What's the book corporate America doesn't want you to read? Find out now -- or you could get scammed.

Swine flu sinks family’s cruise — are they outta luck?

August 6, 2009

princessHere’s a real Morton’s Fork dilemma: You’re about to go on a cruise when you’re suddenly diagnosed with an infectious disease. But your cruise line won’t refund your fare if you cancel.

Do you:

a) Stay home and take the loss.
b) Stay home but let your family go, even though some of them might also be infected.
c) Go, and try to conceal the infection from the cruise line.

Hard choices. But that’s exactly what the Kau family had to decide before their recent Princess cruise.


The Kaus made what I consider the responsible decision: they stayed home. All of them.

Benny Kau picks up the story.

My mom called the travel agency that they booked the cruise through, Four Seasons Travel, and told them about their situation. The travel agency gave Princess Cruises a call and relayed our news to them, asking if there was any way for us to get some type of refund back.

The answer from Princess Cruises was “no.”

So I started to look over the Princess Cruises Contract. It does have a brief section regarding cancellations and stated that they will be taking 100 percent of the total charges at this late of a notice. However, we did not anticipate something like the swine flu to happen to us. Our doctor told us that there should be some way for us to receive some money back due to our situation.

Do you think it’ll be possible to get some type of refund? What should we do now?

Well, unless Kau’s doctor is also an attorney specializing in maritime law, it’s doubtful he can make a determination about the refundability of his cruise fare. But he’s right about one thing: Princess ought to make some allowances for folks with infectious diseases. Otherwise, you could end up with a ship full of infected passengers.

I remember a similar case a few years ago during the SARS epidemic. Northwest Airlines refused a refund under similar circumstances as the Kaus.

I thought Princess might bend a rule for customers that decided to put other passengers first by canceling their cruise vacation. So I contacted the cruise line on their behalf. Here’s the response:

Unfortunately, this is a classic case of the need for travel protection. We can’t emphasize enough that travel protection is for the unexpected. No one expects to get the flu before vacation, but in the event they do, the passengers would be covered.

Travel protection costs are based on the cruise fare paid and, for example, it costs $99 to cover a cruise up to $1,500. In retrospect, I think most passengers would agree that the investment is well worth the peace of mind.

And you’re right, we would deny boarding to any passenger with flu-like symptoms so as not to risk any spread.

I’m sorry to confirm that our response to the Kau family remains the same.

I agree, travel insurance would have been a good investment for the Kaus. But I disagree that this is a “classic case” of the need for travel protection.

Only one of the Kaus was symptomatic. The other family members decided to cancel because they might also be infected, and didn’t want to risk sickening the other passengers.

The way I see it, they’re doing Princess a favor by staying home.

Princess is correct to deny their refund, but this is one case where it should waive its strict refund rules. Not for the sake of the Kaus, but for passengers on future cruises who might be infected by guests who decided to go on a cruise rather than lose everything.

(Photos: no1nose/Flickr Creative Commons)

Christopher Elliott is the author of Scammed: How to Save Your Money and Find Better Service in a World of Schemes, Swindles, and Shady Deals. Critics have called it “eye-opening” and “inspiring” — it’ll “grab your attention and won’t let go.” Order your copy now on Amazon, Barnes & Noble or iTunes.

Tagged as: , , ,

33 comments

  • http://www.singleparenttravel.net John F

    But where does Princess draw the line? Did the passengers who decided to cancel really do it out of concern for other passengers, or because they preferred to not travel when the ill family member would not be able to go.

    I am 1000% on the side of Princess here and insurance is indeed for the unexpected.

  • http://waynedayton.tripod.com Wayne Dayton

    With the sanctimonius attitude of the arrogant bean counters at Princess, I know that, in the future, I would go on the cruise, and would care less if the entire ship were to be quarantined thereafter. They COULD have given a credit less a handling fee towards a future cruise. This solidifies my opinion that “doing good” never pays. The corporate world could care less, their intentions are to screw you over whenever/wherever/however many times they can, so you are doing them no favors.

    Granted, they SHOULD have bought travel insurance. BUT….I would also, even if I had travel insurance, not advise Princess until 2 hours before sailing that I wasn’t going, as, why should those morons have the opportunity to profit TWICE from the sale??? They undoubtedly would have resold the cabin if they could….letting the insurance company pay out, and pocketing the funds, flipping the same inventory for double payment.

  • Peter Zimmerman

    Would the Kaus have been entittled to a refund if they had been denied boarding? Becuase the Princess response indicates that would have occurred had the family attempted to go on their cruise. Constructive denial of entry onto the ship may well be grounds for a refund.

  • Lianne

    I usually come down on the side of the customer, but this is one case where I do think Princess was mostly in the right. Whether its swine flu, regular flu, or and other disease, you buy travel insurance particularly for these sorts of situations.

    That said, Princess could have done the customer service friendly option of giving them some compensation. a good sized voucher for a future sailing would have created an awful lot of goodwill, and Princess gets to keep the money for this sailing and gets the revanue from the family on a future sailing as well, seems like a win/win to me.

  • Billie Keirstead

    Unless, of course, you got your “protection” from an unscrupulous travel agency (Legendary Journeys in Fla.) or one that sold you fraudulaent “insurance” such as Prime Travel Protection in any of its several incarnation. I did not get Swine Flu in LA last New Years, but came down with viral gastroenteritis the morning of a Mexico cruise. My husband later got it too. We had a doctor come to our hotel to treat us. I passed out 3 times from dehydration resulting from the virus. Yet PTP denies that we had a “real” medical condition that prevented us from continuing our travel. I sometimes wish that I would have gone, infected everyone on the ship, and had hundreds of people filing claims against these shysters. I’m still fighting them, but doubt it will really be resolved to our benefit. Also getting the Fla. legislature and insurance and consumer dept. involved.

  • Jose

    This is a classic example of how far the customer service business has fallen. Did the Kaus’ do anything wrong or are they trying to get over? The answer is ‘NO’, it is not their fault they got ill. In the old days, most travel companies would have refunded the money or provided other travel dates. Why, because it is the right thing to do. But, now instead they use the opportunity to peddle travel insurance.

  • http://www.travelinsurancereview.net/ Damian Tysdal

    From a business/customer relations standpoint…I believe it is often worthwhile to “bend the rules”. It obviously cannot become a standard practice, but in the long run they could have saved a customer and avoided negative press (i.e. this blog) by refunding the cruise, providing a voucher for a future cruise, etc.

    As far as travel insurance, it is always important to remember what is covered and in what situations it is covered. If a doctor recommends that you not travel (as in this case), travel insurance should reimburse for the lost expenses. If you merely didn’t feel well due to a mild cold, the insurance would not provide coverage. If you want coverage regardless of the reason/situation, buy a plan with “cancel for any reason” coverage. It costs more, but provides the full “no questions asked” type of coverage that many people want.

  • Daniel Wilson

    They should receive a refund minus a cancelation fee. I am sick and tired of people saying you need to buy insurance… You bought and paid for a service that you never used. I guess next you will be saying that we need to buy insurance if we miss a movie that we had reserved.

    This just shows us once again that greed and screwing people out of money is how this country has thrived for the past century.

  • Bill

    Although I expect that travel insurance would have been a good idea, at up to 6.6% premium, it is surely quite expensive insurance.

    Princess is trying to send a message here – the obvious one being that you should get travel insurance.

    However, the other message they are sending is that, if you don’t have travel insurance, we’re not going to help you, even if you infect the ship.

    You know, I’ve never gone on a cruise. All I have to go on is what I read and what I’m told.

    - people who are sick and didn’t get insurance will lose their money so they will probably go on the ship.
    - a lot of cruise ships fail health inspections – badly.
    - they don’t have separate smoking/non smoking cabins. You could end up paying for a balcony, only to have the person beside or below you smoking on theirs.
    - they charge far too much for internet access. Satellite communications costs have come down, but not on a cruise ship.

    It doesn’t look like I am going to become a cruise customer. Several of these are show stoppers.

  • Alan Gore

    The responsible action for the cruise line to take in a case like this would be to issue refunds for any passenger who has to stay home because of an infectious disease. If I were in the Kau’s situation I would throw the company’s arrogance right back in their face by going anyway, run the risk of infecting everyone else. If the whole shipload of passengers were to get infected, it’s Princess’ fault alone.

    No wonder viruses at sea are so prevalent – it’s all because of idiot policies like this. For my own safety, I will not under any circumstances take a cruise again until the law requires refunds for sick passengers.

  • Lisa S

    Not surprisingly, I agree with Wayne: putting others first allows companies to profit while depriving individuals of a great trip. I work in a clinic and have been exposed to swine flu countless times. There were a couple of weeks where I felt like I had a really bad cold. Maybe I was suffering the effects of the H1N1 virus, maybe I wasn’t–in many cases, H1N1 is very mild. In any case, I didn’t let it slow me down and continued working. Why would I take vacation time (my company has PTO [paid time off] in order to reduce the number of paid days off they have to give employees) when I felt fine enough to work? As long as I am feeling fine, I am not going to sacrifice my vacation on the off chance someone else might get infected and the very real reality that the cruise ship is profiting. Why should individuals behave in what could be considered a morally or ethically correct way when cruise ships, other companies, and employers do not?

  • John

    I’m with John F.
    The group had the opportunity to purchase an insurance policy that would cover this exact event. They made the decision, a very poor one in hindsight, not to purchase the insurance and take the risk on something like this occurring.

    For $100 a person they would have been covered. This is what trip insurance is for. When you don’t buy it, make sure you understand the penalties for not being able to go.

  • SirWired

    If I was Princess, I wouldn’t give them any kind of a refund (this is what insurance is for, after all), but might give them a few hundred bucks credit towards a future cruise as a goodwill gesture.

  • Linda

    @Wayne Dayton – you would punish an entire cruise ship full of passengers to spite Princess? Wow. That’s cold.

    I’m on the cruise line’s side. Insurance is out there. Any of us could run across a problem that prevents us from taking a cruise – not just Swine Flu. The Kaus should have bought it. I’m sorry for them.

  • Bob

    Thank you, Princess, for reminding me why I don’t go on cruises.

  • Noah

    The decision seems fair enough, but don’t complain when I hide my illness and go on the cruise anyway.

  • Jesse

    Given that they would deny boarding…would it be something the credit card can claim back? (Assuming they paid with CC, if they didn’t, that’s a fault on its own and deserves no money back!!!)

    If I was on that case, I would show up to the cruise and have them deny my boarding…boarding denied, I will imagine they will either have to pay back or I would get my CC involved to get a refund.

    Am I right?

  • Ron

    I agree with John F. Where does one draw the line. I have been in the travel industry for over 20 years and I always recommend some form of travel insurance, whether through the vendor or an outside source. As an agent, we have to advise our clients of the what if factor? Would a future cruise credit have been nice? Sure, but I am going to side with the cruise line here.

  • carver

    My problem with this decision is far more fundamental. The entire concept of non-refundable fares is difficult for me. The travel industry sets prices that make little or no sense.

    I’m not a fan of travel insurance. In particular trip cancellation insurance is ridiculously priced. I suspect its becuase of a lack of transparency in the market 6.6% is highway robbery. By comparison, my car insurance premium is $50/month to provide a quarter million in coverage.

    Also, the cruise line is short sighted. I agree it is unethical and immoral to take the cruise knowing that you have a highly contagious disease. That should be a no-brainer. However, the cruise line actions incentivizes people to act immorally to protect their investment and take the cruise. Particularly the family members who don’t know if they are sick.

    I think the people who should really be pissed are the other passengers who are put at risk because of the cruise line’s short sightedness.

  • carver

    CONTINUED…

    In my opinion, all travel tickets should be applicable to a future fare less a reasonable change fee, and with enough restrictions that it doesn’t hurt the travel provider’s business model.

  • http://www.cutcat.com Regina

    I completely disagree that “doing good never pays”–and I don’t think it has to “pay” in the traditional sense. If you cancel a cruise because you may be carrying a disease (not to mention that you won’t enjoy the cruise anyway if you become symptomatic) you are doing the right thing. Just because the cruise line won’t refund your money doesn’t make it right to infect everyone else. You would be punishing other passengers because you were angry at the cruise line. That’s childish, irresponsible and totally selfish. I sincerely hope that you, Mr. Dayton, are never on a cruise I take.

  • sue

    I’m with Carver here, and I question the ethics of the cruise company being the one selling the insurance product. Of course they won’t be generous to anyone who doesn’t buy their insurance because it would undermine their product. Of course they don’t have a reasonable cancellation policy because that too, would undermine their insurance product.

    I’ve never taken a cruise and the more I read about their questionable practices, the less I am ever likely to.

  • MarkieA

    Chris

    You need to add option #4:

    4) Get to the cruise ship early, stand at the top of the gangplank – or whatever it’s called – and loudly announce that you have Swine Flu to every boarding passenger, and that you’re still going to go on the cruise because Princess won’t refund your money. If you don’t get beat up by irate passengers, Princess will surely “come to some agreeable terms” with you :)

  • Jose

    This whole travel insurance thing has gotten way out of hand. What is next? Ice cream insurance, so when I go to Baskin Robbins, if I drop my ice cream, it has happend to a lot of people, I file a claim and get my money back. C’mon, its a scam, if companies would just practice a little bit of common sense and customer service all this would be a moot point and the travel insurance business would not exist.

  • Steven

    This is yet another reason I don’t cruise. If this had been an airline ticket, at the least I could have rebooked for a change fee to a future flight.

    What is really going on here is that the cruise lines WANT to ADD to the cost of the cruise YOUR paying for the trip insurance, which has to be a HIGH PROFIT product, which is either rebated to the cruise lines if the cruise lines don’t own the trip insurance companies in the first place.

    What a SCAM!

  • Paulette

    Before my most recent trip to Australia, I had never purchased trip insurance. I decided to do so this time because of the medical and auto coverage more than the trip package itself. My travel agent tried to push me into purchasing their insurance, but I wanted to do some research before signing up. Boy, am I glad I did. The agency’s policy was a high-price, low-coverage ripoff. I got more than twice the coverage for less than half the price from a reputable third-party company. I agree that buying insurance for a large-ticket trip is a good idea, but I strongly recommend refusing an agent/cruise line’s offering before doing a bit of research — just make sure you sign up within the short time frame allowed for “pre-existing conditions.”

  • Rae

    My question is this: Even if the entire party had purchased travel insurance and decided as a whole not to travel, yet only one of their party had been diagnosed, would the travel insurance have covered the ones not showing symptoms yet?

  • Joel Wechsler

    I think Daniel Wilson and both Joses (assuming they aren’t one and the same) are off the mark with respect to travel insurance as it relates to cruises. The cancellation penalties, which are clearly spelled out when you book, are fairly stiff, ranging up to 100% if the cancellation is last minute. Knowing this, EVERYONE who books a cruise should buy travel insurance, although not from the cruise line for reasons that have to do with your ability to collect in the event of a bankruptcy. That said, it would be nice if Princess and the other cruise lines had something in their policy that makes exceptions for illness.

  • kenish

    I also side with the cruise line in this case. All four cruise lines I have used make the non-refundability very clear and suggest travel insurance. You can buy through them, or get coverage independently. Many great websites exist to help select the best policy for your itenerary and needs.

    Several have commented the Kau’s paid for something they didn’t use. Not entirely true, when the ship sails with an empty cabin (or a plane takes off with an empty seat) that revenue opportunity is lost forever. They can’t hold it on the shelf to sell tomorrow like a box of cereal at the supermarket. A better perspective is Princess set aside a cabin under contract which the Kaus did not use.

    I don’t want to sound unsympathetic; it’s bad when anyone loses a vacation and losing money just adds insult to injury. The cruise line could have tried to resell the Kau’s cabin at a distressed fare, then refunded or credited that amount to the Kaus. There have been cases where a passenger has to cancel days or a week in advance; some cruise lines will not allow them to send a friend or relative in their place (or charge a big fee for the substitiution). That is really a shame on the cruise line.

  • Carver

    @kenish

    I might be more willing to agree with hyou if travel provider allowed you to give away teh cruise to someone else who could use it. But since many tickets are non-transferable, (don’t know about cruises) then I see it as a money grab

  • Adrienne

    A couple posters made statements like this: “I sometimes wish that I would have gone, infected everyone on the ship, and had hundreds of people filing claims against these shysters.”
    To the people who would go on the cruise anyway and risk infecting everyone so the cruise line would be forced to deal with claims, you are evil. Yes, evil. The Kaus should have bought travel insurance but at least they are not EVIL.

  • DeVon Thomas

    Chris,

    Sorry I am a few months late reading this post. But Rae has a great point, would travel insurance cover the entire family since only one was diagnosed? I am thinking it wouldn’t have covered the entire family and they would have still been out of gas if they chose not to go which was the responsible thing to do.

  • Joe Reynolds

    Insurance cost is proportional to the cost of the trip, so it is not just a flat fee.
    It depends on how much you want to risk and how much you want to be secure. The cruise lines rules are spelled out and that is the contract you enter into.
    I can’t see what all the fuss is about. If you don’t like the contract don’t sign it and don’t take the cruise.
    The cruise line is in business to make money. Now if the cruise line refuses to board you for any reason, then look in the contract and find that reason. You are the one that signed the contract. You have to honor it. If you have insurance you can honor the contract and not take the financial loss. If you don’t have insurance and you have to cancel you will take the financial loss. In this case you have self insured. You don’t have to buy the insurance from the cruise line or use the one that cruise line recommends. A good travel agent that you deal with year to year is a good idea. They can be very helpful.

Previous post:

Next post: