QM2 Change of Itinerary

[Jeanne S]

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

 

I would think this falls under "Force Majure" and Cunard acted within their contractural rights.

 

I had a somewhat different response to the events of that day, having been through my own ordeal. What really became very clear to me was that we could be here today and vaporized the very next moment. I had not gone on any sailings for a while, but would see the Queen and other ships sailing out of Upper New York Bay from the Ferry on my commute home and kept thinking, soon I'll book something, but that day never seemed to come. September 12th I went to the local Cruise Ship TA and while others were calling to cancel their various cruises, I said: "Book me on the QE2 and anything else that looks good." Since then I have continued to sail 4-5 times per year.

 

When that 70 foot wave hit the Norweigan Dawn, we were the next cruise scheduled but the ship was being repaired, so they cut one day out of the cruise and cancelled a port. We were just happy NCL did not cancel our cruise. We went and had a great time.

[Jeanne S]

20 years ago a friend from Italy said -terrorism will land here one day.

 

Had someone said that to me in the 1980's, I would have mentioned:

 

Over 30 years ago, in 1975, I watched as body parts were put in bags in the aftermath of the Fraunces Tavern Bombing which was indeed a terrorist act right in Lower Manhattan, not far from the WTC. This was the work of the terrorist group FALN who claimed full credit for the death, carnage and mayhem.

 

Then there was the release of tear gas into the New York Stock Exchange's ventilation system in 1933.

 

In 1920 there was an attack on the Morgan Bank in Downtown Manhattan. On September 16, 1920, a horse-drawn wagon covered with a canvas tarp pulled up to the House of Morgan and the driver abandoned the wagon. Soon after the dynamite packed wagon exploded. Debris ricocheted through the Financial District and shattered windows as far as half a mile away. The attack killed 38 people and injured more than 300. You can still see pock-marks from the explosion on the facade. Bolshevik groups and anarchists were accused, but no one was ever brought to trial.

 

 

Sorry to read about your situation with Cunard and I can certainly empathize with what happened to you after the towers fell having been there myself and also having lost friends.

 

I once read on this forum that we Americans needed to understand that the Brits take terrorism in a more stoic manner, going all the way back to WW2 and the Blitz, plus all the anarchy in Europe that precedeed it. Maybe this is Cunard's take on it?

[travel-to-go]

I would think this falls under "Force Majure" and Cunard acted within their contractural rights.

 

I had a somewhat different response to the events of that day, having been through my own ordeal. What really became very clear to me was that we could be here today and vaporized the very next moment. I had not gone on any sailings for a while, but would see the Queen and other ships sailing out of Upper New York Bay from the Ferry on my commute home and kept thinking, soon I'll book something, but that day never seemed to come. September 12th I went to the local Cruise Ship TA and while others were calling to cancel their various cruises, I said: "Book me on the QE2 and anything else that looks good." Since then I have continued to sail 4-5 times per year.

 

Jeanne,

This sounds very much like my rationale for my very first cruise (on the Cunard Crown Jewel.) I had been burning the candle at both ends, working horrendous amounts of overtime, sometimes alone in my building 60 miles from home on weekends and late nights due to a huge project. One Saturday night around 6 PM, I was having great difficulty breathing. Walking up to pull things off the printer was overwhelming and I collapsed on the floor. I hadn't the strength to walk further. Well, to make a long story short, I finally made it home- barely. The guards didnt want to let me leave, but I told them I would be fine once I got settled in my car and not expending the energy to walk (Which I truly believed, haveing had asthma for quite some time) I ended up stopping on the interstte at one point, then driving slowly home in the breakdown lane, terrified, but not quite sure what to do or willing to admit this was more than "just" an asthma attack. I finally got home. Marc was waiting in the driveway (having rushed home to meet me there) He managed to get me in the house. I felt like I was on fire- (from the overexertion of trying to breathe) Without going into some pretty gory details, he gave me a shot of adrenaline (I carry an epi-pen) and called 911. We had talked to my pulmonologist who was on call. Marc helped get me into the ambulance and headed ahead of us to the ER in his car to meet me there. Well, the ambulance attendents pulled down the road, turned to me and said, "You're not going to make it- We're taking you to Backus" (a closer hospital, but not the one Marc and my Doctor were waiting for me at.) They got me to the closer hospital which confirmed that I would not have made it. I came THAT close. They tried all night to stabilize me but could not. They finally had to intubate (respirator) It was all-in-all a pretty scary - but life affirming experience. When I saw how close I had been to dying- Well, when I got back to work, a friend was showing pictures of her first cruise that she had just returned from. I commented that I had always wanted to go on a cruise, but couldn't afford it. BING! Light bulb goes on over the head. WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? LIFE COULD BE SHORT! REAL SHORT!!! Booked with the co-worker who booked the other girl (she doubled as a travel agent) immediately. Paid $2600 for in inside guarantee (with air!) for the two of us - Got upgraded to an outside, all the way forward in the bow on two deck. We had a marvelous time! And true to what a friend once told me. Watch out! Once you go, you will want to go again and again. Every year! She was right, and we have. Ever since.

 

Karie,

Who knows life could be short- very short- so I am going to live it now!

And you should, too!

[Bramcruiser]

Interesting stories everyone.

 

I think the OP started off this thread with his take on the change in iteniary regarding the Rio to New York cruise on the QM2. It constantly amazes me that people feel it is well within their rights to raise a stink and receive compensation over a change in ports. Even non-cruisers are well aware that iteniaries are just plans and that circumstances sometime dictate necessary changes. A lot has mentioned the small print in the contracts so I won't repeat what has already been said. Sure its never happened to me. Would I be disappointed? Yes, more likely if there was a port I really had my heart set on. However, I'm not sure I'd feel like they owe me a port of call either. Ship happens! I was so embarrassed by the revolt on the trip down to Rio.

 

Anyway, interesting tales of the 9/11 events and Cunard's perceived coldness towards it. On the one hand I do see a business with a contractual obligation but 9/11 was something far more than the ordinary in North America and it completely changed the US (internally and its relationships with its neighbours) forever. To me, this might have been the opportunity for Cunard to foster better relationships by allowing not a cancellation but a rebooking to some other date in the future "in light of the recent events". Sometimes even contractual arrangements should be broken by the extraordinary. I wouldn't call a change or cancellation of ports extraordinary.

 

Jeanne I guess you had the right attitude after all. I admire your moxy to decide you wanted to live life to its fullest because you never know what may be around the corner.

 

As a Canadian, my take on the day was that we were all vunerable and all I really wanted to do was crawl back home and spend the day with my loved ones. Downtown Toronto was virtually a ghost town by mid-day as no one wanted to stay in any office tower including myself. Life returned to normal shockingly slow so those businesses that didn't have the connection to that process - like Cunard - must have come across looking really bad. I forced myself back onto a plane six months later and I went by plane simply because I told myself either I do it now or I'll never fly again. It took me two years before I even allowed myself back into the US and to this day I have only flown into the country with a Canadian carrier so the effects of 9/11 are still extending its tendrils. I flew on my first internal US flight since the incident just last fall and was glad to have the audio/visual entertainment system to take my mind away from having to think. So with all this in mind I can see why Cunard came across as cold-hearted those days right after 9/11. My guess is that they were trying to get back to normal as fast as they could which I can understand but.............................................

 

Karie.............your story sent shockwaves down my spine. I work those kind of crazy hours at this time of year and I often wonder that if I don't show up for work how the office would just fall apart. Thanks for the warning signs.

[Jeanne S]

Bram Cruiser:

 

Thanks for your kind and thoughtful words.

 

Katie:

 

These is nothing like going into respiratory failure to have an epiphany. Here’s hoping your asthma is under control and stays that way. Every time I think that I can’t afford a cruise, I realize that I can’t afford not to go.

 

 

Jeannie

[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.

 

Now that we have returned to the UK I thought that I would provide an update on the cruise and on my claim against Cunard and the agent that I booked the cruise with.

The journey to Rio went well untill we arrived at Rio Airport where there was a great deal of confusion about who was responsible for us - we were sent from representative to representative (5 in all) and from coach to coach (this of course does not go down well after 18 hours travelling) As there was no room on the coach for all of our luggage we had to leave some at the airport for later transportation - this was a little worrying as it was left in a pile at the airport - still it did eventually arrive on the ship.We then went for a tour of Rio which was quite nice and were eventually dropped at the Cruise Terminal to join the QM2.

After a 2 hour wait we were finally allowed to board - now about 24 hours since we had left home - we found our way around the ship quite easily and had our first meal on board.Throughout the cruise we found the food excellent and had very good service - my only negative comment would be that if you don't wish to go to a formal dinner or book one of the other restaurants the choice of food is very limited. On the first evening that we decided to miss a formal dinner the only choice was chinese food, which I am not very keen on, so I had to settle for cheese and biscuits. The second formal night that we missed (due to feeling quite sea sick) again the choice was the same - still it did not matter too much this time.

We were surprised at how much vibration that we experienced on the ship and how poor the stabilastion appeared in quite moderate seas - we were not the only people that experienced this which appeared to be more of a problem towards the front of the ship.

Our overall impression was that we were a little bit disappointed with the ship (perhaps our expectations were too high) and we felt that the 5 days at sea were too much. Other than that it is a nice ship with plenty to do and lots of space - as someone else said "it is now just another cruise ship" which from our perspective sums it up. The only other worrying aspect that I observed were numerous safety problems that I do not wish to go into detail at this point in time due to legal constraints.

In respect of the Change of Itinerary - I have now issued a summons against Cunard and the Travel Agent that I used and I will keep you informed of progress.

[Emu]

I was on board the whole voyage form LA to NY and found the stabilizers controlled the ROLL of the ship magnificently. (It was less than 3 degrees at the maximum) (some unstabilised ships experience roll angles of up to 40 degrees!!!!)

If you are high up on the ship it will always feel more pronounced.

 

I think you may be referring to PITCHING which is the up and down motion of the ship and nothing in the world has yet been invented that can do anything about this. A ship of the QM2s length will always pitch given the right combination of swell frequency and height.

 

As for the whole voyage, the weather was excellent overall......... no wind over force 6 (which was only briefly anyway) and the highest classifiaction the seas registered was rough........... which is just over halfway up the scale!

 

I was actually a bit disappointed that Cape Horn was so out of character with ONLY a 25 foot swell running!

 

In the words of the Captain, "the QM2 has without a doubt the best seagoing characteristics" and I for one would not choose any other vessel to run into REALLY rough seas on.

 

I have been onboard when the waves have been breaking over the bow with water over the 4th floor windows............. so we had it very good for the whole trip!!

[imacruizer]

Emu, would love to hear more about your voyage from LA to NY. Hope it was wonderful.

[lansonlady]

 
In respect of the Change of Itinerary - I have now issued a summons against Cunard and the Travel Agent that I used and I will keep you informed of progress.[/quote]

Do you have any update Fireman 999?

[fireman999]

Did you see the Sunday Express dated May 28th 2006 "Is the jinxed Queen Mary 2 sailing towards a disaster? In respect of the legal action I am waiting for a date for the court hearing.

[lansonlady]

Yes I did, I have a copy of it in my files!. We noticed a number of safety issues on board but it would be interesting to read what the list of '29 problems' included.

 

We did think it might have been you who had produced the report :)

 

I had to smile to myself when I saw the MCA web site has a picture of the QM2 in pride of place on their home page. Presumably they will be keen to have it replaced with a picture of another ship if the allegations are proven!

[guernseyguy]

Did you see the Sunday Express dated May 28th 2006 "Is the jinxed Queen Mary 2 sailing towards a disaster? In respect of the legal action I am waiting for a date for the court hearing.

 

For those interested in the article, the FT has an abstract:

 

http://calibre.mworld.com/m/m.w?lp=GetStory&id=197388241

 

How very public spirited of Mr Cox to point these out. No doubt it is completely un-related to any desire for compensation.

 

Peter

[patwell]

Excuse me, but do any of you "public spirited persons" ever find 'safety issues" elsewhere in your world?? Do you sue them too??? If this "list of 29 problems" is so crucial perhaps the rest of us who have cruises planned on QM2 should be apprised of them?

 

Peter, how right you are...I'm sure this has NOTHING at all to do with compensation of any sort. So why the secrecy????

Cheers, Penny...who can't believe we are going to have to listen to all of this again!!!

[lansonlady]

It is clear from your comments that you have never had to rescue anyone from a dangerous situation, or put your own life at risk fighting a fire, or simply 'pick up the pieces' when its all gone horribly wrong and the damage is done.

 

Neither have I - but I know a lot of 'public spirited professionals' in our emergency services who have - I married one. Maybe Mr Cox is one of these people too. These people also take holidays and yes they see safety issues in many areas of our 'world'.

 

When you live your life sorting out the problems, and sweepinng up the mess,then spotting the problems becomes second nature.

 

Highlighting the potential for danger on the QM2 won't secure anyone compensation but it may save lives.

 

Should we wait for another disaster at sea, there are plenty of lives that have already been lost due to safety issues not being given the consideration they deserve.

 

And as for "having to listen to all this again" - no-one forces you to read a thread you don't want to.

[patwell]

Lansonlady...I have the utmost respect for first responders of all sorts. Please don't presume to indicate differently. Especially since you don't know what I may or may not have done in life.

 

And I ask again, if the gentleman has a list of 29 problems that have apparently escaped the eye of regular safety inspections of the ship then I believe those of us who will be sailing on her deserve to see them and make our own determinations as to our potential risk. Especially as this list has been alluded to in a publication which calls the ship a "disaster waiting to happen", a quote that would appear to be directly attributable to the gentleman with the list. I don't believe questioning this is unreasonable.

 

quote lansonlady "no-one forces you to read a thread you don't want to."

Well that's a tad testy I'd say....Cheers, Penny

[lansonlady]

Yes Penny - you are right - it is a tad testy to say "no-one forces you to read this if you don't want to" and your observation on my comment has made me smile!

 

However, it was you that was complaining about the prospect of having to "listen" that provoked my 'testy' reponse.

 

We don't know who Mr Cox is. We don't know what his 29 points are. We don't know why the Sunday Express didn't print the detail of his claims. We do know that the MCA is investigating his claims and hopefully we will find out the results of their investigations.

 

Its true I don't know anything about what you have done in life, but I do know that people who live their lives dealing with fire and safety issues don't just switch off because they are not at work. And even the "Most Famous Ocean Liners in the world" are not above scrutiny or culpabilty if their safety standards are not acceptable.

 

I applaude people for raising issues regarding safety. I don't think anyone should sneer or assume their motives are about compensation. There are people who post on these boards who have made their views openly about their dissatisfaction with aspects of Cunards "White Star Service". These people don't need to hide behind safety issues.

 

We should all be grateful that a Fire and Safety Expert has taken the trouble to bring the issues to the attention of the appropriate Agency.

[patwell]

Lansonlady... I'm glad I made you smile. I meant no offense and I'm glad you didn't take it that way. What i didn't want to "listen" to again was what the original premise of this thread was about...and that was the OP's complaints about missed ports, inadequate compensation and too many sea days, and his prospects of legal action as a result of this. Disappointing to have your itinerary changed? Absolutely...but not earth shattering and certainly not cause for legal remedy in my humble opinion.

 

In no way would I ever make light of safety issues of any sort where the public is involved. And I would continue to read this thread as that seems to be the direction it's headed. Safety at sea is a huge concern to us all and it is that reason that I would like to know what this gentleman has presented on his list. It's a bit disconcerting to read that the ship you will soon sail is a "disaster waiting to happen" and not be provided with substantiation of that assertion.

 

As a child I was in a fire at sea on the North Atlantic...by my Mother's accounts we spent almost the entire night on deck in March weather at our lifeboats with life jackets on as they fought the fire. Fortunately I have no memory of it but I was apparently passed from passenger to passenger to keep me warm and to give my Mom a rest. Fire is a frightening thing no matter where it is. Penny

[lansonlady]

For those interested in the article, the FT has an abstract:

 

http://calibre.mworld.com/m/m.w?lp=GetStory&id=197388241

 

How very public spirited of Mr Cox to point these out. No doubt it is completely un-related to any desire for compensation.

 

Peter

 

For those interested....The link posted above is the article, not an extract.

 

We will have to wait to see if the results are published before we judge Mr Cox's efforts or his motives.

[QueenValerie]

:D Don't you people know how to read a passenger contract. Company is allowed to change itinerary as needed and you signed it when you paid for your cruise. Stop whining or jump over board.....

 

 

 

 

 

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.

[pepperrn]

We will have to wait to see if the results are published before we judge Mr Cox's efforts or his motives.

 

Lansonlady

 

What a very sensible suggestion. I'm sure we all have opinions about this (I know I have). I look forward to reading how his case develops and it's conclusion.

[guernseyguy]

For those interested....The link posted above is the article, not an extract. We will have to wait to see if the results are published before we judge Mr Cox's efforts or his motives.

 

Since it is not a direct quote I was trying to be charitable....from the tone of the original post reporting it, I had assumed an exhaustive investigation, listing the 29 problems, not just two, nor a re-hash of the 'jinxed' story. If Mr Cox is Fireman999, perhaps he would like to share with the board the 29 problems, so future travellers may be forewarned - surely THAT would be public spirited?

 

Peter

[lansonlady]

What i didn't want to "listen" to again was what the original premise of this thread was about...and that was the OP's complaints about missed ports, inadequate compensation and too many sea days, and his prospects of legal action as a result of this.

 

Penny, you may not be interested to know how the OP'S complaints/legal action is progressing but I am.

 

There are many threads on these boards that are full of discussion that is absolutely no interest to me, but people are either having fun with each other, sharing knowledge/experience or just getting things off their chest. I 'double click' and move on.

 

With all due respect, your comment about having to listen is not fair on the rest of us who are interested this particular thread/subject. Even if there are only two of us interested!

 

Fireman 999 took only 14 words to answer my enquiry about his progress. He hasn't gone over his complaint again - he doesn't need to its all written on this thread.

 

You have already judged Fireman 999's complaints. I'm really surprised you aren't interested to know how his legal action is progressing if only to discover how the law judges the fairness of Cunards contract with its customers. For me, that is really interesting, and I hope that Fireman 999 will share his legal experience with those of us who are interested.

 

At least you and I agree on one thing - safety issues! Lets not confuse the arguments by cynically linking identifying safety issues with Compensation. They are more usually linked after something has gone wrong! - I hope Safety Experts will continue to highlight safety issues where ever they see them in our world, for the benefit of us all - We will.....

 

Cheers!

[Bramcruiser]

I think this thread is now really two threads and thus maybe we should consider moving the safety issue over to a new one.

 

As for the safety concerns I am quite open to hearing about it and think this is something that should be exposed to the appropriate authorities if there are truly violations of cetain codes. I don't know much enough at this point to form opinions.

 

I 100% agree with Penny on the original thread. A change of ports due to an accident to the pods is really no excuse for a lawsuit. Compensation for delays and missed ports are nice if and when they are offered but no cruise line has a contractual obligation to fulfill such. I totally feel bad for people stuck in these situations but no pain and suffering can possibly occur out of a change in iteniary. I think if Cunard loses this lawsuit it'll be a sad day for the cruise industry as a whole. Our western society is far too reliant on blaming everyone else and seeking redress for every problem that occurs. It would be a different story if the pod accident injured or killed a passenger but that never happened and Cunard still managed to leave port in one form or another. The revolt that took place last winter on the trip to Rio got enough media coverage but there was little sympathy from a lot of cruisers in general. The threats not to leave the ship when it arrived in Rio just about lost it for me. I know someone somewhere is going to flame me over my opinions on the latter but I've said my peace.

 

Lansonlady is obviously concerned about the outcome of this lawsuit and that is fine. Its her right to do so. Penny, I guess you and I just have to stop discussing it and hope the cruiseline wins.

 

Now if there truly are safety violations to discuss lets delve into this. However, I suspect that whatever an "expert" discovered about Cunard will most likely be found just on about every other cruise line. I feel an NBC Dateline exclusive coming up. he he he

[patwell]

Amen Bramcruiser...well said. Thanks...I have over $300 as a reservation deposit for DH's charter fishing trip in St Thomas....if for some reason we had to abort that port we'd be disappointed but I wouldn't expect Cunard to reimburse me and I certainly wouldn't sue. Stuff happens...deal with it and don't drag it on forever.

 

Lansonlady...you and will never agree on anything to do with this lawsuit so let's do agree to just drop it. So many other nice things to talk about regarding cruising. Cheers, Penny

[lansonlady]

Stuff happens...deal with it and don't drag it on forever.

 

Lansonlady...you and will never agree on anything to do with this lawsuit so let's do agree to just drop it. So many other nice things to talk about regarding cruising. Cheers, Penny

 

You are right Penny, 'stuff does happen' and unfortunately 'Legal Stuff' does drag on - but it will no doubt be resolved in the fulness of time. Although I suspect this case will not see the inside of a courtroom.

 

I am happy to drop our discussion. I truely hope you don't have to cancel your fishing trip in St Thomas! my Son wanted to do just the same when we were there but we didn't have enough time. And, I hope you have a wonderful cruise!

 

All that said, I hope you will be happy to allow me or anyone else that has an interest in this thread to discuss it freely.

 

I am away now to look for our next holiday.....Happy Cruising!