Jones Act Question

[sail7seas]

For those who propose getting off Maasdam in Quebec City and making one's own way to Montreal to reboard for the next voyage, keep in mind the cruises last spring when HAL overnighted in Quebec City and did not travel the St. Lawrence to Montreal. The water level was too high and Maasdam could not fit under the bridge so she had to stop had Quebec City.

 

That would have messed up your scheme to leave the ship in Quebec City to reboard in Montreal?

 

[jtl513]

Would it be permitted (not necessarily desirable but permitted) do disembark the first cruise in Quebec, take a train/bus to a Montreal hotel overnight, and embark Maasdam the next day?

 

Would the fact that the OP was ticketed for the entire continuous trip override the fact that they didn't actually do a continuous journey?

They can't be ticketed for the entire continuous trip, nor a b2b leaving Montreal. Now whether it would be possible to book a cruise that did it the other way around (starting a second cruise in Quebec city after having disembarked the first the day before in Montreal) is another question. :)

 

Just how long do you have to wait between cruises on the same ship to make it 'legal'?

One night, whether it's the same ship or a different one.

Just suppose the Maasdam did an overnite 'cruise to nowhere' out of Montreal between the two cruises...

Could you then take the next cruise to Boston? I know, the Maasdam never does that, but just suppose for arguments sake....

I don't think the ship would even have to move overnight to make it legal. Then the question is would you have to go to a land hotel for the overnight, or could you stay on the ship?

[sail7seas]

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob brown

Just how long do you have to wait between cruises on the same ship to make it 'legal'?

 

One night, whether it's the same ship or a different one.

I think you are right that one night suffices and if that is the case, it might work if HAL would permit a guest to leave in Quebec City. Travel on their own to Montreal and reboard 24 hours later for the trip south to Boston.

Interesting.

I hope someone pursues it to see the answer.

[richwmn]

Puerto Rico and USVI are mentioned in the PVSA as having different status. It is allowed to start a cruise in either one, and be "transported" to a mainland US port.

 

One night, whether it's the same ship or a different one.

I don't think the ship would even have to move overnight to make it legal. Then the question is would you have to go to a land hotel for the overnight, or could you stay on the ship?

 

IMHO, IANAL (etc) -- I believe that if the ship overnighted in a Canadian city, you would have to disembark, stay in a hotel and return to the ship the next afternoon. If you do not exit the ship then for all intents and purposes it is still a continuous voyage. Even getting off the ship and staying in a Hotel might raise flags and be a grey area.

 

Rich

[Boytjie]

Puerto Rico and USVI are mentioned in the PVSA as having different status. It is allowed to start a cruise in either one, and be "transported" to a mainland US port.

 

Correct; I forgot about cruises like the Caribbean Princess' repositioning cruises from San Juan to New York. This year they have a 4 night cruise - no ports in between just 3 days at sea.

[richwmn]

Would it be permitted (not necessarily desirable but permitted) do disembark the first cruise in Quebec, take a train/bus to a Montreal hotel overnight, and embark Maasdam the next day?

 

Would the fact that the OP was ticketed for the entire continuous trip override the fact that they didn't actually do a continuous journey?

 

Roy

 

This presents a more interesting question, at least to me. The fact that the ticket is from FLL to Montreal doesn't (IMHO) matter, just as a round trip FLL ticket doesn't keep the PVSA from applying if for some reason you need to get off the cruise early.

 

Since the 15 day FLL to Montreal overnights in Quebec anyway it would seem that getting off the ship there, and finding your own way to Montreal would satisfy the PVSA. Even in the case that the river was too shallow to continue to Montreal if you left the ship and spent the total of 2 or more days off the ship would satisfy the PVSA.

 

The question of HAL, or any other cruise line, allowing this practice it would be a toss up. In this case, all you can do is ask for permission. Quebec might not allow the cruise line to disembark passengers, or there may be other immigration / customs issues that would have to be addressed.

 

Rich

[BruceMuzz]

I was told by this board that my daughter couldn't board in San Juan and travel the last 4 nights of our 7 night cruise (porting in St. Thomas and Castaway Cay) before ending in Ft. Lauderdale because of the Jones Act or the other law. After talking with HAL agents 3 or 4 times, they sent a letter asking for approval off to whomever makes the decision and within 2 days I had a letter of approval. She and another passenger joined our cruise in San Jaun. So I say it couldn't hurt to contact HAL and see what they say.

 

THe PVSA does not apply to US Territories - only to US States.

It IS legal to sail from San Juan, Puerto Rico to Ft Lauderdale.

It is NOT legal to sail from Ft Lauderdale to Boston.

[slabeaume]

THe PVSA does not apply to US Territories - only to US States.

It IS legal to sail from San Juan, Puerto Rico to Ft Lauderdale.

It is NOT legal to sail from Ft Lauderdale to Boston.

 

Right. I found that out by going through HAL. A lot of people on the board told me outright it couldn't be done. All I'm getting at is, why doesn't the OP ask HAL?

[bishop84]

THe PVSA does not apply to US Territories - only to US States.

It IS legal to sail from San Juan, Puerto Rico to Ft Lauderdale.

It is NOT legal to sail from Ft Lauderdale to Boston.

 

According to the CBP website the PVSA does apply to Puerto Rico but not the Virgin Islands. However then is an exemption dating from 2003 allowing non-US ships to carry passengers to other US ports until a US ship is available.

[bob brown]

One night, whether it's the same ship or a different one.

I don't think the ship would even have to move overnight to make it legal. Then the question is would you have to go to a land hotel for the overnight, or could you stay on the ship?

Okay. What about a ship on another cruise line, would that be legal?

And if not, who would know? Not either cruise line....

Correct; I forgot about cruises like the Caribbean Princess' repositioning cruises from San Juan to New York. This year they have a 4 night cruise - no ports in between just 3 days at sea.

 

THe PVSA does not apply to US Territories - only to US States.

It IS legal to sail from San Juan, Puerto Rico to Ft Lauderdale.

It is NOT legal to sail from Ft Lauderdale to Boston.

Okay. Then suppose you took a repo cruise from say New York to San Juan, as mentioned above, and then immediately followed it with another from San Juan to Miami or Fort Lauderdale....would that be legal?

It sure can get complicated!:)

[jtl513]

Okay. What about a ship on another cruise line, would that be legal? And if not, who would know? Not either cruise line....

No, it's not legal, and I believe people have been caught trying it, stopped by government Immigration comparing manifests in ports where it's likely to be attempted.

 

I'm pretty sure that I've read here that a couple trying to sail from San Diego to Seattle by changing cruise lines in Vancouver was prevented from doing so.

[RuthC]

Okay. What about a ship on another cruise line, would that be legal?

And if not, who would know? Not either cruise line....

 

It's not where the ship starts and ends so much as it is where the passenger starts/ends as far as the PVSA goes. So, if a passenger, say, starts in LA, terminates in Vancouver, switches immediately to a ship on a different cruiseline heading out on a 1-night cruise to Seattle, then it is a violation of the PVSA.

Who will find out? Probably nobody, and the passenger would "get away with it". If it were the same cruiseline, the second cruise would not be booked; the computers would pick it up and not allow it.

 

 

Okay. Then suppose you took a repo cruise from say New York to San Juan, as mentioned above, and then immediately followed it with another from San Juan to Miami or Fort Lauderdale....would that be legal?

It sure can get complicated!:)

Again, it's where the passenger starts/ends. So, in this case the passenger has started in one US port (New York), and ended in another (Miami), without stopping at a distant foreign port. That is a violation of the PVSA, unless one of those cruises goes to Europe, South America, or the ABC islands as part of the itinerary.

[bob brown]

No, it's not legal, and I believe people have been caught trying it, stopped by government Immigration comparing manifests in ports where it's likely to be attempted.

 

I'm pretty sure that I've read here that a couple trying to sail from San Diego to Seattle by changing cruise lines in Vancouver was prevented from doing so.

Why would the Canadian officials compare them? It is not illegal on their behalf. And how likely would the US officials in Fort Lauderdale and Boston compare the manifests, so far away in distance and in time....

I am not advocating anyone to break the law, just wonder how people can get "caught" in this case.....

[RuthC]

Why would the Canadian officials compare them? It is not illegal on their behalf. And how likely would the US officials in Fort Lauderdale and Boston compare the manifests, so far away in distance and in time....

I am not advocating anyone to break the law, just wonder how people can get "caught" in this case.....

John didn't mention Canadian officials. The US and Canada are on very friendly terms. As a matter of fact, there are US Immigration officials at the Vancouver pier, as well as at the Vancouver airport.

If the US officials want to compare manifests, it should be an easy computer match. Even a manual check wouldn't be too hard.

[jtl513]

Why would the Canadian officials compare them?

Probably at the request of the cruise lines, who do not want to be fined by the US.

And how likely would the US officials in Fort Lauderdale and Boston compare the manifests, so far away in distance and in time....

They wouldn't. It would be officials at the change-over point.

[bob brown]

I believe the purpose of US Immigration officials at Canadian ports are primarily to pre-clear passengers on flights/voyages going to US Ports.

In the case of air carriers, it then becomes a US domestic flight, allowing the passengers to deplane without the need to go through it again. Very convenient for those going from say Montreal or Toronto to LaGuardia Airport in NYC, which doesn't even have customs and immigration...

[MadManOfBethesda]

It's not where the ship starts and ends so much as it is where the passenger starts/ends as far as the PVSA goes. So, if a passenger, say, starts in LA, terminates in Vancouver, switches immediately to a ship on a different cruiseline heading out on a 1-night cruise to Seattle, then it is a violation of the PVSA.

 

Really? How so? If what you state is true, which cruiseline has violated the act? Because as you know, the PVSA instructs ships on how and where they can transport passengers; it is not directed at the passengers themselves. Consequently, it is the cruiseline that must abide by its provisions and it is the cruiseline that is fined for any violations.

 

So if in your scenario above for example, RCL transports a passenger from LA to Vancouver, and then that passenger gets on a HAL ship to travel from Vancouver to Seattle, which line is going to be fined by CBP? Why?

 

RCL certainly hasn't done anything wrong. And HAL would have no way of knowing that the passenger began the trip in LA, so I don't see how they could be held accountable in any way for a supposed violation. And frankly, they haven't violated it.

 

So again, how is this a violation?

[LAFFNVEGAS]

Really? How so? If what you state is true, which cruiseline has violated the act? Because as you know, the PVSA instructs ships on how and where they can transport passengers; it is not directed at the passengers themselves. Consequently, it is the cruiseline that must abide by its provisions and it is the cruiseline that is fined for any violations.

 

So if in your scenario above for example, RCL transports a passenger from LA to Vancouver, and then that passenger gets on a HAL ship to travel from Vancouver to Seattle, which line is going to be fined by CBP? Why?

 

RCL certainly hasn't done anything wrong. And HAL would have no way of knowing that the passenger began the trip in LA, so I don't see how they could be held accountable in any way for a supposed violation. And frankly, they haven't violated it.

 

So again, how is this a violation?

The second Cruise line would be in violation for allowing them to board.

 

Have passengers been able to get away doing this with jumping to a different ship... sure they have. Have passengers been caught doing this... you bet they have. It is my understanding that there is a search done with US Immigration at Canada Place looking for matching names. Now if you take a repo cruise to Vancouver stay over night then board a ship to Seattle you are fine. Or do as I will be doing take a Repo cruise to Vancouver and stay on the ship that will be sailing to Alaska out of Vancouver, then flying home from Vancouver.

[RuthC]

Ultimately, it is the passenger who is in violation of the PVSA, and is the one who is fined for violations. The cruiseline is only the vehicle through which the law is enforced.

If a cruiseline is fined for letting a passenger violate the law, then that charge is probably going to be passed on to the passenger.

Perhaps you didn't read my entire post? I did say that in the case of two different cruiselines, the passenger would probably be able to sail both cruises. If it were to become known in advance that the passenger was going to board the second ship, the boarding could be stopped.

[fleckle]

Okay. What about a ship on another cruise line, would that be legal?

And if not, who would know? Not either cruise line....

Yes, it would be legal and there would be no problem with the PVSA or with the cruise line knowing.

It can even be the same cruise line, as long as it is a different ship.

 

When we were in such a situation, we were informed by the cruise line that it is fine to continue on a different ship, even on the same day, as long as it is not on the same ship.

 

In fact we have done exactly that when our itinerary did not include a distant foreign port and so have many others, starting the trip at one US port, changing to a different ship at a Canadian port, and terminating at a different US port

 

When anyone has such questions, it really is much better to ask and get an answer directly from the cruise line in writing as to what is and what is not allowed, instead of trusting the speculations of people who post on an internet message board.

[MadManOfBethesda]

Ultimately, it is the passenger who is in violation of the PVSA, and is the one who is fined for violations. The cruiseline is only the vehicle through which the law is enforced.

If a cruiseline is fined for letting a passenger violate the law, then that charge is probably going to be passed on to the passenger.

 

Perhaps you didn't read my entire post? I did say that in the case of two different cruiselines, the passenger would probably be able to sail both cruises. If it were to become known in advance that the passenger was going to board the second ship, the boarding could be stopped.

 

Yes I did read your post. I understand that passengers may be able to get around the law. That wasn't the point of my post. My question was which cruiseline would be fined since neither one has actually violated the PVSA.

 

BTW, your first sentence above is incontrovertibly incorrect. There is no law whatsoever that makes it illegal for a person to travel from one U.S. port to another by way of a foreign-flagged vessel. The PVSA prohibits vessels from transporting the passengers and it is the vessel that is fined. The way cruiselines recoup this fine from passengers who disembark in violation of the law is by putting in the cruise ticket contract that they have the right to do so.

[jtl513]

Yes, it would be legal and there would be no problem with the PVSA or with the cruise line knowing.

It can even be the same cruise line, as long as it is a different ship.

Two posts from a thread on this same subject last year. Bolding mine in both cases.

 

On the matter of the PVSA, when we cruised from San Diego to Vancouver, the Oosterdam, our ship, was in the midst of a cruise that originated in San Diego and did a 10 day itinerary in Mexico before going north. Next to us in San Diego and close to us most of the way was the Zuiderdam which was in the midst of a Panama Canal cruise from Florida to Vancouver. Both ships sailed overnight from Vancouver to Seattle, but we could not take either one since we had boarded in San Diego.

 

One last point: Both the Statendam and Westerdam arrive in Vancouver on 9/25, one from Seattle and one from AK. Both ships leave that afternoon to go to San Diego.

 

If it were legal for a person to switch from the Westerdam to the Statendam or vice-versa in order to go on to SD, HAL would sell that combo.

[jtl513]

This year both the Amsterdam and the Statendam leave San Diego on 5/13 and arrive in Vancouver on 5/17. That same afternoon the Amsterdam leaves for an overnight to Seattle. If it was legal for someone to board the Statendam in San Diego and switch to the Amsterdam in Vancouver in order to go on to Seattle, HAL would sell that b2b. They don't.

[slabeaume]

This year both the Amsterdam and the Statendam leave San Diego on 5/13 and arrive in Vancouver on 5/17. That same afternoon the Amsterdam leaves for an overnight to Seattle. If it was legal for someone to board the Statendam in San Diego and switch to the Amsterdam in Vancouver in order to go on to Seattle, HAL would sell that b2b. They don't.

 

I don't see how you can deduce that since it's not offered b2b that it's illegal. I don't know if it is or not, but if I wanted to do that, I'd call the cruiseline and ask.

[Twickenham]

This question is regularly debated. Just for fun, I did a search for an actual legal document issued from the relevant government agency, and found this: http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/trade/legal/informed_compliance_pubs/pvsa_icp.ctt/pvsa_icp.pdf .

 

Now, I didn't read the whole thing - 'cause I'ver read enough reports to realize they're heavy on legalese and detail that doesn't really address the info I wanted - but in skimming, one thing did stand out: compliance or non-compliance with the Act is treated as a vessel issue, not a passenger issue. That is, it is the ship that needs to be in compliance, and the ship that will consequently be fined if found in non-compliance, not the passenger(s). Note this paragraph in particular:

 

It is important to note that a cruise itinerary may be compliant with the PVSA, but a passenger that disembarks at a port other than those designated as part of a compliant itinerary may still cause the vessel/carrier to violate the PVSA depending on where the passenger embarked and disembarked. For example, a passenger that embarks in Seattle, Washington on a round trip itinerary that includes Alaska and disembarks early in Juno, Alaska will cause the vessel/carrier to violate the PVSA, regardless of the reason for the early departure from the cruise ship.

 

A passenger cannot, by definition, be in non-compliance, it is the ship/vessel that is. Now, whether the definition of 'carrier' would preclude changing between 2 ships with the same line (or even same owner, e.g., any Carnival Corp. vessel) is probably debatable, changing between ships of 2 completely separate lines (e.g., HAL to RCI) should be perfectly legal.