RE: Bringing Daughter's 18 yr. old friend on cruise

[discjoker]

cwolf and discjoker are exactly the people that come back on the site and complain that something went wrong and they`re gonna sue someone. it takes no time and no effort to have a letter, you never know!!!

 

Please don't make assumptions about people that you don't know. You know nothing about me. Thank you and have a nice day. :rolleyes:

[discjoker]

 

We require notorized emergency medical forms for all of our the young people on our church trips, even if they are 18. (many times 18 year olds can sign their own forms.)

 

 

That's the thing. If we are talking about medical/emergency consent the 18 year old needs to sign their own form. Their parents cannot grant that consent. That's why it makes no sense for the parents to sign a consent for for you (or any chaperone) to act on their childs behalf in case of emergency. It is not their decision, it is the adult childs. They may be able to convey that consent after an emergency happens (even this I doubt) but a parent cannot decide before an event happens how their adult child (18+) is to be taken care of in the event of an emergency.

 

I am only talking about legalities here, NCL can create any policy they want. I still don't think anyone over 18 needs parental conent (they just need to abide by the over 21+ rule in the cabin, etc). However, NCL isn't very clear most of the time about conveying their rules, so who knows, ya know?

[2Cruise4Ever]

No, according to the OP (cruzfvr), both her daughter and the friend will be 18.

 

Sorry, I meant Marge's daughter's friend is 17. That's who I quoted originally:

 

 

We are facing the same thing, with the exception being that our daughter's best friend will be 17 on the date that we sail. Is there a form that needs to be notarized?

 

Sorry for the confusion

[discjoker]

Sorry, I meant Marge's daughter's friend is 17. That's who I quoted originally:

 

 

 

 

Sorry for the confusion

 

Okay, thanks for the clarification. :)

[refman]

Please don't make assumptions about people that you don't know. You know nothing about me. Thank you and have a nice day. :rolleyes:

and you as well, but a letter is the safe bet

[bigfoot88]

21 is a minor to NCL. With a June cruise you would not have your tickets yet but, I looked at the ticket package from my Aug 2006 Spirit cruise and in the " Passenger Ticket Contract Part 3" it states:

"If the accompanying adult is not the spouse, parent, or legal guardian, a notarized parental/guardian consent letter that authorizes the minor to travel and further authorizes medical treatment in case of emergency."

Later in that section it notes that NCL “MAY” deny travel if the document are not present.

 

Play it save, get a letter. It notes a “NOTARIZED” letter. If your get to the cruise an don’t having, a faxed copy may not be accepted because it may need to be notarized. Also, call NCL and ask if there is a special wording or if they have a form they want used.

[johnql]

21 is a minor to NCL.

Can you tell us where NCL states this? I looked on the web site a few days ago and couldn't find any definition of what constitutes a "minor".

[beachchick]

Can you tell us where NCL states this? I looked on the web site a few days ago and couldn't find any definition of what constitutes a "minor".

 

I do not believe they say "passengers under 21 are considered minors."

 

What they do say is in two parts and I think this is how it is being interpreted:

 

1. Passengers under 21 must be accompanied by a responsible adult.

 

2. Later: If the accompanying adult is not the parent, legal guardian...etc. then the they must have letter for the minor.

 

So you have the accompanying adult specified both times and the references to "passengers under 21" and "minors" are considered equivalent. That is that Passengers under 21 are considered minors by NCL.

 

In any case, several people have reported being required to show the consent letter when they've traveled with passengers between the ages of 18 and 21 who are not their own children. It would only take one instance of this for me to say, "Well then, they probably won't request it, but because they have required it from others, I will go ahead and make sure we have the letter." But that's just me: Better too much documentation than too little.

 

It's the same thing with married women and marriage certificates. If a woman's BC doesn't match her DL (because she was married or re-married or divorced or just legally changed her name for whatever reason), then the immigration officers may (not will) require proof of the name change. Many have reported being asked for a copy of such proof. I haven't, but I take a copy of our marriage certificate anyway--just in case the next time I'm that one woman required to show proof of my name change. (Usually, I just use my passport, so it's not an issue.)

 

beachchick

[johnql]

I do not believe they say "passengers under 21 are considered minors."

 

What they do say is in two parts and I think this is how it is being interpreted:

 

1. Passengers under 21 must be accompanied by a responsible adult.

 

2. Later: If the accompanying adult is not the parent, legal guardian...etc. then the they must have letter for the minor.

 

So you have the accompanying adult specified both times and the references to "passengers under 21" and "minors" are considered equivalent. That is that Passengers under 21 are considered minors by NCL.

 

In any case, several people have reported being required to show the consent letter when they've traveled with passengers between the ages of 18 and 21 who are not their own children. It would only take one instance of this for me to say, "Well then, they probably won't request it, but because they have required it from others, I will go ahead and make sure we have the letter." But that's just me: Better too much documentation than too little.

 

It's the same thing with married women and marriage certificates. If a woman's BC doesn't match her DL (because she was married or re-married or divorced or just legally changed her name for whatever reason), then the immigration officers may (not will) require proof of the name change. Many have reported being asked for a copy of such proof. I haven't, but I take a copy of our marriage certificate anyway--just in case the next time I'm that one woman required to show proof of my name change. (Usually, I just use my passport, so it's not an issue.)

 

beachchick

That's an interesting interpretation of NCL's rules. I'm not sure if it says what you think is implied, but I do agree that it's better to be safe than sorry.

 

Also, I must have missed the instances "where several people have reported being required to show the consent letter when they've traveled with passengers between the ages of 18 and 21 who are not their own children". OK, I sit partially corrected. I just reread this entire thread and found that Sue21 indicated that she obtained a notarized letter after calling NCL. Of course, that's not the same as being asked to produce it. Again, better safe than sorry.

[cruzfvr]

I am getting a notarized letter from the parents. At least I will feel safe, and not worried. Thanks to everyone that replied to my posting.

[bigfoot88]

I STAND CORRECTED. They don't state people under 21 a minor.