Jump to content

Does this scenario violate the passenger vessel thingy act?


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, misha1 said:

4/25/22-5/5/22 Honolulu to Vancouver, 5/5/22-5/13/22 Vancouver to Seattle (Alaska itinerary)

Yes, it is a violation of the PVSA and  won’t be allowed. 

Edited by Ourusualbeach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing besides Ovation leaving Vancouver on May 5, but several options if you stay at least one night in Vancouver and change ships and/or cruise lines:

  • Radiance northbound on May 6
  • Majestic Princess northbound on May 7
  • Koningsdam northbound on May 7
  • Serenade roundtrip on May 8
  • Nieuw Amsterdam northbound on May 8
  • Noordam roundtrip on May 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, misha1 said:

4/25/22-5/5/22 Honolulu to Vancouver, 5/5/22-5/13/22 Vancouver to Seattle (Alaska itinerary)

Right now, I’m booked on a B5B, departing from Sydney, and includes these last 2 legs. It’s looking like Australia may still have closed borders next March. Since that only leaves me with the Hawaii and Alaska legs, I will be in the same situation as you, so I will have to cancel Alaska.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Why would this violate it?  If the person disembarks in Vancouver and then re-embarks for the next cruise it’s totally two separate sailings and journeys.

 

In theory could they fly from Vancouver to Seattle and then back to Vancouver on the same day and the embark on the second leg?

 

Or even easier, rent a car, drive over the border to the US and then go back to Vancouver and get on the ship?

 

 

 

Edited by SkierRobUMN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SkierRobUMN said:

Why would this violate it?  If the person disembarks in Vancouver and then re-embarks for the next cruise it’s totally two separate sailings and journeys.

 

That's not the way it looks to the rule makers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, crzndeb said:

I will be in the same situation as you, so I will have to cancel Alaska.

I would bet a D drink, that RCI would not catch it until you are on the sailing. I would bet the same drink that if the Aussie season gets cancelled so does the Hawaii Vancouver TP leg.

 

Biker, who is being generous with the D drinks since he's unlikely to use all 5 daily.

Edited by Biker19
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SkierRobUMN said:

Why would this violate it?  If the person disembarks in Vancouver and then re-embarks for the next cruise it’s totally two separate sailings and journeys.

 

In theory could they fly from Vancouver to Seattle and then back to Vancouver on the same day and the embark on the second leg?

 

Or even easier, rent a car, drive over the border to the US and then go back to Vancouver and get on the ship?

 

 

 

CBP only looks at where you start and end your voyage not where the cruise line stops sand starts in between.  Your voyage is treated as one voyage not two. 
 

neither of your two scenarios would change anything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SkierRobUMN said:

Why would this violate it?  If the person disembarks in Vancouver and then re-embarks for the next cruise it’s totally two separate sailings and journeys.

 

In theory could they fly from Vancouver to Seattle and then back to Vancouver on the same day and the embark on the second leg?

 

Or even easier, rent a car, drive over the border to the US and then go back to Vancouver and get on the ship?

 

 

 

Might be time to read the hundreds of threads on the PVSA.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Biker19 said:

I would bet a D drink, that RCI would not catch it until you are on the sailing. I would bet the same drink that if the Aussie season gets cancelled so does the Hawaii Vancouver TP leg.

 

Biker, who is being generous with the D drinks since he's unlikely to use all 5 daily.

Debbie agrees with Biker 😉

 

And whoosh, there goes all those points to get this solo traveler past the 340 mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Ourusualbeach said:

CBP only looks at where you start and end your voyage not where the cruise line stops sand starts in between.  Your voyage is treated as one voyage not two. 
 

neither of your two scenarios would change anything. 


Yes, if you left Canada and went through customs and immigration in the US and then re-entered Canada then you would have proof in the systems of that. Now, I understand the cruise lines themselves have mechanisms in place to make this scenario impossible by blocking you from booking b2b cruises like the scenario in this thread. But if they didn’t then my scenarios would work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, SkierRobUMN said:


Yes, if you left Canada and went through customs and immigration in the US and then re-entered Canada then you would have proof in the systems of that. Now, I understand the cruise lines themselves have mechanisms in place to make this scenario impossible by blocking you from booking b2b cruises like the scenario in this thread. But if they didn’t then my scenarios would work. 

As far as I have read exiting and re-entering the country does not matter.  It is the transportation of a passenger from one US port to another that dictates a violation.

 

Perhaps @chengkp75could weigh in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ourusualbeach said:

As far as I have read exiting and re-entering the country does not matter.  It is the transportation of a passenger from one US port to another that dictates a violation.

 

Perhaps @chengkp75could weigh in.


But with my scenario of leaving Canada and going back into the US and then back into Canada the vessel is not transporting them from one US port to another really. 

 

Is there something in the law that says there needs to be some length of time between sailings on the same vessel for it to be ok by the law?  Like what if the ship took a day off on port of Vancouver and then the new Alaska sailing embarked the next day? Would it be considered legal then? (Not that the cruise lines would ever do that, just hypothetical)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, SkierRobUMN said:

 

Is there something in the law that says there needs to be some length of time between sailings on the same vessel for it to be ok by the law?  Like what if the ship took a day off on port of Vancouver and then the new Alaska sailing embarked the next day? Would it be considered legal then? 

Yes, one day break would be enough. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, SkierRobUMN said:


But with my scenario of leaving Canada and going back into the US and then back into Canada the vessel is not transporting them from one US port to another really. 

 

Is there something in the law that says there needs to be some length of time between sailings on the same vessel for it to be ok by the law?  Like what if the ship took a day off on port of Vancouver and then the new Alaska sailing embarked the next day? Would it be considered legal then? (Not that the cruise lines would ever do that, just hypothetical)

They are.  As I mentioned the CBP treats this as one voyage.  Where you board and your final debarkation point.  I believe that it must be 24 hours if staying on the same ship

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Found this, which should be helpful even though it is not good news.

 

https://www.cruisecritic.com/ab/agents/variation-a/articles.cfm?ID=3363

 

Passenger Z books two cruises that are back-to-back on the same ship. The first is a repositioning from San Diego to Vancouver. The second is a one-way Alaskan cruise from Vancouver to Anchorage. That passenger is essentially being transported from San Diego to Anchorage by way of Vancouver, which is not a distant foreign port since it is in North America. A violation would be triggered. Again, the cruise line is not likely to allow you to knowingly create a violation and would not allow the booking in the first place. If the booking slips through, Passenger Z would likely be denied re-boarding in Vancouver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, soremekun said:

That's just stupid.  

My comment is not directed at you, @Ourusualbeach.

100%, completely, totally stupid.

 

Now just waiting for those to argue we're wrong just becasue it's the law.  The original PVSA is 155 years old...I think a few things in life have changed since then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

For some of you that may not understand the PVSA, I copied this from Chengkp75...he has explained it 100 times.

I wanted to save him the time of typing it again.

It’s not just about cruise ships.

 

 

8B0D2AA5-F994-40BD-9410-260D3F14809C.png

Edited by crzndeb
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People sometimes use less-than-technical terms for various laws on Cruise Critic. People are forever calling things the Jones Act that aren’t actually part of the Jones Act. Little know fact: “Passenger Vessel Thingy Act” is the technical name of the particular law. Well done OP 👍 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Thank You for 25 Years - Click for Fun Stuff!
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...