Oosterdam Pacific Coast B2B-Can't be done!

[cruisinjudy]

I booked Oosterdam April 30th and May 4th B2b online at Orbitz. Then I called and had a charge removed, witch needed a call to HAL, then today I called to change our cabin number, and HAL said it can't be done. You can't sail from San Diego to Seattle. Even thought it is two separate cruises. Now we are stuck with just a four day cruise ending in Vancouver. We are taking my 88 year old mother and really wanted to connect for a 7 day cruise. I know that others said they had booked both cruises. Has any one else found it not doable?

[Esme]

It all has to do with the Passengers Service Act and you cannot do this. Don't aks me why - your US laws are very complicated when it comes to passenger ships.
This question has been asked before and the same reason was given.

[seattlecruiser]

I seem to recall that others have requested a waiver from the cruise line's legal department. There was quite an extensive discussion of this issue on the Princess Board last year. You could try a search over there and see if you can find the details.

[kruzkeen]

The Passenger Service Act is sometimes referred to as the Jones Act. I believe it was named after a congress man over 100 years ago. It was to protect US shipping lines. There is more than you really want to know if you go to: http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=93157&highlight=jones+act

It seems that you want to go from San Diego to Vancouver April 30 to May 4 and then Vancouver to Seattle May 4 to May 7. Perhaps a B2B is prohibited by the Jones Act. You might try two seperate cruises. I think that you would have to disembark in Vancouver with your luggage, clear Canadian customs and then check in again and clear US INS.

You might phone HAL again and see if this would work.

[cruisinjudy]

I did book them separately, but when they discovered we were on both they said it couldn't be done. I have dealt with this act in regards t Hawaii cruises, but it seems if they can offer a cruise from Vancouver to Seattle, which they have, then it is hard to imagine that it wouldn't be available for anyone. It is very difficult to make sense of the rules in the Passenger service act.

[kruzkeen]

Very strange. I might call HAL again and this time you might get a different ruling from a different person.

[shipcafe]

The Jones Act prohibits this indeed. Any cruise leaving from a U.S. port must call at a foreign port prior to returning. Perfect example is the call at Ensenada on a 15-day Hawaii cruise.

[cruisinjudy]

The foreign port is Vancouver.

[Philip217]

Judy,
Even though you are hitting a foreign port on the second cruise, the Jones Act still prohibits you from doing this itinerary. If you dig a bit deeper into the very byzantine sections of the Passenger Services Act (the correct name of this legislation), there are clauses and sub-clauses about "Near Ports" and "Far Ports" that preclude you from doing this B2B.
Violating the P.S.A. means a huge fine for the Cruise Line, a huge fine for you, and the ship's Captain gets points against his license (much like the points you get on your driving license for serious traffic violations).

This is all nonsense over a law that protects ships that do not exist anymore - but it is still the law.

[BJane]

I called HAL about this as we have both the 4/30 and the 5/4 cruise booked. I was told that the posts are correct and that they cannot be taken as B2B. I am NOT HAPPY about this. We booked these on 9/27 and neither our travel agent nor I have heard one word from HAL that this is not possible to take these together. Just when was anyone going to mention to us that we would be dumped off the ship in Vancouver, never to be seen again? When I go to the Shore Excursion web site our itinerary shows all 7 days of our "fantasy"
trip. When I called HAL in September to ask if we needed to disembark in Vancouver and reboard I was told that we could stay on the ship if we wanted to, or we could get off at our leisure and use the day as a port of call. I am so angry right now that I am planning not only to cancel both of these, but also the Amsterdam cruise to Alaska that we have booked for July.
Luckily my travel agent has Monday off so maybe I'll mellow out some before
Tuesday! I am so glad that this thread alerted me to what was in store for me. I'm furious with HAL for not being more alert to what they are allowing to be booked, but greatful that the CC posters are more knowledgeable than the HAL customer service reps.

[HeatherInFlorida]

I was following this thread because I found it very interesting. I feel so badly both for Judy and SingerBJ. What is so inexcusable is that neither HAL nor your TA's didn't know enough to tell you this when you booked!!!

I had thought about doing a B2B from Boston to Montreal and return and wonder if the same law would apply. If that's the rule I can understand it, but I certainly can't understand why they accepted the booking and you found out only by chance that it can't be done.

Good luck to both of you with this and I hope there's a happy way out of the disappointment (not to mention anger) for you. I can't imagine packing all my bags, going through customs and getting back on! What a hassle! But I should think that would be one way of getting around the law.

[RevNeal]

This is just awful, I agree. And, quite frankly, what I'm about to suggest will not help your present situation. However, you might use this experience to get the attention of your Congressperson and Senators and see if this idiotic relic of the past can be repealed. Lord knows, it needs to be.

[cruisinjudy]

This all seems to have something to do with us starting in San Diego I guess. Both cruises are acceptable on their own, but not together. It seemed like such a great itinerary together, but alone it is only four days! I would cancel, but now I have my 88 year old mother all excited and we will visit her childhood friend, so it is a go no matter what.

Singerbj, I posted this just so you would see it as I knew you had booked B2B also! I am glad you were checking in, but sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings.

[RuthC]

I had thought about doing a B2B from Boston to Montreal and return and wonder if the same law would apply...
Heather, as far as I understand it is possible to do the Boston-Montreal-Boston in sequence. The difference in taking this b-2-b is that you would begin and end in the same port. (Gotta love that Passenger Services Act. :rolleyes: )
As a matter of fact, more than one person from this board is planning that exact itinerary in a few months.

[HeatherInFlorida]

Heather, as far as I understand it is possible to do the Boston-Montreal-Boston in sequence. The difference in taking this b-2-b is that you would begin and end in the same port. (Gotta love that Passenger Services Act. :rolleyes: )
As a matter of fact, more than one person from this board is planning that exact itinerary in a few months.

Ruth, thanks ... now I get it. I misread and thought they were going back to San Diego, but they're going back to Seattle. Good. Wish I could join whoever is doing the round trip B2B because DH has little interest. Can't, though ... too close to our October journey.:o

[kruzkeen]

The difference in taking this b-2-b is that you would begin and end in the same port. (Gotta love that Passenger Services Act. :rolleyes: )


Thanks Ruth for clearing this up. More that a few of us have done B2B from Vancouver to Anchorage and have never had a problem.

Bottom line. To do a B2B that touches a foreigh port ( and all cruises out of a USA port must) you must embark and disembark from the same Americian port. Right?

[Sierrachik]

To do a B2B that touches a foreigh port ( and all cruises out of a USA port must) you must embark and disembark from the same Americian port. Right?

My TA mentioned to me the other day that if the ship is a US registered ship it will not have to visit a foreign port. All ships out of a US Port of foreign registry must visit a foreign port. The new Pride of America will be a US registered ship and sailing strictly in Hawaii without going to any foreign ports, as I understand it.

I should also mention I'm not familiar with the PSA personally, just relaying info my travel agent mentioned.

[guardhouse]

Judy & BJ, that is why I started the discussion on the other thread. Princess DID tell us upfront that we could not do it, that is why I was asking how you had accomplished it.

Guess that answers the question if we will be going (not!).

The Jone Act allows ships BUILT in the US to operate differently, not those merely REGISTERED under the US flag (I am pretty sure).

[RuthC]

Thanks Ruth for clearing this up. More that a few of us have done B2B from Vancouver to Anchorage and have never had a problem.
You're welcome.
Now the Vancouver-Seward-Vancouver b-2-b doesn't even come under the Passenger Services Act because you're sailing from a foreign port when you end in the good ol' US of A, and from the USA to a foreign port when you end in Vancouver.
That's why Vancouver became the major jumping-off point for Alaska cruises instead of Seattle all those many years ago and why the Seattle departures must stop in Canada and return to Seattle---no one-ways out of Seattle.

Basicly, the rule is USA-remote foreign port-different USA, or USA-foreign country-original USA port. You can begin or end a cruise in the US as long as you end or begin the same cruise in another country.

Wasn't this fun? There will be a short quiz tomorrow. ;)

[guardhouse]

But try and convince PRINCESS of that. They will not knowinly book both as a B2B. Been there, tried that. Failed.

[RuthC]

But try and convince PRINCESS of that. They will not knowinly book both as a B2B. Been there, tried that. Failed.
And that's because the lines---because the government says so---aren't seeing the stop in Vancouver as an interruption in passage. And we can all agree, (can't we?), that Vancouver isn't "remote".

[guardhouse]

Agree totally. Trust me when I say "we are trying to spend $$ with Princess"....and, trust me when i say "Princess is in the business of TAKING reservations, not turning them away".

I think if they could find a way, they would. They know the itinerary better than we do.

[cruisinjudy]

So there must be something in the act that refers to B2B since both cruises on their own are acceptable. I just had not dealt with this particular aspect of it as yet. I do seem to remember someone having a problem like this last year. I guess this was the problem exactly. I had forgotten about that.

[BJane]

[QUOTE=guardhouse]Judy & BJ, that is why I started the discussion on the other thread. Princess DID tell us upfront that we could not do it, that is why I was asking how you had accomplished it.

Maybe HAL could ask Princess to give a short, no make that long and thorough, class to the HAL reps so that they would know not to book a forbidden trip. Had we been told originally that we could not take the B2B we probably would have just booked the San Diego to Vancouver trip. The only reason we were planning this trip was to see what the Oosterdam was like. We have been on all their ships except the new Vista class and although we did take a tour of the O when it was in San Francisco we really couldn't get a feel for it in only one afternoon. We're so disgusted with HAL right now that we're going to rebook our July Alaska trip with a different cruise line.

[kruzkeen]

If you dig a bit deeper into the very byzantine sections of the Passenger Services Act (the correct name of this legislation), there are clauses and sub-clauses about "Near Ports" and "Far Ports" that preclude you from doing this B2B.


Perhaps Vancouver is considered to be a "Near Port" and that is why these cruises cannot be booked.

Panama Canal cruises that go from FLL to San Diego (different USA ports) are allowed. Perhaps the ports in the Caribbean and Mexico etc. are considered to be "Far Ports".

I think the error was made by ORBITZ who CrusinJudy made the booking through. If I have read the original post correctly, she only discovered that it could not be done when she contacted HAL to make a change.

As quoted above the Jones Act is more complicated than I thought it was. For that reason it would not surprize me if those conditions that violate it would be flagged on HAL's reservation system.

[HeatherInFlorida]

Orbitz should know better, too, but the fact remains that Orbitz books the cruise directly with HAL who should immediately red flag it. We all know the booking goes into a computer which can so easily be programmed to recognize that this is a B2B booking and doesn't fit the law.

So ultimately most of the fault still lies with HAL and, in my opinion, it's quite inexcusable. And I don't blame singerbj for being annoyed enough to say "the heck with this"! It's not up to us, the passengers, to know every law ever written regarding these things.

[West Coast]

What you may consider doing is:

Keep your original booking with Orbitz.
Book the second 'leg' with a different TA.
Keep in mind that if you are discovered to be in violation of the PSA (Passenger Services Act) that the cruise line will be fined (+/-$200 per person) and that amount will be added to your on-board account.
In your case, you are 'technically' sailing between 2 US ports - even though you are booked on two cruises, under the PSA you are seen as using a foreign flagged vessel to travel one-way, from San Diego to Seattle (your final destination) and you are not stopping at a (and here's the clincher) a DISTANT Foreign Port. Vancouver, while a foreign port, is not considered to be a *distant* foreign port.

In summary -

Your passage, all R/T from US, must include any foreign port (stop or paperwork shuffle - [Ensanada is known for the shuffle])
Your passage (where you first get on to where you finally get off), one-way US point A to US point B, must include a foreign distant port
Your passage, one way from US to non-US is not effected
The PSA was designed to prevent foreign-flagged vessels from 'transporting' people between two US ports, long ago, when there were US flagged vessels that existed for this prupose (none anymore) - it was a US loophole to prevent foreign competition. As a previous poster had mentioned, NCL has recently (re)flagged one of their ships under the US flag (including all US crew) to do the Hawaii runs, round-trip with-out having to go out to Fanning Island.

Yes, it's confusing and conveluded.

I wish you luck and share your frustration!

[BJane]

My problem with the B2B that we thought we were going to take is now history. We visited our TA this morning and cancelled both of the Oosterdam cruises and also our Alaska cruise on the Amsterdam in July. While I'm sure that it will be time before I get over being angry with HAL for letting us slip through the cracks, we were able to rebook the July trip. We booked for the same dates on RCI's Serenade of the Seas. We are no strangers to RCI. This will be our 30th with them and the Serenade is a beautiful ship. In fact we sailed to Alaska on her last July. Thanks again to all you CC posters for knowing what was going on even if HAL did not! If not for you I could still be assuming that I was going on a cruise in late April. And yes, I have written a letter to HAL which will be sent to the appropriate people.

[dakrewser]

And yes, I have written a letter to HAL which will be sent to the appropriate people.

I'd hope you also wrote to your congressperson as well as Senators Feibstein & Boxer to get this travesty of a law removed from the books....

-dave

[Himself]

I doubt that the Jones Act will ever be repealed. As I recall, passenger ships who fly under a FOREIGN FLAG have to stop at least one foreign port. Today ships fly under FOREIGN FLAGS because it is a lot cheaper to register them in a foreign country. But most of these companies are American Companies.
HAL's offices are in Seattle. Carnival is in Miami, Princess is in LA, Celebrity is in Florida. So, I think that the government is not going to give these American Companies a break--it would be "umpatriotic".

"Patiriotism" is an interesting topic. If I want to buy medicines I need in Mexico or Canada, I am being unpatriotic. However, industry can ship jobs to other countries--costing American Manufactuing jobs--and this is most patriotic. Doesn't make sense.

Himself