I wish to comment on two letters in the April 2002 Cruise Travel, "Cruise Lines Behind The Times" and "Cruise Cancellation Rip-off." I can appreciate the writers' points, but at the present time I do not feel the cruise lines will change their modus of operation. Any change could only occur by widespread rejection by the cruising public to the onerous cancellation provisions or by federal legislation.
The passenger ticket is a contract of adhesion; it is a one-sided "take it or leave it" contract that the passenger can rarely "leave it" without suffering severe monetary penalty. For example, I am leaving on a cruise the first week in April and received the passenger tickets 40 days prior to embarkation. If I were to cancel for any reason such as I could not accept the terms of the contract, I would lose 50 percent of the gross fare. I am of the opinion that within a couple of days of canceling, the cruise line may have sold my stateroom to someone else.
I am not a lawyer, not associated with any lawyers, and I am not offering legal advice, but I have read and studied maritime law for more than 10 years. There are provisions in the passenger ticket that are taken from United States Codes 46, especially Sections 183. However, the cruise lines tend to include only those portions of Sections 183 that benefit them and not the passengers. For example there is a requirement that prohibits the cruise line inserting any provisions in the passenger ticket that are against public policy. I wonder if the severity of the passenger ticket cancellation penalties might not be against public policy.
For younger passengers in good health, perhaps consideration should be given to buying cancellation waiver (C.W.) if offered by the cruise line at a reasonable price. Under C.W., you usually can cancel for any reason, provided you notify the cruise line in the time period specified. But note that C.W. is not insurance.
Hermann Paul Schlander, Palm Desert, CA
COPYRIGHT 2002 World Publishing, Co. (Illinois)
COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group
