PVSA question.

yesterday, we booked the two cruises listed below for 2018. I specifically asked if this was allowed under the PVSA act. The CSR put me on hold to check and said that the two cruises were okay. Both are showing in my personalizer. However, I still question whether we will get to Vancouver and not be able to board the Alaska cruise. Thoughts on who I could call to verify as I don't trust the regular CSRs.

Cruise 1: emerald princess coastal from LA to Vancouver May 9 to May 13,2018 (1 stop in Victoria)

Cruise 2 emerald princess Alaska from Vancouver to Seattle May 13 to May 20, 2018. Multiple Alaska stops with Victoria.

This is not legal. It doesn't matter how Princess divides it - it only matters what the total cruise is. It doesn't matter that you get off the ship and get back on in Vancouver; it wouldn't even matter if you took all your luggage off - it's still one cruise.

You are booking a cruise from LA to Seattle with stops in Vancouver and Victoria.

A cruise between two different US ports (LA and Seattle) is legal in a foreign-flag vessel only if it stops in a distant foreign port, and no Canadian port is distant.

A round trip cruise back to the same US port is legal if it stops at any foreign port. For example, Seattle to Seattle with a stop in Victoria is legal.

A cruise starting or ending in a foreign port is legal.

That's what I thought, however princess per the CSR that put us on hold to find out says it is fine. I am going to call and talk to a supervisor.

Deleted by user....

NavyVeteran sure seems right. However, it is up to Princess to enforce and be in compliance with the PVSA when it comes to booking B2B cruises. It is not your responsibility to determine the compliance of the sailings offered and sold to you. Additionally, in my perspective, you have done your due diligence; you asked about any PVSA violation and gave Princess a first shot to determine if there was an issue. At least on the sales side, they determined that this wasn't an issue and completed the bookings.

No doubt Princess audits their bookings for compliance issues; so I see this playing out two ways. 1. Princess calls you back, informs you that booking you for this particular sequence of B2B cruises can't be done due to provisions of the PVSA and you will have to choose which cruise to keep and which one you will not sail on. 2. Princess won't find this issue and will allow you to cruise it and will deal with any fines on their end if and when they are found by the authorities.

Like any regulatory enforcement issue, there is a lot more self-enforcement than there is any actual hands on government enforcement. If option 2 above occurs, I suspect that you will have sailed on and enjoyed these two cruises many months prior to the issue of a PVSA violation being discovered. At which point Princess will deal with the fine and move on.

Cruise 1: emerald princess coastal from LA to Vancouver May 9 to May 13,2018 (1 stop in Victoria)

 

Cruise 2 emerald princess Alaska from Vancouver to Seattle May 13 to May 20, 2018. Multiple Alaska stops with Victoria.

2 cruises. Neither is subject to PVSA. PVSA only comes into play if you sail from a US port to either the same US port or another US port. You are sailing from a US port to a Canadian port. Then you are sailing from a Canadian port to a US port. No issue with either cruise. Enjoy. :)

Not exactly.

Under the PVSA, either one or the other cruise is legal. Both cruises together are not. The PVSA only looks as where a passenger embarks the ship and debarks the (same) ship. In the original poster's case this would be Los Angeles embarkation and Seattle debarkation. Since there's no distant foreign port stop on either of the cruises, this would be illegal.

I believe you would have to stay one night in Vancouver then board a ship the following day to Alaska. We have done this a few times.

I believe you would have to stay one night in Vancouver then board a ship the following day to Alaska. We have done this a few times.

That's one option. You can also get off one ship, and then get on a different ship the same day. The key is "different" ship.

The ship arrives in Los Angeles from Santiago on March 30. It then has two round trip cruises from Los Angeles - 1 28 day South Pacific cruise and a 12 day Alaska cruise (both with stops in foreign ports).

Princess then wants to take the ship to Seattle for the Alaska season - it will be sailing 18 roundtrip Alaska cruises from Seattle starting May 20. However they cannot take passengers from Los Angeles to Seattle without a stop at a distant foreign port - and no Canadian port is considered distant. They don't want to sail the ship without passengers - no money.

The simplest way to get a ship from Los Angeles to Seattle with passengers is to sail from Los Angeles to Vancouver and then from Vancouver to Seattle. These are two separate cruises, and all the passengers have to get off in Vancouver. A passenger cannot sail from Los Angeles to Seattle with the only foreign ports in Canada.

In the past they have used a one-night cruise to get from Vancouver to Seattle following a repositioning cruise from Los Angeles to Vancouver. It appears that Princess decided the one-night cruise would not work that well in this case, so they replaced it with a 7-night Alaska cruise to get from Vancouver to Seattle. It may also have been because of the calendar. If they had scheduled a 1-night cruise from Vancouver to Seattle, then they would have arrived in Seattle on Monday. By scheduling the 7-night Alaska cruise instead, they arrive in Seattle on Sunday for the preferred Sunday to Sunday 7-night Alaska cruises for the summer season.

It would be possible to sail legally from Los Angeles to Seattle if you want using the following B2B2B2B itinerary:

• Roundtrip South Pacific from Los Angeles (28 days): March 30-April 27
  
• Roundtrip Alaska from Los Angeles (12 days): April 27-May 9
  
• Repositioning Los Angeles to Vancouver (4 days): May 9-May 13
  
• Repositioning Vancouver to Seattle via Alaska (7 days): May 13-May 20
  

Even though this would also be a cruise between two US ports (Los Angeles and Seattle), it would be legal because it calls at a distant foreign port - Pago Pago, Apia, Bora Bora, Papeeta, and Moorea are all considered distant foreign ports. So you don't have to cancel one of your cruises - all you have to do is book the previous two cruises (40 days) and you would be completely legal.:)

As WaltD says, the easiest way to do this is take one cruise up to Vancouver and then a different ship from there. Legally it could be on the same day but recommend spending a day or two in Vancouver between cruises - neat place to visit.

Have seen posts in the past where Princess has cancelled both legs just with an email to the customer near final payment day. If the ship(s) are full at that time you can either be looking at large charges to rebook or no ship available. Best to get this fixed now. They probably are not looking very hard at 2018 cruises right now.

Okay, you are all right. I just called and requested a supervisor. They transferred me to customer care. It was sure enough illegal. I asked three times when booking and the CSR said "I just put you on hold and verified this is fine." OMG, how wrong can you be. The customer care rep said, it would have been fine as we would have caught it before you sailed. Fine for legality, but not fine for us depending on when we found out. So, Those two are now cancelled and we are on a ten day to Alaska from San Fran.

Okay, you are all right. I just called and requested a supervisor. They transferred me to customer care. It was sure enough illegal. I asked three times when booking and the CSR said "I just put you on hold and verified this is fine." OMG, how wrong can you be. The customer care rep said, it would have been fine as we would have caught it before you sailed. Fine for legality, but not fine for us depending on when we found out. So, Those two are now cancelled and we are on a ten day to Alaska from San Fran.

Yes, it's quite likely they would have "caught" it and informed you that one cruise would have to be cancelled. Sadly, too often, it happens after you've already made flight/hotel reservations based on the original plan.

NavyVeteran sure seems right. However, it is up to Princess to enforce and be in compliance with the PVSA when it comes to booking B2B cruises. It is not your responsibility to determine the compliance of the sailings offered and sold to you. Additionally, in my perspective, you have done your due diligence; you asked about any PVSA violation and gave Princess a first shot to determine if there was an issue. At least on the sales side, they determined that this wasn't an issue and completed the bookings.

 

No doubt Princess audits their bookings for compliance issues; so I see this playing out two ways. 1. Princess calls you back, informs you that booking you for this particular sequence of B2B cruises can't be done due to provisions of the PVSA and you will have to choose which cruise to keep and which one you will not sail on. 2. Princess won't find this issue and will allow you to cruise it and will deal with any fines on their end if and when they are found by the authorities.

 

Like any regulatory enforcement issue, there is a lot more self-enforcement than there is any actual hands on government enforcement. If option 2 above occurs, I suspect that you will have sailed on and enjoyed these two cruises many months prior to the issue of a PVSA violation being discovered. At which point Princess will deal with the fine and move on.

Possibility 2 not likely.. Since this is a 2018 cruise, the OP would stay happily booked, until the cruise reached a certain point in Princesses review process and the reservations checked. There is some department that does this in advance of the cruise. At that time he or his TA would have gotten a nice little letter saying that the cruise is not allowed and that he would need to cancel one of the segments. It has happened to many that have initially been allowed to book.

There are several one ways from LA to Vancouver each spring and as many south again at the end of summer. Check to see if you can start a day or two earlier from LA on a different ship and then get the Vancouver-Alaska-Seattle cruise.

Or, get a Vancouver-Alaska-Vancouver cruise. This year Emerald does LA to Vancouver May 10 and then Vancouver to Alaska and back to Vancouver starting May 13.

One more option for you, do your two planned cruises on Emerald Princess but ask for a deviation that lets you disembark a day early at Victoria, spend the night there or in Vancouver and reboard Emerald Princess in Vancouver. That will get you around the problem and has been done before. Lots of scenic ways from Victoria to Vancouver. BC Ferries, Float Planes, a new Fast Cat service. It will cost you a bit more but look at it as a shore excursion, you will see the incredible scenery during the day instead of overnight.

AE_Collector

I have to say I never have had this problem and probably never will, but when are they going to wake up and fix this. Just a stupid antiquated rule that makes no sense. It is literally two different cruises and should be treated as such. I may not be knowledgeable about these things but wish the government would stop making people pay for these unreasonable rules.

Candi

I have to say I never have had this problem and probably never will, but when are they going to wake up and fix this. Just a stupid antiquated rule that makes no sense. It is literally two different cruises and should be treated as such. I may not be knowledgeable about these things but wish the government would stop making people pay for these unreasonable rules.

 

Candi

It is really is not a stupid law. It covers far more than cruise lines. It also covers ferries and other such ships as well. It does what it was intended to do, which is prevent foreign companies, with foreign built ships, and foreign crews from taking over those functions.

It is really is not a stupid law. It covers far more than cruise lines. It also covers ferries and other such ships as well. It does what it was intended to do, which is prevent foreign companies, with foreign built ships, and foreign crews from taking over those functions.

Thank you for the clarification. I wish there was a way they could make it so people could disembark from a cruise ship and re embark on the same ship to make it possible. I get the other instances where it might impede on U.S. regulations for ferries, but cruise ships are different. Just my opinion and like I said not an expert in any way shape or form.

Candi

Thank you for the clarification. I wish there was a way they could make it so people could disembark from a cruise ship and re embark on the same ship to make it possible. I get the other instances where it might impede on U.S. regulations for ferries, but cruise ships are different. Just my opinion and like I said not an expert in any way shape or form.

 

The law pre-dates the existence of cruise ships.

It would take an act of Congress to change this law to exclude cruise ships.

I bet you know the chances of that happening.

Thank you for the clarification. I wish there was a way they could make it so people could disembark from a cruise ship and re embark on the same ship to make it possible. I get the other instances where it might impede on U.S. regulations for ferries, but cruise ships are different. Just my opinion and like I said not an expert in any way shape or form.

 

Candi

The law pre-dates the existence of cruise ships.

 

It would take an act of Congress to change this law to exclude cruise ships.

 

 

I bet you know the chances of that happening.

An exemption for cruise ships probably would not withstand a legal challenge from the dinner boat/casino boat lobby as to why they could not be foreign flag as well.

Also know that CLIA acknowledges that none of their member cruise lines are at all interested in modifying the PVSA, since it would have a marginal impact on their bottom line, and might hurt it because of possible further restrictions that might be placed in order to get allow the coastwise carriage of passengers.

Another note is that up until the 80's (IIRC), foreign flag cruise ships could only have one US port in the itinerary, the embarkation/debarkation port. This is because even allowing a passenger to get off at a US port of call, knowing that the passenger would get back on the ship again that day, is considered to be "transportation between US ports" (from the US embarkation port to the US port of call). The PVSA was amended then to include language that says the disallowed transportation must include the "permanent" disembarkation of the passenger, thereby allowing multiple US port calls.

Thank you for the clarification. I wish there was a way they could make it so people could disembark from a cruise ship and re embark on the same ship to make it possible. I get the other instances where it might impede on U.S. regulations for ferries, but cruise ships are different. Just my opinion and like I said not an expert in any way shape or form.

 

Candi

If the ship overnights in port and you exit the ship for a full 24 hours (fully disembarking and taking all your stuff with you, and staying at a hotel at your own expense) it breaks the chain. That unit an option most of the time, though.

An exemption for cruise ships probably would not withstand a legal challenge from the dinner boat/casino boat lobby as to why they could not be foreign flag as well.

 

Also know that CLIA acknowledges that none of their member cruise lines are at all interested in modifying the PVSA, since it would have a marginal impact on their bottom line, and might hurt it because of possible further restrictions that might be placed in order to get allow the coastwise carriage of passengers.

 

Another note is that up until the 80's (IIRC), foreign flag cruise ships could only have one US port in the itinerary, the embarkation/debarkation port. This is because even allowing a passenger to get off at a US port of call, knowing that the passenger would get back on the ship again that day, is considered to be "transportation between US ports" (from the US embarkation port to the US port of call). The PVSA was amended then to include language that says the disallowed transportation must include the "permanent" disembarkation of the passenger, thereby allowing multiple US port calls.

Interesting info, especially your last paragraph which explains some of the QM2 itineraries. By the way, the big winner of the PVSA "lottery" is the Port of Vancouver, CA :). If not for the PVSA, it is likely that Seattle would have been developed into the major cruise line home port for most Alaskan cruises.

Hank

Interesting info, especially your last paragraph which explains some of the QM2 itineraries. By the way, the big winner of the PVSA "lottery" is the Port of Vancouver, CA :). If not for the PVSA, it is likely that Seattle would have been developed into the major cruise line home port for most Alaskan cruises.

 

Hank

Quite right about Vancouver, and only fair really, since the Jones Act was enacted specifically targeting the growing cargo trade to Alaska, that was using Vancouver as a lower cost alternative. Senator Jones represented Washington state, and was approached by Seattle shipowners, dock owners and warehouse owners who saw their trade to Alaska going away.

If the ship overnights in port and you exit the ship for a full 24 hours (fully disembarking and taking all your stuff with you, and staying at a hotel at your own expense) it breaks the chain. That unit an option most of the time, though.

Yes, the wording of "permanent disembarkation" as noted in my post above is required. However, there is not a strict "24 hour" rule, only that you disembark on one calendar day, and re-embark on the next calendar day.

Quite right about Vancouver, and only fair really, since the Jones Act was enacted specifically targeting the growing cargo trade to Alaska, that was using Vancouver as a lower cost alternative. Senator Jones represented Washington state, and was approached by Seattle shipowners, dock owners and warehouse owners who saw their trade to Alaska going away.

Can you elaborate on this? I cannot see how the act prevents anyone shipping from Vancouver to Alaska.