I am so disappointed!!!!

[newmexicoNita]

This was back in 2013, but we had booked two seperate cruises, same ship, from a port in California, I don't recall which, to Vancouver, and then Vancouver to Alaska, round trip ending in Vancouver. Some on our roll call got grief from NCL, telling them they had to book one leg on a different ship.

 

Advise on the board was to contact the VP of passenger services at NCL. That was done and suddenly the b2b was legal. We ended up cancelling the leg to Vancouver, but several others on the roll call did both legs with no issues.

 

I don't understand this law, and the problem is, neither do the phone reps at NCL who try to get involved in interpreting it, often incorrectly.

 

I would kick it up the ladder if you have to. Worse case scenario, drop the shorter cruise from Seattle, ( is it just one night? ) and just start your cruise in Vancouver.

 

That is a slightly different situation. What she wanted to do is exactly like booking b2b;

[triptolemus]

I explored this a year or so ago, knowing full well it wasn't possible. The NCL booking engine absolutely allowed it, but ultimately NCL would cancel it. I booked a 7 day AK out of Seattle and fancied coming back to SF via YVR on the ship, rather than flying... who wouldn't? I could have disembarked in SEA then made my way to YVR on my own, but it just turned into a PITA.

 

The funny thing is, when I started poking around my booking, I found this message in the Message Center.

 

 

Note how NCL "names" the cruise. In other words, they know. The booking engine can't seem to grasp it, but they know.

Edited June 18, 2016 by triptolemus

[Quilting_Cruiser]

I explored this a year or so ago, knowing full well it wasn't possible. The NCL booking engine absolutely allowed it, but ultimately NCL would cancel it. I booked a 7 day AK out of Seattle and fancied coming back to SF via YVR on the ship, rather than flying... who wouldn't? I could have disembarked in SEA then made my way to YVR on my own, but it just turned into a PITA.

 

The funny thing is, when I started poking around my booking, I found this message in the Message Center.

 

 

Note how NCL "names" the cruise. In other words, they know. The booking engine can't seem to grasp it, but they know.

 

I got a similar message on the HAL site when I booked my one-night cruise from Seattle to Vancouver. I thought it was a good thing that they put the warning right in front of me before I even completed my booking in case I was planning to also book the same ship for its Alaska sailing that started the day I'm getting off.

[Cuizer2]

I am so disappointed! We have (had) 2 reservations on the Jewel beginning Sept 17, Seattle - Vancouver and then Vancouver to LA.

 

NCL says this is in violation of the Jones Act and that I had to cancel one of them!

 

I can understand that if I were booking B2B but I did two separate reservations. Why would it matter especially if we were willing to pack up and disembark and then re-board with everyone else?

 

I'm so ticked off right now!!

 

Am I the only one that this does not make sense to?

 

Barbara

 

First of all, it is not a violation of the Jones Act, it is a violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA). It forbids a foreign flagged ship (the Jewel is a foreign flagged ship) from carrying passengers from one US city to another US city unless the ship stops in a distant foreign port.

 

Seattle to Vancouver is fine because it is transporting passengers from Seattle to Vancouver and Vancouver is a foreign port. Vancouver to LA is fine because Vancouver is a foreign port.

 

However, Seattle to LA (which is what you are doing) is transporting you (a passenger) from Seattle (a US city) to LA (also a US city). It could be ten different cruises, it would not matter. The SHIP (not the cruise - the ship) is transporting you from Seattle to LA and that is a violation of the PVSA.

[Cuizer2]

This was back in 2013, but we had booked two seperate cruises, same ship, from a port in California, I don't recall which, to Vancouver, and then Vancouver to Alaska, round trip ending in Vancouver. Some on our roll call got grief from NCL, telling them they had to book one leg on a different ship.

 

Advise on the board was to contact the VP of passenger services at NCL. That was done and suddenly the b2b was legal. We ended up cancelling the leg to Vancouver, but several others on the roll call did both legs with no issues.

 

I don't understand this law, and the problem is, neither do the phone reps at NCL who try to get involved in interpreting it, often incorrectly.

 

I would kick it up the ladder if you have to. Worse case scenario, drop the shorter cruise from Seattle, ( is it just one night? ) and just start your cruise in Vancouver.

 

You can kick it up the CEO's boss, it will not make any difference. A foreign flagged ship cannot transport passengers between two US cities without stopping at a distant foreign port. There are no distant foreign ports in North or Central America.

[Kamloops50]

First of all, it is not a violation of the Jones Act, it is a violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA). It forbids a foreign flagged ship (the Jewel is a foreign flagged ship) from carrying passengers from one US city to another US city unless the ship stops in a distant foreign port.

 

Seattle to Vancouver is fine because it is transporting passengers from Seattle to Vancouver and Vancouver is a foreign port. Vancouver to LA is fine because Vancouver is a foreign port.

 

However, Seattle to LA (which is what you are doing) is transporting you (a passenger) from Seattle (a US city) to LA (also a US city). It could be ten different cruises, it would not matter. The SHIP (not the cruise - the ship) is transporting you from Seattle to LA and that is a violation of the PVSA.

 

the magic word is distant . Vancouver is a foreign port but not a distant one. The nearest distant foreign port is japan.

[Cuizer2]

The opposite of 'pro' is 'con'.

What's the opposite of 'progress'?

 

 

(Steven Wright's question, I think.)

 

Stagnation.

[Cuizer2]

That may be part of the issue, but there has to be more to it than that, as there are many repo cruises in which the ship departs an east coast port and ends up in a gulf port and then another cruise ending in a west coast port, and then a trip from there up to Seattle or Vancouver. Many people commonly string these cruises together. It may depend on the ports hit along the way, but you can definately do a start and finish in two US ports.

 

Yes, you can, IF the ship stops in a distant foreign port along the way.

[Cuizer2]

The cruises the OP is talking about is:

1. Embarking in Seattle, going to Alaska and disembarking in Vancouver; and

2. Embarking in Vancouver on the same day the OP disembarked, then disembarking in LA.

 

So many of your suggestions were not relevant. OP--are there any other cruise lines going from Vancouver to LA. It would also be interesting in your contacted the VP of whatever that someone posted and see what they say. Please let us know.

 

If the OP changes ships in Vancouver - legal. If the OP stays on the same ship - illegal. Why stop at the VP of whatever? Even the CEO will tell you no.

[Cuizer2]

How do they offer the Canada/New England cruises round trip from US ports if Canada isn't considered a distant foreign port? Does the law only pertain to non-round trip?

 

Yes. The law applies to two different US cities. New York to St. Johns to New York is not transporting any passengers between two different US cities.

[Cuizer2]

OP, now this is someone who you can trust to know what he's talking about!

 

My concern was that the NCL rep did not know what she was talking about, as this is what happened on our Cali to Vancouver and then Vancouver roundtrip Alaska. Nearly had some of us cancelling one leg.

 

If I understand you correctly, then the OP could, if there was an NCL cruise out of Vancouver with the right date, do Alaska roundtrip via Vancouver, and then take the same ship b2b back to Los Angeles. She just can't leave from Seattle.

 

If the OP begins the trip in Vancouver, such as Vancouver to Alaska round trip, then goes to LA, the trip is NOT a violation of the PVSA.

[Cuizer2]

I say with find this trouble making JONES guy and kick his ASS.

 

1) It is the PVSA, not the Jones act.

 

2) The PVSA is from 1886. The law is 130 years old.

[Cuizer2]

Then we go after his family... You with me[emoji35]

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

 

First I want to see the list of people with the last name of Jones. Then I want to know what Jones has to do with the PVSA (which is not the Jones Act).

[Cuizer2]

the magic word is distant . Vancouver is a foreign port but not a distant one. The nearest distant foreign port is japan.

 

Russia might be closer.

[Cuizer2]

Ask President Obama why can do this cruise. He seems to make changes in the law of the land with asking permission.

 

The President would be on either a US flagged ship (the US Navy) or a US flagged airplane (Air Force One) and thus none of this applies because both the PVSA and the Jones Act apply to foreign flagged ships.

 

A US flagged ship can transport passengers between two US cities.

[chengkp75]

Russia might be closer.

 

Actually, Fanning Island in Kiribati is over a thousand miles closer to Seattle than either Russia or Japan.

[Cuizer2]

Actually, Fanning Island in Kiribati is over a thousand miles closer to Seattle than either Russia or Japan.

 

That is where NCL used to go and I did think of that. But then I remembered that Sarah Palin said that she could see Russia from her house and I figured Russia must be closer.

 

I wish NCL would go back to Fanning Island, I would like to book that trip.

[punkincc]

The President would be on either a US flagged ship (the US Navy) or a US flagged airplane (Air Force One) and thus none of this applies because both the PVSA and the Jones Act apply to foreign flagged ships.

 

A US flagged ship can transport passengers between two US cities.

 

 

As does the US flagged POA, which carries passengers between four Hawaiian islands weekly, 52 weeks a year. She even went from San Francisco back to Honolulu with no other stops after dry dock in March. Much preferable to having to stop in either Mexico or Fanning as other foriegn flagged ships do when they do Hawaii from the West coast.

Edited June 18, 2016 by punkincc

[chengkp75]

As does the US flagged POA, which carries passengers between four Hawaiian islands weekly, 52 weeks a year. She even went from San Francisco back to Honolulu with no other stops after dry dock in March. Much preferable to having to stop in either Mexico or Fanning as other foriegn flagged ships do when they do Hawaii from the West coast.

 

And that route, to and from drydock, is the only route outside the Hawaiian islands that POA can do. Because she was not fully built in the US, and as part of the agreement where NCL brought foreign built ships into the PVSA trade, POA is limited to only the Hawaiian trade, or proceeding to/from a shipyard.

[chengkp75]

That is where NCL used to go and I did think of that. But then I remembered that Sarah Palin said that she could see Russia from her house and I figured Russia must be closer.

 

I wish NCL would go back to Fanning Island, I would like to book that trip.

 

Well, the coast of Russia is probably closer, but there wouldn't be a port for a cruise ship there! Vladivostok is about the closest Russian port.

 

Been to Fanning, there ain't much there. You basically travel two days for a barbeque on the beach, and then two days back. NCL's compound was the only place on the atoll with electricity (except for home generators), running water, and flush toilets. When the ships called there, while the guests were ashore eating and boating in the lagoon, we spent the whole time transferring diesel fuel to bladders taken ashore to fuel the generators of the compound.

 

The main "industry" of the atoll is sea weed, which is harvested and shipped out for use as a food and cosmetic thickening agent. Interesting note, is that while Hawaii is only 700 miles away, the capital of Kiribati is Tarawa, which is over a 1000 miles away.

[Freespir8]

And that route, to and from drydock, is the only route outside the Hawaiian islands that POA can do. Because she was not fully built in the US, and as part of the agreement where NCL brought foreign built ships into the PVSA trade, POA is limited to only the Hawaiian trade, or proceeding to/from a shipyard.

 

 

 

As does the US flagged POA, which carries passengers between four Hawaiian islands weekly, 52 weeks a year. She even went from San Francisco back to Honolulu with no other stops after dry dock in March. Much preferable to having to stop in either Mexico or Fanning as other foriegn flagged ships do when they do Hawaii from the West coast.

 

I believe the the POA is a US flagged Ship specifically for this reason and the only one in NCL's fleet. They should be able to cruise to any US city without cruising to a foreign distant port.

[horseymike]

could you go on direction on a different cruise line and then return on another line ????

[triptolemus]

could you go on direction on a different cruise line and then return on another line ????

 

Yes. Different ship... that's all that matters.

 

You can get off one ship and step onto another and continue your journey from one US port to another and be just fine. Same line or different line... makes no difference.

Edited June 19, 2016 by triptolemus

[dogboy]

I'm as pi*$#d as you. It's ridiculous.:confused:

[chengkp75]

I believe the the POA is a US flagged Ship specifically for this reason and the only one in NCL's fleet. They should be able to cruise to any US city without cruising to a foreign distant port.

 

No, despite the fact that the POA is US flagged, since it was not completely constructed in the US, it would not qualify for the PVSA trade. However, there was special legislation enacted that allowed NCL to get a clearance for not only the POA, but two other foreign built, but US flag cruise ships to participate in the PVSA trade, specifically limited to the Hawaiian Islands. Just because a ship is US flag does not mean it is eligible for PVSA or Jones Act trade.