View Single Post
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 04-06-2009, 12:16 PM
Cruise Fanatic Cruise Fanatic is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 6,043
I would like to preface my statement that as a moderator I feel it is our job to provide unbiased and factual information not based on any personal emotion, or loyalty, to any one cruise line name brand. Individuals may, or may not, sympathize or empathize with a posters situation. However; that does not negate the facts of any given situation. That being said, here are the cold hard facts:

Fact 1: Any company is in business to make a profit. They have an obligation to their investors to make that profit. The business also has an obligation to the consumer, to provide a reasonable price for the product and services they sell.

Fact 2: A business (in this case cruise line), has no obligation to compensate or reimburse a consumer, when the consumer has not met the guidelines of General conditions or contracts of the cruise line.

Fact 3: It is an individuals responsibility to take out insurance in the event they cannot meet the General conditions or contracts of the cruise line.

Fact 4: It isn't the cruise lines concern why an individual did or didn't take out insurance. The fact remains the individual made a choice.

Fact 5: A cruise line may or may not make an exception to an individuals situation. However; Facts 1-4 still remain. A cruise line can't meet their obligation to Fact 1, if they make exceptions to every individual, who acting on emotion, thinks their situation is unique and different from all the other individuals making the same claims.

Fact 6: Frivilous lawsuits only hurt everyone. They are self-serving only to the individual suing. Thus, is the reason they are called frivilous. If an individual finds themselves in a situation they deem as unpleasant, then they have a responsibility to remove themselves from that situation.