NCL REP says "NO!" b2b2b JONES ACT embark Seatle final debark Miami

[Seamo]

Hello all,

 

Just off the phone with "Carol" , a rep for NCL.

We asked: "Have booked on the same NCL ship (Jewel) :

.... .... 1.) Seattle to Vancouver and 3.) LA to Miami

and now want to ADD part 2.) Vancouver to LA ...... thus making a

B2B2B , 3 legged embark Seattle, Washington to final debark of Miami with a 'foreign distant port stop' ... in Cartenga, Columbia."

 

Carol said ... NO ... we persist ... No .. we quote the info given here .....A MILLION TIMES ..... NO. "

She goes to a higher authority ... NO!

 

She says: " By having the second part added ... Vancouver to LA ..

""""REGARDLESS"""" of the addition of LA to Miami ---- Which has the distant foreign port in Columbia .... ........ NO.

 

She says (this is NCL REP who has consulted for 5 minutes with

Superiors in booking and customs ) NO.

" In fact, if you have the part one and the part three booked , O.K ____ --- ____ BUT as soon as you try to add part two

Vancouver to LA ______ your are now in violation. NO!!!

 

She says we could change ships for Vancouver to LA but otherwise NO. -- she added ... " when (if) the booking comes up in NCL computers, ... THEY WILL BE SCRUBBED -- denied !!!"

 

O.K. Folks Helping here were ready to jump off the dock at the repetition of this ... subject. our apologies ... all around but HELP!

 

Where do we go from here????

Our T.A. says it is O.K.

Many posters ... here ... said ... " O.K." The Columbia does the trick!

 

Have the "Official downloads" provided by Cruisecritic members on this REPEAT topic --- in previous attempts for a .." can live with it " conclusion.

Quoted these to the NCL Rep ... "does not matter .. if you get on in Seattle and continue to LA you are NOW in violation and it matters not what the NEXT leg is or does or where it goes ... NO".

 

Forgive us this next bit : HELP HELP HELP HELP SOT SOT SOT

( Save our Trip ) ... and what the Hell ... SOS !!!!

 

["Blessed our those who seek the truth .... more Blessed are those whose "help" ... may give the Truth " .... seamo 11-3 :)

 

Thanks Cruise Critic and members,

 

just wanting to ... :) Seamo :)

[SeaShark]

Hello all,

 

Just off the phone with "Carol" , a rep for NCL.

We asked: "Have booked on the same NCL ship (Jewel) :

.... .... 1.) Seattle to Vancouver and 3.) LA to Miami

and now want to ADD part 2.) Vancouver to LA ...... thus making a

B2B2B , 3 legged embark Seattle, Washington to final debark of Miami with a 'foreign distant port stop' ... in Cartenga, Columbia."

 

Carol said ... NO ... we persist ... No .. we quote the info given here .....A MILLION TIMES ..... NO. "

She goes to a higher authority ... NO!

 

She says: " By having the second part added ... Vancouver to LA ..

""""REGARDLESS"""" of the addition of LA to Miami ---- Which has the distant foreign port in Columbia .... ........ NO.

 

She says (this is NCL REP who has consulted for 5 minutes with

Superiors in booking and customs ) NO.

" In fact, if you have the part one and the part three booked , O.K ____ --- ____ BUT as soon as you try to add part two

Vancouver to LA ______ your are now in violation. NO!!!

 

She says we could change ships for Vancouver to LA but otherwise NO. -- she added ... " when (if) the booking comes up in NCL computers, ... THEY WILL BE SCRUBBED -- denied !!!"

 

O.K. Folks Helping here were ready to jump off the dock at the repetition of this ... subject. our apologies ... all around but HELP!

 

Where do we go from here????

Our T.A. says it is O.K.

Many posters ... here ... said ... " O.K." The Columbia does the trick!

 

Have the "Official downloads" provided by Cruisecritic members on this REPEAT topic --- in previous attempts for a .." can live with it " conclusion.

Quoted these to the NCL Rep ... "does not matter .. if you get on in Seattle and continue to LA you are NOW in violation and it matters not what the NEXT leg is or does or where it goes ... NO".

 

Forgive us this next bit : HELP HELP HELP HELP SOT SOT SOT

( Save our Trip ) ... and what the Hell ... SOS !!!!

 

["Blessed our those who seek the truth .... more Blessed are those whose "help" ... may give the Truth " .... seamo 11-3 :)

 

Thanks Cruise Critic and members,

 

just wanting to ... :) Seamo :)

 

Sorry to hear of your disappointment, but the NCL rep (why exactly is her name in quotes?) is correct...you cannot follow Seattle to Vancouver with a Vancouver to LA. Without a stop in a DISTANT foreign port, this is a violation and US law prohibits it.

 

No amount of pleading, arguing, discussing, "the people on Cruise Critic said...", etc is going to change that. Very sorry, but you can't do all three...in a row.

[Seamo]

SeaShark wrote: " Sorry to hear of your disappointment, but the NCL rep (why exactly is her name in quotes?) is correct...you cannot follow Seattle to Vancouver with a Vancouver to LA. Without a stop in a DISTANT foreign port, this is a violation and US law prohibits it.

 

No amount of pleading, arguing, discussing, "the people on Cruise Critic said...", etc is going to change that. Very sorry, but you can't do all three...in a row. "

____________________________________________________________

Name is in " " because ... she said : " Carol" in response to question from me: .... " and your name is ?"

___________________________________________________________

 

---- can you give us a place to verify ? Please.

________ _________ ___________ _________ ___________ _________

A long time member wrote:

Originally Posted by angelsonefive

I believe someone on this post already did. I have written the CBP for some clarification on this subject (MIA to SEA), being they are the ones to enforce the PVSA. If NCL had an intinerary that did MIA to SEA the OP's plan might fly, but it doesn't and that is where the PVSA comes into play. It will be interesting to see what the CBP has to say. This link might help it's a PDF from the CBP about the PVSA. http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/...t/pvsa_icp.pdf

OP these boards can be a wealth of information and misinformation, just because someone has thousands of posts or only one doesn't make them right. ..."

_________________ _______________ ________________________

 

We know these kinds of questions ... are not FUN ..

but we are only ... asking ... for help to sort this out ..

How do .. where do .. we go for .. ultimate clarification???

thanks,

 

wanting to :) Seamo :)

[Seamo]

This gentleman posted the link to the PVSA rules:

 

+++ ++++ +++ +++ +++

njhorseman

5,000+ Club

 

Join Date: Jul 2007

Posts: 7,673

 

Originally Posted by luv4cruisin View Post

Some one who understands the Jones Act, please help me figure out if this is a violation. Sept 2012 on the Pearl I want to do:

 

The Seattle to Vancouver 7 day

then the Vancouver to LA 5 day Pacific Coastal

then the LA to MIA Panama Canal 14 day.

 

I'm pretty sure I can't do it, but NCL said I could. I just don't trust the "hourly" answers. If you know, please help!

The itinerary looks good to me, because the third leg includes a port call at Cartagena, Colombia, which qualifies as a Distant Foreign Port under the Passenger Vessel Services Act. (The PVSA, not the Jones Act is the law that applies to cruise ships.)

Last edited by njhorseman; June 8th, 2011 at 01:14 AM.

_____________________________________________________________

Old June 8th, 2011, 01:19 AM

njhorseman njhorseman is offline

5,000+ Club

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharke View Post

We actually booked a B2B like this several yrs ago. We arranged the Seattle to Vancouver and Vancouver to LA. No problems when we booked but 2 wks later a NCL agent called and said we couldn't do it because of the Jones Act set way back in I think 1916. Can't remember the details, something about way back when protecting trading rights from country to country etc. So we cancelled both of the cruises since the attraction was following the coast. NCL wasn't too happy but we ended up finding a great deal on a repositioning cruise out of New York on the Dawn, to the Caribbean and ending in Miami. Sure would like that original itinery, though.

The third segment of the OP's cruise, from LA to Miami, makes the whole cruise itinerary legal under the PVSA (the Jones Act isn't for passenger cruise ships) because it calls at Cartagena, Colombia.

____________________________________________________________

Old June 8th, 2011, 01:20 AM

njhorseman njhorseman is offline

5,000+ Club

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seanote View Post

My best guess is you can't do the first two legs together. You can't travel from Seattle to LA without a stop at a distant foriegn port and Vancouver is not a distant foreign port. The second two legs together are ok, however.

Correct...and all three legs together, which is what the OP is doing is also legal.

________ ______________ ________________ ___________

any updates , links etc ...??

Thank you, :) Seamo :)

[SeaShark]

The issue that you have here is with the classification of the ports...which I think was missed in your previous thread.

 

For example...NCL offers a Florida/Bahamas itinerary out of NY. It goes from New York to New York, with stops in Port Canaveral, and Nassau. It is NOT a violation because Port Canaveral is a port visit stop, and not an embark/debark stop (and it matter not if you in particular embark/debark there, it is an embark/debark port if ANYONE can embark/debark there).

 

In your example of three cruises together: Seattle, Vancouver, LA, and Miami are all embark/debark ports (again...doesn't matter if YOU don't get off in LA...as long as some people can, then it is an embark/debark port). The three legs together is a violation since you will have THREE United States embark/debark ports and you will be visiting two of them without a distant foreign port in between.

 

Let me add:

 

If this was all just a B2B consisting of 1) Seattle to Vancouver followed by 2) Vancouver to Miami (with a port visit to LA - No embarking/debarking guests) it would not be a violation and you would be good to go. It is the fact that they are letting people on/off in LA that is causing an issue with booking all three segments.

Edited November 2, 2011 by SeaShark

[Seamo]

Now we are REALLY scared.

 

Lived in Key West for 25 years and used to take

our sailboat out in front of 'White St. Pier' for

4th of July ... as the sun is just under the Horizon,

we jump off the stern for a refresh ... only the face masks

in hand ........... two minutes into that swim ... I urgently

encourage a retreat to the ladder .... Bull Shark ... I still

feel the tightening off my Transversus perinæi superficialis!

 

And until now ... actually experiencing this again ..

tee hee ...

 

o.k. we sit back , re think, re calculate ... and re late

to ... maybe a hole bitten in the middle of our B2B2B.

 

Ooooh ... that hurts.

 

thanks , :0 Seamo :)

[SeaShark]

Now we are REALLY scared.

 

Lived in Key West for 25 years and used to take

our sailboat out in front of 'White St. Pier' for

4th of July ... as the sun is just under the Horizon,

we jump off the stern for a refresh ... only the face masks

in hand ........... two minutes into that swim ... I urgently

encourage a retreat to the ladder .... Bull Shark ... I still

feel the tightening off my Transversus perinæi superficialis!

 

And until now ... actually experiencing this again ..

tee hee ...

 

o.k. we sit back , re think, re calculate ... and re late

to ... maybe a hole bitten in the middle of our B2B2B.

 

Ooooh ... that hurts.

 

thanks , :0 Seamo :)

 

 

Not a problem...I hope that you find a good solution.

 

Sorry that in this case you can only do Cruise 1 and Cruise 3.

 

The shame is that you could do what you have booked OR you could do Cruise 2 and Cruise 3. It is just trying to do either Cruise 1 and Cruise 2 OR Cruises 1, 2, and 3 that are going to cause you issues.

 

The alternatives would probably be a cruise from Vancouver to LA on another ship OR a flight between the two.

 

Best of luck in whatever you choose to do!

[njhorseman]

The issue that you have here is with the classification of the ports...which I think was missed in your previous thread.

 

For example...NCL offers a Florida/Bahamas itinerary out of NY. It goes from New York to New York, with stops in Port Canaveral, and Nassau. It is NOT a violation because Port Canaveral is a port visit stop, and not an embark/debark stop (and it matter not if you in particular embark/debark there, it is an embark/debark port if ANYONE can embark/debark there).

 

In your example of three cruises together: Seattle, Vancouver, LA, and Miami are all embark/debark ports (again...doesn't matter if YOU don't get off in LA...as long as some people can, then it is an embark/debark port). The three legs together is a violation since you will have THREE United States embark/debark ports and you will be visiting two of them without a distant foreign port in between.

 

Let me add:

 

If this was all just a B2B consisting of 1) Seattle to Vancouver followed by 2) Vancouver to Miami (with a port visit to LA - No embarking/debarking guests) it would not be a violation and you would be good to go. It is the fact that they are letting people on/off in LA that is causing an issue with booking all three segments.

 

Sorry, but I disagree.

 

First, the NY to NY cruise is not a violation because it is a closed loop cruise, and the law only requires closed loop cruises stop at nearby foreign port (in this case in the Bahamas). The cruise line actually can't prevent a passenger from disembarking in Port Canaveral. If someone were to disembark in Port Canaveral, that passenger would be in violation of the PVSA and subject to a fine. The "embark/disembark port" vs "port stop" issue you mention is a red herring...the law makes no such reference or distinction. The only relevant facts are where the passenger embarks and disembarks, and whether the ship has made a call at a distant foreign port or a nearby foreign port. If the ship has called at a distant foreign port then passengers may legally disembark at a US port other than their port of embarkation. If a ship has only called at a nearby foreign port, passengers may only legally disembark at their port of embarkation.

 

The NCL rep does not understand the law.

 

I suggest you read the following from CBP, which is the government agency responsible for administering the Passenger Vessel Services Act:

 

http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/trade/legal/informed_compliance_pubs/pvsa_icp.ctt/pvsa_icp.pdf

 

In particular, please take careful note of the following on the bottom of page 13, especially the words about proceeding with the vessel to a distant foreign port:

 

However, there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or

more coastwise ports and a “distant foreign port” or ports (whether or not the voyage

includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise

port other than the port of embarkation, provided the passenger has proceeded with the

vessel to a “distant foreign port.” See 19 CFR § 4.80a(b)(3). For example, a noncoastwise-qualified vessel that embarks a passenger in Miami, transports him/her to

Aruba, then proceeds to Key West where the passenger disembarks does not violate

the PVSA. A port in Aruba is a “distant foreign port” pursuant to the CBP regulations.

19 CFR § 4.80a(a)(3).

 

Alternatively, you may wish to read the exact text of the federal regulation here:

 

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2010/aprqtr/pdf/19cfr4.80a.pdf , paying particular attention to this, noting that the law speaks to where a passenger embarks and disembarks :

 

 

(4) Embark means a passenger boarding a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and disembark means a passenger leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage. The terms embark and disembark are not applicable to a passenger going ashore temporarily at a coastwise port who reboards the vessel and departs with it on sailing from the port.

Edited November 3, 2011 by njhorseman

[rvsullivan]

The problem here is NCL is not listing or selling a cruise that goes from OP's beginning and ending. They are selling three separate cruises. If you could buy one ticket for the whole trip, it would be golden, but you can't. NCL is correct on this one. You want to buy three trips and use the fact that one leg calls on a distant port. Can't do it. Sorry.

Regardless of what any of us say here, if they won't sell you a ticket, it's a moot point.

[SeaShark]

Sorry, but I disagree.

 

First, the NY to NY cruise is not a violation because it is a closed loop cruise, and the law only requires closed loop cruises stop at nearby foreign port (in this case in the Bahamas). The cruise line actually can't prevent a passenger from disembarking in Port Canaveral. If someone were to disembark in Port Canaveral, that passenger would be in violation of the PVSA and subject to a fine. The "embark/disembark port" vs "port stop" issue you mention is a red herring...the law makes no such reference or distinction. The only relevant facts are where the passenger embarks and disembarks, and whether the ship has made a call at a distant foreign port or a nearby foreign port. If the ship has called at a distant foreign port then passengers may legally disembark at a US port other than their port of embarkation. If a ship has only called at a nearby foreign port, passengers may only legally disembark at their port of embarkation.

 

The NCL rep does not understand the law.

 

I suggest you read the following from CBP, which is the government agency responsible for administering the Passenger Vessel Services Act:

 

http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/trade/legal/informed_compliance_pubs/pvsa_icp.ctt/pvsa_icp.pdf

 

In particular, please take careful note of the following on the bottom of page 13, especially the words about proceeding with the vessel to a distant foreign port:

 

However, there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or

more coastwise ports and a “distant foreign port” or ports (whether or not the voyage

includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise

port other than the port of embarkation, provided the passenger has proceeded with the

vessel to a “distant foreign port.” See 19 CFR § 4.80a(b)(3). For example, a noncoastwise-qualified vessel that embarks a passenger in Miami, transports him/her to

Aruba, then proceeds to Key West where the passenger disembarks does not violate

the PVSA. A port in Aruba is a “distant foreign port” pursuant to the CBP regulations.

19 CFR § 4.80a(a)(3).

 

Alternatively, you may wish to read the exact text of the federal regulation here:

 

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2010/aprqtr/pdf/19cfr4.80a.pdf , paying particular attention to this, noting that the law speaks to where a passenger embarks and disembarks :

 

 

(4) Embark means a passenger boarding a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and disembark means a passenger leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage. The terms embark and disembark are not applicable to a passenger going ashore temporarily at a coastwise port who reboards the vessel and departs with it on sailing from the port.

 

So...you disagree. :eek:

 

Not surprising as this is your position with the vast majority of what anyone posts...nothing is "quite right" until you put your spin on it.

 

Well, spin away because you are not correct here. These three cruises cannot be taken together despite your interpretations of what you cut & paste from the web. These cruises are listed in the NCL Sales PAL's B2B Restrictions list specificially because a passenger would be in violation by booking them. This happens quite often with the Pacific Coastal itineraries.

 

Bottom line...the ONLY way you are going to convince me, the OP, or anyone else is to actually book this cruise. If your sooooooooo confident in your position, then call NCL and convince them of your logic.

 

I'm sure the OP would be grateful....and I'd be first in line to eat crow.

[SeaShark]

The problem here is NCL is not listing or selling a cruise that goes from OP's beginning and ending. They are selling three separate cruises. If you could buy one ticket for the whole trip, it would be golden, but you can't. NCL is correct on this one. You want to buy three trips and use the fact that one leg calls on a distant port. Can't do it. Sorry.

Regardless of what any of us say here, if they won't sell you a ticket, it's a moot point.

 

You are absolutely correct...this is what I was saying to the OP earlier.

 

It isn't where the OP is planning on getting off...it is where the OP has the "option" of getting off. (Of course, a passenger could disembark "early", but booking has to be based on the planned embark/debark points). The issue with booking the three segments and calling them one cruise, is that the OP could, after sailing segments 1 and 2, decide to cancel segment 3 and disembark in LA. The decision to then cancel cruise number 3 makes the already taken cruises a violation...by disallowing the booking, NCL avoids this potential situation.

[melbur]

Seems to me if you booked Segment 1 and 3 first, then tried to add segment 2, you knew the answer to this before you booked:eek:

[sparks1093]

Seems to me that the authority, NCL, is saying no. Whether they are right or wrong they are the final arbiter of this question. Is there another cruise line you could book with for leg #2? (Sorry, don't know much about West Coast cruise options.)

[sjnyc323]

My friend just did the three trips back to back on the Pearl. Seattle to Vancouver. Vancouver to LA and LA to Miami this past September/ October.

 

This gentleman posted the link to the PVSA rules:

 

+++ ++++ +++ +++ +++

njhorseman

5,000+ Club

 

Join Date: Jul 2007

Posts: 7,673

 

Originally Posted by luv4cruisin View Post

Some one who understands the Jones Act, please help me figure out if this is a violation. Sept 2012 on the Pearl I want to do:

 

The Seattle to Vancouver 7 day

then the Vancouver to LA 5 day Pacific Coastal

then the LA to MIA Panama Canal 14 day.

 

I'm pretty sure I can't do it, but NCL said I could. I just don't trust the "hourly" answers. If you know, please help!

The itinerary looks good to me, because the third leg includes a port call at Cartagena, Colombia, which qualifies as a Distant Foreign Port under the Passenger Vessel Services Act. (The PVSA, not the Jones Act is the law that applies to cruise ships.)

Last edited by njhorseman; June 8th, 2011 at 01:14 AM.

_____________________________________________________________

Old June 8th, 2011, 01:19 AM

njhorseman njhorseman is offline

5,000+ Club

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharke View Post

We actually booked a B2B like this several yrs ago. We arranged the Seattle to Vancouver and Vancouver to LA. No problems when we booked but 2 wks later a NCL agent called and said we couldn't do it because of the Jones Act set way back in I think 1916. Can't remember the details, something about way back when protecting trading rights from country to country etc. So we cancelled both of the cruises since the attraction was following the coast. NCL wasn't too happy but we ended up finding a great deal on a repositioning cruise out of New York on the Dawn, to the Caribbean and ending in Miami. Sure would like that original itinery, though.

The third segment of the OP's cruise, from LA to Miami, makes the whole cruise itinerary legal under the PVSA (the Jones Act isn't for passenger cruise ships) because it calls at Cartagena, Colombia.

____________________________________________________________

Old June 8th, 2011, 01:20 AM

njhorseman njhorseman is offline

5,000+ Club

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seanote View Post

My best guess is you can't do the first two legs together. You can't travel from Seattle to LA without a stop at a distant foriegn port and Vancouver is not a distant foreign port. The second two legs together are ok, however.

Correct...and all three legs together, which is what the OP is doing is also legal.

________ ______________ ________________ ___________

any updates , links etc ...??

Thank you, :) Seamo :)

[sparks1093]

My friend just did the three trips back to back on the Pearl. Seattle to Vancouver. Vancouver to LA and LA to Miami this past September/ October.

 

And maybe NCL got a nasty gram or fine from CBP for letting it happen.

[njhorseman]

The problem here is NCL is not listing or selling a cruise that goes from OP's beginning and ending. They are selling three separate cruises. If you could buy one ticket for the whole trip, it would be golden, but you can't. NCL is correct on this one. You want to buy three trips and use the fact that one leg calls on a distant port. Can't do it. Sorry.

Regardless of what any of us say here, if they won't sell you a ticket, it's a moot point.

 

There's no reference in the law to how the ticket is sold. The requirements are solely where the passenger embarks, disembarks, and whether the cruise calls on a distant foreign port.

Edited November 3, 2011 by njhorseman

[njhorseman]

So...you disagree. :eek:

 

Not surprising as this is your position with the vast majority of what anyone posts...nothing is "quite right" until you put your spin on it.

 

Well, spin away because you are not correct here. These three cruises cannot be taken together despite your interpretations of what you cut & paste from the web. These cruises are listed in the NCL Sales PAL's B2B Restrictions list specificially because a passenger would be in violation by booking them. This happens quite often with the Pacific Coastal itineraries.

 

Bottom line...the ONLY way you are going to convince me, the OP, or anyone else is to actually book this cruise. If your sooooooooo confident in your position, then call NCL and convince them of your logic.

 

I'm sure the OP would be grateful....and I'd be first in line to eat crow.

 

I'm sorry that you believe the law is "spin". I've given you the link to the entire document from CBP, and the link to entire section of the federal code from which it is derived. I suggest you attempt to read and understand them before accusing me of cutting and pasting.

 

If NCL doesn't want to sell the cruise that's their prerogative, but that doesn't mean it violates the law.

 

Please also read post #14...apparently NCL has permitted this very itinerary earlier this year.

Edited November 3, 2011 by njhorseman

[jakesnana]

There's no reference in the law to how the ticket is sold. The requirements are solely where the passenger embarks, disembarks, and whether the cruise calls on a distant foreign port.

 

IT DOES make a difference on how the ticket is sold. If NCL was offering one cruise from Vancouver to Miami (instead of 2 cruises, Vancouver to LA and LA to Miami), than the OP could book that and not be in violation. The cruise would start in a non-US port and end in a US port. No possibility for violation.

[njhorseman]

IT DOES make a difference on how the ticket is sold. If NCL was offering one cruise from Vancouver to Miami (instead of 2 cruises, Vancouver to LA and LA to Miami), than the OP could book that and not be in violation. The cruise would start in a non-US port and end in a US port. No possibility for violation.

 

I make the same suggestion to you that I've made to others...please read the regulations. They say nothing of the sort.

[smeyer418]

each cruise line has an expert in their legal department that is responsible for PSVA issues. When you call the call center they are following written guidelines that in fact may not cover this particular problem/issue. Even the supervisor just follows these rules. The only way to get the definitive answer is to write(by snail mail) the legal department of NCL ask their legal department to review this and get back to you. I would also suggest that you use the email addresses for executives that have been posted.

Call centers don't vary from the rules they have.

 

BTW I agree with NJ Horseman. The CBP which enforces these rules looks at where the person embarks and finally disembarks. Its irrelevant on how the cruise line sell the tickets for the segments. If you get on in one US port and get off in another US port you can only do so without a fine if the cruise ship-while you are on it or at least scheduled to be on it- stops in a distant foreign port(any port not in North America including Bermuda- Aruba Bonaire and Curacao are considered to be part of South America's Continental shelf)..

 

BTW its not in the law anyway. Its in the regs and old-really old interpretation letters-many of which are 50 years old anyway. Is it possible that NCL was told not to do this anymore? sure but that would also be something that counsel's office would be aware of.

Edited November 3, 2011 by smeyer418

[SeaShark]

Actually, all you have to do is look at the current NCL Sales PAL...the restriction against booking these 3 cruises as a b2b2b is specifically spelled out. ANY travel agent can see and verify this information.

 

The law is clear on what it allows. You cannot simply use b2b bookings as a way to circumvent the law.

 

According to the law:

 

--A cruise line cannot offer a NY to Miami cruise...even with a stop in Nassau on the way.

--A cruise line CAN offer a NY to Nassau cruise.

--A cruise line CAN offer a Nassau to Miami cruise.

 

However...you can't book the NY-Nassau as a b2b with the Nassau-Miami to avoid creating a violation. If you could, the cruise lines would be doing it.

 

 

To see how this example applies to the OP, substitute Seattle for NY, Vancouver for Nassau, and LA for Miami....the violation occurs BEFORE the leg (LA-Miami) that visits the distant foreign port.

[smeyer418]

Actually, all you have to do is look at the current NCL Sales PAL...the restriction against booking these 3 cruises as a b2b2b is specifically spelled out. ANY travel agent can see and verify this information.

 

The law is clear on what it allows. You cannot simply use b2b bookings as a way to circumvent the law.

 

According to the law:

 

--A cruise line cannot offer a NY to Miami cruise...even with a stop in Nassau on the way.

--A cruise line CAN offer a NY to Nassau cruise.

--A cruise line CAN offer a Nassau to Miami cruise.

 

However...you can't book the NY-Nassau as a b2b with the Nassau-Miami to avoid creating a violation. If you could, the cruise lines would be doing it.

 

 

To see how this example applies to the OP, substitute Seattle for NY, Vancouver for Nassau, and LA for Miami....the violation occurs BEFORE the leg (LA-Miami) that visits the distant foreign port.

 

I respectfully disagree. It doesn't matter what the segments are just what the reality of the actually trip is....just as selling two seperate segments from NY to Nassau and then Nassau to Miami is not allowed , the same rule applies here. You can ask the legal department of CBP for an opinion if you want...

[ColinIllinois]

...

Edited November 3, 2011 by ColinIllinois

[time2cruise1]

There is no reason this cruise can not be booked except it is flagged incorrectly in the reservation system. What you can't book is Seattle to Vancouver to LA only. As long as you continue on to Miami it s perfectly legal.

 

As suggested send an email to legal or one of the officers to forward to legal and this will be resolved. I went thru the opposite problem last summer. I booked a b2b and then realized it was not legal. Repeatedly everyone at NCL insisted it was fine until someone took my position to legal and NCL cancel mine and everyone else that had booked the same b2b. Better then then 2 weeks before the cruise.

 

Include NJHorseman's material and clearly explain your position. " I am cruising from Seattle to Miami with a distant foreign port and that makes it legal". How NCL sells the trip as one cruise or b2b2b plays no roll. It is all about where you get on and get off.

[my_crib_too]

Take the train from Seattle to Vancouver. It's a lovely ride and once you get tired of being on the train, you will arrive in Vancouver. Great scenery along the way.

 

The train station in Vancouver is a very short taxi ride from the pier and taxies are available at the station. Buy your tickets early. In September, the train sold out a few months in advance of our trip.