is this a legal b2b cruise?

[pdmlynek]

Are you sure Disney actually booked anyone back to back on those two cruises? Each of the cruises independently are fine under the act, but a back to back would clearly violate the act. A change in ship would make it two different cruises, but a change in cabin makes no difference. If this is true, Disney violated the PVSA.

 

What do you base your conclusion on?

[njhorseman]

What do you base your conclusion on?

 

It's based on the law as written together with how DHS has interpreted and enforced it. In recent years other cruise lines have tried to the same thing Disney just did and were slapped upside the head by DHS, and subsequently discontinued booking passengers on these types of b2b itineraries.

[njhorseman]

But the customs agents do not know where the passenger will ultimately depart.

 

They know where the passengers are scheduled to disembark. If someone makes an unscheduled disembarkation at another port that turns a previously legal itinerary into an illegal one, DHS will also know that and fine the cruise line. The cruise line can't hide where people disembark...it will be in their passenger records.

[Cruisin' Chick]

I am pleased to read that Disney is pushing the limits on this really stupid poliitical law/rule. After all you cannot get much more American based than the Disney Corporation. I would think that Disney creates more US jobs and pays more taxes than NCL and many other Corporations. Perhaps they have negotiated a compromise. I hope it is just a start.

 

I sometimes wonder which group of people are preventing the the elimination of this law and what benefit do they receive.

 

Keep up the pressure, Disney.

 

 

About some five or so years ago, NCLa was trying to make the law even more restrictive in an attempt to discourage Princess, HAL, and other cruises from offering the RTs to Hawaii from the west coast. I seem to remember some of the changes would have required the ships on this itinerary to spend at least 50 per cent of the time in a foreign port and also increase the time spent in Ensenada (and I think most of us who go on that itinerary, from the look of all those who remained onboard on my two Hawaiian cruises, want to spend even less time, if not zero time in Ensenada).

 

Some of us on CC did go to the Congressional Record website to protest these changes, as well as chamber of commerces for the west coast ports, many mayors and governors, and some others. On the other side of the coin, was Senator Stevens from Alaska (who apparently was palsy-wowsy with Colin Veitch of NCLa) and Senator Inouye of Hawaii (ditto). The Guvernator and the governor of Hawaii got together and had a little talk with Cherney...and the changes to the law got tabled indefinitely.

[S.S.Oceanlover]

Carnival was also ignorant of the law but learned of it very quickly. I would imagine Disney being new to Alaska will also learn, hopefully not the hard way.

 

 

exactly how did carnival learn? did they ever do an illegal cruise, or did they book people only to have been canceled?

 

the people doing the back to back cruise on disney called disney to confirm it was okay.

 

if they knew it was okay why did they make them switch cabins?

 

Bill

[thinfool]

Under the PVSA there are no far foreign ports in North America (Canada, US, Mexico), Central America, or the Caribbean except the ABC islands (Aruba, Bonaire, and Curacao).

 

While not technically in the Caribbean, Cartagena, Colombia can be added to your list of far foreign ports.

[Starry Eyes]

While not technically in the Caribbean, Cartagena, Colombia can be added to your list of far foreign ports.

I believe the other poster was addressing North America. I believe Cartagena, Colombia is in South America (just barely)...at least our guide said it was when we visited.

[crzndeb]

I believe that Disney will pay a lot more than $300pp. If they are knowingly allowing passengers to book, as others have said, they have broken the law, and the fines will probably be a lot larger.

[smeyer418]

About some five or so years ago' date=' NCLa was trying to make the law even more restrictive in an attempt to discourage Princess, HAL, and other cruises from offering the RTs to Hawaii from the west coast. I seem to remember some of the changes would have required the ships on this itinerary to spend at least 50 per cent of the time in a foreign port and also increase the time spent in Ensenada (and I think most of us who go on that itinerary, from the look of all those who remained onboard on my two Hawaiian cruises, want to spend even less time, if not zero time in Ensenada).

 

Some of us on CC did go to the Congressional Record website to protest these changes, as well as chamber of commerces for the west coast ports, many mayors and governors, and some others. On the other side of the coin, was Senator Stevens from Alaska (who apparently was palsy-wowsy with Colin Veitch of NCLa) and Senator Inouye of Hawaii (ditto). The Guvernator and the governor of Hawaii got together and had a little talk with Cherney...and the changes to the law got tabled indefinitely.[/quote']

 

its way more complicated, first it wasn't a law change but a change in the regs that was proposed by the TSA. yes NCL did complain about the drive by technical stops in Ensenada where no one was allowed off. They complained to the US maritime commission which still had a mortgage on the Pride of America. What came out was a proposal that would have as you suggested required equal foreign and US port time. that would have effected many of the East Coast and Canada cruises. You never know what comes out of the hopper when you put something-whether its a law a regulation or sausages-in. By that time the technical stops that NCL complained about had stopped replaced with a real albeit 4-5 hour stop that includes letting the passengers off. so the new reg was thankfully shelved.

btw it is in my opinion a violation by Disney...which besides the fine can be barred from any US port for up to a`year...its why the cruise lines don't just agree to pay the fine.

 

you probably won't see a change. its the same reason foreign flagged airlines can't transport people between 2 US airports...thousands of jobs

[njhorseman]

I believe the other poster was addressing North America. I believe Cartagena, Colombia is in South America (just barely)...at least our guide said it was when we visited.

 

Yes...Colombia is in South America...and yes, the other poster was talking about North America.

[paul929207]

I believe that Disney will pay a lot more than $300pp. If they are knowingly allowing passengers to book, as others have said, they have broken the law, and the fines will probably be a lot larger.

More than just fines for deliberately violating the PVSA, a cruise line can be banned from US ports.

[Cruise Junky]

I wonder..... Their coastal was a bit strange, they had two full days in Vancouver, which is extremely rare. I wonder if this is some kind of loophole. I just can't see Disney making that kind of mistake.

[Princess Patches]

What do you base your conclusion on?

 

See 19 CFR 4.80(a)(b)(3) of the Code of Federal Regulations which defines what it means to disembark a ship. The term disembark is 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". This code section is often cited in the cases that violate the PVSA.

 

Also you can look to a particular case involving a nearly identical itinerary of a passenger on a back to back NCL cruise under Customs Ruling HQ115467. That passenger sailed from Seattle to Vancouver and then Vancouver to Honolulu with a short same day disembarkation at Vancouver and was held to be in violation of the PVSA because they did not "disembark" the ship as defined in 19 CFR 4.80. Just Google "HQ115467" if you want to read the case. Hope that helps.

 

I am unaware of any customs ruling, code section, or case law that defines "disembark" as changing cabins on the same ship. If you are aware of such, please cite it.

[DanJ]

I wonder..... Their coastal was a bit strange, they had two full days in Vancouver, which is extremely rare. I wonder if this is some kind of loophole. I just can't see Disney making that kind of mistake.

 

I'm thinking that if they overnighted in Vancouver, then that's probably why the cruises were allowed to be booked B2B. I wonder when people had to disembark and when the next cruise could embark. I think this is Disney's first season in Alaska, so perhaps they left the ship in Vancouver for the day to do travel agent and special guest functions, with the side benefit being people were able to book the cruises back to back.

[Mary Ellen]

I think this is Disney's first season in Alaska, so perhaps they left the ship in Vancouver for the day to do travel agent and special guest functions, with the side benefit being people were able to book the cruises back to back.

No, this is Disney's second season in Alaska.

 

It is my understanding that those on the b2b had to disembark when the ship arrived in Vancouver. They stayed at a local hotel and embarked the ship the next day, going to a different cabin.

[crzndeb]

I didn't think there was an overnight in Vancouver. The LA-Vancouver was May 14-21, and the cruise to Alaska departed on the 21st.

 

Was the coastal only 6 days?

 

For those more familiar with the law, I'm not sure if that is even OK. Still the same ship transporting the same passengers.

[Cruise Junky]

I didn't think there was an overnight in Vancouver. The LA-Vancouver was May 14-21, and the cruise to Alaska departed on the 21st.

 

Was the coastal only 6 days?

 

For those more familiar with the law, I'm not sure if that is even OK. Still the same ship transporting the same passengers.

 

I saw the overnight on a Disney PDF today, but can't seem to find it again. I know the law pretty well, but am not familiar with any loopholes about overnights.

 

Found it...page 9 of 11

 

http://www.mousemisers.com/images/2012DCL.pdf

[crzndeb]

7-Night Pacific Coast Cruise (Los Angeles to Vancouver)

 

Ship: Disney Wonder

2012 Sail Dates: May 14

*

Day Port

Sunday Los Angeles, California

Monday At Sea

Tuesday San Francisco

Wednesday At Sea

Thursday At Sea

Friday Victoria, B.C.

Saturday Vancouver, B.C.

Sunday Vancouver, B.C.

 

Yes, it was an overnight. I found the itinerary. I don't think passengers had to disembark until Sunday though. I wouldn't be happy paying for a 7 night cruise and getting only 6.

 

One of the B2B passengers on the Roll Call did mention booking a hotel for Sunday though, in case they were denied boarding for the 2nd leg.

 

You beat me to it Cruise Junky....

[Putterdude]

OK, I knew that there had to be more to this and this all is making sense to me now. According the Port of Vancouver sked the Wonder arrived at 0600 on May 20 and departed on May 21, I don't remember exactly when she sailed by us but likely was after 1800. I am not that familiar with the PVSA to have an opinion as to if pax staying on the ship would be in violation of the the PVSA or if the ship was in fact zeroed out. I would think we would need some input from someone who was in fact on the ship as to what really happened.

[molly2kit]

I was on the Alaska trip May 21 - 28 -

 

I met several people who had been on both cruises and spoke with one person in a little more detail.

 

She told me that the Disney rep had walked them off the ship (using one of the character placards that they use for shore excursions for everyone to follow). The Disney rep waited with them and then escorted them back on the ship and their new cabins were ready - Disney had told them they had to have different cabins so that it would be two cruises.

 

I did not get the impression that they had stayed in a hotel on May 20 night. I did not get any idea of how many people were in this group. Perhaps the fact that the ship overnighted in Vancouver May 20 made this b2b OK?

 

At any rate the passengers who had booked both legs were allowed to continue with both legs.

[fleckle]

I saw the overnight on a Disney PDF today, but can't seem to find it again. I know the law pretty well, but am not familiar with any loopholes about overnights.

 

Found it...page 9 of 11

 

http://www.mousemisers.com/images/2012DCL.pdf

You did indeed, Cruise Junky!

The overnight stop in Vancouver (staying there more than 24 hours) is what makes it legal for passengers to continue on the same ship.

 

Vancouver is a great city and many people would be delighted to have the extra time there in any case.

[BillB48]

I was on the Alaska trip May 21 - 28 -

 

I met several people who had been on both cruises and spoke with one person in a little more detail.

 

She told me that the Disney rep had walked them off the ship (using one of the character placards that they use for shore excursions for everyone to follow). The Disney rep waited with them and then escorted them back on the ship and their new cabins were ready - Disney had told them they had to have different cabins so that it would be two cruises.

 

I did not get the impression that they had stayed in a hotel on May 20 night. I did not get any idea of how many people were in this group. Perhaps the fact that the ship overnighted in Vancouver May 20 made this b2b OK?

 

At any rate the passengers who had booked both legs were allowed to continue with both legs.

 

From what I have read about the PVSA, DCL may have been trying to see how close to the line they could get without invoking the PVSA's wrath or maybe just try to cover their tracks. The same ship is not supposed to transport you to another US port without the distant foreign port stop, regardless of length of stop in the near foreign port. The same cruise line is permitted to do so however.

 

The link takes you to another post in a similar thread a month or so ago. smeyer418 is a lawyer and has posted numerous times, very informatively on the subject.

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showpost.php?p=33112467&postcount=3

[Keith1010]

wondering what others think. I say it's not legal.

 

first leg:depart LA Californinia with a stop in San Francisco and end in Vancouver.

 

Second leg starts in Vancouver, does Alaska and ends in Seattle, WA.

 

Bill

 

Bill, my advice is to contact the cruise line.

 

Keith

[fleckle]

Bill, my advice is to contact the cruise line.

 

Keith

I totally agree with Keith, but would add to ask for it in writing, preferably from someone in their legal department who is knowledgeable about maritime law.

 

If not, you will just have the opinion of the person you happen to speak to over the phone, or the person who answers your email, who could unknowingly give you incorrect information, as has happened to so many others before in similar situations.

 

What you want to avoid is the situation where somebody from the cruise line says it is fine, they go ahead and book you, you pay for the cruise and have all arrangements made, and then at the last minute they inform you that you can't do it after all.

[smeyer418]

the issue here is whether the overnight in Vancouver was permanent or temporary. If they permanently got off in Vancouver by staying overnight in a hotel, and then started a new cruise for PSVA purposes that might be ok. If they merely got off temporarily than it possibly is not. Does changing cabins matter? does going through customs? my opinion for what it is worth is that it is a violation. When I graduated from law school, I wasn't given a crystal ball. All lawyers will tell you that they won cases they should have lost and lost cases that they thought they should have won. Disney may have gotten an opinion that it is ok.