Fuel Supplement announced (4 merged threads)

[maiden]

I was just on the Celebrity website and yes, the are also charging each passenger a $5.00 per day surcharge up to I think $170.00.

[Brad1185]

Its up to $70 pp not $170

[jaxon41]

Yes we were.

 

Fuel supplement is not always included.

 

Let that be a warning to all who book charter flight/vacations.

[dkjretired]

Well, we have all become more atuned on the necessity of reading contracts before we put money down, I think. Before the Nov 16th announcement such an eventuality of a surcharge did not exist (at least for RCI/X cruisers), but, now, of course, it does. , some are less onerous.

 

Why would you say the eventuality of a surcharge did not exist before Nov. 16th. when they had one a few years ago. Seems to me if you are at all aware of the news, the possibility might exist of a surcharge. I just don't see the big deal and haven't since this whole thing started.

[Tatka]

Let that be a warning to all who book charter flight/vacations.

 

It's nothing new... It happened in 2000, but even then it was nothing new. Fuel supplement always existed, sometimes it's included in the price, sometimes not. Either way you are paying it.

[Jade13]

The cruise lines that provided a grace period all have a higher surcharge of $7 or more/day/person - some without a limit on the # of days or the # of passengers/cabin. The cruise lines that did not allow a grace period are charging a lower amount, but spreading it out amongst all cruises from a particular date, regardless of when it was booked. Celebrity could have gone one step further and did what Carnival is doing...include the charge for those who have already paid in full.

 

It looks like Celebrity took the 'middle road' & I doubt that cruiselines could go down any road on this issue without numerous complaints.

 

Susan, Celebrity came out on the 16th and said anyone who was paid in full by the 15th was exempt. That is my issue, not the surcharge itself. I still think there were people who had inside knowledge and could have paid in full a day earlier. Regent, I believe, gave pax until December 1 to pay in full. I would not pay in full for a cruise next summer but would have for one in mid February that I was going to pay within two weeks of the announcement anyway. Celebrity did not handle this even across the board and that is what I personally have a problem with. In fact, they still have not e-mailed me about this surcharge. There has been no customer service after I booked my cruise. My Vacation Planner left the company probably the same week I booked and they won't give pax a new one because of the commission (they even told me that).

[SHill64]

Here's the e-mail I got from RCCL/Celebrity dated 11/17/2007. Where does it say anything about being paid in full by 11/15/2007?? :confused:

 

This notice is from Royal Caribbean International:

We are writing to provide you with important information regarding a new

fuel supplement that Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. is

implementing for three of its brands, Royal Caribbean International®,

Celebrity Cruises® and Azamara CruisesSM.

 

Today, in an effort to deal with the sharp increase in fuel prices, Royal

Caribbean International announced the implementation of a fuel supplement of

$5 per guest per day for sailings that depart on or after February 1, 2008.

The supplement will assist the company in offsetting the

widespread increases in fuel prices, which have more than doubled in recent

years.

 

We thank you for understanding our need to implement this fuel supplement.

We have gone to great lengths to minimize

the impact of rising fuel costs, for example, designing and building more

fuel-efficient ships, installing energy-saving lighting,

and using air conditioning more efficiently. Unfortunately, as fuel prices

have reached record highs, we are forced to take this extraordinary

step to offset those costs. The supplement will be periodically reviewed,

with the intent of being temporary, and may be adjusted

as fuel prices fluctuate.

 

We have taken measures to soften the impact of this decision. For example,

we will not apply the supplement on any bookings where

the guest has already paid the full cost of the cruise. In addition, guests

who were booked before November 16, and who do not agree

to pay the supplement, may cancel their reservation prior to December 7,

2007, for a full refund of all monies they have paid to the

company, and they will not be subject to any cancellation charges that would

normally apply. Those guests who do not cancel their

reservation and pay in full will receive one logo item per stateroom,

onboard their cruise. Finally, the supplement will apply only to the

first and second guests in each stateroom and will not exceed $70 per

person, per sailing.

[jaxon41]

Why would you say the eventuality of a surcharge did not exist before Nov. 16th. when they had one a few years ago. Seems to me if you are at all aware of the news, the possibility might exist of a surcharge. I just don't see the big deal and haven't since this whole thing started.

 

The contract language changed on the 16th, prior to that, the language was very clear --- after deposit there would be no increase except for taxes and government imposed fees. I have no idea what the contract language was the last time one was imposed -- maybe no one took the trouble to read it and they got away with it, so thought, they might as well do it, again? Seems to me the language would have been the same after the 1997 settlement with the Fl AG. There is a class action suit questioning whether that settlement protocal was indeed followed regarding the port taxes.

 

The deal is honoring a contract that did not allow for an increase after deposit. None of the many who have lodged complaints with the line, the AG, or whomever has yet to hear what their contract justification was thought to be.

[jaxon41]

Here's the e-mail I got from RCCL/Celebrity dated 11/17/2007. Where does it say anything about being paid in full by 11/15/2007?? :confused:

 

This notice is from Royal Caribbean International:

We are writing to provide you with important information regarding a new

fuel supplement that Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. is

implementing for three of its brands, Royal Caribbean International®,

Celebrity Cruises® and Azamara CruisesSM.

 

Today, in an effort to deal with the sharp increase in fuel prices, Royal

Caribbean International announced the implementation of a fuel supplement of

$5 per guest per day for sailings that depart on or after February 1, 2008.

The supplement will assist the company in offsetting the

widespread increases in fuel prices, which have more than doubled in recent

years.

 

We thank you for understanding our need to implement this fuel supplement.

We have gone to great lengths to minimize

the impact of rising fuel costs, for example, designing and building more

fuel-efficient ships, installing energy-saving lighting,

and using air conditioning more efficiently. Unfortunately, as fuel prices

have reached record highs, we are forced to take this extraordinary

step to offset those costs. The supplement will be periodically reviewed,

with the intent of being temporary, and may be adjusted

as fuel prices fluctuate.

 

We have taken measures to soften the impact of this decision. For example,

we will not apply the supplement on any bookings where

the guest has already paid the full cost of the cruise. In addition, guests

who were booked before November 16, and who do not agree

to pay the supplement, may cancel their reservation prior to December 7,

2007, for a full refund of all monies they have paid to the

company, and they will not be subject to any cancellation charges that would

normally apply. Those guests who do not cancel their

reservation and pay in full will receive one logo item per stateroom,

onboard their cruise. Finally, the supplement will apply only to the

first and second guests in each stateroom and will not exceed $70 per

person, per sailing.

 

It's inherent within the document -- "we will not apply the supplement on any bookings where

the guest has already paid the full cost of the cruise"

The change was implemented at their announcement on the 16th -- to be paid in full prior to that date would mean, by the 15th, at the latest.

 

However, a poster on the RCI thread is reporting that they paid in full on the 16th and they got an email saying they would not be assessed.

 

I am pretty sure the announcement was released on the 16th, and you must be one of the very, very few who got an email who had a booking.

[SHill64]

I'm not a "cheerleader" any cruise lines, but I feel this thread has gotten argumentative. Here are your options. Either pay the $5 per day, per person or cancel your cruise by 12/7/2007. Period. Spouting legal jargon and pointing out over and over what the cruise lines have done wrong in you opinion, will not stop the "fuel surcharge" It's that simple.

I've also noticed a member's posts here have been deleted. I hope in all fairness to this member and others, the moderator will close this thread to further posts. Please no more!

 

Shaun

[jaxon41]

I'm not a "cheerleader" any cruise lines, but I feel this thread has gotten argumentative. Here are your options. Either pay the $5 per day, per person or cancel your cruise by 12/7/2007. Period. Spouting legal jargon and pointing out over and over what the cruise lines have done wrong in you opinion, will not stop the "fuel surcharge" It's that simple.

I've also noticed a member's posts here have been deleted. I hope in all fairness to this member and others, the moderator will close this thread to further posts. Please no more!

 

Shaun

 

Why would anyone say you have 2 options, pay or cancel? How do you know that the thousands who have lodged a complaint over what they see as a contract violation, won't have success? If you do not want to follow this thread, I think that is your perogative, but why do you think you should have the right to ask that it be closed to others? There are 1400 plus posts on this at the RCI thread, over 1,000 on the Carnival thread, and only a couple hundred here.

 

I do not understand why anyone would get their drawers in a bunch because others want to stand up for themselves -- it is truly bizarre!

[dkjretired]

The contract language changed on the 16th, prior to that, the language was very clear --- after deposit there would be no increase except for taxes and government imposed fees. I have no idea what the contract language was the last time one was imposed -- maybe no one took the trouble to read it and they got away with it, so thought, they might as well do it, again? Seems to me the language would have been the same after the 1997 settlement with the Fl AG. There is a class action suit questioning whether that settlement protocal was indeed followed regarding the port taxes.

 

The deal is honoring a contract that did not allow for an increase after deposit. None of the many who have lodged complaints with the line, the AG, or whomever has yet to hear what their contract justification was thought to be.

 

I think you are making an assumption that the contract changed on that date, I remember it being in there and all the other lines have had it in their contracts. If you look at various contracts from cruise lines, they essentially mirror each other. I don't believe in limiting discussion on this and I wish you well in attempting to obtain monies but I just can't see it happening and considering everything in the news, it should not have been a surprise to anyone.

[jobob]

I think you are making an assumption that the contract changed on that date, I remember it being in there and all the other lines have had it in their contracts. If you look at various contracts from cruise lines, they essentially mirror each other. I don't believe in limiting discussion on this and I wish you well in attempting to obtain monies but I just can't see it happening and considering everything in the news, it should not have been a surprise to anyone.

 

I will state up front: I do not have a cruise booked with Celebrity. However, I have 4 booked with RCCL. I printed the Q&A that was on the RCL website before the fuel supplement charge and it states the only increases after full deposit will be for gov't imposed taxes and fees. My Cruise/Cruisetour ticket contract dated Oct. 26th for my Dec. cruise makes no mention of additional fees or taxes of any kind. I understand this is getting tedious and boring to many, however if I don't stand up for what I think is right I will be ashamed of myself. Any person has the right to disagree with my convictions.

[shepp]

I think you are making an assumption that the contract changed on that date, I remember it being in there and all the other lines have had it in their contracts. If you look at various contracts from cruise lines, they essentially mirror each other. I don't believe in limiting discussion on this and I wish you well in attempting to obtain monies but I just can't see it happening and considering everything in the news, it should not have been a surprise to anyone.

 

With all due respect...if what you "remember" about the details of the X contract regarding adding surcharges does in fact contradict the brochure's unambiguous language, it would be helpful to see the clause in question rather than taking a vague recollection as fact. I mean, somebody must have a dated copy of that contract somewhere, no? (Of course, it would then be a good question why the language in the brochure doesn't match that in the contract.) And it would also be interesting to know why an additional enabling clause in the contract seems to have been added at just the time the surcharge was imposed.

 

While it was not, no, a surprise to me that a surcharge was added, it was a surprise to find out on the 16th that if I'd made final payment just a few hours earlier, I would have saved nearly 10% on the base price of my cruise. I think very few posters here or on the RCCL board are objecting to the charge per se - just to its mode of implementation. If X had lived up to what it had previously promised cruisers, adding the charge only to new bookings as NCL is doing, these threads would be a lot shorter - like the one on the NCL board.

[FinelyCruising]

If I have it correct, I do not get my 'contract' until I have paid in full. I think have that right....

 

And yes....while I see this thread has taken on a legal beagle overture by some, I prefer to hear facts, so I don't really rely on the speculation of the legal beagles when it comes to this issue.

[dkjretired]

With all due respect...if what you "remember" about the details of the X contract regarding adding surcharges does in fact contradict the brochure's unambiguous language, it would be helpful to see the clause in question rather than taking a vague recollection as fact. I mean, somebody must have a dated copy of that contract somewhere, no? (Of course, it would then be a good question why the language in the brochure doesn't match that in the contract.) And it would also be interesting to know why an additional enabling clause in the contract seems to have been added at just the time the surcharge was imposed.

 

While it was not, no, a surprise to me that a surcharge was added, it was a surprise to find out on the 16th that if I'd made final payment just a few hours earlier, I would have saved nearly 10% on the base price of my cruise. I think very few posters here or on the RCCL board are objecting to the charge per se - just to its mode of implementation. If X had lived up to what it had previously promised cruisers, adding the charge only to new bookings as NCL is doing, these threads would be a lot shorter - like the one on the NCL board.

 

There had to be a cutoff date and no matter what happened not everyone would be happy.

 

As far as finding a contract, please give me the same freedom to express my views. I haven't seen anything on this board to show that it was not there before the 16th. I have just as much right to say I believe it was in there as others have in saying it wasn't. I am in the process of moving from one state to another and quite frankly I don't know where my documents are and don't have the time right now to look for it.

[jaxon41]

I think you are making an assumption that the contract changed on that date, I remember it being in there and all the other lines have had it in their contracts. If you look at various contracts from cruise lines, they essentially mirror each other. I don't believe in limiting discussion on this and I wish you well in attempting to obtain monies but I just can't see it happening and considering everything in the news, it should not have been a surprise to anyone.

 

I agree about the mirroring, which is why I think one can put some reliance on the contracts of the mother company for guidance, with exception of specialty ships, or European contracts since their laws differ. X and RCCL brochure langage certainly mirrors each other. As a poster down thread mentions, a difference between the brochure, advertisement, and the contract (especially as a poster down thread states is only received after final payment!) would be a different issue.

 

Alas, I never save my old contracts, once fulfulled, but I am wondering how another poster found the old language on line for RCCL.

 

Thanks for the well wishes.

[Jade13]

Here's the e-mail I got from RCCL/Celebrity dated 11/17/2007. Where does it say anything about being paid in full by 11/15/2007?? :confused:

 

 

 

We have taken measures to soften the impact of this decision. For example,

we will not apply the supplement on any bookings where

the guest has already paid the full cost of the cruise. quote]

 

Right in your quote. It would have meant anyone paid prior to the announcement.

[Jade13]

I think you are making an assumption that the contract changed on that date, I remember it being in there and all the other lines have had it in their contracts. If you look at various contracts from cruise lines, they essentially mirror each other. I don't believe in limiting discussion on this and I wish you well in attempting to obtain monies but I just can't see it happening and considering everything in the news, it should not have been a surprise to anyone.

 

Don, I qoted the language from the last two Carribean Brochures and it does say governmental increases. There is an additional paragraph that is questionable because it is not attached to the one before it. I posted the language.

[Jade13]

 

While it was not, no, a surprise to me that a surcharge was added, it was a surprise to find out on the 16th that if I'd made final payment just a few hours earlier, I would have saved nearly 10% on the base price of my cruise. I.

 

My issue too.

[Jade13]

If I have it correct, I do not get my 'contract' until I have paid in full. I think have that right....

 

And yes....while I see this thread has taken on a legal beagle overture by some, I prefer to hear facts, so I don't really rely on the speculation of the legal beagles when it comes to this issue.

 

Look at the language in the printed brochures.

[Jade13]

Here's the e-mail I got from RCCL/Celebrity dated 11/17/2007. Where does it say anything about being paid in full by 11/15/2007?? :confused:

 

 

 

We have taken measures to soften the impact of this decision. For example,

we will not apply the supplement on any bookings where

the guest has already paid the full cost of the cruise. quote]

 

Right in your quote. It would have meant anyone paid prior to the announcement.

 

Fro the Celebrity Wed Site:

 

"- (Effective November 16, 2007 ) - Because of the sharp increases in fuel prices, Celebrity Cruises has announced a fuel supplement for North America reservations of $5 per guest, per day, for sailings that depart on or after February 1, 2008.

 

The supplement applies to the first and second guests in a stateroom up to a maximum of $70 per person per sailing, for new and existing bookings. The company will not apply the supplement where the guest has already paid the full cost of the cruise for bookings paid in full prior to the implementation date.

 

The supplement will assist the company in offsetting the widespread increases in fuel prices that have more than doubled in recent years. The supplement will be periodically reviewed, with the intent of being temporary and may be adjusted as fuel prices fluctuate.

 

We thank our guests for understanding our need to implement this fuel supplement. We have gone to great lengths to minimize the impact of rising fuel costs. Unfortunately, as fuel prices have reached record highs, we are forced to take this extraordinary step to offset our record costs and to remain competitive within our industry."

[jaxon41]

I am hoping that an x cruiser has a copy of the contract before 11-15. I have not been able to find it on line, and currently you can't find the contract of carriage at X's site, period. "Sorry for the inconvenience, but we are working...."

 

I could find RCCL's prior contract by googling, however. The only contract I found purportedly for X had no identified on the PDF as being for X, mentioned RCCL, wasn't dated, but did have clause #21 -- so I am really curious for someone to come up with their old contract of carriage.

 

X's site does talk about not getting this info until on-line check in or docs receipt, which I think is problematic if it is going to differ from the brochure info.

[shepp]

I suppose I'm as guilty as anyone else of attempted legal hair-splitting here. This is getting even more arcane than debates over the meaning of "jeans." I just go back to what seems to me to be self-evident: If a company unambiguously states something in an official brochure, a consumer should have a reasonable expectation that the company will stand by that. And if they don't, that they'll either a) give decent warning that the provision will be changed, or b) if confronted with the facts, eat it.

 

RCI has done neither.

 

And "I needed the money" is not a valid excuse for breach of contract. Uh-uh.

[Toyboats]

The Royal Caribbean board seems to have a much greater activity on the issue of the fuel surcharge. In reviewing recent posts there, I noted that at least one CC member indicated that they had received notification from RCI that since they made final payment on 11/16, the fuel surcharge fee would be waived. I made final payment on 11/16 based on the information that was posted on this board. It will be interesting to see if the RCCL waiver also applies to Celebrity and whether it will be waived for future final payments for pax that made full deposits prior to 11/16.

I consider myself in the group of passengers that can afford the additional costs, but believe that Celebrity has made a unilateral change to a contract and violated prior agreements made with me and the State of Florida (see 1997 agreement). Should the surcharge not be waived, I will not cancel the cruise, but will consider carefully all expendtures made during the cruise.