Back to Back Cruises Not Allowed???

[Dr. J]

:eek: :mad: :confused:

Almost a year ago I booked an Owner's Suite on the Star to Alaska departing on September 17th, from Seattle. This was to be followed by a 1 night "Dinner Dance Cruise" from Seattle to Vancouver, BC. I booked this also in the same suite. This was to be followed by a "Re-Positioning Cruise" from Vancouver, BC to Los Angeles. I booked this also in the same suite. I booked all three segments at the same time in the same suite with the same TA. Yesterday, I recieved my documents. I was told that there was a "small problem". I was told by my TA that NCL cancelled the 1 night Seattle to Vancouver. I was then told that we would have to disembark in Seattle and take a bus to Vancouver, BC and reboard the Star (it will sail from Seattle to Vancouver) on the same day and stay in the same suite! Then we could then sail on to Los Angeles. We just couldn't stay in our suite from Seattle to Vancouver. My TA wasn't sure if we would have to off load our luggage or not. What the xxxx is going on? Does anyone understand this. Any advise that would include being able to still cruise? I'm very upset and confused.

 

Thanks,

Dr. Jon

[HurricaneSally]

Sounds to me like they decided to do the one night without passengers for some reason.

[Dr. J]

It has got to cost them more to transfer us and our luggage than to let us just stay with a "limited day" sail. It makes no sense financially or logically.

 

Dr. Jon

[johnql]

It sounds like your cruise falls under the complicated (almost incomprehensible) umbrella of the Passenger Services Act (sometimes mistakenly referred to as the Jones Act), which sets regulations concerning what is and isn't allowed with regard to passengers on cruise ships.

 

Here's a link to a pretty good article about the Act:

 

http://www.sealetter.com/Oct-99/alancol.html

 

Based on your description of your intended cruise, you would be ultimately sailing from Seattle to LA, which is a cruise between two U.S. ports. According to the above article, such a cruise, if permitted, falls into one of two categories:

• A cruise between different US ports where no permanent disembarkation is permitted along the way, but at least one port is a nearby foreign port

or

• A cruise between US ports where permanent disembarkation IS allowed at a US port along the way, but only if the ship visits a distant foreign port and any permanent disembarkation takes place at a subsequent US port

Your intended cruise doesn't fit the first description because there will be permanent disembarkation permitted along the way (i.e., Seattle and Vancouver).

 

Your intended cruise cruise also doesn't fit the second description because the ship will not be visiting a "distant foreign port". Vancouver doesn't qualify; it is considered a "nearby foreign port".

 

So, the problem is your intended cruise is not a legal itinerary, which is why you're being forced to break it up in the middle. Absolutely ridiculous, but that's the law.

 

If there's something wrong with my analysis, somebody please point it out. I won't take offense.

[emilygrace]

I think you're right about this, johnql, and I'm surprised the TA didn't notice this glitch when they made the booking. I would be pretty upset to make this discovery at this late date.

 

It will be interesting to find out if the OP has to pack up everything and take it off the ship, or if they will be allowed to store the bulk of their belongings on board and just take off what they will need for the one night.

[Dr. J]

Thanks johnql and others --

Do you think that there is any flexibility? Do you think that the Concierge can help. What if we lock ourselves in our suite and ask for no food or services until we leave Vancouver?

Dr. Jon

[johnql]

Thanks johnql and others --

Do you think that there is any flexibility? Do you think that the Concierge can help. What if we lock ourselves in our suite and ask for no food or services until we leave Vancouver?

Dr. Jon

Unfortunately, there really is no flexibility, assuming my interpretation of the law is correct. The cruise line would not knowingly permit you to break the law. Upon your return to Seattle, the ship's personnel will know exactly who has disembarked and who hasn't (in theory, no one) since everyone needs to swipe their cruise card one last time as they disembark. At the very least, I hope you'll be allowed to leave all your belongings onboard. Good luck.

[cruisingbug]

Same thing happened to some folks last year who were trying to do the first Alaska cruise of the season - booked from LA to Vancouver, and then were supposed to stay on Vancouver to Alaska but at the last minute the cruise line (probably Princess as those were the boards I was on) discovered the error. They unfortunately had a 3 or 4 day LA to Vancouver which got cancelled and they had to lose days off their vacation plus make their way to Vancouver. So, in a way, consider yourself lucky (??).

[electricron]

It sounds like your cruise falls under the complicated (almost incomprehensible) umbrella of the Passenger Services Act (sometimes mistakenly referred to as the Jones Act), which sets regulations concerning what is and isn't allowed with regard to passengers on cruise ships.

 

Here's a link to a pretty good article about the Act:

http://www.sealetter.com/Oct-99/alancol.html

Based on your description of your intended cruise, you would be ultimately sailing from Seattle to LA, which is a cruise between two U.S. ports. According to the above article, such a cruise, if permitted, falls into one of two categories:

• A cruise between different US ports where no permanent disembarkation is permitted along the way, but at least one port is a nearby foreign port

or

• A cruise between US ports where permanent disembarkation IS allowed at a US port along the way, but only if the ship visits a distant foreign port and any permanent disembarkation takes place at a subsequent US port

Your intended cruise doesn't fit the first description because there will be permanent disembarkation permitted along the way (i.e., Seattle and Vancouver).

Your intended cruise cruise also doesn't fit the second description because the ship will not be visiting a "distant foreign port". Vancouver doesn't qualify; it is considered a "nearby foreign port".

So, the problem is your intended cruise is not a legal itinerary, which is why you're being forced to break it up in the middle. Absolutely ridiculous, but that's the law.

If there's something wrong with my analysis, somebody please point it out. I won't take offense.

 

You're 100% correct. Although each cruise itinerary by itself is legal, the combination of starting from Seattle to Vancouver, followed by Vancouver to Los Angeles isn't. The closest distant foreign port per the Passenger Service Act from the West Coast is in Central America. If your cruise itinerary from Seattle to Vancouver, or Vancouver to Los Angeles sailed south of Mexico, the back to back itinerary would be legal.

To do the back to back or a single cruise from Seattle to Los Angeles as it's presently scheduled, you would have to sail on an American flagged ship, such as the NCLA "Pride of ---". But here's an an interesting tidbit about the "Pride of ---" ships, they can't sail to Mexico, Alaska, Caribbean, or Gulf of Mexico ports. So, the first leg of your cruise is also illegal. There's only two cruise ships in the world that can do the three back to backs legally, and they are both owned by NCL, believe it or not. They are the SS Independence, which is laid up in San Francisco, and the SS United States, which is laid up in Philadelphia. At the present time, it appears that NCL is not going to refurbish the Independence, but might refurbish the United States, although NCL hasn't committed any funds of doing so yet.

 

To repeat, the Passenger Service Act prevents foreign flagged, foreign manned, foreign owned and foreign built ships sailing between two American ports, where passengers can start or end a cruise, without first entering a "distant" foreign port. The best way to descrbe what a "distant" port is, is to define what a "nearby" port is. "Nearby" ports include all ports in Mexico, Canada, Caribbean Sea, Bahamas and Bermuda. All others are "distant" ports. The only exception to "nearby" ports is Pureto Rico, which has it's own loophole in the US maritime laws. Pureto Rico is considered a "distant" foreign port, although it borders the Caribbean.

 

Another interesting tidbit: Passengers only have to visit a "distant" foreign port. Passengers don't have to go ashore in the "distant" foreign port. Manufactured goods must be offloaded and then reloaded in the "distant" foreign port. It's illegal to ship goods, for example oil, from Alaska to Los Angeles on a foreign flagged ship. Even if the ship sails to Japan first, without first pumping "all" the oil ashore in Japan. If theship is offloaded entirely, then you can reload any goods for shipping to another American port.

I hope this helps!

[hotspur]

We tried last year to book the Dream's "Pacific Coastal" [LA(?) to Vancouver] back-to-back with her first Alaska cruise (Vancouver to Seattle) and NCL wouldn't allow it for the reason johnql articulated above. It's nuts--but it's the law.

 

Enjoy the short bus ride and don't let it ruin your vacation. Think of the stories you'll be able to tell.

[emilygrace]

Well, my whole point is that the TA should have caught this in the preliminary booking process so these folks wouldn't have to be disappointed later on. And since Dr. J booked those 3 cruises almost a year ago, was still allowed to make final payment on all 3 and only found out after the documents were issued, I would say this TA is not on the ball.

[NJBear]

Thanks johnql and others --

Do you think that there is any flexibility? Do you think that the Concierge can help. What if we lock ourselves in our suite and ask for no food or services until we leave Vancouver?

Dr. Jon

 

 

Get to a therapist quickly!!!;) LOL--I was thinking along the same lines on your original post..and I KNOW I shouldn't spend too much time alone in my mind!! :D :D :D

[Cruise_More_Often]

Dr. J: Talk to your concierge or butler when you board about leaving your luggage aboard during the time you'll be off the ship. I'm sure with the proper incentive ($$$) they can help you out.

 

We had a somewhat similar situation in May. We took the Sun's repo cruise from San Francisco to Vancouver. The difference was that the Sun was sailing completely empty to Seattle to begin the Alaska season. We had to leave the ship in Vancouver and take the bus down to Seattle. We had the same cabin booked, so we were able to leave our heaviest bags in our cabin (we each took a carryon off the ship with us).

 

Here's the link to QuickCoach service between Pier 66 in Seattle and various Vancouver stops. We've used it twice, and it's very good. If you decide to spend the night in Seattle, there's another QuickCoach pickup point.

[electricron]

Get to a therapist quickly!!!;) LOL--I was thinking along the same lines on your original post..and I KNOW I shouldn't spend too much time alone in my mind!! :D :D :D

 

I agree, thye should have. But one must remember Travel Agents aren't lawyers.

 

There is some flexibility, if you're willing to pay the $800 per person penalty the cruise line will be fined, plus whatever court fees. Isn't it better to just take the coach?

[hotspur]

I agree, thye should have. But one must remember Travel Agents aren't lawyers.

I'd say NCL should have caught it at the time of booking. When we tried to book ours through an on-line TA, she had no objection to the back-to-back, but NCL wouldn't let her book it. As someone said above, this is an extremely complex law, and I wouldn't expect a TA to understand all its ramifications.

[Tobintemp]

I have a b2b booked for next year so I will need to check on my booking.

1st cruise is on the SUN Vancouver-Astoria-Vancouver, 2nd cruise is on the Sun Vancouver-Alaska-Vancouver. I don't think it would be effected but I am going to double check anyways. Thanks for warning.

[jp2001]

To repeat, the Passenger Service Act prevents foreign flagged, foreign manned, foreign owned and foreign built ships sailing between two American ports, where passengers can start or end a cruise, without first entering a "distant" foreign port. The best way to descrbe what a "distant" port is, is to define what a "nearby" port is. "Nearby" ports include all ports in Mexico, Canada, Caribbean Sea, Bahamas and Bermuda. All others are "distant" ports. The only exception to "nearby" ports is Pureto Rico, which has it's own loophole in the US maritime laws. Pureto Rico is considered a "distant" foreign port, although it borders the Caribbean.

 

I'm just trying to understand this Passenger Service Act. You can sail a round-trip itinerary that doesn't have a distant foreign port but you can't disembark in a different port if you have not visited a distant foreign port first?

[Joy2Day]

I'm just trying to understand this Passenger Service Act. You can sail a round-trip itinerary that doesn't have a distant foreign port but you can't disembark in a different port if you have not visited a distant foreign port first?

 

That's it. A round-trip itinerary can visit any foreign port (Victoria is often the port for the Seattle sailings) while a one-way itinerary must visit a distant foreign port.

[Jana]

I'm just trying to understand this Passenger Service Act. You can sail a round-trip itinerary that doesn't have a distant foreign port but you can't disembark in a different port if you have not visited a distant foreign port first?

 

It's an arcane, stupid law that made sense in the 1920s but is thoroughly outdated now, especially with "homeporting" so important to the cruise industry these days.

 

Even the interpretation of "distant" is fudged, all the time. You can sail round trip to Alaska as long as your ship stops in Victoria, Vancouver or Prince Rupert on the way back. How distant are those cities? And, sometimes the "foreign" port has to be the last one you visited before your final U.S. destination, but not always.

 

Last year, my daughter and I sailed on Celebrity Mercury, a repositioning cruise from Seattle. We stopped in Victoria and Nanaimo, then Astoria, Oregon and San Francisco. My daughter had to leave in San Francisco and... since we'd been in Canada, I thought it would be OK. It wasn't. (The fine, by the way, for her to leave early, was $300). Not only that, we couldn't disembark in San Diego, we had to go to Ensenada and be BUSED to San Diego, while the ship dead-headed its way up the coast.

 

It doesn't surprise me that neither the travel agent nor the reps at NCL caught it at the outset. It's hard to figure out. I'm in the industry and I don't understand it, nor do most of my colleagues. John has a better handle on it than most I know, but it's still a very difficult rule to figure out.

 

I don't think you'll be able to stay onboard, no matter what.

 

Jana

[smeyer418]

I have a b2b booked for next year so I will need to check on my booking.

1st cruise is on the SUN Vancouver-Astoria-Vancouver, 2nd cruise is on the Sun Vancouver-Alaska-Vancouver. I don't think it would be effected but I am going to double check anyways. Thanks for warning.

 

This should be fine as you start and end in Canada at the same Canadian port. The PSA only becomes a problem if you start in a US port and end in another US port or their is a segment that starts at a US port and the next segment ends in a different US port. Since you never end or begin a segment in the US its just not an issue. Its the US portion that is the problem here you never permanently disembark in a US port so its not a problem at all.

[Jana]

That's it. A round-trip itinerary can visit any foreign port (Victoria is often the port for the Seattle sailings) while a one-way itinerary must visit a distant foreign port.

 

I didn't know that either. Don't any cruise lines sail from Seattle to Seward or Whittier? Or do they all leave from Vancouver?

 

Jana

[Joy2Day]

Nope. Alaskan cruises out of Seattle or San Francisco are all roundtrip cruises. All the NB/SB cruises start or end in Vancouver.

[Jana]

Wow, thank you Joy! I'm so thrilled to have learned something today. I appreciate it!

 

Jana

[broberts]

It's an arcane, stupid law that made sense in the 1920s but is thoroughly outdated now, especially with "homeporting" so important to the cruise industry these days.

 

I won't comment on the intelligence of this particular law but I will say that most countries have something similar.

 

In the narrow context of a cruise this type of law may appear to have questionable benefit. Consider, however, the fact that these laws generally cover many forms of passenger transportation. The picture changes. Most countries do not want foreign owned passenger transport companies dominating their market.

 

While these laws were often conceived and implemented as trade protection, in this day and age there are also security considerations.

[mbmam2]

I am not sure wherre you are from, but if you are not from the Northwest, spend the night at a great hotel in downtown Seattle and then rent a car to get to Vancouver. It is a beautiful drive and you can stop along the way as you like.