Something I learned about repositioning cruises and the PVSA

[Desert Cruizers]

I haven't talked to her recently to see what she is doing, she is sailing the Transpacific as many of us are and continuing with the Honolulu to Vancouver sailing, beyond that I haven't heard her final plans. I will look back on her Posts off our Roll Call to see what her cruise is showing.

[njhorseman]

I haven't talked to her recently to see what she is doing, she is sailing the Transpacific as many of us are and continuing with the Honolulu to Vancouver sailing, beyond that I haven't heard her final plans. I will look back on her Posts off our Roll Call to see what her cruise is showing.

 

I think the other posters who responded were under the impression that this person was starting her cruise in Hawaii. If she's on a transpacific cruise that originates in a foreign country (Australia or New Zealand perhaps?)Hawaii, and then continues on after that then she can continue on that same ship and cruise to any disembarkation port in the US she wants. A cruise that starts or ends in a foreign port is never subject to PVSA restrictions. THE PVSA requirement to call on a distant foreign port only applies when your voyage starts in one US port and ends in another.

[Cuizer2]

A lady on our Hawaii to Vancouver, April 27, 20114 to May 9, 2014 was considering continuing on with an Alaska cruise on the Radiance, not sure what the final ruling was but several suggested they didn't think that was possible. I believe the question came from Vancouver not being considered a foreign port.

 

Vancouver is a foreign port. However, it is not a DISTANT foreign port.

[Cuizer2]

I think the other posters who responded were under the impression that this person was starting her cruise in Hawaii. If she's on a transpacific cruise that originates in a foreign country (Australia or New Zealand perhaps?)Hawaii, and then continues on after that then she can continue on that same ship and cruise to any disembarkation port in the US she wants. A cruise that starts or ends in a foreign port is never subject to PVSA restrictions. THE PVSA requirement to call on a distant foreign port only applies when your voyage starts in one US port and ends in another.

 

This is correct. If the person is beginning the trip at a foreign port, any foreign port, then there are no restrictions. The PVSA only come into play when one begin a voyage at one US city and end the voyage at a different US city.

[bob278]

To add just a little confusion to the game:

 

We recently completed a b2b2b on the Solstice from Sydney to Honolulu, Honolulu to Ensenada and Ensenada to Seattle. Since the CBP considers a passenger's starting and ending point, not the cruiseline's definition of a "cruise", we were fine. Many people wanted to do the Honolulu-Ensenada-Seattle b2b but could not.

 

I know for a fact that two of our friends (and I think a few others) found a loop hole. They worked with Celebrity to end their cruise in Victoria (their cruise was defined as a "downline itinerary" or something like that. We told them hello in Honolulu and goodbye in Victoria. So I am guessing that by defining the start point as Honolulu and end point as Victoria, the PVSA was satisfied. I have no idea what would have happened if something had prevented us from porting in Victoria.

 

Using the approach of defining the start and end point of the passenger rather than any cruise line definition, the b2b suzyluvs2cruise was on would look like Boston to Tampa with stops at distant foreign ports, thus satisfying the PSVA (just like most people here have said). The b2b did not change her starting point.

[chengkp75]

To add just a little confusion to the game:

 

We recently completed a b2b2b on the Solstice from Sydney to Honolulu, Honolulu to Ensenada and Ensenada to Seattle. Since the CBP considers a passenger's starting and ending point, not the cruiseline's definition of a "cruise", we were fine. Many people wanted to do the Honolulu-Ensenada-Seattle b2b but could not.

 

I know for a fact that two of our friends (and I think a few others) found a loop hole. They worked with Celebrity to end their cruise in Victoria (their cruise was defined as a "downline itinerary" or something like that. We told them hello in Honolulu and goodbye in Victoria. So I am guessing that by defining the start point as Honolulu and end point as Victoria, the PVSA was satisfied. I have no idea what would have happened if something had prevented us from porting in Victoria.

 

Using the approach of defining the start and end point of the passenger rather than any cruise line definition, the b2b suzyluvs2cruise was on would look like Boston to Tampa with stops at distant foreign ports, thus satisfying the PSVA (just like most people here have said). The b2b did not change her starting point.

 

Yes, if a few of us had read the OP a little closer, and noted the Sydney embarkation, a lot of this would have blown away. As for your friends who arranged to disembark early in Victoria, if you could not make the port call in Victoria, they would not have had any problems. RCI, however, would have been liable for a fine for every passenger that boarded in Hawaii and disembarked in Seattle, for every day of the cruise (I seem to remember that the Norwegian Star paid $100 per person per day, when she blew out an azipod in Hawaii, and couldn't make it to Fanning Island).

[Cuizer2]

I know for a fact that two of our friends (and I think a few others) found a loop hole. They worked with Celebrity to end their cruise in Victoria (their cruise was defined as a "downline itinerary" or something like that. We told them hello in Honolulu and goodbye in Victoria. So I am guessing that by defining the start point as Honolulu and end point as Victoria, the PVSA was satisfied. I have no idea what would have happened if something had prevented us from porting in Victoria.

 

They would have been fined. The fine is at least $300 per person.

 

By the way, that is not a "loop hole". Beginning or ending a cruise is a foreign port is perfectly within the rules of the PVSA.

[Desert Cruizers]

njhorseman, the lady will be doing the Transpacific with us ( Sydney to Honolulu) followed by the 12 day Hawaii to Vancouver.

 

Gay

[bob278]

They would have been fined. The fine is at least $300 per person.

 

By the way, that is not a "loop hole". Beginning or ending a cruise is a foreign port is perfectly within the rules of the PVSA.

 

Knowing my friend, if the ship had not been able to port in Victoria and Celebrity tried to fine him, there would have been a fight worthy of prime-time television. His view would have been that they sold him the cruise and it wasn't his fault they couldn't deliver it.

 

While it is not truly a loop hole, most people at Royal and Celebrity do not know about downline (neither do most passengers) and they just parrot the answer that it can't be done. My friend is persistent (OK, he's stubborn) and kept going up the chain until he found someone who understood. He got an e-mail from them that his TA used when booking his two cruises as she also got push-back telling her she couldn't do that.

 

I used the term incorrectly to keep it simple. I should have said "he found someone who understood the rules and figured out how to document the actual cruise taken as opposed to the official cruise itinerary and was able to book the cruise using an alternate itinerary definition", but I am basically lazy and chose to say all that with two words. :D But then again, I did describe all that he went through so I didn't really save any typing, did I?

[Cuizer2]

njhorseman, the lady will be doing the Transpacific with us ( Sydney to Honolulu) followed by the 12 day Hawaii to Vancouver.

 

Gay

 

The continuing on to any US port would be completely legal under the PVSA.

[Cuizer2]

Knowing my friend, if the ship had not been able to port in Victoria and Celebrity tried to fine him, there would have been a fight worthy of prime-time television. His view would have been that they sold him the cruise and it wasn't his fault they couldn't deliver it.

 

I believe that fight would have to take place by mail. I don't think someone would be standing at the end of the gangplank with their hand out. I believe the CBP would fine the cruise line and then the cruise line would fine your friend.

[mjldvlks]

Shouldn't be a fight at all. The fine is assessed by the government againts the carrier [RCI in this case]. That is not to say that the carrier might not seek reimbursement if a passenger leaves the ship voluntarily at a port in violation of the act. There may be something in the passenger contract that covers when they will seek reimbursement. I have never looked.

 

Here is a quote from a Dept of Homeland Security pamphlet:

 

. . . the penalty of $300 is assessed against the vessel operator or carrier that has provided the unlawful transportation. Thus, for example, a passenger who embarked on a non-coastwise-qualified vessel at Baltimore, Maryland for a Caribbean cruise scheduled to return and disembark at Baltimore, Maryland could not disembark in Miami, Florida for medical or emergency reasons without there being a violation of the PVSA. The penalty for this unlawful transportation would be assessed against the vessel/carrier.

[bob278]

I was trying to be humorous. I'm sure the most that would have happened is that his account might have been charged the last night if we hadn't made it to Victoria and he would have been at Guest relations in a heartbeat if that occurred. Since he had approval documentation and booked the Victoria departure clearly and his documents showed that, I doubt that he would have had any problems. If any violation had occurred, regardless of the reason (other than if he just didn't get off in Victoria), then I don't think he would have been liable.

 

We had a good on-going discussion from Honolulu to Ensenada when I kept teasing him that he would be thrown off the ship there since what he planned was logical and the government couldn't deal with logic. But he got the same letter as all the Sydney b2b2b-ers got 2 nights before we got to Ensenada so the ship staff obviously knew about him. I haven't talked to him since the cruise, so I don't know how many others did the same thing but he told me he thought there were six.

 

But he would not have reacted positively to any request from Celebrity for any payment for violating the Act.

[chengkp75]

I was trying to be humorous. I'm sure the most that would have happened is that his account might have been charged the last night if we hadn't made it to Victoria and he would have been at Guest relations in a heartbeat if that occurred. Since he had approval documentation and booked the Victoria departure clearly and his documents showed that, I doubt that he would have had any problems. If any violation had occurred, regardless of the reason (other than if he just didn't get off in Victoria), then I don't think he would have been liable.

 

We had a good on-going discussion from Honolulu to Ensenada when I kept teasing him that he would be thrown off the ship there since what he planned was logical and the government couldn't deal with logic. But he got the same letter as all the Sydney b2b2b-ers got 2 nights before we got to Ensenada so the ship staff obviously knew about him. I haven't talked to him since the cruise, so I don't know how many others did the same thing but he told me he thought there were six.

 

But he would not have reacted positively to any request from Celebrity for any payment for violating the Act.

 

Since it would have been Celebrity's problem for not allowing him to disembark in Canada, he would not have been liable. Like I said, when the Dawn took the fines for cruising Hawaii, it was NCL's decision, and they willingly took the fine for about 6-8 weeks until they could schedule a drydock.

[Desert Cruizers]

Cruizer at this time I am not sure she is still doing Alaksa, as it isn't showing up under her future cruise lists for 2014.

[atb]

On another thread - we were talking about retiring and living on a cruise ship - long-term. How does PVSA affect the stringing together of multiple cruises (Caribbean b2b, Panama Canal b2b, then transatlantic)

[chengkp75]

On another thread - we were talking about retiring and living on a cruise ship - long-term. How does PVSA affect the stringing together of multiple cruises (Caribbean b2b, Panama Canal b2b, then transatlantic)

 

Sounds like you are getting on in US port, then staying on same ship for 5 cruises, and ending in Europe? No problem. You are effectively cruising from a US port to a European port, with several foreign and US ports in between. You would then need to stay at least one day off the ship, or change ships for you to get back to US and disembark at a different US port than your original.

 

If you changed ships in Europe, did some European cruising, then a transatlantic back to US, you could even string some more b2b on after the US port of the transatlantic, as the voyage started in a foreign port, and you could end at any US port.

 

Theoretically, you could board a ship in Europe, sail transatlantic, stay on for the entire Caribbean season, then sail back to Europe. Repeat as desired.

[njhorseman]

Sounds like you are getting on in US port, then staying on same ship for 5 cruises, and ending in Europe? No problem. You are effectively cruising from a US port to a European port, with several foreign and US ports in between. You would then need to stay at least one day off the ship, or change ships for you to get back to US and disembark at a different US port than your original.

If you changed ships in Europe, did some European cruising, then a transatlantic back to US, you could even string some more b2b on after the US port of the transatlantic, as the voyage started in a foreign port, and you could end at any US port.

 

Theoretically, you could board a ship in Europe, sail transatlantic, stay on for the entire Caribbean season, then sail back to Europe. Repeat as desired.

 

Even if they stayed on the same ship, which then returned to any US port they would be fine because they clearly satisfied the distant foreign port requirement when the ship made the transatlantic voyage to Europe. In fact the Panama Canal cruise segments likely already satisfy the distant foreign port requirement as they virtually always make a port call in Colombia or the ABC islands.

[chengkp75]

Even if they stayed on the same ship, which then returned to any US port they would be fine because they clearly satisfied the distant foreign port requirement when the ship made the transatlantic voyage to Europe. In fact the Panama Canal cruise segments likely already satisfy the distant foreign port requirement as they virtually always make a port call in Colombia or the ABC islands.

 

Quite true, I stand corrected.

[Cuizer2]

On another thread - we were talking about retiring and living on a cruise ship - long-term. How does PVSA affect the stringing together of multiple cruises (Caribbean b2b, Panama Canal b2b, then transatlantic)

 

It is simple. If you start in a US port and end in the same US port and you visit any other ports (this would not apply to a CTN) then you must visit at least one non-US port.

 

If you start in a US port and end in a different US port, you must visit at least one distant foreign port. Any port in South America, Asia or Europe would qualify. So do the ABC islands near South America.

 

If you start or end in a foreign port - there are no restrictions.

[atb]

I am working on a retirement / lottery win bucket list. Long term on a cruise ship is number 1 on that list.

Now I just need to hit the lottery - and I'm good to go. :D

[golfer1966]

I was curious how, given the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) restricts the ability for foreign-flagged ships to transport passengers from one US port to another, ships are able to reposition from one US port to another. For example, Enchantment of the Seas is sailing from Baltimore down to Port Canaveral. Grandeur of the Seas will soon be sailing from San Juan to Baltimore. How are they legal under the PVSA?

 

Well, the answer is related to the particular ports in question. According to the Wikipedia article linked above, the PVSA only restricts ships from doing closed-loop itineraries when they visit nearby ports such as Bermuda, the Bahamas, and most of the Caribbean. Interestingly, if a ship visits Aruba, Bonaire, or Curaçao, then the PVSA no longer applies, and a ship can return to a different US port. This is what's happening with Enchantment of the Seas. The current repositioning itinerary includes stops in Aruba and Curaçao, so she'll be able to arrive at Port Canaveral and disembark the passengers there.

 

Another interesting exception is San Juan. Since there are no US-flagged ships transporting passengers to/from San Juan, foreign-flagged ships may sail from San Juan and end up at different US port, such as Grandeur of the Seas arriving at Baltimore.

 

Anyway, I thought this was interesting and wanted to share it with others who might have also been curious.

 

 

Who knows, I am more interested if they will have Honey Stung Chick the first day....;)