Thomson Celebration Disaster

[aviss]

Thomson celebration sailed from Southampton on 8/5/05 after continuous problems from the time of boarding the 14 night cruise was abandoned on Thur pm.
Due to Thomson charm offensive publicity has been kept to a minimum. The only true report seen is at the following link, all other reports simply give the Thomson line which is economic with the truth.
http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/men/n ... 58662_the_ cruise_from_hell.html

[HW tenpin]

First thing,
While not in the least supporting Thompson, a ships waste system is so unlike a hotel or your home where up to 8 litres of water is used, the vacuum system uses minimal amounts, and has to be sucked into the recycling tanks through small bore tubes. The use of excessive amounts of paper can and does block these, as can other materials not to be mentioned here. On some ships there is a polite request for you to place used paper in the bin provided, not even I can bring myself to do that.

The second part is to my mind a lot worse, and does not only involve cruise ships but all bad holidays.

The offers to refund all your money and give you 25% off your next one, does not in anyway compensate you for the lost of those two weeks, which are irreplaceable. The 25% is less than you can obtain through early booking discounts and the like, particularly with cruising.

For most of us the two weeks holiday has been taken, and can't be re-taken this year. What makes these Companies think we want to travel with them again next year?

Let them give us a full refund, compensation, or a complete free two weeks with them or elsewhere. Whoever's fault it was.

What do you think?

[aviss]

Further to the comment by TENPIN
I accept that the vacuum system is prone to blockage but this was only part of the problem.

We have cruised 16 times on 10 different ships and have seen the vacuum system used on a number of ships but it has not caused the catastrophic problems we had this time.

There was a problem with the system before we joined the ship despite what Thomson says, then they blamed the Vacuum pumps for failing, I honestly believe they were on their last leges before we joined. being shut down for several months may have had a part to play.

Some cabins had no water supply from day one, others only boiling hot water others only cold water.

We were told by a senior officer that they knew well in advance that a lot of engineering work was needed before going into service but that the money for this work was not forthcoming until the last minute when it was too late to get it all done.

The whole thing comes down to bad management and judgement.

the front line staff were fine.

[BoozeCruise]

ccasion1 Purely a personal opinion but old ships go wrong, its inevitable. The difference in fare between a 2* Thompson Cruise and a 4* Costa is normally just a few quid, but you travel on a new modern cruiseship as opposed to a 21 year old 'hand-me-down' vessel. [/FONT] ccasion1

[aviss]

I agree, the QE2 is nearly twice as old.
I have been on Costa and would not touch them again, the ship was as you say quite new but the cruise staff and food very poor.

[just_cruising]

Please no one mention the Aurora.

[HW tenpin]

Aviss

If you read my post, you will see that I am fully on your side, I do not in any way condone Thompson's part in the failure of your cruise. The offer of your money back and a discount off your next Thompson cruise is laughable. I should think that less than 50% would ever sail with them again.

I find it extremely hard to believe you were told and I quote �a Senior Officer knew well in advance that a lot of Engineering was needed before going into service' un-quote. He obviously had little regard for his prospects with Thompson's or indeed for any future employment. Also the inspectors from the British Maritime Board might have been a little upset about this.

However back to the point, surely this comes down to whether to sail or not. In this case given your views, it would have been financially better for them to have cancelled the cruise thus saving on food, fuel, harbour and port fees, before you embarked. I am not sure I would have been any less pleased with this, than what you endured.

Having gone through a few delayed and one cancelled flight due to technical problems and one cruise delayed by a safety problem, the majority of the complaints were about the fact that we were delayed, not as you might expect, thank heaven they found that before we left.

CATCH 22

[aviss]

The engineer conecrned was a temporary deputy who is not normally on cruise ships.
He also said that being a cruise ship the below deck mechanics are squeezed in with very poor access for maintenance, prioity being given to passenger space unlike commercial ships which are much easier from a maintenance access point of view.
The money spent on a refit also prioritises things like carpeting and things the public see.
He did say that a lot of work had been done on the main engines which were in good condition.

[aviss]

Further to Tenpin comments and my own, I have found the following on Ship Happens website from a customer, the reference to the chief engineer bares out what I heardform a n other.


'------- However, I would like to make certain observations - not moans. 1. The ship should never have sailed. As the Chief Engineer told me on deck one night that Thomson were warned not to take the boat out as it was not ready but ignored the advice. 2. Why would a British company have reception staff that had great difficulty speaking and understanding English - I was sent a locksmith when needed a plumber. 3. The reception staff, assistant Purser and onboard Thomson manager constantly lied to me when they continued to assure me on the third day that mine was the only cabin with no hot water and freezing air conditioning - when in fact the whole corridor was the same. 4. Thomsons must do as the head waiters and waiters want and have 2 specific sittings in the main restaurant. The food was good, the waiters equally good but there was no atmosphere whatsoever. They really do need the 'Spiceboys'. 5. I was concerned with the training of the crew. They had enormous problems with the gangplank at Bilbao. Why did the Captain cut out the two tendered stops when he changed the itinery after Bilbao? After all we had only lost one day. Perhaps he had no cvonfidence in the crew being able to work the tenders. We sat on deck and watched the crew do thier emergency drill - it was absolute chaos. 6. The captain had the cheek in one announcement to say that you must expect teething problems with a first sailing. Many of us who booked early booked the Spirit - we consider that we paid too much to be guinea pigs.'

[MrKnow]

re: The 25% is less than you can obtain through early booking discounts and the like, particularly with cruising.

You will find that your 25% is in addition to any discount you source