QM2 Change of Itinerary

[fireman999]

We are due to go on the Rio de Janeiro to New York cruise on the 3rd April 2006 and have been notified by Cunard that the itinerary has changed due to the incident that resulted in one of the four propulsion units being taken out of service. We were due to meet friends from the USA in one of the ports that has been removed from the itinerary which now involves 5 days at sea as part of the voyage. We have expressed our dissatisfaction to Cunard but all they have offered is $50 compensation which we feel is inadequate for such a major change.

We have now consulted a specialist travel solicitor who informs us that under the Package Travel Regulations (UK) Regulations 12 and 13 we are entitled to "take a substitute package of equivelent or superior quality", or to be repaid all the monies and that we can cancel without penalty. In addition to this we can take our claim to ABTA and use their arbitration scheme.

This information will be of help to UK passengers that are not happy with changes that Cunard or other cruise lines make to their itineries.

[lansonlady]

We are due to go on the Rio de Janeiro to New York cruise on the 3rd April 2006 and have been notified by Cunard that the itinerary has changed due to the incident that resulted in one of the four propulsion units being taken out of service. We were due to meet friends from the USA in one of the ports that has been removed from the itinerary which now involves 5 days at sea as part of the voyage. We have expressed our dissatisfaction to Cunard but all they have offered is $50 compensation which we feel is inadequate for such a major change.

We have now consulted a specialist travel solicitor who informs us that under the Package Travel Regulations (UK) Regulations 12 and 13 we are entitled to "take a substitute package of equivelent or superior quality", or to be repaid all the monies and that we can cancel without penalty. In addition to this we can take our claim to ABTA and use their arbitration scheme.

This information will be of help to UK passengers that are not happy with changes that Cunard or other cruise lines make to their itineries.

 

Good Morning Fireman999,

 

Yes, I'm afraid there are a number of passengers who are not happy with the changes to our itinerary. See the roll call for the RIO to NY cruise, meet some of your CC fellow passengers.

[fireman999]

This is the letter that I have today sent to Cunard by Recorded Delivery:

 

I refer to my previous correspondence in respect of the above cruise and would now make the following observations:

 

1. I sent an URGENT Fax on the 22nd March 2006 asking for a substitute cruise to which I have not received a reply.

2. I sent an URGENT email on the 26th March asking about a full refund to which I have not received a reply.

 

As you have not shown me the courtesy of a reply would you please note the following:

 

1. Your offer of $50 compensation is rejected – please remove it from our on board account.

2. This cruise is being taken under duress.

3. I reserve the right to pursue Cunard for compensation on my return.

 

I would add that I have travelled with many cruise lines in the past and have never ever received such disgraceful customer service in my life. I will certainly never use Cunard in the future.

[Kindlychap]

You are only entitled to a refund/alternative holiday in the case of a "significant change". This is defined as a major change in your holiday.

 

You have lost one port (Brazil) and gained another (St. Thomas) and in the great scheme of things I don't really see how that can be defined as a "significant change". You have the same number of ports and the same number of sea days.

 

I am looking at the itinerary that appears in the 2006 UK brochure and the itinerary that is currently on the .co.uk website. On this basis your assertion that the port where you were meeting friends was "one of the ports that have been removed" was misleading.

 

No doubt Cunard will be able to explain exactly why they have made this alteration - it is clearly as a result of the pod incident but they will, I am sure, be able to tell you the reasoning behind it. These things happen, and whilst it may well be disappointing to lose Brazil, I think you would be much better advised to get on with enjoying your holiday rather than getting so worked up about it that you will spoil it for yourself.

[mufi]

I doubt you will get much satisfaction on this one. Better to go in a good frame of mind than spend the cruise in a fog of resentment.

 

Also I did not think ABTA covered cruise lines.

 

David.

[lansonlady]

You have lost one port (Brazil) and gained another (St. Thomas) and in the great scheme of things I don't really see how that can be defined as a "significant change". You have the same number of ports and the same number of sea days.

 

I am looking at the itinerary that appears in the 2006 UK brochure and the itinerary that is currently on the .co.uk website. On this basis your assertion that the port where you were meeting friends was "one of the ports that have been removed" was misleading.

 

The change to the itinerary is actually two, not just one port that has been removed. Ft Lauderdale was included as a port of call in some of Cunards marketing material and because of the misleading nature of the advertising I actually got confirmation over the telephone that it was indeed a port of call before I booked. When they notified the changes they noted that FL was only a service call?

 

As a first time cruiser I have found the changes very disappointing but after reading these boards it seems that Cunard have a reputation for changes and in our case they probably have better cause than on other occaisions.

 

Although I have no previous experience of service with a cruise company I know poor service when I receive it and Cunard's administration team provide very poor service in a number of areas. I'm afraid that if Cruisers don't make their complaints known to Cunard or 'vote with their feet' Cruisers will continue to suffer bad service from 'The most famous Ocean Liners in the world'

 

All that said, I agree entirely that at this stage its 'best to get on and enjoy the holiday'. I'm away to start packing...I KNOW the Cunard on board team aren't going to let us down (she says with fingers crossed!)

 

I hope to meet you on board Fireman 999, I come from a 2nd generation Fire Service Family -

[fireman999]

It is not a question of getting worked up about the changes, although as you have probably gathered I am not very happy about them and neither are quite a few other people by the looks of it. If the amended itinerary had been available at the time of booking I would not have booked it - its as simple as that. I wanted to go to Fort Lauderdale and Salvador - not St Thomas and I certainly didn't want a cruise with 5 days at sea.

Cunard are selling a product and it has to be "fit for purpose" - the original itinerary is part of my contract with Cunard and if they cannot meet the conditions, then I should be offered an alternative acceptable holiday or my money back. As you will note from my letter to Cunard they have not even had the courtesy to respond to my communications - what type of responsible company operates in a manner like this - this is not a rare case - look at some of the other comments on this website.

These days customer service is everything and companies that act in this way do not deserve to survive in todays customer driven market.Clearly, Cunard think that because they have a unique product they can treat customers with contempt - not this one.

[mufi]

In addition to this we can take our claim to ABTA and use their arbitration scheme.

.

 

Fireman 999 Just looked up the ABTA web site and you are correct and Cunard have an ABTA number. Worth a try and good luck.

 

David.

[TxnAquarian]

I don't know how many cruises you have taken, but from the look of it you haven't taken many. Because if you had, you would know that it is a cruise line's right to make alterations to their itineraries. On several previous cruises of mine, ports were cancelled and replaced with other less desirable places, but I just go with the flow. On my Med cruise, Venice was cancelled and that was the main reason we booked. But I didn't let it bother me. You need to just go on your vacation and enjoy it. Realize how lucky you are to be able to cruise. Having said that, I do find it insulting that Cunard does not respond to your complaints. As a leading cruise line, I would think they would have more respect for your comments and give you the courtesy of a reponse. It seems to be as if their customer service is slipping rather rapidly.

 

 

Michael

[Goldryder]

The itineraries were altered for QM2 within a couple of weeks of her knocking out one of her pods in Florida, they added an extra dirt cheap Scandinavian cruise too inbetween removing the damaged pod in May and replacing it in November.

 

The changes were made public via their website and TA's weeks ago, its old news. And as rightly stated above, its every cruise line's right to change the itinerary as they feel fit for a multitude of reasons too.

 

Its a pain in the backside when they do it, but you either ride with it or, like me when I discovered a cruise had changed, cancel and rebook elsewhere. Its part of cruising, I'm afraid, always has been and probably always will be. If you need to be in a specific place at a specific time, then don't book a cruise, cos there are too many factors that will get in the way.

[lansonlady]

It is not a question of getting worked up about the changes, although as you have probably gathered I am not very happy about them and neither are quite a few other people by the looks of it. If the amended itinerary had been available at the time of booking I would not have booked it - its as simple as that. I wanted to go to Fort Lauderdale and Salvador - not St Thomas and I certainly didn't want a cruise with 5 days at sea.

Cunard are selling a product and it has to be "fit for purpose" - the original itinerary is part of my contract with Cunard and if they cannot meet the conditions, then I should be offered an alternative acceptable holiday or my money back. As you will note from my letter to Cunard they have not even had the courtesy to respond to my communications - what type of responsible company operates in a manner like this - this is not a rare case - look at some of the other comments on this website.

These days customer service is everything and companies that act in this

way do not deserve to survive in todays customer driven market.Clearly, Cunard think that because they have a unique product they can treat customers with contempt - not this one.

 

No - I wouldn't have booked this cruise either if it had been advertised in its current form. I wrote to Cunard one month ago and I haven't received a reply either!

 

The original itinerary spread the ports and gave diversity to the destinations. For us it seems like the whole balance of the cruise has been spolied. With 5 days at sea and three stops back to back it doesn't feel 'right'.

 

I think that unfortunately, we have missed the 'boat' on the 'unique Cunard Experience'. From reading the posts from experienced Cunarders I'm afraid standards are 'not what they used to be' However, my family would enjoy themselves in a telephone box, so we will try to enjoy our hoilday come what may and I will be taking up my concerns with Cunard on my return. I wonder if they will manage to reply to my letter of complaint before we get back?

[fireman999]

Whilst I do not have as much cruise experience as some of the correspondents - I have enjoyed 15 cruises with companies such as Costa, NCL, Celebrity, Fred Olsen and Princess. Without exception the itineraries that were booked with these companies were delivered even when bad weather was experienced (Force 9 Gale on one occasion) - I can accept that bad weather or unforseen circumstances during the voyage can force a change of itinerary and I would accept that, but here we are looking at something that is not caused by an Act of God but by the negligence of the crew. If you read some of the information on the ship you will note that the QM2 is supposed to be one of the easiest ships afloat to manoueuvre - so why should my holiday be changed because of their failings. I would have been quite prepared to delay seeing my friends for another 6 or 12 months but they have not even offered me that facility - I would have accepted my money back but they have not replied to my correspondence. I think that I have been fair with Cunard - I have put my concerns in writing to them - if they can't reciprocate then they should not be surprised when people take action against them. Thanks to all those correspondents that have added their support - I will keep you informed of events.

[Kindlychap]

Cunard should certainly have responded, I don't see how anyone can disagree with that.

 

In my experience when Cunard get things wrong they pull out all the stops to get it right again. (Save for the onboard Travel and Tour Office, who seem to delight in being obstructive!)

 

I also think it would have help had Cunard explained why the changes were necessary - presumably they no longer have the speed necessary for the original itinerary - which would at least have told you that it was a considered measure.

 

I have to say that my experience is at odds with the experience of most of those on this board who suggest that Cunard shoreside is failing.

[Rotterdam]

Cunard should certainly have responded, I don't see how anyone can disagree with that.

 

In my experience when Cunard get things wrong they pull out all the stops to get it right again. (Save for the onboard Travel and Tour Office, who seem to delight in being obstructive!)

 

I also think it would have help had Cunard explained why the changes were necessary - presumably they no longer have the speed necessary for the original itinerary - which would at least have told you that it was a considered measure.

 

I have to say that my experience is at odds with the experience of most of those on this board who suggest that Cunard shoreside is failing.

 

Kindly Chap with respect I tell my story of CUNARD...

 

I had one crossing & 1 cruise onboard QE2(out of 45 +cruises) back in 2001. As you can see I live in New York City - I booked the 16 September2001 QE2 crossing - NYC to Southampton. Everyone knows the horrendous events that unfolded on the morning of 9/11/01. I live downtown Manhattan - I was waiting for the Federal Express to deliver my tickets for the crossing(due to Cunards mistake on the air portion) when the first plane flew over my apartment that was to hit the World Trade Center. My entire neighborhood was put under protective custody & no one allowed to enter without ID...no deliveries of any kind...no newspapers, no food etc. I spent the next few days searching for 1 neighbor, 1 co worker & one friend in the hospitals that were working in the Trade Center that day.(not one of them has ever been found). IT WAS A LIVING HELL.

 

So the day after the attack my TA calls & asks how I am & I told him there was no way I would / could sail on QE2 that weekend. On top of everything else - not knowing what was happening - why as an American would I leave the US??? He said no problem - he would contact Cunard. The next day I get a call from Cunard asking if I could get to the Sheraton Hotel on 53rd Street & they would then bus me to Boston to board QE2 - again I explained the situation. At the time I could not of even gotten a car/ cab or public transportation to 53rd st(3 miles away).They said they would get back to me. Cunards end reply was that if I did not sail I would lose the $$$$..I said so what.

 

I called American Express & told them the story & put a hold on my payments to Cunard....end result was that I received a form letter stating Cunards cancellation policy. Months later I fought again & finally received a credit on CUNARD.

 

The entire experience taught me what type of company Cunard has become under Carnival. I'm more the wiser - I did use the credit on the Transcanal portion of the World Cruise in 2003 - my first vacation after 9/11/01. I lost people I loved, my home was smelling of smoke & death from the WTC fires that smouldered for months, lost my job & fought depression over the devastation.

 

So a change in intinerary in the scheme of things is not a priority to Carnivore/ Cunard. I wish the OP luck.

[Kindlychap]

Rotterdam - I really cannot see what you are complaining about.

 

You elected not to travel. Cunard were prepared to make arrangements to assist you.

 

The reasons for your election not to travel are neither here nor there, at least in relation to the contract you have with Cunard.

[patwell]

Kindly Chap...I guess you'd have had to be an American in this country during that time to understand why none of us would want to leave this country to travel on anything to go anywhere...including the QE2!!! Perhaps Cunard could have shown a bit of sensitivity to the situation...it was rather out of the ordinary. I don't consider Rotterdam's decision not to travel "neither here nor there". I consider it to be a very real reaction to what he, and all Americans, had just endured. In his case he suffered very personal losses...everything else pales by comparison.

 

Rotterdam....I am so sorry for your losses. That was an horrific time for us all...I can't imagine the agony you experienced. I doubt any of us would have left our homes for anything. We had friends scheduled for a Med cruise a couple of days after....no flights out of this country...they missed the ship...got nothing back, even tho there was no possible way to get there.

Penny

[Kindlychap]

I'm not saying that Rotterdam didn't have good reasons not to go. Far from it.

 

What I am saying is that those reasons do not have anything to do with the contract that he signed with Cunard. Indeed his reaction at the time to Cunard saying that there would be no refund was "so what?". He also made it clear in his first post that he didn't want to travel - which is his decision (and not one that I would for a moment criticise) and not Cunard's decision.

[Norfolk Brit]

I worked in travel (in the UK) at the time of 9/11. To be fair to Cunard, no travel company to my knowledge would accept cancellations under the basis that Rotterdam states; it was deemed to be 'disinclination to travel' (unless a close family member was involved) and I dealt with a similar case, not a happy experience for either of us. From memory this decision was taken by insurance underwriters, and the same applied when the IRA were active in the UK.

 

I am not saying that the decision was right, but Cunard were not standing alone.

 

Regards, Mary

[Therapst]

With apologies if this questions has previously been addressed in another thread, but can any one of you please tell me what is happening with the QM2 during the period between January 6, 2007 (when it finishes a Southern Caribbean cruise), and January 10, 2007 (when it begins its maiden World Cruise)?

Thank you very much.

[joy2cruz]

Therapst,

 

I called Cunard about this and it is a private charter (january 6-10, 2007). Hope that helps,

 

joy

[Therapst]

Therapst,

 

I called Cunard about this and it is a private charter (january 6-10, 2007). Hope that helps,

 

joy

 

Joy, that was very nice of you. Thank you very much for the information. (I suppose it is fairly evident that we are not on the list for the private charter.... :rolleyes: )

[travel-to-go]

Rotterdam - I really cannot see what you are complaining about.

 

You elected not to travel. Cunard were prepared to make arrangements to assist you.

 

The reasons for your election not to travel are neither here nor there, at least in relation to the contract you have with Cunard.

 

First let me say, Rotterdam. I am so very sorry for your losses. Truly, we had never experienced something of this nature in the US. The reasons behind it made each of us wonder if we were next, unlike the OK City Murrow Fed building bombing, or even the earlier trade center bombings. I was fortunately that any friends or relatives were safe and accounted for, though a friend of my sister's was in the subway under the building when they hit. Under the cirucmstance, it would be normal for alomst any biusiness like this to offer some sort of compensation or arrangement to reuse the ticket at a later time. Airlines were grounded for several days in the US, Trains were also stopped. I think ferries too. It wasn't easy going anywhere the next few days, and one could not get in and out of lower Manhattan very easily, if at all. Something of this nature, where months later they were still trying to identify remains, (where there even were any) it was difficult. I would have reacted the same way. I cannot imagine the guilt one would feel going of on a cruise or crossing when my friends and co-workers are still unaccounted for. The entire world wept with us. I think it was rather cold-hearted of Cunard. We're not talking about some who lived a couple of states away. We are talking about someone who lived and worked in the footprint of the horror. For Americans,it was a tremendous shock. Europeans have dealt with the horrors of war on their own soil, and born the consequences admirably. Something very basic was taken from us that day- We were disabused of the fantasy that we were invulnerable. I know that sounds selfish- saying Europeans would have dealt with the emotions better because they've been through such losses before. It is never easy to suffer something like this. I don't mean to say that. I mean that this country was paralyzed in the following weeks. We didn't know how to act. Our government didn't know how to act- How much is too much? How much isn't enough? Nobody knew. We'd never experienced anything like this before. It just seems like Cunard would have been much more able to graciously absorb the loss of a few folks who could not see themselves leaving the US at that time. It would have been VERY good business practice. After all, a lot of businesses were suspending a lot of rules to help. My own company pitched in where we could. You cannot put a money value on that kind of PR. Even if it is not fair to Cunard to lose that moeny either, the gesture would have been well recieved.

 

I willl never EVER forget being on one of the first ships allowed back into Grand Cayman after Hurricane Ivan. A cabbie took a bunch of us around the island and showed us first hand the devastaion- We saw houses and buildings we knew from the past, simply vanished. But i will never forget the cabbie telling us how, in the days after, when Grand Cayman officailly downplayed the infrastrucutre damage and the hardship, because they were afraid of it affecting real estate values and tourism, Royal Caribbean sent a ship loaded with non-perishable and ready-to-eat food and bottled water. When nothing else was coming into the harbor and people were literally starving and in dire need of fresh water. Royal Caribbean came to their rescue. No one else did- Not one other cruise line did that. I will never forget that, and I make sure to share that fact with others, too.

 

You can't BUIY that kindof good will for a business. And it was 100% altruistic. Theydid not do it for publicity, but becasue it was the right thing to do. They didn't even spread the word!

 

Karie, who thinks Cunard needs to get it's corporate head on a bit straighter at times.

[Kindlychap]

Karie,

 

It has already been said that the fact that Cunard took the view it did is as the result of long standing practice in the tourism market.

 

From a European perspective (indeed from an international one) the only thing that was unusual about 11/9/2001 was the scale, combined with the fact that it was so well planned and executed.

 

Given that, it is neither surprising nor wrong that Cunard (and others) followed established precedent.

[Rotterdam]

Travel to go - thank you for your kind thoughts......I can relate to your tale of Grand Cayman -after 9/11 here in NYC many small shops closed due to lack of business...even large companies were begging for people to return....the face of the downtown area changed completely.

 

Kindly Chap - terrorism is more frequent in Europe - 20 years ago a friend from Italy said -terrorism will land here one day. Not only was it the number of people that were murdered - but also the tactics used.

 

As far as CUNARD is concerned - they would not bring the QE2 into NY Harbor & yet expected me to somehow get 50 blocks north, get on a bus for a 5 hour trip & then board a ship that can certainly be considered to be a possible target....all during a time when the airports here were shut down & they had no way to ensure I could return from Europe. I was not alone....

 

So Carnivore has changed tourism.....doesn't make it right or honorable.

 

PS - no matter the act...any terrorism is horrendous & an insult to the basic good of mankind.

[Jeanne S]

 

As a first time cruiser I have found the changes very disappointing but after reading these boards it seems that Cunard have a reputation for changes .

 

 

 

No more than some other lines - and there are those that make changes and do not inform passengers, they just make those changes on the web site and consider that proper notification. Some send out faxes to your TA, others do not.

 

One really has no recourse nor is one entitled to any compensation as all the Cruise Lines clearly state in the very fine print of your sailing contract that they may change the itinerary at any time for any reason the company deems necessary. According to the Ombudsman Column in Conde Nast Traveler (the complaint column) anything the cruise line does to compensate you for such changes is above and beyond what they are required to and one should therefore not expect compensation for itinerary changes. This is why we go on sailings mainly for the ship - and not the ports. So when we are told at the pier our cruise to Bermuda has been re-routed to Canada due to a tropical storm or hurricane we are somewhat better prepared for it.