PVSA and length of time between cruises

[Shmoo here]

Yes, doing all three would violate the PVSA. The question was asked if the passengers got off in Vancouver, travelled on their own to Seattle, and then took a Seattle round trip, would that be okay. If the Seattle round trip is an advertised cruise, not a late embarkation on a cruise starting in Vancouver, then there would be no violation. This is why I asked whether the 1 day repo is sold separately.

 

I can't find a one night Van/Sea repo on the Carnival website only the 4/12 LA-Van (Hawaii itinerary) and the 4/28 Van-Sea (Alaska itinerary).

 

So, it's looking like "yes, it would violate the PVSA" as it seems they are just wishing to board the Van-Sea trip a day late.

[chengkp75]

Good info.

 

Yeah, Sharon had the better scenario than I did, but the result is the same.

 

The problem I had with this, is that some have said that many cruise lines, even if exiting in Vancouver making your own way to Seattle then boarding in Seattle, say that this would still be "continuous" as part of the same "trip".

 

I tried looking at different sites explaining the PVSA, and none of them really define the term continuous. Does 12 hours do it? 24? A different day? A different month (got off the Miracle on April 30th and got back on May 1st)?

 

I guess I would just have to let each cruise line make that determination as they would be the ones fined if they violate the act. However, even tho Chengkp75 says that Carnival would have to pay the fine if they allow the booking and then get fined, I would be MORE worried about them allowing the booking, then last minute telling me I can't and canceling one of my cruises.

 

Hence the reason I was trying to get a more accurate definition of "continuous".

 

I appreciate all the replies. I guess I should have put Carnival in the title so it wouldn't get moved. I posted on the Carnival board because it was Carnival who had the potential itineraries that would make this cruise dicey.

 

Bob

 

Bob;

 

I think the main definition of "continuous" is that here you are leaving the ship in one port, and getting back on in another. As I've said, if the 1 night repo is sold separately, and the 7 night Seattle round trip is sold separately, then there is a cruise in between your two cruises, and therefore, not continuous. Also, as I've stated, if you are actually booking the second cruise as a Vancouver to Seattle, and just embarking late in Seattle, then no it would not be allowed. It all depends on how the cruise is marketed.

[Twickenham]

Would this hypothetical itin violate PVSA???

 

April 12 16 day LA-Hawaii-Vancouver

April 28 1 night repo Vancouver-Seattle

April 29 7 day Seattle-Seattle

 

Pax who want to go do Seattle RT spend the night in Vancouver and getting to Seattle on their own?

 

This scenario would not be a violation of the PVSA, because the ship isn't transporting you from LA to Seattle, it's transporting you to Vancouver. The one-night break is enough.

I've no doubt some employees would argue that it is a violation, but they would be wrong.

[Shmoo here]

This scenario would not be a violation of the PVSA, because the ship isn't transporting you from LA to Seattle, it's transporting you to Vancouver. The one-night break is enough.

I've no doubt some employees would argue that it is a violation, but they would be wrong.

 

However, the one night "break" isn't a separate cruise.

 

The OP is asking if they board the next cruise following the LA/Van cruise (which is Van/Sea) a day late (in Seattle) would that be considered a break in the "continuous" sequence. It's not.

[cherylandtk]

Good info.

 

Yeah, Sharon had the better scenario than I did, but the result is the same.

 

The problem I had with this, is that some have said that many cruise lines, even if exiting in Vancouver making your own way to Seattle then boarding in Seattle, say that this would still be "continuous" as part of the same "trip".

 

I tried looking at different sites explaining the PVSA, and none of them really define the term continuous. Does 12 hours do it? 24? A different day? A different month (got off the Miracle on April 30th and got back on May 1st)?

 

I guess I would just have to let each cruise line make that determination as they would be the ones fined if they violate the act. However, even tho Chengkp75 says that Carnival would have to pay the fine if they allow the booking and then get fined, I would be MORE worried about them allowing the booking, then last minute telling me I can't and canceling one of my cruises.

 

Hence the reason I was trying to get a more accurate definition of "continuous".

 

I appreciate all the replies. I guess I should have put Carnival in the title so it wouldn't get moved. I posted on the Carnival board because it was Carnival who had the potential itineraries that would make this cruise dicey.

 

Bob

Well, I still haven't seen the correct answer so far, so here it is: the determining factor is not a 24 hour break or overnighting; it is whether or not you are on the same ship when it departs the port. Period. Does not matter if the ship spends three days in port and then departs, if it is the same ship on its departure after you disembark, it is considered continuous. I know only because I called the government lawyers and spoke to one of the three who make the PVSA determination rulings a couple of years ago. In the LA-Vancouver-Seattle-Alaska (rt) scenario above, as long as you are not on the ship when it leaves the port of Vancouver there is no PVSA violation. Getting the cruise line to allow you to book that, however, is an entirely different matter unless they sell the first and last legs separately. But LA to Vancouver and Seattle to Alaska (rt) are two distinct journeys from a PVSA viewpoint. Edited March 27, 2014 by cherylandtk

[SadieN]

I can't find a one night Van/Sea repo on the Carnival website only the 4/12 LA-Van (Hawaii itinerary) and the 4/28 Van-Sea (Alaska itinerary).

 

So, it's looking like "yes, it would violate the PVSA" as it seems they are just wishing to board the Van-Sea trip a day late.

 

The one night itin was imaginary.;)

[Shmoo here]

Well, I still haven't seen the correct answer so far, so here it is: the determining factor is not a 24 hour break or overnighting; it is whether or not you are on the same ship when it departs the port. Period. Does not matter if the ship spends three days in port and then departs, if it is the same ship on its departure after you disembark, it is considered continuous. I know only because I called the government lawyers and spoke to one of the three who make the PVSA determination rulings a couple of years ago. In the LA-Vancouver-Seattle-Alaska (rt) scenario above, as long as you are not on the ship when it leaves the port of Vancouver there is no PVSA violation. Getting the cruise line to allow you to book that, however, is an entirely different matter unless they sell the first and last legs separately. But LA to Vancouver and Seattle to Alaska (rt) are two distinct journeys from a PVSA viewpoint.

 

Does it matter that the Seattle roundtrip is not a separate cruise from the Vancouver to Seattle one? The cruise is really Vancouver to Seattle, and OP is proposing to skip embarkation in Vancouver and catching up to the ship in Seattle, thereby making it a Seattle roundtrip.

 

So, on paper OP would be technically on the Vancouver to Seattle cruise, even though they don't board until Seattle.

[SadieN]

...................

BTW the Person who talked about the change in San Juan and two different starting and ending US-mainland ports- that isn't a violationas there is a currently existing exemption for San Juan(until such time as a US flagged vessel starts traveling to and from San Juan)...

 

 

The Carnival Conquest repo'd to Miami in November.

Carnival did it in two stages-- NOLA to San Juan, San Juan to Miami.

Those that booked both segments were forced to choose which itin they wanted, they couldn't do both. We did the NOLA to SJU segment.

 

Puerto Rico is odd as it's a territory not a State.

[BruceMuzz]

Well, I still haven't seen the correct answer so far, so here it is: the determining factor is not a 24 hour break or overnighting; it is whether or not you are on the same ship when it departs the port. Period. Does not matter if the ship spends three days in port and then departs, if it is the same ship on its departure after you disembark, it is considered continuous. I know only because I called the government lawyers and spoke to one of the three who make the PVSA determination rulings a couple of years ago. In the LA-Vancouver-Seattle-Alaska (rt) scenario above, as long as you are not on the ship when it leaves the port of Vancouver there is no PVSA violation. Getting the cruise line to allow you to book that, however, is an entirely different matter unless they sell the first and last legs separately. But LA to Vancouver and Seattle to Alaska (rt) are two distinct journeys from a PVSA viewpoint.

 

While your comments and the information you received from the government lawyers are very sound, sensible, and logical, these factors are often missing when CBP rules on situations like this.

 

In over 30 years of dealing with whacky CBP decisions and rulings, it seems more likely that the direction the wind is blowing, which side of the bed the officer got out of that morning, and how many donuts he ate on his coffee break have far more impact on the final CBP ruling on just about any case.

Most cruise line employees are very well versed on PVSA rules and regulations, but we cannot trust that the CBP will follow them with any regularity or consistency. We always err on the side of caution to protect the company and our Captains.

 

Note that it is more often - but not always - the case that the passenger's personal itinerary (not the actual ship's itinerary) that ultimately determines a violation.

 

For example if a passenger boards a ship in Seattle, and sails to Alaska - but dies before the ship reaches it's foreign port stop (usually Victoria BC), and his body is offloaded in Alaska, he has violated the PVSA and his estate is subject to a fine. I have seen this fine levied a few times (the cruise line ate the fine), but more often the fine is waived. (The actual violation cannot legally be waived).

A few CBP officers have informed me that if a passenger dies before reaching the foreign port stop on a closed loop cruise from a US Port, he has still violated the PVSA as he was not alive when his body was onboard the ship in the foreign port - even though his body physically made the entire closed loop cruise itinerary and stopped at the required foreign port.

 

I have never known a local CBP decision or ruling - no matter how crazy or nonsensical - to be over-ruled by Washington or anyone else. But I have had many conversations with CBP Officers in one district telling me how stupid and nonsensical their counterparts in another district really are.

 

Your tax dollars at work......................................

Edited March 28, 2014 by BruceMuzz

[knippsel]

Am pretty familiar with the PVSA rule that one cannot disembark a foreign-flagged ship in a different US port other than the port of embarcation without stopping at a distant foreign port, which outlaws, for instance, a Pacific Coastal cruise to Vancouver b2b with a 1 day repo back to Seattle on the same ship. But what about changing cruise lines in Vancouver?

I've seen 3 different opinions.

1. It isn't legal at all

2. It could be done but you must spend 24 hours in Vancouver

3. It's OK, since the rule applies to one cruise line/ship transporting a passenger between 2 different US ports, not to what the passenger is doing, and in this case no one ship is doing the transporting.

 

Does anyone know for certain, and can they maybe cite some references?

 

And another question: Does CBP care, since it's a US rule?

 

Thanks!

[chengkp75]

Am pretty familiar with the PVSA rule that one cannot disembark a foreign-flagged ship in a different US port other than the port of embarcation without stopping at a distant foreign port, which outlaws, for instance, a Pacific Coastal cruise to Vancouver b2b with a 1 day repo back to Seattle on the same ship. But what about changing cruise lines in Vancouver?

I've seen 3 different opinions.

1. It isn't legal at all

2. It could be done but you must spend 24 hours in Vancouver

3. It's OK, since the rule applies to one cruise line/ship transporting a passenger between 2 different US ports, not to what the passenger is doing, and in this case no one ship is doing the transporting.

 

Does anyone know for certain, and can they maybe cite some references?

 

And another question: Does CBP care, since it's a US rule?

 

Thanks!

 

Both the west coast to Vancouver, and the Vancouver to Seattle are foreign voyages since you are changing not only ships, but companies. The law proscribes one foreign flag ship from transporting a passenger from one US port to another. The law proscribes the carrier, not the passenger, so regardless that you are going from one US port to another, any one ship is not.

 

And CBP is the agency that enforces the PVSA.

[knippsel]

Both the west coast to Vancouver, and the Vancouver to Seattle are foreign voyages since you are changing not only ships, but companies. The law proscribes one foreign flag ship from transporting a passenger from one US port to another. The law proscribes the carrier, not the passenger, so regardless that you are going from one US port to another, any one ship is not.

 

And CBP is the agency that enforces the PVSA.

So it would be legal. Nobody would get fined. That seems most logical, (though I know that often logic doesn't apply). Thank you, Chengkp75!

[jcl410]

Does it matter that the Seattle roundtrip is not a separate cruise from the Vancouver to Seattle one? The cruise is really Vancouver to Seattle, and OP is proposing to skip embarkation in Vancouver and catching up to the ship in Seattle, thereby making it a Seattle roundtrip.

 

So, on paper OP would be technically on the Vancouver to Seattle cruise, even though they don't board until Seattle.

 

 

This is the part that sounds illogical to me ....(Of course , it's the Fed. Gov. :-) )

 

I'm not a lawyer, nor CBP expert, but ....

 

Assume the OP gets permission to disembark in Vancouver and get back on in Seatle ...

 

So, the ship arrives from, HI (oe was it LA? any way, a US port.) The OP departs the ship and clears Canadian Immigration and Customs.

 

The ship then departs; they should haver removed the OP from the manafest; he was left in Canada.

 

The OP then take Amtrak (or car, bus, etc) to Seattle. Crossing back into the US he will clear with CBP at the border.

 

He them embarks onto the ship, where his name is added back on the manifest.

 

The ship did NOT transport him to Seattle.

 

That "shouldn't" violate the PVSA, or am I just being to logical? :-)

 

(He'd have to get the OK from the cruise line to be able to clear into Canada.)

 

Aloha,

 

John

[Kamloops50]

The cruise line computer may flag or even cancel something like that.

 

Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Forums mobile app