Bad experience on Paul Gauguin

[rloeb]

After months of trying to get a response from Regent Seven Seas Cruises, we have decided to publicise our disappointing experience so that others can save their money by staying away from this ship!

 

Copy of our 2nd letter to RSSC (which was also not answered) follows---

 

Mr. Mark Conroy

President

Regent Seven Seas Cruises

1000 Corporate Drive, Suite 500

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33334

Re: Sailing date 9/28/07, original cabin E425, upgraded C767

 

I am writing again to explain how dissatisfied my husband and I were with our Tahitian Gauguin cruise experience. We were asked if we wanted to “upgrade to a veranda cabin”. The two thousand dollars seemed like a lot, but because we were celebrating our 25th Anniversary we decided to splurge, even more, as we assumed we would make good use of our accommodations. When our travel agent informed me of the option, I asked if it could be held to discuss this with my husband. We checked on the Internet to see the location of the room but it wasn’t on the diagram. The agent said it was a better cabin with a veranda on the back of the ship and she said Reagent assured her it was a cabin upgrade.

 

The cabin did give us a veranda but this upgraded cabin was underneath the Night Club. Every night at 11 the music would start. The few nights we were asleep at that time we were awakened and if we were trying to fall asleep it was impossible – between the movement of the furniture and the loud music. We called several times only to be told we’ll make it quieter. The second to last night Virginie Bouysson said I’ll get back with you soon, as I don’t want to leave you hanging. She ended up leaving us a message the next day, which we could not access because there was no card in the room explaining how to activate voice messaging (The cabin we moved to the last night had this card). We again went to the help desk and were told we could move later that evening, the last night to another cabin.

 

Another problem with our upgraded cabin was the inability to regulate the temperature without it being excessively cold or hot about 80% of the time. (Not a problem in the cabin we spent the last evening) Also, a putrid odor came from the sink or vents in the bathroom in the cabin. The steward came on several occasions to “cover up” the disgusting odor with an orange scented spray. One night the spray was so powerful we needed to redress and leave the cabin to permit the scent to disperse.

 

Virgine Bouysson told us to talk to Mr. O’Neill upon our return. We wrote to him and three weeks later received an unsatisfactory response. I called him and after much difficulty got a bunch of mumbo jumbo saying there was nothing wrong with your cabin and I am finished with you. I told him I wanted to speak to someone else in charge and he claimed to give me Mr. Watson’s Extension – it was not. He told me Mr. Watson would be out until the following Tuesday. I replied fine, but please ask him to call me. When another week passed I attempted to call Mr. Watson and was told I had the wrong extension and that he would be out of the office for another ten days.

 

In closing, a vacation that we expected to be of the “highest standard of cruising excellence” did not leave us with “all the fond memories and fresh perspectives” we had anticipated as our upgraded cabin was substandard. We expect at the very least our upgrade be refunded.

[Gardening Girl]

I'm just curious, did you happen to check the CC member reviews on the Paul Gauguin before booking your original cabin & cruise??

 

We just booked our first ever cruise on a RSSC on the Mariner for April to celebrate our 15th anniversary, and I spent alot of time reading the boards and reviews on all their ships. I would have prefered to go to Tahiti than the Caribbean, but I saw that the Gauguin received some disturbing reviews, stating that it is not at the level of luxury, food not as good, etc. as the other RSSC ships.

 

Also I spent alot of time choosing our cabin making sure that we are not located above or below areas that may be noisy, such as the swimming pool, casino, nightclub, restaurant, etc. We are sensitive to noise, we live out in the country so when we travel we always look for what appears to be a quiet room, etc. This is why we would not be able to do a guarantee in a category because we would not be happy to be under a nightclub, etc.

 

Sorry I don't have any suggestions of how to get some kind of refund from Regent!!

 

Happy Anniversary! I wish you happy travels in your future! GG

[Wendy The Wanderer]

So I guess those new aft cabins aren't so great, that's too bad. How was the rest of the cruise? The service, the food, the destination, the excursions?

[freddie]

It appears to me that the upgrade from 425 (a window cabin) to 767 (an aft balcony cabin with the new larger bathroom) is in fact a significant upgrade. The fact that 767 is below La Palette is clear on the current RSSC website - perhaps it was not at the time you had to make the decision (or you did not take the time to study the deck plans carefully). One always takes a risk with a cabin above or below a noisy venue, such as the restaurant or a nightclub. In our case, since we usually were among the group closing down La Palette each night, it would not have been a problem at all.

 

Frankly, even though we certainly will attest that the PG is not at the same level of quality as the other Regent ships, it seems quite unreasonable to suggest that passengers would be well advised by "staying away from this ship!" simply because you had the bad luck/bad judgment to take a cabin on the deck below La Palette and did not like the noise.

 

Just my own humble opinion, of course...

 

Cheers, Fred

[planner8]

I think your TA should have done his/her homework for cabin selection -

[Iamboatman]

I think your TA should have done his/her homework for cabin selection -

 

It is important that one's travel agent advise a client that is not familiar with a particular ship what to expect where the cabin is located. A novice cruiser just wouldn't know. I met people who had a Grand Suite and hated it because it was far forward and the bed faced fore and aft, so sleep was not easy. I truly enjoyed the PG, and I probably would have enjoyed the particular cabin (sans the smell issue!) because I generally stay out later. Bad advice or not enough advice. I think that is issue one.

 

That said, I would have been very disappointed if I was expecting true luxury because not matter how good the PG is, it is not true luxury. That Grand Suite was larger, but nothing special and no real design. I am interested in the OP's view of other aspects of the ship, but figure it probably would be colored and fairly so without a good night's sleep and not great response.

 

If there was nothing else, Customer Relations may have not handled this too well. There is, to be sure, another side to the story and I can't tell if this is Regent saying it cannot guarantee noise issues so there is nothing it can do, or if it is something else. Many times a delayed response is worse than a negative one. Hopefully this is explained better.

 

Regardless, it is unfortunate the OP didn't have a great experience. I still instantly smile when I think back to my time on the PG last summer.

[Travelcat2]

The lack of response from Regent is disturbing and not typical. It is possible that the PG is caught in the middle of Regent being purchased by Apollo, Grand Circle Travel (the owner of the PG) also being sold, etc?

 

I do agree that more research should have been done prior to this cruise (particularly by the travel agent), however, there is no excuse for Regent not responding.

[DocDesdin]

It appears Regent did respond, however it was an unsatisfactory response for the customer.

[egret]

It is too bad that rloeb had a poor experience with cabin noise and responsiveness from Regent. The only cabins immune from noise are probably deck 8 true "veranda" suites, as long as no one is doing laps. I have experience with noise at night from an adjoining room in a bungalow at a luxury resort and I can sympathize with how miserable it can be. I am not sure Regent can do anything to make it better. This does reconfirm my choice of midship C cabin on deck 7. We got some morning noise when the crew started cleaning the deck and moving chairs etc, but we were usually up by then.

When/if we are at the lounge late at night we will try to be quiet to minimize the discomfort to the folks in those cabins next week.

While the PG may not be perfect, I am clearly addicted to the total package.

22 hours till we leave for #4 on the PG.

[Island Cruiser]

Several years ago, we booked an aft cabin on deck 10 of the Voyager. We did this as an on board booking. When we got home we had an email from our sensational new travel agent telling us she had moved us to an aft deck 8 corner cabin offering a larger deck and the same wonderful view we would have enjoyed on deck 10. (She offered to move us back to deck 10 if we wished.) She explained that the cabin we had booked was immediately below the outside deck of La Veranda and "they start moving chairs around up there at 6:00 a.m. to set up for breakfast." She also explained they hose down that deck regularly and a little of it tends to drip down on to the deck 10 decks. We were delighted with the change and we learned to lessions from the experience. One, carefully research the location of any cabin you book on a cruise ship. (Over or under a restaurant or nite club? Across from a laundry room? Near a stairwell? Close to a dinging elevator?) The cruise lines will not alert you to the relative merits of any cabin. Two, use a travel agent who knows the ships he/she sells and is proactive with respect to your interests. In our case, minus the odor problem we would probably grap an aft cabin on the PG because we close the bars on Regent ships.

 

If I read your post correctly, they finally moved you to another cabin. If so, why didn't they do it at the beginning of your cruise?

[azgkrudi]

I agree, it is up to you (and your TA) to research the deck plans to find out about potential noise issues. But we had 765 (right next to 767) on the PG and absolutely LOVED IT. We were WAY more pleased with that than the category B we had on our prior PG cruise, #814.

 

Our experience has been that La Palette does not normally "rock out" all hours of the night, unless they have guests who wish for them to, but it's pretty unusual. And I'm talking that midnight is even pushing it.

[cruiseej]

I'm very sorry rloeb had such a bad experience on the PG, but I'd caution readers here not to take any one passenger's experiences on any one cruise as a definitive word in branding particular cabins good or bad.

 

We actually stayed in the exact same cabin, 767, last summer, our second trip on the PG for our 20th anniversary. (I posted pictures and some comments in this thread after our trip. At the time we booked, the revised deck plans weren't out yet, but they were on the Regent site by sometime in the spring. We chose 767 because it was the largest of the new cabins. We were happy with the cabin, and fortunately never had problems with temperature, smells, or noise from above. (I don't know why you'd need to get dressed to leave the cabin if they're spraying, when you can take three steps out onto the balcony you paid extra to have. Heck, I'd probably have gone out there and fallen asleep under the stars!)

 

As azgkrudi said, we found La Palette didn't stay active very late, and I don't think we ever heard noise from above when we were trying to fall asleep. (Maybe we were just too tired after wonderful long days in the sun... and plenty of wine at dinner! But we probably weren't asleep before 11 any night, either, another way our experience was different than the original poster's.) The cabin isn't actually under the club, but under the wide deck area outside La Palette. I can imagine that if a particular cruise had a lot of late night party people keeping La Palette going later into the wee hours, and their partying spilled out onto the deck, the circumstances could be different -- although that doesn't seem typical on the PG.

 

So while I'm truly sorry to read of rloeb's experience -- and it's too bad Regent didn't respond, either during the cruise or after, in a way that satisfied an unhappy customer -- I will say based on our experience in the same cabin that we enjoyed it immensely and would recommend it to anyone.

 

-- Eric

[mythologist]

I, too am sorry that rloeb had a bad experience. Every once in awhile a person can have a bad experience anywhere.

 

I opted for the South Pacific as it was my dream vaacation. I found the Polynesian paradise I was looking for. The sapphire colored water and the tropical landscape was incredible. To be able to explore the lagoons via the motu's and the snorkeling trips was awesome.

 

I also found that I liked the PG ship because of it's small size. I have no complaints about my trip.

 

As a consumer, you need to look for the best cabin for you. You need to have a TA that knows her stuff search as far out as possible prior to your planned trip. The earlier you book, the better choices you have. We were offered an upgrade on our first Regent sailing - which was not the PG - and we turned down the upgrade as we felt our original choice of cabin was better. More $$$$ is not always the best option.

[Dolebludger]

More $$$$ does not always mean the best suite or cabin is very true. On another Regent ship we booked a Category H guarantee, and were initially delighted to be upgraded to a Category C. Well, the suite was so bad in many respects that we asked to be moved to the H we had paid for. Ship was full, so not possible. Since then, we've always booked a specific suite, with the help of our TA.

[drifting_away]

I think that at this point we can assume that the op was just out to stir us up. They joined just to throw out the complaint. I think it is time to move on and start talking about something more interesting.:rolleyes: We all know that the PG is not what they describe.

[Iamboatman]

While I agree the OP did make the post to stir things up, I don't think discussing how to avoid those types of problems mentioned by making sure your travel agent advises you of potential issues (and has the ability to do that!) and to not blindly accept "upgrades" that aren't actually upgrades, etc. is inappropriate or done with.

 

Threads like these tend to provide a wealth of "I never thought of that" information for not only those that post, but those that lurk.

 

JMHO juxtaposed to the prior poster's.

[drifting_away]

My bad...sorry! By all means keep it going.

[Island Cruiser]

I couldn't agree with Eric more. I want to read the good, the neutral, and the bad on the message boards. I sort through it all and consider the sources. And I have both profited and been entertained by reading the whole range of opinion. I started reading CC in 2003 and I think I am a much better selector of cruise options from having done so. I get bored to death reading endless one-to-one posts, i.e. "have a wonderful trip," but I am very interested in clashes of opinion. I find it quite amusing that some folks respond to a criticism of their "favorite ship" as if you were attacking their firstborn. But I learn from the discourse and, short of personal attack, I want it to continue. Pat

[count florida]

The exchange in this thread again emphases the real need to find and stick with a knowledgeable client-oriented TA. She or he can steer you around most problems, solve others, and in the absence of either of those, help you to understand why you cannot get the resolution or compensation you seek in other situations.

 

Having said that, here again is just more evidence that Regent is not the customer-oriented cruise line Radisson was, when a promised (or at least implied) opportunity to talk and resolve something is avoided. Everyone at Regent knows (or at least should know) Ken Watson’s correct phone extention; giving out a different one knowingly is a disgrace. But calling Regent’s main number in Ft. Lauderdale and asking for Mr. Watson should at least get you his voice-mail, secretary or AA, where (or with whom) you can leave a message. While Regent is still very good, particularly compared to its competition, the level and personalization of service has certainly declined, except in the plethora of slick (and expensive) mailings we get. I gather they have to do something with all the money they are making with the constant price increases.

 

Actually, that may be an unfair comment, but there is no doubt that the cost of cruising on Regent has gone up, and the days of personal service, including e-mail responses from the President, are gone. Which is really too bad. With the Carlson Co. out of the picture, lets all wait and see what develops. The people heading up the new umbrella group have an excellent track record and reputation, which gives hope!

[rloeb]

Our purpose of the initial post was to inform others of our poor experience. For the record we booked the cruise 10 months ahead of time. When we were offered the upgrade, 6 months had elapsed and, in the interim, we had cruised on a larger ship (family cruise) in which we had a veranda that was amazing (the cost 1/5 of PG). The upgraded cabin 767 wasn't on the PG website because it previously didn't exist. We were skeptical because of this and asked our T.A. She said Reagent assured her it was a great cabin. We chose a smaller ship because we wanted peace and quiet to enjoy our special time together. A vacation should be a choice should it not? We chose to get to bed early because we woke up early for Scuba and other activities. To be prevented from a good nights sleep

was very upsetting! Reagent had been known for incredible service. In retrospect, we should have made more of a "fuss" on the cruise but we tried to be tactful so as not to ruin the peaceful nature we were trying to absorb - A BIG MISTAKE!

I believe they only moved us the last night because several people left the ship on the 6th night - therefore they had a vacancy. As for the poor response while back on land suggests they do not want repeat customers!

[Island Cruiser]

I am truly sorry you didn't enjoy the PG and I fully understand why. I was puzzled why they didn't move you upon your first complaint. Thanks for clearing this up. We had a great time on the PG and recommend it in spite of the fact it was a bit of a let down for us. We had one truly awful experience on board the PG and another bad one. But in our case, Regent made it right. We have found all of our other Regent cruises sensational and have two more booked. I hope you won't write off all the Regent ships on the basis of this unfortunate experience. Both the Voyager and Mariner offer a genuine luxury cruise experience. We are booked on the Navagator in July and will form an opinion about that ship then. Even on the Voyager (and I have been advised the Navagator) you can pick the "wrong cabin." If you don't have some tolerance for a bit of vibration, some of the Voyager and Navagator aft cabins can be a challenge. We booked a Voyager aft cabin knowing this and we were delighted with it. But some folks aren't. Unfortunately, Regent doesn't alert customers to this potential problem. I think they should. But a good TA will definitely do so. Pat

[cruiseej]

Rloeb, again, I'm sorry you had such a bad experience. Some here have blamed your travel agent for not alerting you that this could be a bad cabin, but I don't know if that's a fair assessment. We stayed in the very same cabin on a cruise last summer a few months before your trip, and we had a completely fabulous time. Most of the other posts I've read about the PG's new aft cabins have generally been positive as well.

 

Now, I'm not questioning the problems you experienced -- only pointing out that things can happen from trip to trip to yield widely different experiences for different people. Maybe on our cruise, on which a wonderful jazz group was playing every night in La Palette, it lead to less people moving around and less noise being transmitted to the deck below; or maybe on your cruise, there were some people who liked to disco until they closed up and made a lot more noise. If lots of people had reported noise concerns with the aft cabins, it might be accurate to say travel agents (and ideally Regent) should make potential passengers aware, like the aft vibrations on Voyager which are frequently discussed on this forum. But since there haven't been many similar comments about the PG aft cabins in the year they've existed, it may just be that things were unusually noisy on your cruise. That doesn't exempt Regent from trying to help satisfy you, but it may ease the minds of others planning trips on the PG that these aren't fatally-flawed cabins.

 

You mentioned that you had talked with someone from Regent after your return and that you received an "unsatisfactory response." I'm just curious if it was unsatisfactory because they didn't agree to give you the $2,000+ refund you indicated you expect to receive, or because they disputed that you had had problems and an unhappy experience? From reading this forum awhile, it seems to me that when Regent has had to make amends to passengers for unfortunate circumstances, such as mechanical problems that delay the ship and cost them a port call, they typically do so in the form of credits for future cruises -- something that seems to generally satisfy loyal multi-time customers, but might only further anger a first-time customer like yourself, who is thinking he may not go on another Regent cruise after having a bad experience. I was just curious if they made any such offer in your case, or what their response actually was.

 

In any case, I'm sorry you're still working through the aftermath of an unhappy experience four months later, and hope your next cruise (on Regent or otherwise) is much more pleasurable. I know it's no consolation that most Regent customers seem to have great experiences -- at least based on what's written hear and the passengers I've interacted with on my Regent cruises -- when you're one of the ones who didn't.

 

-- Eric

[freddie]

Rloeb - While I am somewhat hesitant to continue this debate about due diligence with respect to cabin choices, your last post seems to call for some response.

 

You state that "we booked the cruise 10 months ahead of time. When we were offered the upgrade, 6 months had elapsed... The upgraded cabin 767 wasn't on the PG website because it previously didn't exist."

 

Please forgive me if my math doesn't work out (we liberal arts majors/corporate lawyers don't have great math skills); but it appears that you were offered the upgrade to 767 in April or May of 2007. I am looking at the Regent Cruise Atlas 2007, with an "effective date" of June 15, 2006, which clearly shows the aft cabins on deck seven, including 767, as being situated directly below the outside deck of La Palette Lounge. How likely is it that a deck plan shown in print in June, 2006 was not reflected on the Regent website nearly a year later? Perhaps a look at the website might have been in order, irrespective of the vague assurances given by your TA.

 

Readers of this site know well that although I am a great fan of Regent, I have had some significant issues with Regent and the PG. Nevertheless, to attack the Paul Gauguin and suggest that potential passengers stay away from this ship because of an experience that could have easily been avoided if the OP or her TA had spent a few minutes investigating the deck plans is simply not reasonable.

 

On another note, regarding the OP's not being moved until the last night, it seems to me that if she had discussed this with the hotel manager there would not have been any problem whatever in finding someone who would have been quite delighted to swap cabins with her. After all, she had one of the most desirable cabins on the ship in the estimation of most passengers, considering that 767 had the largest shower and the largest category C balcony on the ship.

 

Cheers, Fred

[cruiseej]

Fred, since we cruised on the PG last summer, and choose the same 767 cabin as rloeb, I can attest that the new deck plans weren't posted on the Regent site early in 2007. I know they were posted before we left for the cruise in June -- but I can't recall when they appeared on the site. So it is indeed possible it was after rloeb booked.

 

However, even without the deck plan, a verbal description accomplished the same thing as seeing the revised deck plan: when they say there are five new cabins across the back of deck seven, between 761 and 762, it was pretty clear where they were located. So I don't think the presence or absence of the revised deck plan should be considered an issue -- it was pretty obvious these cabins were underneath the deck outside La Palette. What deck plans can't tell you is if there are any noise issues from above or not, and as this thread shows, different people have had significantly different experiences.

 

-- Eric

[scm]

...I saw that the Gauguin received some disturbing reviews, stating that it is not at the level of luxury, food not as good, etc. as the other RSSC ships.

Our first RSSC experience was on PG, and we wouldn't have changed a thing. But we had no basis for comparison until we cruised on Voyager -- and we still wouldn't change a thing, even though the two experiences are not easily comparable. PG puts much more emphasis on outdoor activities. If you don't enjoy being in the water, you will miss half the experience. The luxury is good enough. There aren't the shows there are on Voyager -- but we were too tired to have enjoyed them. The food is as good as almost all of the Voyager venues, save Signatures. La Veranda at night comes close. But again, the comparisons are almost pointless.

 

You also have to remember where you are -- a stay at almost any FP hotel will get you begging to crawl back to the luxury of the PG -- and I include most of the high end BB hotels in that crowd -- just haven't tried the St. Regis yet -- might have to eat those words.