Welcome to Bolsover Cruise Club Forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to the Cruise Club Forum by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Tinkerbell

Bad Publicity

78 posts in this topic

Are members concerned about the bad publicity P and O are receiving at the moment.

Last week there was a report about a lady being put off a ship in Mexico as she was ill. It was alleged that she was told "this is a hotel not a hospital". She died before getting back home.

This week there is an article about a couple being ill with chest infections and norovirus for 18 days on Adonia. They came off the ship in Barbados, managing their own luggage, with the husband being transferred to a clinic. The report said that their cabin was made up for the next passengers without being fumigated.

Like the majority of passengers, my husband and I are in our seventies, and not always in the best of health. We both dread the thought of being abandoned in a strange country if the worst happened.

Scrag likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are not concerned about these reports as there are always two sides to every story, some stories seem to get bits added on or bits missed out,that is not to say these reports are not correct but to say you need to hear both sides.

 

So we are very happy to continue sailing with P&O.wink.png

J-Dog and Falmouthgirl like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are not concerned either,  as sad as the recent stories are the ships are not a hospital,  can you imagine the outcry if a doctor agreed to let ill people stay onboard and then they died who would they be blaming then.

As Ron says there are two sides to every story and we are only hearing one side.

pennbank and ron like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two sides maybe, but if these stories are even only a percentage correct then P&O have behaved appallingly.

 

With the first case common sense seems to have gone out of the window, it would have been much more sensible to keep the lady on until San Francisco, only a couple of days as she was responding to treatment, rather than dump her in Los Cabos.

 

And if there are two sides to every story P&O should state theirs openly.

 

RayO

Janantholly likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that all ships, no matter which company, should be fumigated more often. They could easily set up a rota to have a deep clean say once a month when in their home port and have an overnight stay before the next cruise goes out to enable this to be done. I know its all about profits etc but what is the point of making profit if you aren't going to get the clientele who trust that the ship is clean. 

 

The first thing I ever do when I go on a cruise is to go around with Dettol wipes on the surfaces and items that I am going to touch in the cabin but at the end of the day a passenger shouldn't have to do that. 

Janantholly and pennbank like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Ron there are always two sides to every story. However if these stories are true and P & O are so uncaring maybe we should think about using another cruise line, but are they any different?

Irene

ron likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there are two sides to every story and all the assumptions are being made after only hearing one of them. In the first case not P&O but a qualified doctor made the decision to transfer the patient as they thought it in the patients interest. If anyone disagrees with their decision I trust they are a qualified doctor and in full possession of all the facts.

 

With the second case it should be remembered that Norovirus usually only lasts for 48 hours which is why it is known as the '48 hour vomiting bug'. To have this and chest infections for 18 days seems somewhat excessive and perhaps there was more to it. I have seen many people taken off ships with illness but have never seen anyone struggle with luggage and that includes P&O. Indeed the crew usually go that extra mile and even help with the packing.

vamp23, pyewacket, ron and 3 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just imagine what the publicity would have been if the Doctor had agreed to the family's request and allowed the patient to stay on the ship and then she had died when on board. There would have been an outcry - I can just see the Headlines - Doctor failed to get the patient to hospital which would be fully equipped to deal with the situation - Would this patient have died? All the Doctor can do is what he/she feels is in the patient's best interest. I think P&O were dammed whatever was decided.

As for someone cancelling a cruise because of a one-sided report I can't believe anyone would do that. It's like reading a bad review of a cruise and then deciding to cancel an cruise already booked. I know I've read reviews of cruises I've been on and I often wondered if we had been on the same cruise!

AFC04/03, loz6, ron and 4 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just imagine what the publicity would have been if the Doctor had agreed to the family's request and allowed the patient to stay on the ship and then she had died when on board. There would have been an outcry - I can just see the Headlines - Doctor failed to get the patient to hospital which would be fully equipped to deal with the situation - Would this patient have died? All the Doctor can do is what he/she feels is in the patient's best interest. I think P&O were dammed whatever was decided.

As for someone cancelling a cruise because of a one-sided report I can't believe anyone would do that. It's like reading a bad review of a cruise and then deciding to cancel an cruise already booked. I know I've read reviews of cruises I've been on and I often wondered if we had been on the same cruise!

 

I completely agree Annieuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that all ships, no matter which company, should be fumigated more often. They could easily set up a rota to have a deep clean say once a month when in their home port and have an overnight stay before the next cruise goes out to enable this to be done. I know its all about profits etc but what is the point of making profit if you aren't going to get the clientele who trust that the ship is clean. 

 

The first thing I ever do when I go on a cruise is to go around with Dettol wipes on the surfaces and items that I am going to touch in the cabin but at the end of the day a passenger shouldn't have to do that. 

 

Doesnt matter how often the ship is fumigated you could do it every week it only takes one passenger to get on ship with any symptoms or not to practice good hygiene when going to the toilet and then touch a surface/hand rail or go to buffet and mess with the food with hands which a lot do and thats it it spreads. P&O or any cruise line can only do so much before it becomes pointless especially with the filthy habits of some cruisers i.e. touching food in buffet when there are tongs, not washing hands after using toilet or fill up bottles with water at drink stations when labels clearly state not too.

ron likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are members concerned about the bad publicity P and O are receiving at the moment.

Last week there was a report about a lady being put off a ship in Mexico as she was ill. It was alleged that she was told "this is a hotel not a hospital". She died before getting back home.

This week there is an article about a couple being ill with chest infections and norovirus for 18 days on Adonia. They came off the ship in Barbados, managing their own luggage, with the husband being transferred to a clinic. The report said that their cabin was made up for the next passengers without being fumigated.

Like the majority of passengers, my husband and I are in our seventies, and not always in the best of health. We both dread the thought of being abandoned in a strange country if the worst happened.

 

In a nutshell, NO.

 

And that is a Carnival shareholder speaking.

hturtle likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the comment made by Ron. Some people are ready to latch onto sensationalistic events without having the whole story. I fully agree there are two sides tro every story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there are two sides to every story and all the assumptions are being made after only hearing one of them. In the first case not P&O but a qualified doctor made the decision to transfer the patient as they thought it in the patients interest. If anyone disagrees with their decision I trust they are a qualified doctor and in full possession of all the facts.

 

With the second case it should be remembered that Norovirus usually only lasts for 48 hours which is why it is known as the '48 hour vomiting bug'. To have this and chest infections for 18 days seems somewhat excessive and perhaps there was more to it. I have seen many people taken off ships with illness but have never seen anyone struggle with luggage and that includes P&O. Indeed the crew usually go that extra mile and even help with the packing.

 

...and in every case there is usually an underlying gripe. 

 

Fortunately those of us, like you and I OldWorldTraveller, each with some considerable experience, can read between the lines.

 

I was only reading yesterday a review slagging off Cunard because the reviewer had to pay £360.00 for visas to enter India. Now what on earth does that have to do with Cunard. Perhaps i should have complained about APT on my Mekong River cruise when we had to pay over £100.00 for Vietnamese visas.

 

The mind sometimes boggles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it be that medics on ships generally err on the side of caution in an increasingly litigious world.

The downside is that some people may be reluctant to visit the doctor on board if the pendulum swings too much one way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could it be that medics on ships generally err on the side of caution in an increasingly litigious world.

The downside is that some people may be reluctant to visit the doctor on board if the pendulum swings too much one way.

 

My personal view is that doctors do what they think is right and best for the patient and always have done. I agree with you wheels36, they probably do err on the side of caution but I don't think it has anything to do with litigation but more about the best for the patient. If people become reluctant to visit the doctor for fear of being put ashore then I am sorry but my answer would be, more fool them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to reiterate, there has been no detailed comment from P&O so all the assumptions are purely based on the back the cruise line, damn the complainant mentality.

 

In the first instance a woman died, apparently brought on by stress from the actions of P&O.

 

I find the complacency in thinking that it will be OK for me if ever this should happen a bit ostrich like. There are a fair number of cases where crew and passengers have been treated badly by cruise lines, read Events At Sea.

 

RayO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would appear that the family are citing subsequent alternative medical opinion that "it would have been better for the woman to have stayed on the ship."

The subsequent opinion no doubt took account of stress caused by having to find cash to fund medical treatment in lieu of an insurance claim, and the stress and strain of a road and air journey to San Francisco for her flight home.

The P&O position can probably be best gauged by their quoted response,"unfortunately it is necessary occasionally for the ship’s medical centre to refer sick patients to a shore-based hospital for specialist treatment."

So you can read into that what you wish but for me it's a classic case of "buyer beware."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to reiterate, there has been no detailed comment from P&O so all the assumptions are purely based on the back the cruise line, damn the complainant mentality.

 

In the first instance a woman died, apparently brought on by stress from the actions of P&O.

 

I find the complacency in thinking that it will be OK for me if ever this should happen a bit ostrich like. There are a fair number of cases where crew and passengers have been treated badly by cruise lines, read Events At Sea.

 

RayO

 

I'm afraid I can't agree with you Ray.

 

The majority of cruise lines have a policy of not responding to either these reports or the style of criticism we regularly read on 'cruise reviews'.

 

I can agree with that policy too. 

 

There is little or no point in getting into a verbal slanging match.

 

I think P&O's regular clientele support speaks volumes. 

Falmouthgirl likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to reiterate, there has been no detailed comment from P&O so all the assumptions are purely based on the back the cruise line, damn the complainant mentality.

 

In the first instance a woman died, apparently brought on by stress from the actions of P&O.

 

I find the complacency in thinking that it will be OK for me if ever this should happen a bit ostrich like. There are a fair number of cases where crew and passengers have been treated badly by cruise lines, read Events At Sea.

 

RayO

 

Hi Ray, I am not sticking up for the cruise lines but I think it should be remembered that these are 'Alleged' incidents with only one side of the story being reported.

Personally I am always a little dubious of these stories. Firstly everyone should have travel insurance and if they have given all the required details at the time of booking there should be no need to pay your own money up front, this is why you supply the emergency 24 hour number for the insurance agents. Secondly if things are as bad as are reported why don't they sue the cruise line? The world is full of lawyers who will act on a 'No Win-No Fee' basis. Finally if people did sue and won their case it would be all over the newspapers, but guess what, we never hear of one. Is that because they didn't have a case in the first place. Just my opinion. ;) 

Falmouthgirl and tigerlilly like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no chance of P&O or any other cruise line entering into discussions on issues such as this, as their publicity departments will be effectively gagged by their lawyers. What you can be sure about however is that there will be huge analysis going on internally not only within P&O but in other cruise lines as well, as they are all affected by the outcomes.

Until recently the liabilities were apparently fairly clear in that the medical department on a ship was a separate legal entity from the ship, and the medic on a ship had only to administer care to a standard similar to what would be administered by a shore based medic of equivalent experience and qualifications to be legally compliant. That situation however has apparently now changed.

So if for example on-board medical cardiac knowledge and experience is light and a passenger is showing worrying signs, then it is understandable that the medics would want to get the passenger off the ship.

The problem for the passenger is what is available on shore and have the facilities been checked out beforehand?

For the answer to that see P&O conditions section 31

 

31. In the event of illness or injury a Passenger may have to be landed ashore for medical treatment. No representations are made regarding the quality of medical treatment at any port of call or at the place at which the Passenger is landed. Medical facilities do vary from port to port and no representations or warranties are made in relation to the standard of medical treatment provided by the various hospitals and/or clinics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no chance of P&O or any other cruise line entering into discussions on issues such as this, as their publicity departments will be effectively gagged by their lawyers. What you can be sure about however is that there will be huge analysis going on internally not only within P&O but in other cruise lines as well, as they are all affected by the outcomes.

Until recently the liabilities were apparently fairly clear in that the medical department on a ship was a separate legal entity from the ship, and the medic on a ship had only to administer care to a standard similar to what would be administered by a shore based medic of equivalent experience and qualifications to be legally compliant. That situation however has apparently now changed.

So if for example on-board medical cardiac knowledge and experience is light and a passenger is showing worrying signs, then it is understandable that the medics would want to get the passenger off the ship.

The problem for the passenger is what is available on shore and have the facilities been checked out beforehand?

For the answer to that see P&O conditions section 31

 

31. In the event of illness or injury a Passenger may have to be landed ashore for medical treatment. No representations are made regarding the quality of medical treatment at any port of call or at the place at which the Passenger is landed. Medical facilities do vary from port to port and no representations or warranties are made in relation to the standard of medical treatment provided by the various hospitals and/or clinics.

Thank you, wheels36, for the clarity of your post.  Very interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no chance of P&O or any other cruise line entering into discussions on issues such as this, as their publicity departments will be effectively gagged by their lawyers. What you can be sure about however is that there will be huge analysis going on internally not only within P&O but in other cruise lines as well, as they are all affected by the outcomes.

Until recently the liabilities were apparently fairly clear in that the medical department on a ship was a separate legal entity from the ship, and the medic on a ship had only to administer care to a standard similar to what would be administered by a shore based medic of equivalent experience and qualifications to be legally compliant. That situation however has apparently now changed.

So if for example on-board medical cardiac knowledge and experience is light and a passenger is showing worrying signs, then it is understandable that the medics would want to get the passenger off the ship.

The problem for the passenger is what is available on shore and have the facilities been checked out beforehand?

For the answer to that see P&O conditions section 31

 

31. In the event of illness or injury a Passenger may have to be landed ashore for medical treatment. No representations are made regarding the quality of medical treatment at any port of call or at the place at which the Passenger is landed. Medical facilities do vary from port to port and no representations or warranties are made in relation to the standard of medical treatment provided by the various hospitals and/or clinics.

 

Fair cop that Wheels.

 

Of course another problem is passengers continually opting for the cheapest insurance without either researching the small print or considering the likely conditions they may find themselves in.

 

It's always easy to blame the cruise lines and always convenient to ignore one's own shortcomings.

ron likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now what would you say to a person being taken of a Celebrity cruise mid Atlantic? it happened after an elderly passenger fell and smashed his collar bone unfortunately Celebrity didn't have the facilities to deal with this accident and transferred this passenger onto the USS WASP and their sickbay, we never did hear the outcome [i bet that was some bill] who would argue?

The moment PO is mentioned someone will jump in and immediately condemn them after hearing only one side of the story there are so many unexplained factors, insurance, passengers condition the passenger would have only been removed on medical advice and has all ready been said the lawyers would have been like bees around a honeypot if there is a case to answer , maybe there is but lets wait and see until we apportion blame CG

Oldworldtraveller likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main and most important point is to ensure you have good quality travel insurance. The doctors on board any ship will do the very best they can and with the facilities they have but there are times when a passenger will need more specialised facilities. It happens the same with hospitals in the UK and the need for transfers.

I, probably like many, have been on board when a passenger has died but, unfortunately, these things happen. You cannot place any blame on the cruise company. People will bring all sorts of illnesses onboard or will travel when they are not well which can put everyone at risk. Going shopping gives you the same risk.

I will continue to travel with P&O and, for Solent Richards benefit, continue to receive my shareholder discount.

pennbank and Falmouthgirl like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0