3 different cruises on one ship - back to back??

[DaveOKC]

Thanks for all the quick replies. I liked the idea of staying on the Alaska cruise for one more day and getting off in Vancouver as it would be alot less hassle and the cost would be about the same (depending on class of hotel and cabin).

 

As I have been thinking of trying a PCC with HAL anyway, I think I will ask him/her how to do this. While I am sure that the regular staff at HAL may not know the correct answer, I would think that a PCC should (or can find out).

 

Thanks again.

 

DaveOKC

[CtheW0rld]

Thanks but you all just restated my question, not really saying why such a law exists.

 

And if I call HAL for all my answers why have a cruise critic board? :p

 

the laws were originally on the books to protect US shipping interests. they serve no purpose, now.

[vicocala]

I guess they don't want to become passenger ships and prefer to remain strictly cruising ships. Otherwise, you would think the cruise lines would look for a repeal of what may be an outdated and useless law. You would think they could resell your room as a shorter cruise, but if only one person did it, I can understand how difficult it would be to advertise the fact.

 

Thanks for all the replies.

[lilith1155]

Does this law only apply to U.S. citizens?

[RuthC]

Does this law only apply to U.S. citizens?

The PVSA applies to all passengers traveling US ports. Other countries have similar laws for their ports.

[sail7seas]

The same PVSA law applies to airlines and air travel by foreign airlines.

 

[jtl513]

Why would it matter if it was foriegn flagged? Is this the United States way of trying to get cruise ships flagged as American ships? If so, it hasn't worked.

As has been said, it is to protect US shipping from cheaper foreign competition. Not only must the ship be US flagged to carry pax from US to US, but it must also be US built. Waivers have been granted on this rule, however, notably to NCL-America in HI.

 

Otherwise, you would think the cruise lines would look for a repeal of what may be an outdated and useless law.

The foreign-flagged cruise lines and airlines would very much like to see the law repealed.

 

OK - how about this. Take the Seattle to Seattle for 7 days, then stay onboard for one night to Vancouver. In Vancouver (on the same day), change ships for the next 5 day cruise

Yes, that is perfectly fine.

No problem doing this because the same ship is not transporting you between two different US ports.

WRONG! If you leave any port on the same day as you arrive it is considered one continuous voyage whether you change ships or cruise lines or not. You are still sailing from one US to another without visiting a distant foreign port.

 

I know you have said you have gotten away with breaking the PVSA in the past by changing cruise lines in Vancouver, but no foreign-flagged cruise lines would knowingly book this illegal combination of cruises for you.

[Boytjie]

Because unless you spend one night on land it's considered one continuous voyage, whether you change ships or not.

 

But is the penalty for breaking the PVSA is levied against the ship (for transporting passengers between two different US cities) , which ship would be liable? The first two cruises on Ship A are legal, as is the third cruise on Ship B.

[jtl513]

But is the penalty for breaking the PVSA is levied against the ship (for transporting passengers between two different US cities) , which ship would be liable? The first two cruises on Ship A are legal, as is the third cruise on Ship B.

I would surmise ship B, because until you arrive in the US on that ship you haven't broken any law.

[Boytjie]

I would surmise ship B, because until you arrive in the US on that ship you haven't broken any law.

 

But ship B is transporting the passenger from Vancouver to San Diego (legal). How would it even know what the passenger did before.

[jtl513]

But ship B is transporting the passenger from Vancouver to San Diego (legal). How would it even know what the passenger did before.

Canadian or US Immigration computer cross-checking (in Vancouver) detected it and reported it to them.

[fleckle]

Thanks for all the quick replies. I liked the idea of staying on the Alaska cruise for one more day and getting off in Vancouver as it would be alot less hassle and the cost would be about the same (depending on class of hotel and cabin)......

If you find another southbound ship leaving from Vancouver the same day you arrive there, you would not even need a hotel.

Leaving on the same day is fine as long as it is not on the same ship.

 

But Vancouver is a great city, so you may want to spend a day or two, or more, there anyway.

 

If cruising b2b on Royal Caribbean or Celebrity in situations where passengers need a night on shore between the two cruises, they will put you up at a hotel for the night at no charge and include transfers to/from the pier. I have never heard of HAL doing this so I don't know whether or not it is something they would do also.

 

 

 

for instance, why if a ship is sailing from, let's say NY or Boston and it's first port of call is Port Canaveral. Why can I not take the cruise and just get off at Port Canaveral if I live nearby? Answer: Because it is the law. But what is the purpose of the law.

It was intended to protect US industries from foreign competition. It is the same way that you can fly British Airways from a US airport to Britain, but you cannot fly British Airways from one US airport to another US airport and get off there, even if the plane makes a stop there.

 

 

[DaveOKC]

If you find another southbound ship leaving from Vancouver the same day you arrive there, you would not even need a hotel.

Leaving on the same day is fine as long as it is not on the same ship.

 

 

 

 

Now I am confused, as others say this cannot be done - it is exactly what I want to do - two different ships, changing in Vancouver, BC.

 

DaveOKC

[Boytjie]

Now I am confused, as others say this cannot be done - it is exactly what I want to do - two different ships, changing in Vancouver, BC.

 

DaveOKC

 

Welcome to the mysteries of the PSVA! Methink unless you have a maritime law degree there is not answer that is 100% guaranteed to be correct. :D

[jtl513]

Now I am confused, as others say this cannot be done - it is exactly what I want to do - two different ships, changing in Vancouver, BC.

If you want to take a chance on breaking the law and getting away with it, go right ahead. Be prepared to be denied boarding in Vancouver or pay a $300 pp fine in San Diego if they catch you.

 

The simple solution is to take a train or bus from Seattle to Vancouver, with an overnight hotel stay in either city. Then you could change cruise lines or get back on the same ship.

[pepsigirl64]

What you are missing is the word distant. The requirement is that a ship carrying passengers between two U.S. ports has to stop in a distant foreign port. NO port in Canada qualifies as distant. This is why the one way cruises to or from Alaska begin or end in Vancouver, not Seattle.

 

:eek: Yes, one way from Anchorage/Seward to Vancouver or Vancouver to Anchorage/Seward do not need to stop in a foreign port. That is not what the OP asked.

 

Seattle round trip cruises to Alaska stop in Victoria Canada to satisfy the foreign port issue. There is nothing distant about Victoria to Seattle, but it is a foreign port. Our San Diego round trip to Hawaii stopped in Ensenada Mexico to satisfy the foreign port issue, and there is nothing distant about Ensenada and San Diego, other than is it another country.

 

 

With that said, I am commenting on the OP's original post....A 7 day cruise from Seattle to Seattle will stop in Victoria, observing the foreign port issue. The one day from Seattle to Vancouver, again observes the foreign port issue. Finally, the Vancouver to San Diego portion observes the foreign port issue. Three seperate cruises, each doing a foreign port. :D

[fleckle]

Now I am confused, as others say this cannot be done - it is exactly what I want to do - two different ships, changing in Vancouver, BC.

 

DaveOKC

Go by the actual restrictions of the PVSA, not by the personal opinions of someone who posts on a message board.

 

The PVSA deals with restrictions on the vessel (the ship), not on the passenger.

 

It prohibits a foreign vessel (a ship) from transporting passengers between two different US ports.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~

 

"Transportation of passengers in foreign vessels

 

No foreign vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States, either directly or by way of a foreign port, under a penalty of $300 for each passenger so transported and landed."

 

 

American Maritime Partnership: Passenger Vessel Services Act

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Our own experiences have been that both Princess and Royal Caribbean recommended changing ships in such situations.

 

The supervisors with whom we spoke at both cruise lines were very aware of the restrictions of the PVSA. When we questioned them each time, they specifically pointed out that the PVSA says nothing at all to prevent a passenger from changing ships.

Not only is it frequently done, but it is their recommended method of dealing with these circumstances.

 

[richwmn]

:eek: Yes, one way from Anchorage/Seward to Vancouver or Vancouver to Anchorage/Seward do not need to stop in a foreign port. That is not what the OP asked.

 

Seattle round trip cruises to Alaska stop in Victoria Canada to satisfy the foreign port issue. There is nothing distant about Victoria to Seattle, but it is a foreign port. Our San Diego round trip to Hawaii stopped in Ensenada Mexico to satisfy the foreign port issue, and there is nothing distant about Ensenada and San Diego, other than is it another country.

 

 

With that said, I am commenting on the OP's original post....A 7 day cruise from Seattle to Seattle will stop in Victoria, observing the foreign port issue. The one day from Seattle to Vancouver, again observes the foreign port issue. Finally, the Vancouver to San Diego portion observes the foreign port issue. Three seperate cruises, each doing a foreign port. :D

Sorry, but under the PVSA what matters is where each passenger embarks and disembarks, thus this would be considered 1 cruise for the passenger in question.

 

In addition, for closed loop cruises (Seattle to Seattle or San Diego to San Diego) only a close foreign port is required.

 

Any cruise that starts or ends in a foreign port is not covered by the PVSA

[jtl513]

:eek:

With that said, I am commenting on the OP's original post....A 7 day cruise from Seattle to Seattle will stop in Victoria, observing the foreign port issue. The one day from Seattle to Vancouver, again observes the foreign port issue. Finally, the Vancouver to San Diego portion observes the foreign port issue. Three seperate cruises, each doing a foreign port. :D

You are still confused. Victoria and Ensenada are NEAR foreign ports which are sufficient on closed-loop cruises from Seattle to Seattle or San Diego to San Diego. In order to go from one US port (Seattle) to a different US port (San Diego) you must stop at a DISTANT foreign port, and there are no distant foreign ports in North America. Trans-Panama cruises can originate in FL and end in CA or WA only by stopping in South America or Aruba/Bonaire/Curacao just off the coast.

 

As I've said a couple of times already, if you arrive in Vancouver and leave again the same day it is considered one continuous cruise from Seattle to San Diego, and illegal.

 

Forget about the 7-day Seattle to Seattle - that has nothing to do with the problem of going from Seattle to S.D.

[maxout]

Nevermind.

[Mary Ellen]

pepsigirl64 - You are talking about r/t cruises. Those only need to stop in a foreign port. To cruise between two different U.S. ports, like the OP wants, does require a stop in a distant foreign port by U.S. law.

 

I was merely trying to point there is a reason the one-way Alaskan cruises start or end in Vancouver. If what the OP wants to do were allowed (and what you apparently feel is possible), one would be able to cruise between Alaska and Seattle. Sorry, one can NOT sail a r/t Seattle, 1-nt Seattle-Vancouver and a Vancouver-San Diego without an overnight stay ashore between Seattle and Vancouver as there is not a distant foreign port involved.

[jtl513]

On Sep 29, 2013 both the Statendam and the Westerdam will be leaving Vancouver and heading south along the Pacific coast. The Westerdam will be arriving in Vancouver after a 1-day cruise from Seattle.

 

HAL will not sell you a b2b combination leaving Seattle on the 28th on the Westerdam and then continuing on a 4-day down to San Diego. Also they will not sell you a b2b on the Westerdam on the 28th followed by a change to the Statendam for 3-day to San Francisco or a 5-day to San Diego. Both of these combinations violate the PVSA because they leave Vancouver on the same day as arrival. HAL would certainly sell these combinations if they were legal.

 

Cruise lines that recommend changing ships in Vancouver as mentioned in post #42 are doing so knowing that it is skirting the law, but with a decreased probability of being caught doing it.

 

The PVSA does not apply strictly to the ship, but considers the embarkation and debarkation points of the individual passengers. A ship may transport passengers from Fort Lauderdale to Seattle by satisfying the PVSA with a stop in South America. A passenger may not board that same ship in Los Angeles and disembark in Seattle because they have not visited a distant foreign port, even though the ship has.

 

[Boytjie]

The PVSA applies to all passengers traveling US ports. Other countries have similar laws for their ports.

 

The PSVA applies to vessels, not passengers. :)

[RuthC]

The PSVA applies to vessels, not passengers. :)

And to all the passengers thereon. Not just US citizens, which was the question.

[Boytjie]

And to all the passengers thereon. Not just US citizens, which was the question.

 

I understand that there is no distinction between US citizen or not, but the act is still about the vessel and not about who it transports. ;)