A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travelling Style » Cruises
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Splendor cruise ship fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 14th, 2010, 06:08 PM posted to rec.travel.cruises
Charles[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,112
Default Splendor cruise ship fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue

Interesting article from a lawyer who specializes in Cruise Law.

Splendor Cruise Ship Fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue
Carnival

http://bit.ly/d17ndM


--
Charles
  #2  
Old November 14th, 2010, 11:26 PM posted to rec.travel.cruises
Val Kraut
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default Splendor cruise ship fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue

Splendor Cruise Ship Fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue
Carnival


He's right, it is a fair offer - you get two good crusies for what you
originally paid, the cruise line didn't do it on purpose, and commuters are
routinely inconcienced by railroads and airlines with essentially no such
compensation. Anyone who sues should be barred from entertaining their
friends with heroic stories of having spam for breakfast.

On the side I think the Cruise Line saying they didn't serve the Spam, like
it was unacceptable, should result in the Commander of Naval Operations
sending a picture to the Carnival CEO of himself in full uniform standing
with his middle finger outstretched and a voice bubble saying "Loose my
phone number and have your next disaster someplace off Somalia." They really
do owe the US Navy and Taxpayers an appology on that one! The Navy mounts a
maximum effort, at taxpayer expense, because the cruise ship is supposedly
running out of food - and they're not happy with what was delivered. That's
why the Taxpayers came equiped with middle fingers. Some military families
may comsider this when booking their next cruise.


Val Kraut


  #3  
Old November 15th, 2010, 12:12 AM posted to rec.travel.cruises
Charles[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,112
Default Splendor cruise ship fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue

In article , Val Kraut
wrote:

On the side I think the Cruise Line saying they didn't serve the Spam, like
it was unacceptable, should result in the Commander of Naval Operations
sending a picture to the Carnival CEO of himself in full uniform standing
with his middle finger outstretched and a voice bubble saying "Loose my
phone number and have your next disaster someplace off Somalia." They really
do owe the US Navy and Taxpayers an appology on that one! The Navy mounts a
maximum effort, at taxpayer expense, because the cruise ship is supposedly
running out of food - and they're not happy with what was delivered. That's
why the Taxpayers came equiped with middle fingers. Some military families
may comsider this when booking their next cruise.


I don't think the Navy commander cares. The provisions were bought and
provided by Carnival. The Navy only delivered them.

--
Charles
  #4  
Old November 15th, 2010, 12:42 AM posted to rec.travel.cruises
Val Kraut
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default Splendor cruise ship fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue


" I don't think the Navy commander cares. The provisions were bought and
provided by Carnival. The Navy only delivered them.


ONLY DELIVERED THEM - do you have any idea how much it costs to operate a
CVN task Group. Do you realize all flight airframes have limited lives and
Carvival just used how many of these on the C-2s and delivery Helicopters.
They should pay the taxpayer back for these. Especially if they ordered
stuff they didn't indend to use . A fools mission at the Taxpayers expense.
That's like I bought the box of Candy my friend paid top dollar to deliver
it and I criticized it and choose not to eat it when it arrived. I still
think the way it was done shows basic disrespect for those who came to aid -
and an apology and thanks from Carnival to the Navy and US taxpayer is very
much in order. You must think a CVN battle group is something like a UPS
delivery truck!


Val Kraut


  #5  
Old November 15th, 2010, 01:07 AM posted to rec.travel.cruises
Charles[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,112
Default Splendor cruise ship fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue

In article , Val Kraut
wrote:

ONLY DELIVERED THEM - do you have any idea how much it costs to operate a
CVN task Group. Do you realize all flight airframes have limited lives and
Carvival just used how many of these on the C-2s and delivery Helicopters.
They should pay the taxpayer back for these. Especially if they ordered
stuff they didn't indend to use . A fools mission at the Taxpayers expense.
That's like I bought the box of Candy my friend paid top dollar to deliver
it and I criticized it and choose not to eat it when it arrived. I still
think the way it was done shows basic disrespect for those who came to aid -
and an apology and thanks from Carnival to the Navy and US taxpayer is very
much in order. You must think a CVN battle group is something like a UPS
delivery truck!


Carnival says the Spam was not ordered, it was substituted by a vendor.
All Carnival did was state that none was served to guests in response
to the media making a big deal about Spam being served to luxury cruise
ship passengers. It was not a fools mission, provisions delivered were
used and needed. Carnival did thank the Navy. I don't see why an
apology is needed. Also the Navy was already operating in the area
training. The Navy helping out is part of it's mission and most of the
passengers were US taxpayers. It was not a fools mission.

--
Charles
  #6  
Old November 15th, 2010, 01:48 AM posted to rec.travel.cruises
Val Kraut
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default Splendor cruise ship fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue


" Carnival says the Spam was not ordered, it was substituted by a vendor.
All Carnival did was state that none was served to guests in response
to the media making a big deal about Spam being served to luxury cruise
ship passengers.


O Good! - the Carnival image must be preserved - there are no operating
toilets, the place smells - but we're above serving Spam delivered at the
Taxpayers expense. I still think, as a taxpayer, they owe an apology.


Val Kraut


  #7  
Old November 15th, 2010, 02:05 AM posted to rec.travel.cruises
Charles[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,112
Default Splendor cruise ship fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue

In article , Val Kraut
wrote:

O Good! - the Carnival image must be preserved - there are no operating
toilets, the place smells - but we're above serving Spam delivered at the
Taxpayers expense. I still think, as a taxpayer, they owe an apology.


I am not a Carnival fan but from everything I have read they handled
the fire well. How it happened and why the power could not be restored
needs to be investigated so it hopefully can be prevented from
happening again. Carnival apologized to the Splendor passengers for
what they went through. They thanked the Navy. Your attitude is a
little much.

--
Charles
  #8  
Old November 15th, 2010, 02:15 AM posted to rec.travel.cruises
Kurt Ullman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,653
Default Splendor cruise ship fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue

In article ,
"Val Kraut" wrote:

" I don't think the Navy commander cares. The provisions were bought and
provided by Carnival. The Navy only delivered them.


ONLY DELIVERED THEM - do you have any idea how much it costs to operate a
CVN task Group. Do you realize all flight airframes have limited lives and
Carvival just used how many of these on the C-2s and delivery Helicopters.

All of this was written off as good training time for the chopper
crews and folks deployed to the cruise ships. Probably better than what
was scheduled since it was closer to real life situation. IF the flights
from SD to the carrier were in addition to regularly scheduled, that
might be an issue.

--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
---PJ O'Rourke
  #9  
Old November 15th, 2010, 02:36 AM posted to rec.travel.cruises
Val Kraut
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default Splendor cruise ship fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue


"Carnival apologized to the Splendor passengers for
what they went through. They thanked the Navy. Your attitude is a
little much.


No it's not a bit much - they were on the ropes and called for help and then
criticized what the help delivered because it didn't fit what they think
their image is - so next time help yourself. Make a nice T-Shirt - I'd
rather starve on Carnival than eat Spam!


Val Kraut


  #10  
Old November 15th, 2010, 02:40 AM posted to rec.travel.cruises
Jean O'Boyle[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 624
Default Splendor cruise ship fire - 3 reasons why you will lose if you sue


"Val Kraut" wrote in message
...

" Carnival says the Spam was not ordered, it was substituted by a vendor.
All Carnival did was state that none was served to guests in response
to the media making a big deal about Spam being served to luxury cruise
ship passengers.


O Good! - the Carnival image must be preserved - there are no operating
toilets, the place smells - but we're above serving Spam delivered at the
Taxpayers expense. I still think, as a taxpayer, they owe an apology.



You are so very over the top in your criticism....it was an ACCIDENT for
heaven's sake. You're behaving as if it were intentional. It could have
happened on any cruise line. Carnival ordered food supplies that were not
perishable since there was no refrigeration.
They may have ordered canned hams or turkey breasts...who knows? The
supplier SUBSTITUTED the Spam because apparently they did not have what
Carnival ordered in immediate supply. Carnival has thanked all who came to
their aid and will generously reimburse all inconvenienced passengers at a
pretty hefty price tag...The Navy was already in nearby waters doing
exercises in preparation for exactly the situation that occurred. It gave
them a real life experience to deal with. You are making a mountain out of a
mole hill. Give it up...Carnival does not owe any apologies to you or anyone
else for something that they did not deliberately cause...They have already
apologized profusely to the passengers involved by word and action.

--Jean---a taxpayer who thinks there are lots of other ways money is being
wasted everyday that you should complain about!


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cruise ship fire in Cozumel???? Dillon Pyron Cruises 3 August 18th, 2006 10:51 PM
Cruise ship fire near UK Joseph Coulter Cruises 1 May 6th, 2006 11:21 PM
Cruise ship fire near UK Joseph Coulter Europe 3 May 6th, 2006 11:21 PM
Cruise Ship Returns After Fire!!! steinbrenner Cruises 2 January 19th, 2005 08:38 PM
Cruise Ship Fire in 2000 Pat Cruises 15 April 20th, 2004 03:03 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.