– Avalon Myanmar – Myanmar River Cruise – April 2017
Avalon Waterways – Myanmar – Part VI (Kya Hnyat to Kyauk Myaung)
Avalon Waterways – Myanmar – Part IX (The Ship: Avalon Myanmar)
Avalon Waterways – Myanmar (Burma) – Reflections: “Isn’t This Amazing!?”
*Azamara Club Cruises – Azamara Journey – Singapore to Dubai (April 8, 2018)
* Azamara Quest – Southeast Asia and Japan (February 2015)
– How Close to Luxury Can Celebrity’s Smallest Ship Get? – Part I
– How Close to Luxury Can Celebrity’s Smallest Ship Get? Part II
– How Close to Luxury Can Celebrity’s Smallest Ship Get? Part III
– How Close to Luxury Can Celebrity’s Smallest Ship Get? Part IV
– How Close to Luxury Can Celebrity’s Smallest Ship Get? – Some Final Observations and Thoughts
– The Prologue to the Travelogue
– The Adventure Begins…With a Bump or Two
– Settling In Made Easy
– Luxury Touches Here, There and OK, Not, Everywhere…But There Are Lots of Them!
– Asian Flair Onboard and On Shore
– Private Tours, Israel and Conflicts in Perceptions and Perspective
Celebrity Equinox 2009 – Egypt…Impressive and Depressing
– Dining With the Captain and the Reidel Wine Seminar
– The Last Dinner (Tuscan Grille) and Disembarkation
– What Happens When A Class Act Meets Highly Discounted Cruise Fare
– Lisbon to Monaco: Crystal As a “Move Up” & “Move Over” Luxury Option – Part I
– Lisbon to Monaco: Crystal As a “Move Up” & “Move Over” Luxury Option – Part II
– Lisbon to Monaco: Crystal As a “Move Up” & “Move Over” Luxury Option – Part III
– Lisbon to Monaco: Crystal As a “Move Up” & “Move Over” Luxury Option – Part IV (Food & Wine!)
– Princess Cruises Doesn’t Treat You Like Royalty; Celebrity Cruises Does! Which is a Better Value for the Upscale Cruise Guest? Part I
– Celebrity Silhouette vs. -Royal Princess – Which Is A Better Value For The Upscale Cruise Guest? Part II: The Standard Veranda Staterooms
– Celebrity Silhouette vs. Royal Princess – Which Is A Better Value For The Upscale Cruise Guest? Part III: Treating You Right From The Start
– Celebrity Silhouette vs. Royal Princess – Which Is A Better Value For The Upscale Cruise Guest? Part IV: The Wine Lists Speak Volumes (As Do The Beverage Packages)
Regent Seven Seas Voyager – August 2017
– Italy and Corisca 2014 – Part I
– Italy and Corisca 2014 – Part II (Getting There, The Stateroom and First Impressions)
– Italy and Corisca 2014 – Part III (“You Can’t Teach Five Star Service” and Bonafacio, Corsica)
– Italy and Corisca 2014 – Part IV (Calvi, Monaco, Portofino, Porto Azzurro…and Stale Bread)
– Italy and Corisca 2014 – Part V (My Last Day…and How The Chef’s Team Makes It Happen)
I receive a number of newsletters that distribute website articles relating to cruise line industry news. One website that posts regularly is the law firm of Walker & O’Neill; which specializes in making (or is that seeking?) claims against cruise lines.
As a maritime attorney myself, I read their articles (or is that advertisements) sort of like a moth being attracted to a light bulb: I just can’t help myself. And invariably I read about possible claim after claim that I (and therefore they should or must) know are frivolous. (Yes, on occasion they do handle a claim with merit.)
They even have an app which encourages you to make claims through their firm, regardless of the facts that you probably will not recover anything on the vast majority of the prospective claims and that if you do recover the amount will be minimal. And for that you get yourself fired up as you diminish or destroy the cruise vacation you spent thousands and thousands of dollars to enjoy yourself on. (I do not consider that to be a service to you; quite the contrary. I see it as an effort by that firm to transform your cruise into a possible payday for them…at your expense. Hence, this article.)
Today I read their January 20, 2015 article which stated, in part:
Many people like to think that cases filed against cruise lines are frivolous, or silly, or filed just for the purpose of trying to get a free cruise and will result in higher cruise fares. Hardly.
Some of the cases which we file reveal the cruise industry at its absolute worst.
Guess what? I am one of those people and have been taking aim at Walker & O’Neill as of late; not only because some of their claims are, to my mind, frivolous (and embarrassing to me as a law professional), but because they appear in my opinion to be bad faith efforts to cast cruise lines in a false and bad light.
And, I must point out, it is the third sentence that “reveals” (using their words) that they are the legal “industry at its absolute worst”.
Why? Because the statement should say “Our cases” or “Most of the Cases” or “Many of the cases” which they file reveal something. Instead they use the word “Some”. How about “A few”? Is that any different?
For example: You fall down the stairs, trip on a threshold or slip by the pool. In theory there might be some…and I mean a very modest amount of…merit to the stairs or carpeting or pool deck having a design defect, but the cruise lines (just like every hotel, restaurant, movie theater, etc.) have no obligation provide the best design, but one that is reasonable. And then there is the issue of damages: Absent some serious bodily injury they would be minimal…and if you add your potential negligence – whether it be not holding a handrail or having a cocktail or being distracted so you tripped, etc. – that recovery will probably be drastically reduced or eliminated. (In many instances if you are 50% or more at fault you receive nothing.) And let’s face it, with millions of passengers cruising every year and only a very limited number of successful claims made, practically your chance of recovery is extremely small.
But the article goes on to give examples of some of those “worst” cases:
The cases include issues like the cruise line’s mistreatment of female crew members who were sexually assaulted on so-called luxury cruise lines. Other cases involve the cruise lines’ refusal to provide and/or delay in providing life-saving medical treatment to crew members diagnosed with cancer.
While there is no question that there have been instances of sexual assaults not being handled correctly, that is not a cruise industry issue, but a global issue. Without regard to whether they won or lost any such cases (they don’t say) the fact of the matter is we have read about this problematic issue in the military, in hotels, at colleges and even in our neighborhoods. Yes, there needs to be serious improvement and, fortunately, in the past decade there has been a good bit. But to promote you law firm by implying this is somehow purely a cruise industry issue or they are somehow now at the forefront of this issue is, in my opinion, simply wrong.
The second case allegedly showing the cruise industry at its worse, is another example of a global issue, rather than a cruise industry one. How many of you have watched television and seen attorneys advertising their services for people that have inhaled asbestos while working in various industries? The fact is asbestos is present in the engine rooms of many older ships (just like it is in many older factories and homes) and people can suffer from cancer through exposure to it. The issue, which Walker & McNeill apparently left out of their above pitch is that many cruise ship workers had jobs before and/or after working on cruise ships so it is extremely difficult to determine if the worker’s asbestos-related illness is actually associated with the cruise line.
Think about it: In some of the third world factories where asbestos is present the care to wrap or seal it simply is not present. So does the cruise line just open its pockets to every worker who steps onboard who becomes ill or – as is the norm with land-based claims – does the worker need to establish the cause of his illness was the cruise lines? And if the cruise lines did, would it not have to do the same for you, the passenger, because you took a cruise on one of its ships…after spending years in a factory that was riddled with freely exposed asbestos and the reality of it is there is a very low (or no) possibility you contracted it onboard?
The point is that while cruise lines are not infallible and do some things that might well expose them to liability, the reality is that in the vast…and I mean vast…majority of cases the cruise lines get it right. And when they don’t, as we have all seen, they work very hard to improve their practices to do it even better. But, alas, there are some times when there is liability on the part of the cruise lines and they should be held accountable.
However, if Walker & McNeill feel it ethically appropriate to hawk their services by pulling out those very few cruise line cases without balancing them against all of the cases that have come through their door as a result of their advertising which they have either advised there was no claim or was a claim with no or little economic benefit or, heaven forbid, a claim which they lost in court (and there are many of those), I let you make your own determination as to whether you want to believe them, let them change the focus of your cruise vacation or, possibly, even use them.
But I leave you with this:
There is a simple concept in the law that applies in a number of negligence cases:
Goldring Travel LLC
12177 Business Park Drive, Suite 6
Truckee, California 96161
US: (877) 2GO-LUXURY (877-246-5898)
UK: 020 8133 3450
AUS: (07) 3102 4685
Everywhere Else: +1 530-562-9232
Email: info@goldringtravel.com
Fla Seller of Travel Re. No. W014898
California Seller of Travel No. 2127458-40
Contact | Privacy Policy | Sitemap
© 2020 Goldring Travel.