Jones Act?

[Cuizer2]

We had a B2B pacific coastal on the Pearl, then continuing on the pearl from Van to Alaska. We are from CA and USA.

Booked a year in advance.

Was told by NCL 2 weeks prior to sailing we would have to take the pearl to Van, then be bused to Seattle, overnight in a hotel and get on the sister ship (?). for Seattle to Alaska and then to Van. Transportation and hotel would be paid by NCL.

Why because of the Jones act. NCL computer should have caught this booking error but did not until cruise review 2 weeks prior to sailing.

Overall, NCL was very helpful and refunded the Pacific Coastal. We flew to Van for a short vacation and got on the Pearl to AK.

 

Not because of the Jones act, but rather because of the PVSA.

[Cuizer2]

Hmmm. Something not right about this story. CBP could care less who the passenger was, the fine is against the cruise line, so no idea why or if CBP would impose the fine 3 years later. It is only the ticket contract between the passenger and the cruise line that allows the cruise line to pass the fine to the passenger. If you look at the CBP page concerning the PVSA, their FAQ's state that they are not interested in who the passenger was. There would not have been any "special stamp" in the passport for a violation of the PVSA, since the PVSA only deals with domestic travel.

 

Also, a bit surprised that security didn't say anything when the passenger went ashore with all their luggage.

 

What I believe happened, and this had nothing to do with the PVSA, is that the poster left the ship without clearing CBP, and hence there was no record of his re-entering the US. I suspect he never left the US between this cruise and their encounter at Sea-Tac, and the fine was for failing to properly enter the country.

 

I agree.

[Loonbeam]

Bingo. If he had reported, the ship would have been fined for allowing him to do so (not that they could stop him), but entering the country without registering entry is subject to a fine, possible revocation of passport (rare) and in extreme cases a lovely federal investigation depending on where they think you were. It's not a PVSA violation in that case.

 

I got hit on a clerical error once, where the system did not record my entry back in the US. When I went to fly again, it pinged me, but there was an entry stamp in the passport so they cleared it.

 

When did this happen. Nowadays this can get you on the no-fly list until cleared. It's designed to help protect against stolen/fake passports overseas being used.

 

 

 

 

Hmmm. Something not right about this story. CBP could care less who the passenger was, the fine is against the cruise line, so no idea why or if CBP would impose the fine 3 years later. It is only the ticket contract between the passenger and the cruise line that allows the cruise line to pass the fine to the passenger. If you look at the CBP page concerning the PVSA, their FAQ's state that they are not interested in who the passenger was. There would not have been any "special stamp" in the passport for a violation of the PVSA, since the PVSA only deals with domestic travel.

 

Also, a bit surprised that security didn't say anything when the passenger went ashore with all their luggage.

 

What I believe happened, and this had nothing to do with the PVSA, is that the poster left the ship without clearing CBP, and hence there was no record of his re-entering the US. I suspect he never left the US between this cruise and their encounter at Sea-Tac, and the fine was for failing to properly enter the country.

[don't-use-real-name]

Somewhat related on a south bound Alaska cruise terminating at Vancouver

Canadian citizens residing in Victoria wanted to disembark there instead of

Vancouver necessitating a trip back there to go home.

Don't quite know how Canada and NCL worked that one out but that is another

country maybe with more liberal customs than ours. Should not have been a

big deal as if sailing around Puget Sound for 12 hours at putt putt speed to

enjoy one last dinner and show and the casino cleaning you out of your last

Loonie or $ peso ! This was case of NCL furnishing a water taxi within Canadian

waters. I can't image there being a mass exodus of folks doing this.

 

The government needs to wake up to the fact that there are no competing

commercial vessels (tramp steamers) transporting people between distant

points at sea any more !

 

YES protect the cargo vessels with trade and tariff restrictions !

[chengkp75]

Somewhat related on a south bound Alaska cruise terminating at Vancouver

Canadian citizens residing in Victoria wanted to disembark there instead of

Vancouver necessitating a trip back there to go home.

Don't quite know how Canada and NCL worked that one out but that is another

country maybe with more liberal customs than ours. Should not have been a

big deal as if sailing around Puget Sound for 12 hours at putt putt speed to

enjoy one last dinner and show and the casino cleaning you out of your last

Loonie or $ peso ! This was case of NCL furnishing a water taxi within Canadian

waters. I can't image there being a mass exodus of folks doing this.

 

The government needs to wake up to the fact that there are no competing

commercial vessels (tramp steamers) transporting people between distant

points at sea any more !

 

YES protect the cargo vessels with trade and tariff restrictions !

 

I'm not aware of how this happened, as the Canadian Coasting Trade Act (an equivalent of the combination of Jones Act and PVSA) calls for far more severe penalties than the PVSA: up to $50,000 per violation, or detention of the vessel, not a mere $300/passenger.