# Couple hit with cruise fuel bill ( BBC )



## Gavin Gait (Aug 14, 2005)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/7497284.stm


----------



## Pat Kennedy (Apr 14, 2007)

I saw this story on BBC news this morning.
Apparently this couple had paid a £900.00 deposit on a £9000.00 25 day cruise, and were hit with a surcharge of just under £900.00 because of the increased fuel cost to the ship. They couldnt find the extra money, the company offered them a shorter cruise or a less prestigious cabin. They refused.
Tough, my heart bleeds for them, especially when I read of kids starving to death in Darfur and other less fortunate parts of the world.
Pat


----------



## Santos (Mar 16, 2005)

I think we are going to see more and more of this in the coming months. Some companies apparantly have in the past applied the surcharges on the day at the point of departure. I feel very sorry for the couple.

Chris.


----------



## captainchris (Oct 29, 2006)

I do thinkthat the remark was in bad taste, the couple are obviously getting on a bit and it was probably a trip of a life time.An extra £900 would probably mean a lot to them. They may not be retired Local Government officials with a pension like yours.
Thats my twopenneth anyway!!!

Chris


----------



## ROBERT HENDERSON (Apr 11, 2008)

Hi Chris
I can't add anything to your remarks, I agree with you whole heartedly.
Regards Bob


----------



## Pat Kennedy (Apr 14, 2007)

Not yet retired , and when I do, the pension is worth £!00 per week.No cruises for me then.
But this is not about envy, good luck to them if they can afford it but why go on TV complaining about it?
I think fuel surcharges are entirely justifiable,given the present soaring cost of oil, and the offer made by the cruise company was reasonable


----------



## 6639 (Apr 20, 2006)

would you have been so vitriolic, Mr Kennedy, had this been your parents who had worked hard all their lives, going for something they deserve. 
and how much of your monthly salary to you donate to those same starving children in Darfur?


----------



## K urgess (Aug 14, 2006)

> *Respect other members:
> *Remember: treat others as you would expect to be treated yourself.
> 
> Please do not post messages containing personal attacks. We do encourage healthy debate but not slanging matches. There is a difference between disagreeing with an opinion and a personal attack, so please think before you post. So 'play the post, not the poster'.
> ...


Read the rest *here *


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

I saw this story on the local news tonight. In my opinion, they were badly advised as to which ship they went on. I have found Voyages of Discovery to be very expensive anyway. Oriana for example is doing a similar Med Cruise next year for 25 days from Southampton, far closer to where these people live. A Deluxe Balcony Stateroom, far superior I think to the cabin they had on Discovery is from £8,958. I think P&Os surcharge on new bookings is £4.45 per person per day, but only apply to new bookings unlike Voyages of Discovery. A Deluxe Outside Stateroom which I think is similar to their cabin aboard Discovery is from £7,198 aboard Oriana which even with surcharges is far cheaper than Discovery and well within their budget. An ordinary outside cabin on Oriana which I have had many times and perfectly okay would cost them from £4,998. Passengers put a little too much emphasis on cabins in my opinion, most spend little time in them anyway other than sleeping etc, you simply do not have time with so much going on aboard ship and of course the ports of call.

I would urge them to find another company where they could save the money they have lost on the deposit by finding a cheaper cruise. It is tragic they have missed out on their cruise. They had been on a cruise before and wanted to go on another for one last time, that is what they said on TV tonight. Hopefully they will receive good advice now and find a similar cruise but far cheaper. 

David


----------



## Santos (Mar 16, 2005)

Well said David, Life is very short and good luck to them I hope they get a cruise they deserve.

Chris.


----------



## deepseatiger (Jul 4, 2005)

What a silly uneducated remark Mr.Kennedy.


----------



## makko (Jul 20, 2006)

There are of course other ways to surcharge customers. My kids went off to the USA on Monday with Continental Airlines. Ticket paid for etc. My understanding was two pieces of checked luggage per passenger, not to exceed 23 Kg (I fly, on average, once a week). When we got to the counter, we were informed that only one piece, not to exceed 23 Kg. was allowed. The extra bag that they were taking (2xdaughters, three bags) would cost $25. We took out the things and they travelled with two bags, I took the extra case home. However, there were other people who were travelling who did not live in Mexico City and they had to fork out the extra cash as they could not get shut of the luggage. Oh, and the US airlines don't feed you and charge you extra for almost everything once onboard! Fly Mexicana or Aeromexico!
Rant over, Rgds.
Dave


----------



## Keltic Star (Jan 21, 2006)

Pat Kennedy said:


> ......
> But this is not about envy, good luck to them if they can afford it but why go on TV complaining about it?


Because they were victims of another typical travel trade rip off and are fully justified in warning the public. Possibly if they had booked P&O or one of the Carnival "family" of ships they would have been treated more fairly. 

Yes, fuel surcharges are justified under current conditions, but not after you have accepted a substantial deposit or payment from a customer. Once a contract has been established, fuel costs are a commercial risk of the operator.

As for Dafur, what did they do with the last ten million or so that we, the Western world, sent them???


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

Like so many stories, there was a little more to this than can be seen at first glance, and the straw that broke the camel’s back for the couple was the rather (too) clever act by the cruise company to set the surcharge at an extra £892 and not £900, which figure would have allowed the couple to be entitled to a full refund of their deposit. Added to that clever trick, the cruise company then offered to downgrade them so they could still go on their holiday, but in a lesser cabin. Yes, of course this gesture could be explained away (even if on the face of it there was in the couple’s mind little doubt it was an insult) by claiming that _“No, the lesser cabin does not burn less fuel, it is just that we can sell your expensive cabin to others and put you in the cheaper one” _– A very neat bit of foot work, but one that clearly proved to be the straw that broke the camel’s back.

So, I would cautiously suggest that whilst fuel surcharges may be correct, logical and perfectly legal, they can be occasionally misused by contracting parties and possibly exploited somewhat unfairly. Whilst I neither work for the Cruise Company, nor know of the couple in question, I would venture to suggest that everyone has a breaking point, and finding that the surcharge had by a complete coincidence been set at £8 short of the magic figure for the full refund, was unfortunate and maybe that is why they went on BBC to show up the tricks that are employed. 

The surcharge itself is certainly not a trick, just using the precise figure £8 short of the cut-off for a refund was.


----------



## Tony Breach (Jun 15, 2005)

I saw the interview clip on Breakfastime & was under the impression that they could probably afford it but contacted BBC in order to get publicity & hopefully the bad publicity would cause the cruise company to yield. That is unlikely as I would presume that there are pretty much a shipload of people in the same boat & they would all require the same treatment. The BBC of course never mentioned that others may be affected.

Be interesting to know the outcome.


----------



## JamesM (Feb 27, 2008)

Sorry Pat but I think your remarks are a little OTT.

As usual Tonga has given a very clear picture of what transpired.In my opinion the Cruise Company acted very badly and I hope that people who might be thinking about booking with them will think again.
Maybe the publicity will bring about a happy resolution to the problem.
JamesM


----------



## Tony Crompton (Jul 26, 2005)

If retired people were not prepared to spend their savings and pensions on cruises many of the ships (including "Discovery") and the jobs associated with them could not exist.
-------------------------------
Tony


----------



## mikeg (Aug 24, 2006)

I can't agree with you either Pat.
Many couples thoughts of the dream holiday cruise is just what 'keeps them going' towards retirement. It does appear they were ill advised and could have done better elsewhere but they couldn't have fortold the massive rise in fuel prices and the effects it would have.
I hope it all turns out well for them and they realise their dream.


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

Tony Crompton said:


> If retired people were not prepared to spend their savings and pensions on cruises many of the ships (including "Discovery") and the jobs associated with them could not exist.
> -------------------------------
> Tony


Quite true Tony. Discovery is their only ship I think, and at only 20,000 tons can't compete with bigger companies and bigger ships. As far as I am aware she offers specialised cruises including Maritime Memories where she is dressed with old company flags and memorabilia re-living the great liner voyage era with lectures etc. This rise in fuel would hit them harder than most but if they want to stay in business they cannot treat passengers like this because they will lose more custom than they will gain with this publicity. They may well regret asking for an extra surcharge which could prove a much bigger loss if they cannot re-sale that cabin. Being greedy for a few extra quid could cost them far more in the long run. 

As I said in other posts, I think this couple were badly advised by travel agents or whoever. For what they wanted having enjoyed their last cruise and wanting one last trip, I think this was the wrong ship anyway in both price and amenities. Also, Discovery sails from Harwich, a long and tiring journey from Dorset especially when older and loaded down with luggage. Far better to go from Southampton much closer to them on a similar cruise, and on a bigger and more modern ship at a far cheaper price and possibly better cabin. Don't forget, P&O (Princess Cruises) sold this ship, she could no longer meet their needs as Princess Cruises grew with new purpose built ships. As Island Princess she started Princess Cruises, but the cruise market grew and she was no longer viable. Now, she meets the needs of a specialised market which in my opinion was not what this couple was looking for anyway?.

David


----------



## Derek Roger (Feb 19, 2005)

Any lawyer worth his salt could win this one if it went to litigation . The company had issued tickets and accepted a deposit ; they therefore had a contract .

Surcharges I do not think can be retroactive .

The point to be argued is that had the price of fuel dropped would the couple have enjoyed a price reduction ???

Without knowing what was in the terms and conditions of the ticket purchase I suppose we should not surmise of the legality except that any such condition that may have cause for an increase in price after ticket issue should have been made clear at that time .


Derek 

PS I should be flying back to Canada soon and if faced with a retroactive surcharge I may be sitting in Gatwick for some time ?


----------



## ssr481 (Feb 2, 2008)

Derek Roger said:


> ....if faced with a retroactive surcharge I may be sitting in Gatwick for some time ?



Methinks most airlines nowadays are up front with charges... after all, many airlines are feeling the crunch of not many people flying as much as they did because of the expense of the ticket..and all the departure/airport/September 11 fees added on. If they did a retroactive surcharge.... the airlines would get slammed bigtime with lawsuits, etc. 

A few months ago, when my wife and I purchased air tickets to go to South Africa (my wife took our son over.. I'm going in a few weeks to bring him back), all the taxes and fees added almost $400 dollars to the ticket price.


----------



## Frank P (Mar 13, 2005)

Tony Breach said:


> I saw the interview clip on Breakfastime & was under the impression that they could probably afford it but contacted BBC in order to get publicity & hopefully the bad publicity would cause the cruise company to yield. That is unlikely as I would presume that there are pretty much a shipload of people in the same boat & they would all require the same treatment. The BBC of course never mentioned that others may be affected.
> 
> Be interesting to know the outcome.


I agree with you Tony. The couple looked they could more than afford it.

Some friend/lawyer probably told them that legally they have no claim, but if they get onto the TV companies with the story there is a chance that the cruise company will back down or better still another cruise company give them a free cruise and get allot of free publicity.

In later program the BBC explained the rules regarding surcharges. If the surcharge is 10% or more the customers have the option of saying NO and they can have a full refund, less than 10% surcharge and the customer must pay the surcharge or loose their deposit, hence the £892 surcharge for the couple.
A bit cynical you might say.

Cheers Frank (Thumb)


----------



## JimC (Nov 8, 2007)

Derek Roger said:


> Any lawyer worth his salt could win this one if it went to litigation . The company had issued tickets and accepted a deposit ; they therefore had a contract .
> 
> Surcharges I do not think can be retroactive .
> 
> ...


 Got it one derek!

These surcharges are to pay for future fuel. The stuff that's in the tank was bought by the supplier at a lower price. you're quite right. When the price goes down or looks like going down will they reduce prices accordingly? Not on your nelly! The ones I feel for are all those who have to travel during school holiday times. In some cases, fares a trebbled during these times. Operators say it's not discrimination - of course it's not - everyone gets screwed! There's a lot of very nasty little accountants out there. Perhaps when numbers drop, they'll find that they don't have to charge just as much.
Having said that, the money lenders will just lend more - people will owe more and we'll get back into the sub-prime problem once again around 2018


----------



## Tony Crompton (Jul 26, 2005)

Pompeyfan said:


> Quite true Tony. Discovery is their only ship I think, and at only 20,000 tons can't compete with bigger companies and bigger ships. As far as I am aware she offers specialised cruises including Maritime Memories where she is dressed with old company flags and memorabilia re-living the great liner voyage era with lectures etc. This rise in fuel would hit them harder than most but if they want to stay in business they cannot treat passengers like this because they will lose more custom than they will gain with this publicity. They may well regret asking for an extra surcharge which could prove a much bigger loss if they cannot re-sale that cabin. Being greedy for a few extra quid could cost them far more in the long run.
> 
> As I said in other posts, I think this couple were badly advised by travel agents or whoever. For what they wanted having enjoyed their last cruise and wanting one last trip, I think this was the wrong ship anyway in both price and amenities. Also, Discovery sails from Harwich, a long and tiring journey from Dorset especially when older and loaded down with luggage. Far better to go from Southampton much closer to them on a similar cruise, and on a bigger and more modern ship at a far cheaper price and possibly better cabin. Don't forget, P&O (Princess Cruises) sold this ship, she could no longer meet their needs as Princess Cruises grew with new purpose built ships. As Island Princess she started Princess Cruises, but the cruise market grew and she was no longer viable. Now, she meets the needs of a specialised market which in my opinion was not what this couple was looking for anyway?.
> 
> David


My point was that cruise companies rely on retired peoples pensions and savings to keep going, and this applies equally to Carnival Cruises (Including P&O & Princess) as it does to Voyages of Discovery.

I have done 3 Maritime memories Cruises on Discovery and found them superb but a great percentage of the passengers (both Maritime Memories and other passengers) were pensioners.

Tony


----------



## Tony Breach (Jun 15, 2005)

Derek Roger said:


> Any lawyer worth his salt could win this one if it went to litigation . The company had issued tickets and accepted a deposit ; they therefore had a contract .
> 
> Surcharges I do not think can be retroactive .
> 
> ...


Had the company issued a ticket? They have sold a cruise and are not a common carrier so the contract is not what one may expect. You should have no problem at Gatwick, Derek, as long as you have paid your fare in full and been ticketed. Have a pleasant flight.
Tony


----------



## fred henderson (Jun 13, 2005)

It is interesting that one of the weekend papers listed the following fuel surcharges per person per night imposed on cruises for UK passengers: -

Royal Caribbean - £4.00
Celebrity - £4.00
P&O Cruises - £4.50
Princess - £4.50
Norwegian Cruise Line - £5.50
Fred Olsen - £6.00
Voyages of Discovery - £19.15

Most of these companies only apply the surcharge to future bookings. Some apply an upper cap on the charge – Fred Olsen’s is £120 per person per cruise. 

Voyages of Discovery appear to be well out of line with the rest of the industry. This is possibly because they operate an ancient, scrap value ship with minimal fixed capital costs, but very high operating costs per passenger. Discovery is 36 years old, with an inefficient hull-form, low passenger capacity and old “gas-guzzling” diesels that need to burn very expensive, highly refined fuel to comply with European exhaust emission regulations. The average age of the entire Royal Caribbean fleet of 22 ships is only 7 years. 

On Derek’s legal point, I suspect that Voyages of Discovery had only accepted the couple’s booking in exchange for their 10% deposit. Tickets are usually only issued after full payment is received.

Fred(Thumb)


----------



## lakercapt (Jul 19, 2005)

Never having been on a cruise and nerer likely to either I believe from what my friends who have been on cruises tell me that the price of a ticket is only the starters.
From the time you step on board you are spending money and there are staff there to help you do so.
Course you can elect to not spend and then see the service you get!!


----------



## Tony Crompton (Jul 26, 2005)

lakercapt said:


> Never having been on a cruise and nerer likely to either IQUOTE]
> 
> 
> I felt like you about it until I was tempted by the first "Maritime Memories" cruise now am "Hooked". Not bothered really about the Itinerary, just nice to be back on a ship again,especially without doing 12-4!!
> ...


----------

