Couple removed from Hal Noordam Med Cruise

[world~citizen]

You're probably right. My guess is that these people will get a settlement that will compensate them for the cost of their cruise and any other out of pocket expenses, and they'll be told never to darken HAL's door again. They'll be added to that "no sail list" or whatever it is called. But then, if they were treated as badly as they claim, I guess the prospect of never being able to sail another HAL ship won't be particularly upsetting to them anyway.

 

But I am sure there will be a gag order issued that everyone involved will have to agree to. After all, no one likes to give settlements and then have word of their amounts get out. That only encourages more lawsuits, most of them unjustified.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

 

Well your guesses may be good or they may be bad, but if there is a settlement or gag order those article on the web will probably have to go as part of the bargain.

 

Can we assume they are still unhappy campers?

[tomterw]

This is one of those incidents where nothing the ship does would please the passenger. The on-board health facilities on the Noordam are limited as is the staff. There are very good hospitals in Italy where they can treat any ailment. You can be sure the Captain was following the best medical advice of his shipboard physician. Failure of the Captain to follow medical advice would be idiotic.

 

Hank

Wow! This story is disturbing. While Hank may be correct that there are good hospitals in Italy, if this was a place the ship had advised passengers not to visit then obviously this was not one of those places with a good hospital. It sure would be nice to know what HAL's explanation was, but my guess is they will never tell. I, too would question the competency of the ship's doctor.

[tomterw]

I was recently on a HAL cruise where a passenger was taken ill with a suspected heart attack. We spoke with him over breakfast one morning and he said he received excellent care (in Haifa) but he and his wife were both told to pack their bags in case he needed extended treatment. They had to sign a release form to leave the ship. It transpired the Israeli medics thought it best for him to return to the US but didn't think the case was urgent. Since the next plane home was in 4 days and there was only 3 days remaining on the cruise they decided they would like to rejoin the ship rather than wait in a hotel room in Haifa. They had great difficulty in being allowed back on the ship as the ship's doctor thought he would not be in a position to treat him if he was taken ill. They then had to sign every more release forms waiving any rights.

 

I can understand why the ship wouldn't want to take responsibility of sick passengers when facilities to treat them onboard are inadequate. But I would hope they treat those involved with compassion and courtesy.

 

On another note, we were on a cruise from Goa two years ago. It was a new line and new cruise (we thought we would be on the 4th or 5th cruise so all teething problems would be ironed out, however we were actually the first)! We were extremely disappointed with the ship, the cabin and the cruise in general. Most importantly, there was no air conditioning in the cabins (the temperature was in high 30s/low 40s centigrade)! The waiters were bringing our found with perspiration dripping from their faces into the meals and everything was shabby and not as advertised. When we dared to complain to the cruise director and asked her to fax a letter of complaint to our HO on our behalf she came back to say she wanted us to leave the ship! We asked her if she would arrange transport/accommodation but she refused and said she would 'leave us at the port gate'. We were absolute dumbstruck. We were travelling with a relative who had recently been bereaved and were desperate for her not to become upset by all of this. We eventually agreed we would stay on to see if things improved. They actually got worse. We were not the only people complaining but somewhere we were 'scapegoated'. We eventually asked to be let off in Sri Lanka and found our own accommodation and transportation. When we arrived home we wrote to the company and received full compensation and expenses (including our airfares to and fro)! Needless to say the company is no longer in existence! But it is a truly dreadful feeling to be placed in that situation. My husband and I could cope with it but we were so anxious for our sister in law who was on her first cruise since losing her husband. Dreadful!!

 

I think the real key is the 2nd paragraph, namely the hope that the passenger would be treated courtesly and with compassion. Sometimes that happens and sometimes it does not. For those of you who have been treated compassionately, this is great, but consider yourselves lucky. Many of us (myself included) have not. Now I do consider myself lucky in that my problem with HAL was no where close to anything written here. I do hope the couple here will eventually get some appropriate level of closure on this, but I am sure it will take much time and effort.

[JerseyJaguar]

I do hope the couple here will eventually get some appropriate level of closure on this, but I am sure it will take much time and effort.

Unless they're lying, and then it will just take money.

[pipedreams62]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkRIbUT6u7Q

[4kids3dogs2cats&fish]

Just the fact that they got dumped into an inflatable boat, an hour from land, no less!, makes me hope they sue the cruise line for a ton of money and get it. The cruise line acknowledged the inflatable boat (in the local news report).

 

Totally mishandled from start to finish. Shame on HAL.

[Donray]

Just the fact that they got dumped into an inflatable boat, an hour from land, no less!, makes me hope they sue the cruise line for a ton of money and get it. The cruise line acknowledged the inflatable boat (in the local news report).

 

Totally mishandled from start to finish. Shame on HAL.

 

This happens more often then you think...

I have seen three times when people were removed from the ship in a foreign port for medical conditions. Not emergency medical conditions, but conditions the ships doctors thought they could not handle if things got worse. Two were probable minor heart attacks.

If one is going to sue, they better have a lot of doctors verify that they would have been better off on the ship without a hospital and proper medical equipment than on land with a hospital. Probably cost anyone a minimum off 100K to bring this to court and then another 100K to 200K for a trail. No one would do this on contingency.

[pms4104]

Just the fact that they got dumped into an inflatable boat, an hour from land, no less!, makes me hope they sue the cruise line for a ton of money and get it. The cruise line acknowledged the inflatable boat (in the local news report).

 

Totally mishandled from start to finish. Shame on HAL.

We only learned one emotionally-charged side of the story. Generally, there are three sides to every story. In this case ... their's, HAL's, and the truth, which likely lies somewhere between the other two versions.

[happy cruzer]

Ok, my take...

 

If two well trained lawyers can only make a case of the the strength displayed so far then I think that they are out for what they can get. They haven't mentioned any real damages. And if the insurance won't pay that tells me that there are not any covered/normal type damages. There is more to the story than they say. And what they say is is pretty weak.

 

Hey, they decided to travel in regions where English was not the first language, they decided to travel with pre-exiting medical conditions, etc. therefore I'm not sure that anyone is totally responsible for the resulting consequences.

 

Bottom line, they should be going after the insurance company and instead they are going after HAL with a smear campaign instead of one in the courts?????

[4kids3dogs2cats&fish]

And if the insurance won't pay that tells me that there are not any covered/normal type damages. There is more to the story than they say. And what they say is is pretty weak.

 

You're wrong. Insurance companies try to weasel out of paying many claims, as we have seen well too often. And I'd say what the couple says is pretty strong, not weak, the cruise line admitted the inflatable boat and had no hospital notified nor had any legitimate transport to said hospital. No hospital, no helicopter, no cruise employee escort, NO NOTHING. HAL really screwed up here, that's certainly clear.

 

they decided to travel with pre-exiting medical conditions, etc. therefore I'm not sure that anyone is totally responsible for the resulting consequences.

 

Wrong again. The guy had a runny nose from a cold. No mention of any preexisting condition except high blood pressure. Probably half the ship's passengers have a technical case of high blood pressure.

[jtl513]

Totally mishandled from start to finish. Shame on HAL.

I see you're swallowing the couple's version of the story in toto. Many of us do not.

[gemcrusier]

YIKES!!!!:eek: I suppose they'll be writing HAL a strongly-worded letter!

love the dogs!!!!!!!!!!!

[Copper10-8]

The Italian Coast Guard and their lil' inflatable boats in the middle of the ocean in the dark! Mamma Mia!:eek: Those silly guys, what were/are they thinking!:rolleyes:

[happy cruzer]

You're wrong. Insurance companies try to weasel out of paying many claims, as we have seen well too often. And I'd say what the couple says is pretty strong, not weak, the cruise line admitted the inflatable boat and had no hospital notified nor had any legitimate transport to said hospital. No hospital, no helicopter, no cruise employee escort, NO NOTHING. HAL really screwed up here, that's certainly clear.

 

 

 

Wrong again. The guy had a runny nose from a cold. No mention of any preexisting condition except high blood pressure. Probably half the ship's passengers have a technical case of high blood pressure.

 

The couple was taken to a clinic. If the insurance company is not paying for the costs associated with that and the couple does not seem to be going after the insurance company but are trying to smear HAL. Sounds to me they don't think they have a good claim i.e. a weak case. The pre existing condition of blood pressure is what caused the problems with his treatments. They don't say why their claim was rejected, guesses would be they declined treatment on the ship, they made the decision that they needed better treatment than available on the ship, they did not get pre approval for treatment, any number of things....

 

I still say two lawyers doing alot of smearing instead of doing due process in the courts means it is a weak case.

[Nutrioso]

There are so many pieces missing to this story. And there have been so many suppositions on threads like this that one does not know what's real and what isn't. I advise caution! ----Penny