View Single Post
  #18 (permalink)  
Old July 31st, 2007, 06:24 PM
nmnita nmnita is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 2,617

Originally Posted by Irish Shark
I am on the same page alright. This is busted in two pieces, the Alaska tax (which you suggested was the price increase) and the difeerence in what she paid and what the contract called for.

She has paid the Alaska tax and she does not dispute that. She is not chasing the overchage on what she paid and the contract.

That's her call. For me I would have protested both as they are an increase to the origninal contract price.
oh come on, I was thinking $200 not the $350. I have already said she should go after the TA. If I am not mistaken you referred back a ways that even the taxes she shouldn't have to pay or maybe I misunderstood you.

Of course I don't think she should have to pay the additional charges, I simply referred to the tax portion. Who do you think should pay the additonal taxes?

I can guarantee you, I am on Magnolia's side on this. She never complains, is fair, objective and has a great attitude. Anyone can go after what they want, but when it comes to additional monies charged by the government or fuel sur charges, increase in port charges, these are expenses that are passed on. Recently, the government taxes on taxes on the Mexican Riv itinerary were actually cut. Yes, the passengers received a small deduction on their cruise. It was only about $2.50 per person, but it was something.

ncl, carnival, HAL, Costa, RCI, commodore,chamdres,celebrity,Princess
Reply With Quote