I'm confused about the Passenger Services Act

[Anonymous Number]

In particular:

 

 

The 4-day Paradise (Flag: Panama) itinerary:

Monday: Depart Long Beach

Tuesday: Catalina (albeit via tender, correct?)

Wednesday: Ensenada

Thursday: Sea Day

Friday: Return to Long Beach

 

 

 

The 4-Day Monarch of the Seas (Flag: Norway) itinerary:

Monday: Depart Long Beach

Tuesday: San Diego

Wednesday: Catalina

Thursday: Ensenada

Friday: Return to Long Beach

 

How do these itineraries not violate the Passenger Services Act? :confused:

[Anonymous Number]

This probably does belong elsewhere, it was just the discussion of Pride's change of ports that got me thinking about this.

[CatgirlNC]

The stop in a foreign country port (Ensenada, Mexico) before returning back to disembark makes it a valid route.

[Kurbanfan]

Yep.....Ensenada Mexico......

 

Also the Monarch sails out of San Pedro not Long Beach.

[DMFdavid]

As I understand it, all that is required from a foreign flag passenger carrier is for it it make an intermediate call at any foreign port. So with the two examples you gave, since they stop at Ensenada, that qualifies.

 

David :)

[Anonymous Number]

The stop in a foreign country port (Ensenada, Mexico) before returning back to disembark makes it a valid route.

 

So, they can stop in a domestic port for shore excursions prior to heading to the foreign port?

 

Then if someone were to disembark at San Diego, and didn't return to the ship, they would then be in violation of the Passenger Services Act?

[Anonymous Number]

Also the Monarch sails out of San Pedro not Long Beach.

 

Right. :o

[Goofyisme]

So, they can stop in a domestic port for shore excursions prior to heading to the foreign port?

 

Then if someone were to disembark at San Diego, and didn't return to the ship, they would then be in violation of the Passenger Services Act?

 

Correct

[Sundagger]

In particular:

 

 

The 4-day Paradise (Flag: Panama) itinerary:

Monday: Depart Long Beach

Tuesday: Catalina (albeit via tender, correct?)

Wednesday: Ensenada

Thursday: Sea Day

Friday: Return to Long Beach

 

 

 

The 4-Day Monarch of the Seas (Flag: Norway) itinerary:

Monday: Depart Long Beach

Tuesday: San Diego

Wednesday: Catalina

Thursday: Ensenada

Friday: Return to Long Beach

 

How do these itineraries not violate the Passenger Services Act? :confused:

 

It would be a violation if passengers were allowed to get on in Long Beach and off (permanently) in San Diego or Catalina. The whole trip is the consideration. Since passengers aren't allowed to disembark and not get back on before the foreign port, it's OK. That's one of the reasons that they keep close track of who gets off and doesn't get back on at a port.

 

It's the same situation when a ship cruises from the west coast to Hawaii and makes several port calls on the islands before going to the foreign port.

[big_duck]

The key phrase in both examples is " Return to Long Beach".

 

If the cruises terminated in another port they would be in violation.

 

The reason the Carnival Spirit leaves from Ensanada is the cruise terminates in Hawaii.

 

Now for some real fun, Ensanada is not considered a "distant foreign port" for the purposes of the act. So in your examples, if you got off in Ensanada you would still be violating the act.

[Kurbanfan]

This probably does belong elsewhere, it was just the discussion of Pride's change of ports that got me thinking about this.

 

I read on here that the passengers on the Pride were told upon boarding about the itinerary change. At that point some people cancelled right there and are to receive full refund.

That's what I would have done.