Complaining Couple Banned from RCI

[joycefnp]

Then you are not a chair hog. The "official" definition (based on the bazillions of post that I've read on that topic, as well as the official policy of RCI) is someone who saves a deck chair for longer than 20 minutes. So if you aren't doing that, then you are fine.

 

I seriously doubt that anyone has ever been banned for chair hogging...but I appreciate that they include that as a banable (is that a word?) offense! In any case, I suspect they include such items in their policy so that they can refer to it, to impress its severity on people who do it.

 

I am so relieved that I'm not a chair hog after all. I was starting to feel hostility emanating from the boards. I guess they include it so that if someone has repeated offences, they can be banned. I wish the resorts in Hawaii would think about it.

[suzyed]

OK, after reading all these posts, here's my take on this.....

 

I think these folks are chronic complainers and always get comps and freebies for all their "troubles". :rolleyes: I also think she came on to the CC boards and started spouting off about all her troubles and about all the goodies she got from RCI. I think she probably gave out way too much information about cruise credits and comps and the like...after RCI was so kind to smooth things over for them. Then other folks get wind of it and they go to RCI and say, "how come we didnt get what those other people got". :mad:

I bet that RCI got sick of hearing all that and just finally decided that the woman was just not happy with RCI and she should go elsewhere....which she did.

I just read her last review on her NCL birthday cruise and it was a very nice review.....

 

Next year, however, we will be reading how they have been banned by NCL....and they will move on yet again......;)

[wrp96]

If you look at RCCL's guest conduct policy, there are several things on there that wouldn't really warrant being banned just for that reason. Most of them are what I call lesser offenses, but they are included so that no one is confused about what they aren't supposed to do. In other words, sure we aren't going to ban you, but you might get in trouble for doing it so we just want to warn you about it.

[CruiseKeeper]

I am so relieved that I'm not a chair hog after all. I was starting to feel hostility emanating from the boards. I guess they include it so that if someone has repeated offences, they can be banned. I wish the resorts in Hawaii would think about it.

 

Seriously, no offense meant. I am just certain that I'm not a chair hog, that's all.

[joycefnp]

OK, after reading all these posts, here's my take on this.....

 

I think these folks are chronic complainers and always get comps and freebies for all their "troubles". :rolleyes: I also think she came on to the CC boards and started spouting off about all her troubles and about all the goodies she got from RCI. I think she probably gave out way too much information about cruise credits and comps and the like...after RCI was so kind to smooth things over for them. Then other folks get wind of it and they go to RCI and say, "how come we didnt get what those other people got". :mad:

I bet that RCI got sick of hearing all that and just finally decided that the woman was just not happy with RCI and she should go elsewhere....which she did.

I just read her last review on her NCL birthday cruise and it was a very nice review.....

 

Next year, however, we will be reading how they have been banned by NCL....and they will move on yet again......;)

 

I have only had exposure to her after the fact, but I think you have summed it up nicely. Most of us are probably very safe from being banned. I think we were all initially stunned to even think that it could happen. Now we feel better understanding the circumstances. One question however, is since cruise lines keep acquiring each other, is the ban transferrable? And since parent companies own several lines, does the ban apply to all the lines they own, or only that specific line?

[suzyed]

I have only had exposure to her after the fact, but I think you have summed it up nicely. Most of us are probably very safe from being banned. I think we were all initially stunned to even think that it could happen. Now we feel better understanding the circumstances. One question however, is since cruise lines keep acquiring each other, is the ban transferrable? And since parent companies own several lines, does the ban apply to all the lines they own, or only that specific line?

Very good question! Anyone know?

[joycefnp]

Seriously, no offense meant. I am just certain that I'm not a chair hog, that's all.

 

None taken, I was being very tongue in cheek. I don't consider what I do as being a chair hog, and I seriously don't like it when people run out and save chairs at 6 am. Unfortunately, I have been at resorts where if you don't do it, you don't get a chair.

[bae54]

And for everyone trying to catch up on this thread's reading, the common consensus is that it wasn't the review alone that got this person/family banned but rather a long period of complaining and an inability to ever be satisfied which led to RCI telling them not to come back.

 

I may be wrong, but I believe the way I read the article- she was banned because she refused to remove the post reguarding the amount of compensation that she recieved, not because of a neg review. The article also went on to say that the company had recieved complaints from CC and cruise mate posters about the broadcasting of how much and how to of compesation.

[Leejnd4]

If you look at RCCL's guest conduct policy, there are several things on there that wouldn't really warrant being banned just for that reason. Most of them are what I call lesser offenses, but they are included so that no one is confused about what they aren't supposed to do. In other words, sure we aren't going to ban you, but you might get in trouble for doing it so we just want to warn you about it.

 

Precisely! :D That's what I was trying to say, but it didn't come out so succinctly.

 

I may be wrong, but I believe the way I read the article- she was banned because she refused to remove the post reguarding the amount of compensation that she recieved, not because of a neg review. The article also went on to say that the company had recieved complaints from CC and cruise mate posters about the broadcasting of how much and how to of compesation.

Ah, but you see, I think it's been pretty well established that there were errors of fact in that article. So you really can't base your assumptions about this case entirely on what you read in there.

[Jeka]

What's interesting, my wife and I were on a RCCL last week and on the last night we sat next to a family at a bar, adult children and older parents, and they were filling out their cruise surveys. The parents suggested they fill in some answers negatively so that they could get future on boards credits. Perhaps this problem is wider spread than just this couple.

[Cuizer2]

One question however, is since cruise lines keep acquiring each other, is the ban transferrable? And since parent companies own several lines, does the ban apply to all the lines they own, or only that specific line?

 

The ban included Azamara, a line that couple have never traveled on.

 

Think about this for a second. Lets say that Royal Caribbean buys Acme Cruise Line (this is Coyote's favorite cruise line by the way) and this couple books a cruise on this line after Royal Caribbean buys it. Do you think Royal Caribbean is going to let them cruise?

[AnotherCruisingKid]

WOW that sure is some interesting reading over at the other site. And instead of the writer saying "I will report any updates" she writes that she stands by her story. And then got an editor to back her up to call it "fair and balanced". :rolleyes:

 

Yeah about as "fair and balanced" as the National Enquirer.

 

All the story needed was an alien abduction and it would have been perfect! :D

 

And we all know much BS "fair and balanced" is in the news world....

[Cruise Gypsy]

I was actually very glad to see this string as it reminded me of a correction I needed to make.

 

In my review of my cruise on RCI's Brilliance, it may have appeared that I was complaining about the long and drawn out Life Boat drill. What I actually meant to say was that RCI's boarding process was Brilliant...as it afforded me ample opportunity to meet my fellow passengers and help several of them with their autobiographies.

 

And, as I recollect that cruise, I realize I may have accidently reversed some numbers on my cabin. It was not 646 as I originally stated, but actually 464.

 

SailorBill regrets any misunderstanding this may have caused.

 

 

SailorBill - I am glad you cleared that up. :D:D (Very Funny)

[vmom]

What's interesting, my wife and I were on a RCCL last week and on the last night we sat next to a family at a bar, adult children and older parents, and they were filling out their cruise surveys. The parents suggested they fill in some answers negatively so that they could get future on boards credits. Perhaps this problem is wider spread than just this couple.

 

What is so unfortunate about that attitude is that the crew and staff on board may be held accountable for these false complaints.

 

What a poor and dishonest attitude. You wonder how these people can live with themselves.

[Jeka]

What is so unfortunate about that attitude is that the crew and staff on board may be held accountable for these false complaints.

 

What a poor and dishonest attitude. You wonder how these people can live with themselves.

 

What makes it worse is that they told us they had a great cruise, only disappointment was the shows.

 

Unfortuantely, they have learned "the squeaky wheel gets the grease."

[Leejnd4]

Think about this for a second. Lets say that Royal Caribbean buys Acme Cruise Line (this is Coyote's favorite cruise line by the way) and this couple books a cruise on this line after Royal Caribbean buys it. Do you think Royal Caribbean is going to let them cruise?

 

BAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! This cracked me up! I love the way you just slyly slid that in there. Thanks for the guffaw! :D :D :D

[AnotherCruisingKid]

Very good question! Anyone know?

 

Usually if a company goes as far as banning someone, its from all their properties. So in this case I would assume its all RCI owned lines.

[Cuizer2]

Regarding all the speculation over what got the couple banned, doesn't anyone think it was the sum of all the parts, and not just one or two reviews, posts, letters or complaints?

[vmom]

And for everyone trying to catch up on this thread's reading, the common consensus is that it wasn't the review alone that got this person/family banned but rather a long period of complaining and an inability to ever be satisfied which led to RCI telling them not to come back. I may be wrong, but I believe the way I read the article- she was banned because she refused to remove the post reguarding the amount of compensation that she recieved, not because of a neg review. The article also went on to say that the company had recieved complaints from CC and cruise mate posters about the broadcasting of how much and how to of compesation

 

.

 

I think it has to do with your first point, and not your second point. It has to do more with a long standing history of complaining. Not just one post, one complaint or one report of compensation. Many people have posted the amount of compensation they have recieved without a problem.

[vmom]

Regarding all the speculation over what got the couple banned, doesn't anyone think it was the sum of all the parts, and not just one or two reviews, posts, letters or complaints?

 

If I read the quote from the RCCL executive, I think you have it right. Its the LONG HISTORY if complaints.

[AnotherCruisingKid]

LeeAnn,

thanks for posting the link, very interesting to say the least.:eek:

 

Interesting indeed.

 

Jocelyn, will we be seeing you at the pool bar on the day we leave?

[Rahi]

I have nothing good to add. .just want to post to be notified of updates:) . I would be sooo embarassed if I were this couple.. Something tells me they are piece of work!

[maddea20]

I love cruising and vacationing period. I can't imagine always going on vacation and finding something wrong like some people seem to do. My vacations have not been perfect but they were always still fun and relaxing. Maybe I'm just so happy to be on a nice vacation that I don't see certain things as a big deal. And maybe the people who are always complaining about little things on their vacations go on them so much that it's no big deal to them so they can focus on the negativity taking place around them? I don't know. I hardly complain about things in my life (esp little petty things, one of my pet peeves) so maybe it's just me. :rolleyes:

[kingsgirl]

The ban included Azamara, a line that couple have never traveled on.

 

Think about this for a second. Lets say that Royal Caribbean buys Acme Cruise Line (this is Coyote's favorite cruise line by the way) and this couple books a cruise on this line after Royal Caribbean buys it. Do you think Royal Caribbean is going to let them cruise?

 

Good point. Since we all know that RCI will take over all lines in the future, it does not bode well....hee hee...just teasing.

 

I wonder if there really will be a followup to this story. Again it leaves me wondering why news agencies are so focussed on biased stories. I realize they make the most commotion but...you'd think they too would have to live with themselves at the end of the day.

[PhoenixCruiser]

Regarding all the speculation over what got the couple banned, doesn't anyone think it was the sum of all the parts, and not just one or two reviews, posts, letters or complaints?

 

I believe it was due to a lot of things, slander, always complaining/asking for refunds and rude behavior toward the crew and their fellow cruisers.

 

###