not only financially different but experientially different. People generally don't choose an Antarctica cruise on a whim. It is like buying a car and paying extra to have a sun roof installed. If you recieved the car sans sun roof I doubt you would accept that with the same attitude of I bought a car I received a car. 

It's a balancing act for sure but no cruise line guarantees itineraries or ports of call. Of course what we're talking about is a cruise line knowing of a change and not communicating that change, even still selling that itinerary knowing of the change. Again, I've only seen two cruise lines mentioned as being guilty of this on a frequent basis. Is that enough to warrant sweeping changes across the industry? Not to me.

 

The whole river cruise thing is a separate issue and while I would be disappointed with being bussed around, that possibility is covered in the contract. 

[ldubs]

9 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

It's a balancing act for sure but no cruise line guarantees itineraries or ports of call. Of course what we're talking about is a cruise line knowing of a change and not communicating that change, even still selling that itinerary knowing of the change. Again, I've only seen two cruise lines mentioned as being guilty of this on a frequent basis. Is that enough to warrant sweeping changes across the industry? Not to me.

 

The whole river cruise thing is a separate issue and while I would be disappointed with being bussed around, that possibility is covered in the contract. 

 

I think I disagree on the River cruise issue.  Regardless of the contract, why should the passenger pay for not being on the boat?  They know ahead of time low waters might be an issue and the itinerary can't be completed by water.  In my opinion, they, not the passenger, should bear the cost of the empty river boat and provide a refund less the cost of the bus tour.  

 

[sparks1093]

4 minutes ago, ldubs said:

 

I think I disagree on the River cruise issue.  Regardless of the contract, why should the passenger pay for not being on the boat?  They know ahead of time low waters might be an issue and the itinerary can't be completed by water.  In my opinion, they, not the passenger, should bear the cost of the empty river boat and provide a refund less the cost of the bus tour.  

 

Even so, it doesn't warrant industrywide changes or government oversight. 

[ldubs]

Just now, sparks1093 said:

Even so, it doesn't warrant industrywide changes or government oversight. 

 

Again, I might disagree if fair practices won't happen without doing either of those things.  

[sparks1093]

Just now, ldubs said:

 

Again, I might disagree if fair practices won't happen without doing either of those things.  

But they are unfair practices being used by only one company. And a company that sells a completely different type of cruise (although they do sell ocean cruises as well, but I haven't heard of any unfair practices in that regard). 

[ldubs]

1 minute ago, sparks1093 said:

But they are unfair practices being used by only one company. And a company that sells a completely different type of cruise (although they do sell ocean cruises as well, but I haven't heard of any unfair practices in that regard). 

 

I admit I'm not that knowledgeable.  I didn't realize it was only one river cruise company that took that approach during low water situations.  

[ldubs]

On 2/19/2024 at 5:37 PM, ilikeanswers said:

 

And you believe that is reason enough to ignore valid complaints? Are you not worried that ignoring valid complaints could lead to the cruise industry mistreating the customer? 

 

19 hours ago, clo said:

Absolutely. If all ya want to do is complain, that's fine but it's not going to affect change. When I've stopped shopping at a store, they - at management level - will know why. I'm close to doing this with an MD.

 

A company that ignores customer feedback is not a very good company and is not likely to have long term success.   

[cruisemom42]

21 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

I admit I'm not that knowledgeable.  I didn't realize it was only one river cruise company that took that approach during low water situations.  

 

It is not just one company. Most of the river cruises do this.

 

As for cruise ships. I think we are seeing a new attitude post-Covid. I can name other cruise lines that have, in the past, NOT provided any options or compensation when itineraries completely changes -- but then miraculously "changed their minds" when there was blowback on social media and more widespread communications media as well. Celebrity is one that did it when a "Holy Lands" cruise morphed into a "Greek Isles" cruise -- only after much hullaballoo did they offer something like a 50% refund on the cruise....

 

I understand cruise lines are desperate. But that shouldn't make it legal for them to mislead and cheat customers either!

[ldubs]

1 minute ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

It is not just one company. Most of the river cruises do this.

 

As for cruise ships. I think we are seeing a new attitude post-Covid. I can name other cruise lines that have, in the past, NOT provided any options or compensation when itineraries completely changes -- but then miraculously "changed their minds" when there was blowback on social media and more widespread communications media as well. Celebrity is one that did it when a "Holy Lands" cruise morphed into a "Greek Isles" cruise -- only after much hullaballoo did they offer something like a 50% refund on the cruise....

 

I understand cruise lines are desperate. But that shouldn't make it legal for them to mislead and cheat customers either!

 

I agree it should not.  In my opinion, fares on mainstream lines are still a bargain.  I wish they would raise fares, if that is the excuse, then provide expected service and handle issues fairly.  

 

Just to point out,  the comment you quoted is about river boat cruises that are stopped because of low water.  My feeling a partial refund is appropriate if the trip is completed looking through the windows of a tour bus.  

[cruisemom42]

10 minutes ago, ldubs said:

Just to point out,  the comment you quoted is about river boat cruises that are stopped because of low water.  My feeling a partial refund is appropriate if the trip is completed looking through the windows of a tour bus.  

 

We agree!