Major problem for Voyager Sept 12th cruise

[KC_fn]

I'm just reading the article about the Oceania situation, and way at the end of the article (easy to miss) it does say the following:

 

And passengers do have the right to say "no thanks, won't switch." "Princess does offer move-overs," notes Princess Cruises' Karen Tetherow, "but our guests have the opportunity to decline if they wish."

 

Is it different on Regent?

[seahorse]

Tryon, I feel for you. I know I'd be losing sleep and up and saying unprintable words if it happened to me. Being the holiday weekend of course makes it worse. I know that the 2 times my SO and I had a problem and contacted Mark Convoy or Gar, we were more than satisfied with his answer and in one case the compensation provided (It was a problem with one of their post cruise packages). Hopefully come Tuesday this will only have been a bad "dream" and you'll be happily on your way to your anticipated vacation.

 

Personally I think all of you are jumping the gun except Tryon. I believe instead of throwing potshots at Regent, we should wait to see what transpires. Maybe the problem is with her TA and not Regent. Two unlikely scenerios come to mind; 1. The TA was asked if she had any takers and accepted their being bumped without asking them or 2. The TA actually sold them a FAM rate and pocketed the difference. Both are highly unlikely with a good TA, but so is the idea of Regent bumping someone involuntarily.

 

As for that customer service person at regent who said they could do what they want, I hope Tryon got their name so they are disiplined or fired. That was totally uncalled for.

 

Richard, your advice was spoken like a true lawyer. ;)

 

A FAM rate can not be sold to a regular passenger by a TA and no TA in their right mind would make the decision on their own to bump. They would get sued up the wazoo:(

 

The only other senario that no one has mentioned is perhaps they were on a waitlist and it did not clear and they were not told that they were on one or misunderstood.

 

Princess offered passengers a free cruise if they would downgrade for our Sept 6th sailing. I declined.

[cruiseerf]

Regent..Radisson has done this many times before. They cancelled and bumped hundreds of people off the Diamond because the lease was "called" on the ship and it had to be returned....which all turned out to be false. The ship cost too much to run...high staff vs low passenger #'s.

 

While we all like to look at crusing as vacations and "fun" Cruises=Business and you should not forget this. if a Regent cruise overbooks by 3 cabins per cruise at $9000 per cabin is 27,000 per cruise X 45 cruises per year is 1.2 million dollars PER SHIP they can make extra by "overbooking" and arranging their own little insurance policy if they actually do not have the cancellations or emergencies they are betting on. Their compensation bills will be far less then NOT overbooking same as airlines. Strictly a business decision SAME as with the Diamond...they decided to sell those cabins knowing full well that the ship could be sold...or "called" as was the supposid case. 97% of the passengers are fine and when this occurs they pay up.

 

Nothing in life is set in stone....Radisson/Regent has done this for years but many people keep quiet about it as the compensation is high. Enjoy your cruise but I would most definitely look at Silversea or Seabourne as they supposidly have a no overbook policy. Travel safe.

[Off Shore]

I seem to remember that when we sailed on the Diamond in late June 2001 there was another cruise where the ship was chartered by a large group and those with early reservations were bounced; but this was with at least six months notice.

 

Danny Weitz

[Wendy The Wanderer]

I thought that Diamond episode was a one-off, and hardly comparable.

[cruiseluv]

A FAM rate can not be sold to a regular passenger by a TA and no TA in their right mind would make the decision on their own to bump. They would get sued up the wazoo:(

 

The only other senario that no one has mentioned is perhaps they were on a waitlist and it did not clear and they were not told that they were on one or misunderstood.

 

Princess offered passengers a free cruise if they would downgrade for our Sept 6th sailing. I declined.

 

 

I don't think the waitlist scenario applies either. Tryon said she has a cabin number, already received cruise tickets/ documents and even made dinner and excursions reservations!

[cruiseerf]

Radisson/Regent have cancelled cruises, overbooked passengers and played these games for years. There were rumours that this is why they went through the corporate rebranding to the name Regent....because Radisson's name had become Synonymous with these types of situations.

 

Bottom line....This is a cruise line caught putting money before passenger loyalty and satisfaction. Sad.....too bad they do not give passengers chances to put the truth into the ads we see in magazines day in and out. Things are never as they seem!

[seahorse]

I don't think the waitlist scenario applies either. Tryon said she has a cabin number, already received cruise tickets/ documents and even made dinner and excursions reservations!

 

I did not look back to the original, sorry:o

 

As far as what cruiseerf said.............huh:confused:

[cruiseyguy]

I have no problems with a cruise line overbooking if fair, equitable and PUBLISHED procedures are in place so that passengers have advance notice of the possibility it may happen and what will happen if it does. Airlines do this but they have far more transparency in their business practices than do the cruise companies.

[AtA]

Radisson/Regent have cancelled cruises, overbooked passengers and played these games for years. There were rumours that this is why they went through the corporate rebranding to the name Regent....because Radisson's name had become Synonymous with these types of situations.

 

Bottom line....This is a cruise line caught putting money before passenger loyalty and satisfaction. Sad.....too bad they do not give passengers chances to put the truth into the ads we see in magazines day in and out. Things are never as they seem!

If this is so common, then why is this the first time I'm hearing about it? I'm sure if it was "so common" as you state, everyone would be ranting and raving here on this board and on the other boards. The only time I've ever heard of this was when it was voluntary and quite frankly I only recall that happening once or twice. Are you sure you're not an agent who specializes in the other lines? Or a disgruntled employee?

[divenski]

One more possible reason why this happened, i.e. cruise was overbooked, is because of cancellations.

 

A few posters have noted that final payment was due many weeks/months ago, BUT pax do have a right to cancel for a penalty up to 15 days out. At 15 days, the fee is 50%, which is a lot, but I am sure that it happens from time to time.

 

So in order to maximize sales, Regent probably overbooks based on data which shows how many people cancel even if they have paid in full. The fact that the OP was notified about 2 weeks out supports this scenario, IMO. Not saying it's right, especially if RSSC gets 50% for free, but it seems likely.

 

Also, this looks like a somewhat unique cruise, i.e. with guest speakers, Cordon Bleu, etc, and so I could see that a lot of people would not want to switch.

 

Another possibility is that a room was taken out of service due to mechanical issues, but it would have to be a serious problem if they didn't think it could be fixed over the next 2 weeks.

[cruiseej]

Regent..Radisson has done this many times before. They cancelled and bumped hundreds of people off the Diamond because the lease was "called" on the ship and it had to be returned....which all turned out to be false. The ship cost too much to run...high staff vs low passenger #'s.

 

Cruiseerf, I know the Diamond is old news, and certainly in no way comparable to the subject of this thread, but I read about it a lot at the time -- we were on the last cruise of the Diamond -- and I never read anything supporting this claim. Sure, Radisson could have chosen to purchase the ship and didn't in the years before it was purchased, but that doesn't mean they weren't caught off-guard when the ship was purchased in January 2005 and the new owner wanted to take control very quickly. Unless you can point to solid evidence of your claim, it seems irresponsible to suggest that Radisson bumped hundreds (it actually was more than that for all the cruises scheduled between June and October of 2005) of passengers booked on future cruises in order to dump the ship quickly because it was too expensive to continue to run. The Diamond had a number of factors which likely figured in Radisson's decision not to purchase the ship: it was older (built in 1972), slower (limiting itineraries), more expensive to operate, and wasn't an all- or mostly-balcony ship. But a billionnaire's purchase of the ship from its owners doesn't mean Radisson was at fault, as you state. I certainly don't claim to be an expert in the cruise industry, so if you have facts to back up such a claim, I'd be most interested in reading about it. Otherwise, I'd suggest that claiming Radisson/Regent has a long and frequent history of bumping passengers based on this one event is off-base.

 

-- Eric

[cruiseerf]

In answer to a few quotes about my comments. No, not a travel agent or related to any travel related industry or have family in such industries....no connections whatsoever on this end.

 

Lastly, regarding business and the way the world works. Many things today happen in the world that are completely wrong and should not be. But with open cruise tickets like we purchase and companies firing employees and cover ups everywhere, you need to be a bit realistic about the way big business works. Radisson in the day of the diamond knew they had liability if the ship was called back....this was accepted and they made a business decision that it was cheaper to pay the passengers expenses then not book the season if the ship was not called. PURELY a business decision whether the ship was too slow, not enough balconies etc...that is fine but this decision was ultimately controlled by money and the people were inconvenienced similar to our original poster. That is the point. Whether it is Radisson/Regent or Carnival...many cruiselines do this.

 

Strictly as an FYI the old Diamond was in Hong Kong Harbour last week sitting there dormant and not going out on gambling cruises during the 3 days I was there....

 

You ask for proof of this? Do you really think anyone would post proof? Or a corporation would make said proof available? So then the line would open itself up to liability?....people calling up angry, articles written? What you do have is employees who talk....financial advisors who analzye books, liabilities and a variety of different sources which all large corporations have. Information trickles down and it does not take much these days to learn why things happen or the reasons behind the decisions. Anybody living in Miami can learn about this. Do you think the automobile manufacturers who it took years to sue due to faulty seatbelts and gastanks provided "justifiable proof" of what happened....course not. Please be realistic....this is why we have boards....blogs, and a variety of unconfirmed sources whom you can glean information from and choose to believe or not.

 

I seem to have struck a cord with some because I suggested other cruise lines....Regent screwed up with this overbooking as the emails suggest and other cruiselines do similar. I am not laying this solely on Regents doorstep. What I do say is it appears that this has been done to others and this is a part of their business plan. Do other cruiselines do the same? Sure....until Congress enacts a cruise passenger bill of rights (something cruiselines spend millions per year lobbying against) we are all at the cruiselines mercy.

 

Cruising is great fun, an excellent easy vacation but Regent should not have overbooked that cruise and if it was me, I would be very upset. Please don't kill the messenger.

 

Travel safe healthy and well!

[Wendy The Wanderer]

That's sad to hear about the Diamond.

 

No news about the main issue yet?

[Iamboatman]

Well, I'm not on a Fam fare or any reduced fare or Non revenue fare. I paid full price. But I have to admit your email (POSS) made me wonder if I should trust my travel agent and not call REGENT directly to find out. So I called, spoke to Tara C who told me that my TA had not lied, I have been bumped, that they don't have to ask for volunteers and that Nolan Gaskill ;the head of inventory, won't be available until Tuesday to answer any questions. So excuse my post if I'm rather curt, but I'm absolutely seething right now.

 

Those pondering a FAM or other fare are probably well off base. FAM fares require agents be tagged to them and FAMS on high demand sailings don't usually happen.

 

Similarly, there is a huge difference from a ship's sailing being canceled months in advance because of a charter and an individual move-off at the last minute. I have never heard of a move-off so that a partial charter so to speak (as no such thing exists) could be filled.

 

While move-offs do happen - generally because the model for how many will cancel last minute for medical, work or other reasons didn't play out - it is inconceivable to me that it would be done without an inquiry being made and a volunteer obtained.

 

I am very interested in the outcome.

[tryan70]

Sorry, meant to post earlier but the day after a holiday is always busy.

 

I am satisfied with the outcome. I didn't hear from REGENT directly, but my TA called me this morning (I had emailed her over the weekend, including the links to the message boards as well as my communication with Mr Conroy) with an update. By mid-day she reported back to me that "the bumping" was rescinded, that I am back on board and in the same suite as I had been before. As a "good will" gesture REGENT has posted a shipboard credit to our suite. As all I wanted was a reinstatement of what I had paid for, I am satisfied with this outcome.

 

I want to thank everyone again for their concern and their advice. I think I can say "literally", I couldn't have done this without you. Thank you.

[NCCruzQueen]

Great news, tryan70,

 

As long as you are happy, go and have a wonderful cruise.

[Dolebludger]

Fantastic, tyran!!! I know we all hope you really enjoy your cruise.

[Donaldm]

That is wonderful news. If you get more details (even after the cruise) could you post it? I guess the old saying applies: the squeeky wheel gets the grease.

-Don in Sacramento

[seahorse]

Great news:D

[cruiseerf]

Congratulations.....I am Very happy that Regent is standing by your reservation and stepping up to the plate. Enjoy your trip and travel safe!

[count florida]

We have been cruising with Radisson and Regent since the Diamond's westbound transatlantic crossing in the fall of 2000, will make SSS Platinum on our Grand Pacific cruise that starts later this month, and I've never heard of them doing anything like bumping someone less than 2 weeks before departure! I have been a regular (not frequent) poster on this site for at least five years, as well as on another with similar interest, and I've never heard anything like the claim that

 

"Radisson/Regent have cancelled cruises, overbooked passengers and played these games for years. There were rumors that this is why they went through the corporate rebranding to the name Regent....because Radisson's name had become Synonymous with these types of situations."

 

To the contrary, in 2003 the Navigator blew its bow thrusters and had to go into dry-dock, canceling two segments of a three-segment cruise from Montreal to Florida we were booked on. Many options were offered, including any available cruises that year. In place of the 7-6-7 day cruise we were booked on, we sailed around So. America for 43 days on the Mariner - same price! That is the way Radisson handled things in the past!

 

Lately, and despite Mark Conroy's recent statement "We are in the business of saying yes to our guests" (http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2007/sep/02/staterooms-on-regent-wont-smell-of-smoke/) Regent has become a rigid, negative-responding cruise line in many aspects of its business. Thank goodness the ships and crews seem to have escaped most of these very real negatives so far!

 

This incident is bad enough without exaggerating the fallacies of the RSSC line! But the fact that someone is angry enough with Regent to post such a statement should send a message that there are some very unhappy folks out there just waiting for them to stub their toe!

[tryan70]

I wanted to give just a f/u that I think will put many worries to rest. This morning I received a call from Ken Watson. This call was followed by an email in which Mr Watson expressed an apology both personal and from the company for the manner in which the above events were handled. In particular he acknowledged that mistakes were made, but some good will come out of this event in that it pointed out a need for improvement in inventory control and the guest notification process. I again expressed I was quite satisfied with the ultimate outcome and very happy that he had called (I think I can finally breathe easy that there won't be any problems during embarkation). I just wanted to share, that in the end, REGENT got it right. Looking forward to a stress free cruise.

[jhp]

Okay, Tryan is satisfied, and that is the most important thing! She has received an apology from Regent that suits her. She has been made whole for her ordeal, and more, and Regent has handled it well. This being a private matter, no need for any public apology to the rest of us from Regent, as they handle their problems case by case, and this one and others usually turn out more to the benefit of the passenger if there is a problem. I am happy that Tryan was so reasonable throughout this ordeal, had no doubt it would get resolved, as Regent hasn't let me down after a few blips along the way with my 20 cruises with them! Thank you Mark Conroy, and others who helped our friend along the way!

[freddie]

Tryan - I, like most of the posters here, am delighted that this worked out and that Regent acknowledged that they make a mistake. One can hope that they will take appropriate measures to reduce the chances of such an event occurring again.

 

Count - With respect to your comment that, "But the fact that someone is angry enough with Regent to post such a statement should send a message that there are some very unhappy folks out there just waiting for them to stub their toe!", I would suggest that the poster in question has not shown any evidence to back up his/her assertion that Regent is known for such events. It appears, rather, that the poster in question has an agenda much more than an anger issue. I am not an apologist for Regent, having posted highly critical comments about the PG and being currently booked on Seabourn and Silversea, in addition to a couple of Regent cruises. However, the poster whom you quoted clearly is intent on slamming Regent irrespective of his/her lack of any examples of Regent's having "played these games for years". I would respectfully suggest that we should all be wary of buying into the animus of certain posters whose motives are somewhat suspect and whose facts are even more so.

 

Cheers, Fred