200 passengers disembarking from the Stolstice

[dkjretired]

I have no idea when Celebrity realized that there was a big problem, or when the 200 passengers were told they would disembark in Victoria. Normally when the cruise line catches the illegal b2b cruises (usually months before the sailing) - they make the passengers cancel one of the cruises.

 

We've had several questions and threads on this issue over the past couple of years so we know this is an issue. I am sure Celebrity is aware also and if someone contacted Celebrity, it was probably worked out. I would question whether this actually involves 200 people, would suggest if we ever get an answer the number will be much lower.

[upwarduk]

I doubt Celebrity just informed them today.

 

We were informed mid cruise that we would have to disembark in Ensenada (Mexico) when we had booked a Hawaii- San Diego cruise on Century ( March 2012). All the passenger and a huge number of crew had to disembark, not just 200. Over 55 coaches bussed us to San Diego ( some impounded along the way) The ship arrived in San Diego before we did!

I later mentioned it to our UK TA, who knew nothing about the PVSA act.

But surely Celebrity UK should have been aware when they took the booking.

Edited May 10, 2016 by upwarduk

[Gonzo70]

I just looked at the Roll Call; the issue was known in advance of the cruise as it was discussed on the Roll Call. Some PAX made advance arrangements to do the B2B, but end the cruise early in Victoria instead of Seattle.

[NancyIL]

I just looked at the Roll Call; the issue was known in advance of the cruise as it was discussed on the Roll Call. Some PAX made advance arrangements to do the B2B, but end the cruise early in Victoria instead of Seattle.

 

Good detective work!

[richstowe]

This has been discussed repeatedly. The disembarkation in Victoria ends that cruise. The passengers then make their way to Vancouver. From there tge can begin another cruise or fly home. Either way there is no violation of PVSA.

 

The PVSA sometimes comes as a surprise to Australian travel agents (and others) who book passengers on illegal cruises. This is the solution proposed by the cruise line and allowed by the law.

Excellent explanation . I would agree that PVSA issues can surprise TA's (to say nothing of passengers) ,

but cruise lines must be held accountable . This is on Celebrity .

[RDC1]

If they knew in advance, they would be intentionally violating the law! If Celebrity had caught it in time, they would have made the passengers on the b2b cruises cancel one segment.

 

No. People can make arrangements in advance to disembark a port early to avoid violating the law. The passengers that are disembarking, could have made arrangements with Celebrity, prior to the cruise, to disembark in Victoria and therefore be allowed to do the back to back. There was a discussion on CC a few months ago with someone describing the arrangements to do exactly that.

[RDC1]

We were informed mid cruise that we would have to disembark in Ensenada (Mexico) when we had booked a Hawaii- San Diego cruise on Century ( March 2012). All the passenger and a huge number of crew had to disembark, not just 200. Over 55 coaches bussed us to San Diego ( some impounded along the way) The ship arrived in San Diego before we did!

I later mentioned it to our UK TA, who knew nothing about the PVSA act.

But surely Celebrity UK should have been aware when they took the booking.

 

Totally different case, that cruise route always ended or started in Ensenada with a bus to/from San Diego. Only way they could do a one way to/from Hawaii.

[DirtyDawg]

200 passengers are disembarking from the Stolstice in Victoria on May 12th. Anybody knows why? The ship leaves the same day for Seattle what is the end of the Alaska cruise.

 

The good news is they are disembarking in Victoria. It's a beautiful little city. I hope your friends are spending a little time there.

[NancyIL]

No. People can make arrangements in advance to disembark a port early to avoid violating the law. The passengers that are disembarking, could have made arrangements with Celebrity, prior to the cruise, to disembark in Victoria and therefore be allowed to do the back to back. There was a discussion on CC a few months ago with someone describing the arrangements to do exactly that.

 

The passengers were fortunate that the ship stopped in Victoria, as that's the only port where they could've legally disembarked early. The Solstice will stop in Victoria again in May 2017, following its Hawaii cruise.

 

Disney ran afoul of the PVSA in 2012 when they allowed passengers to sail from LA to Vancouver, followed by Vancouver to Seattle. Lots of people warned that it violated the PVSA, but DCL told the passengers that it was not a problem. Those passengers did do the b2b cruises that May. However, shortly after that, the passengers on the fall Seattle-Vancouver and Vancouver- LA b2b cruises were told they had to cancel one.

[dodger1964]

I would welcome this outcome if I was doing b2b...That stop is (at least the one time we did it) not very timely. You get there late in the day, and barely have time to do anything in the daylight.

 

At least these passengers can enjoy their day/over night in town.

[deercottage]

Thank you for all your responses and explaining the law. Our friends knew in advance that this was happening. According to them there are 200 passengers leaving the ship in Victoria. Celebrity disembarks 30 passengers at the time, so it will be a long process. So far I understand Celebrity will pay for their transport to Seattle. Our friends will stay with us in Victoria for a few days. I know this law is different from the Jones Act, but we have 260+ cruise ships visiting Victoria this year just to add a foreign port to avoid the Act before returning to the US. Maybe the Cabotage law has to be updated.

[RDC1]

Thank you for all your responses and explaining the law. Our friends knew in advance that this was happening. According to them there are 200 passengers leaving the ship in Victoria. Celebrity disembarks 30 passengers at the time, so it will be a long process. So far I understand Celebrity will pay for their transport to Seattle. Our friends will stay with us in Victoria for a few days. I know this law is different from the Jones Act, but we have 260+ cruise ships visiting Victoria this year just to add a foreign port to avoid the Act before returning to the US. Maybe the Cabotage law has to be updated.

 

 

Are you sure about the transport? From what I recall from previous discussion those that chose to do the B2B, had to disembark in Victoria and travel from there at their own expense. I believe that they also had to pay full cruise fare with no discount for the last day.

[Gonzo70]

Thank you for all your responses and explaining the law. Our friends knew in advance that this was happening. According to them there are 200 passengers leaving the ship in Victoria. Celebrity disembarks 30 passengers at the time, so it will be a long process. So far I understand Celebrity will pay for their transport to Seattle. Our friends will stay with us in Victoria for a few days. I know this law is different from the Jones Act, but we have 260+ cruise ships visiting Victoria this year just to add a foreign port to avoid the Act before returning to the US. Maybe the Cabotage law has to be updated.

 

The Jones act is sometimes mistakenly used interchangeably with the PVSA, but they are different - the PVSA governs passenger vessels, the Jones Act governs transportation of cargo.

 

The reason many ships stop at Victoria during round trip Seattle cruises is the PVSA - if a foreign flagged ship starts and ends in the same US port, it can satisfy the PVSA by stopping at ANY foreign port (i.e. it need not be a DISTANT port as in the case when one's voyage begins in one US city, but ends in a different US city).

 

If the PVSA were to be updated, it would be to make things more, not less stringent. Without it Mexico, Canada (and other countries) could operate ferry services, water taxis, river cruises, sightseeing cruises, whale watching, fishing expeditions etc. within the US. Also (I could be wrong on this), were foreign flagged ships to transport people around the US without foreign port calls, they would be subject to additional US laws, taxes, etc. that currently they are exempt from - cruise ships like being exempt from US labor laws for obvious reasons.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Gonzo70

[Wickets]

We booked at these last year and Celebrity caught this well before final payment. The suggested we cancel one or get off in Victoria. They offered $100 each for the 7 hour early departure. We cancelled the first cruise to avoid flying out on commuter plane.

[dkjretired]

The passengers were fortunate that the ship stopped in Victoria, as that's the only port where they could've legally disembarked early. The Solstice will stop in Victoria again in May 2017, following its Hawaii cruise.

 

Disney ran afoul of the PVSA in 2012 when they allowed passengers to sail from LA to Vancouver, followed by Vancouver to Seattle. Lots of people warned that it violated the PVSA, but DCL told the passengers that it was not a problem. Those passengers did do the b2b cruises that May. However, shortly after that, the passengers on the fall Seattle-Vancouver and Vancouver- LA b2b cruises were told they had to cancel one.

 

The ship has to stop in Victoria otherwise all their cruises would be violation of the PSVA.

[lovecruzin]

I'm currently on Solstice. We've talked to a few people who are disembarking in Victoria they indicated X is putting them up in a hotel and paying transportation costs to Seattle, there may also be an OBC. Another person I spoke to got on in HNL and is doing the Seattle RT after this, she is able to leave her belongings on board and will re board in Seattle after a night in Victoria. No one seems particularly upset about having to disembark, but that's just the handful of people we've chatted with.

[Gonzo70]

The ship has to stop in Victoria otherwise all their cruises would be violation of the PSVA.

 

That's true of round trip Seattle cruises, but this was a one way Vancouver to Seattle cruise - so did not need to stop in Victoria.

[Celebrity Cruises]

200 passengers are disembarking from the Stolstice in Victoria on May 12th. Anybody knows why? The ship leaves the same day for Seattle what is the end of the Alaska cruise.

 

The Solstice 4/26/16 & 5/6/16 sailings are a Jones Act violation, however we would allow guests to do the back to back as long as they disembark the ship on 5/12/16 in Victoria, British Columbia.

[Gonzo70]

I'm currently on Solstice. We've talked to a few people who are disembarking in Victoria they indicated X is putting them up in a hotel and paying transportation costs to Seattle, there may also be an OBC. Another person I spoke to got on in HNL and is doing the Seattle RT after this, she is able to leave her belongings on board and will re board in Seattle after a night in Victoria. No one seems particularly upset about having to disembark, but that's just the handful of people we've chatted with.

 

Sounds like Celebrity must have permitted people to book the illegal back-to-back and only notified people of the issue after flights were booked - and therefore is doing the right thing and making arrangements as well as footing the bill. One would think they have enough practice with this issue from previous years that they would not allow these cruises to be booked back-to-back to begin with. Costly mistake that they keep repeating year after year, both financially as well as with regards to stress for the affected passengers. Hopefully they figure away going forward to simply not permit such cruises to be booked back-to-back from the get-go.

[NancyIL]

The ship has to stop in Victoria otherwise all their cruises would be violation of the PSVA.

 

This particular cruise started in Vancouver, so no other foreign port stop was needed. The subsequent roundtrip cruises from Seattle do need the Victoria port stop.

[Gonzo70]

The Solstice 4/26/16 & 5/6/16 sailings are a Jones Act violation, however we would allow guests to do the back to back as long as they disembark the ship on 5/12/16 in Victoria, British Columbia.

 

You might want to read up on the difference between the Jones Act and the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA). ;)

[NancyIL]

A cabotage law restrcts the transport of goods or passengers. In this case the passengers would be traveling between two United States cities without visiting a distant foreign port, as required by the passenger vessel service act.(PVSA), sometimes incorrectly known as the Jones act. In order not to violate this, the passengers must disembark in Victoria and then begin a new journey in Vancouver so that the first journey is between a US city and a non-US city and the second is also.

 

There is a lot of information on the PVSA on Cruise Critic and elsewhere, including Wikipedia

The PVSA considers the port of embarkation (Honolulu) until the port of disembarkation (Seattle) to be one cruise. Once the Solstice passengers disembark in Victoria, they don't have to return to Vancouver unless they are flying from there. I suspect most passengers will have their return flights booked out of Seattle, so they could take a boat from Victoria to Seattle. Taking the ferry to Vancouver and then a bus or train to Seattle just adds extra time.

This has been discussed repeatedly. The disembarkation in Victoria ends that cruise. The passengers then make their way to Vancouver. From there tge can begin another cruise or fly home. Either way there is no violation of PVSA.

 

As I mentioned above - the passengers don't have to return to Vancouver. They can cruise out of Seattle on the same ship if they wish, as long as they disembark in Victoria and spend one night off the ship.

[Cancruz]

We had to disembark at a MX port following Pacific Coastal cruise. It took an entire day to bus back to San Diego our previous port. Everyone had to get off each bus go through customs and reload the bus. We knew before we sailed, but thought it was just over the border. Felt like Gilligan. One of the passengers from San Diego wanted to take his luggage to his house so they would just have their overnight bag. No go.

 

 

Passenger Vessel Services Act of 1886

 

See also: Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (Jones Act) regarding cargo vessels

The Passenger Vessel Services Act of 1886 (sometimes abbreviated to PVSA, Passenger Services Act, or PSA) is a protectionist piece of United States legislation which came into force in 1886 relating to cabotage. Essentially, it says:

 

No foreign vessels shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States, either directly or by way of a foreign port, under a penalty of $200 (now $300) for each passenger so transported and landed.

 

As a result, all vessels engaged in the coastwise trade have been required to be coastwise-qualified (i.e., U.S.-built, owned and documented). Under the Passenger Vessel Services Act of 1886 (46 U.S.C. § 55103), non-coastwise-qualified vessels cannot transport passengers directly between U.S. ports. Generally, a passenger is any person carried on a vessel who is not directly and substantially connected with the operation of such vessel, her navigation, ownership, or business. The precise definition of what constitutes a U.S. port ("coastwise point") includes artificial islands and similar structures, as well as to mobile oil drilling rigs, drilling platforms, and other devices attached to the seabed of the Outer Continental Shelf for the purpose of resource exploration operations, and the anchored warehouse vessels that supply drilling platforms.[1]

 

The handful of U.S.-flagged cruise ships in operation are registered in the U.S. to permit cruises between the Hawaiian Islands, or from the continental U.S. to Hawaii.

 

The Passenger Vessel Services Act, however,

does not prohibit foreign-flagged ships departing from and returning to the same U.S. port, provided the ship visits any foreign port;

does not prohibit foreign-flagged ships departing from a U.S. port, visiting a distant foreign port, and then continuing to a second U.S. port. However, in order to embark in a U.S. port and disembark in a second U.S. port, the vessel must visit a distant foreign port outside of North America (Central America, Bermuda. the Bahamas, and all of the Caribbean except Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao, count as part of North America);

does not prevent a ship from taking on passengers at a U.S. port and then returning them to another U.S. city by ground or air, or vice versa, as long as the cruise ship returns to its departing point without stopping (a "cruise to nowhere"), or stops in at least one distant foreign port.

 

In accordance with this law, cruise lines that operate foreign-flagged vessels are fined $300 for each passenger who boarded such a vessel in one U.S. port and left the vessel at another port. The cruise lines typically pass this cost on the passengers who "jump the ship". Exemptions are available in the case of family emergencies etc.[2]

 

 

 

Contents [hide]

1 Exceptions

2 Inter-island transportation in Hawaii

3 See also

4 External links

5 References

 

 

Exceptions[edit]

 

Some exceptions have been made to the requirement of the Passenger Services Act. For example, Canadian vessels may transport passengers between Rochester, New York and Alexandria Bay, New York until such time as a U.S. carrier enters the market (46 U.S.C. § 55121(a)), and between ports in southeastern Alaska (46 U.S.C. § 55121(b)).

 

As of October 30, 2003, foreign vessels are also allowed to transport passengers (but not cargo) between the U.S. mainland and Puerto Rico (46 U.S.C. § 55104). However, this exemption will disappear if U.S.-flagged ships resume passenger operations of this type.[2]

 

Waivers from the PVSA can be requested in case of national defense interest.

 

Inter-island transportation in Hawaii[edit]

 

 

 

 

 

Pride of Aloha (now Norwegian Sky), NCL America's formerly U.S.-flagged ship, which is not required to call on foreign ports.

The law has had an interesting consequence with regard to the cruise ship industry within the state of Hawaii. Foreign-flagged cruise ships may carry passengers between ports in the Hawaiian Islands as long as no passenger permanently leaves the vessel at ports other than the origination port and the vessel makes at least one call at a foreign port. Norwegian Cruise Line created a subsidiary, NCL America, and introduced three new US-flagged vessels: Pride of Aloha in 2004, Pride of America in 2005, and Pride of Hawaii in 2006. Previously, with its foreign-flagged vessels, NCL needed to include a four day detour to Tabuaeran (Fanning Atoll) in the Line Islands (Republic of Kiribati) on its Hawaiian itineraries.

 

Reportedly due to financial losses, in 2007 NCL renamed Pride of Hawaii to Norwegian Jade, and reflagged and relocated the ship to Europe. In 2008, NCL also relocated Pride of Aloha to Florida, reflagging it and renaming it to Norwegian Sky at the same time. Thus the Pride of America is the sole NCL ship currently in Hawaii service.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Cancruz

[cruisestitch]

Dear Celebrity Cruises

 

Passengers aren't cargo.

 

Jones Act deals with cargo.

[Shadow1966]

Dear Celebrity Cruises

 

 

 

Passengers aren't cargo.

 

 

 

Jones Act deals with cargo.

 

 

[emoji23] I like that!

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums mobile app