Pooch Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 I like the upgraded cabin idea. Try a balcony! AC issues or not, interior rooms feel like caves to me. I need sunlight & fresh air! If the room is too warm, the balcony will be more comfortable than sleeping in the Centrum!!! Srp431 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXcruzer Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 I think the 30% is a reasonable offer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BennyandBo Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 4 hours ago, Xaa said: I hate how things went overall for you @TempoGL I stated early on that I thought 30% was a good offer and I think you would have been better served arguing to have it converted for use on your next cruise than arguing for more compensation. I understand that it impacted 3 days but you don't sleep 24 hours a day. Part of your fare is being onboard, eating, moving to next destination. I also think there is an assumption that the loud complainers received more, but they may not have, they may have received less than this. I don't think it's known. I also think you diluted your argument by pushing for the last 12% and bringing up taxes and port fees. You're not getting port fees back, they were paid on your behalf. You seem like a good guy trying to do your best. I would respond back to the executive request and begrudgingly accept the 30% and plead to be allowed to use it on your next cruise. Your next cruise is Royal's chance to prove that they can perform and continue to earn your business. I certainly understand if this next one is the end of the line for you with RCL. Once bitten, twice shy. I disagree with all of this 101%. How many hours out of 24 you sleep is irrelevant. How much of your fare is transportation, food, etc, is irrelevant. You paid and were contracted for a cabin on a ship with the understanding that air conditioning was one of the amenities. Royal Caribbean has failed to provide and live up to there end of this contract. You are well within your rights as a party in this contract to seek and expect compensation. I would go back to them with the argument of how you came to your figure. I would argue for a refund in this figure. I would point out how an unpleasant, already extremely unhappy, passenger on a future cruise with FCC could become more trouble to guest and crew alike, then would be worth to them to have on board. Keep in mind no business wants someone in it who is hell bent on causing aa much trouble as they legally can to everyone around them. That's bad business over what seems to be 12% at this point. Then sadly I would seriously consider any new offer they may want to make. As well as what kind of future customer you want to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BennyandBo Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 (edited) 5 hours ago, Xaa said: I hate how things went overall for you @TempoGL I stated early on that I thought 30% was a good offer and I think you would have been better served arguing to have it converted for use on your next cruise than arguing for more compensation. I understand that it impacted 3 days but you don't sleep 24 hours a day. Part of your fare is being onboard, eating, moving to next destination. I also think there is an assumption that the loud complainers received more, but they may not have, they may have received less than this. I don't think it's known. I also think you diluted your argument by pushing for the last 12% and bringing up taxes and port fees. You're not getting port fees back, they were paid on your behalf. You seem like a good guy trying to do your best. I would respond back to the executive request and begrudgingly accept the 30% and plead to be allowed to use it on your next cruise. Your next cruise is Royal's chance to prove that they can perform and continue to earn your business. I certainly understand if this next one is the end of the line for you with RCL. Once bitten, twice shy. Edited January 22, 2023 by BennyandBo Accidentally reposted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xaa Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 1 hour ago, BennyandBo said: I disagree with all of this 101%. That's a lot! I think you and I agree that he deserves compensation. I just happen to think 30% is actually ok and his best bet is not to try and get more, but to alter the mthod in which he receives it. I only agree with myself 100%, so I guess you win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rackham Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 1 hour ago, BennyandBo said: I would go back to them with the argument of how you came to your figure. I would argue for a refund in this figure. I would point out how an unpleasant, already extremely unhappy, passenger on a future cruise with FCC could become more trouble to guest and crew alike, then would be worth to them to have on board. That sounds like a great way to get future cruises canceled and added to Royal's watch list with threatening to interrupt operations. Based upon section 12 of the cruise contract, Royal owes nothing due to the arguments OP is making in their email. Making threats if they provide FCC you're going to go on that cruise and make trouble is a surefire way of receiving absolutely nothing. Keanoknick 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXcruzer Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 2 hours ago, BennyandBo said: I disagree with all of this 101%. How many hours out of 24 you sleep is irrelevant. How much of your fare is transportation, food, etc, is irrelevant. You paid and were contracted for a cabin on a ship with the understanding that air conditioning was one of the amenities. Royal Caribbean has failed to provide and live up to there end of this contract. You are well within your rights as a party in this contract to seek and expect compensation. I would go back to them with the argument of how you came to your figure. I would argue for a refund in this figure. I would point out how an unpleasant, already extremely unhappy, passenger on a future cruise with FCC could become more trouble to guest and crew alike, then would be worth to them to have on board. Keep in mind no business wants someone in it who is hell bent on causing aa much trouble as they legally can to everyone around them. That's bad business over what seems to be 12% at this point. Then sadly I would seriously consider any new offer they may want to make. As well as what kind of future customer you want to be. Legally, and contractually; Royal has the upper hand. 30% is generous and should be taken, IMO tjcruisers and Keanoknick 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BennyandBo Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 1 hour ago, Rackham said: That sounds like a great way to get future cruises canceled and added to Royal's watch list with threatening to interrupt operations. Based upon section 12 of the cruise contract, Royal owes nothing due to the arguments OP is making in their email. Making threats if they provide FCC you're going to go on that cruise and make trouble is a surefire way of receiving absolutely nothing. I will have to read section 12. I disagree with what they owe based on the OP argument and/or in general. As far as a making threats. No threats were suggested or would be made. Merely observations on the underlying unnecessary unpleasantness of having already unhappy customers on board. This is why most smart businesses bend to customer service as much as possible. Basically no smart business wants to offer a return visit as compensation to someone who already has a stick up their ***. It's always in both parties best interest to come to a mutual agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BennyandBo Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 47 minutes ago, TXcruzer said: Legally, and contractually; Royal has the upper hand. 30% is generous and should be taken, IMO Upper hand, yes. Legally and contractually, I could successfully argue that and win. USCG Teacher 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BennyandBo Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 1 hour ago, Xaa said: That's a lot! I think you and I agree that he deserves compensation. I just happen to think 30% is actually ok and his best bet is not to try and get more, but to alter the mthod in which he receives it. I only agree with myself 100%, so I guess you win. My take I guess is 12% more to make this go away is a wise customer service move. And when you know this person is already booked and returning in the near future, having them return with previous attitude and grudge from last encounter, just is not smart business. The form in which we get to 42% from 30% should be flexible. The compromise would be 30% to 42% vs fcc or obc. An alternative option for compromise should have been discussed. I would revisit this. As far as suggesting future attitude on board? If there is no happy resolution, this will already be a given. And steps to avoid based on that obvious assumption should have already been made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChessE4 Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 21 hours ago, TempoGL said: My problem is not that the AC went out, it's the atrocious way in which customer service handled it after the fact. With all due respect, it seems like you missed a lot of what I said. I explicitly mentioned already that I remained calm with the staff on board, even though I witnessed multiple people with the same problem yelling at (dare I say "berating?") staff. The staff on board the ship were all very nice and I think they did the best they could. And if I were at a land hotel, I would inform them that I'd find another room elsewhere and ask (again, politely) that they cancel my reservation. Read your original post, and I am not criticizing you. I was simply pointing out the perennial land vs cruise comparison, as cruise lines continue to claim they are cheaper than equivalent land experiences. You decide what is best for you and your significant others. I do believe, since I am bad at relationship building, that it goes a long way to getting good service, whether on land or sea. It really is an art.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddy Posted January 22, 2023 Report Share Posted January 22, 2023 5 hours ago, BennyandBo said: I would point out how an unpleasant, already extremely unhappy, passenger on a future cruise with FCC could become more trouble to guest and crew alike, then would be worth to them to have on board. 2 hours ago, BennyandBo said: As far as a making threats. No threats were suggested or would be made. Merely observations on the underlying unnecessary unpleasantness of having already unhappy customers on board. You can call it whatever you want, however if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck....... If I'm unhappy with a company, I'm not going to take their compensation then warn them that I will be an extremely unhappy customer who could be trouble for everyone when I use their compensation. Meh, this is the internet. You do you. BennyandBo, Keanoknick and Ampurp85 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RorySC Posted January 27, 2023 Report Share Posted January 27, 2023 On 1/19/2023 at 5:00 PM, Xaa said: We're two peas in a pod. I think you and I would get along really well. well if you are sailing the end of the year, we will be sailing all of December 2023 and January 2024. I will cover the first round...you bring the bail $ Xaa 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.