200 passengers disembarking from the Stolstice

[deercottage]

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.

[JimAOk1945]

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.

 

I wonder what happened? Can you provide the source of this information? I would like to read/hear the story.

 

Thanks

[deercottage]

We have friends on board who were told to disembark in Victoria BC.

[K.T.B.]

I'm with Jim, got a source for this?

[Gonzo70]

Were they doing a back-to-back? May have been because of the PVSA (a cabotage law).

[deercottage]

Yes they are doing a back to back. What is the cabotage law?

[Gonzo70]

Just like non-US airlines can't fly you from one US city to another, non-US flagged ships can't transport you from one US city to another (unless a distant foreign port is visited in between). If the first leg of a back-to-back cruise starts in one US city, and the second leg ends in a different US city and no distant foreign port is visited (Canada, Mexico and most Caribbean ports are not considered distant) then the cruise would be illegal. By debarking in Victoria (a non-US port) the law is not being broken.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Gonzo70

[cruisestitch]

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

[SheriffJoe]

Normally you can do a B2B on Solstice but since this cruise began in Vancouver and ends in Seattle to do the B2B you have to have a day separating your 2 cruises...the normal Seattle to Seattle Solstice cruises are no issue for a B2B

[TeaBag]

Solstice sailed from Honolulu to Vancouver on Apr 26. The next itinerary was Vancouver to Seattle via Alaska. I'm betting those passengers who are disembarking in Victoria (instead of Seattle) are B2Bers who would be violating the PVSA if they stayed on till Seattle.

[NancyIL]

Solstice sailed from Honolulu to Vancouver on Apr 26. The next itinerary was Vancouver to Seattle via Alaska. I'm betting those passengers who are disembarking in Victoria (instead of Seattle) are B2Bers who would be violating the PVSA if they stayed on till Seattle.

 

Duplicate

Edited May 10, 2016 by NancyIL

[NancyIL]

Solstice sailed from Honolulu to Vancouver on Apr 26. The next itinerary was Vancouver to Seattle via Alaska. I'm betting those passengers who are disembarking in Victoria (instead of Seattle) are B2Bers who would be violating the PVSA if they stayed on till Seattle.

 

Exactly, and apparently no one at Celebrity caught that before it was too late for the passengers to cancel one of the cruises.

 

I will be on the Radiance of the Seas Honolulu to Vancouver cruise next May, followed by b2b Alaska cruises to avoid violating the PVSA.

[jagoffee]

Exactly, and apparently no one at Celebrity caught that before it was too late for the passengers to cancel one of the cruises.

 

Really? What makes you think everyone did not know in advance?

 

I think the OP just wanted to know and they are not one of the 200.

[NancyIL]

Normally you can do a B2B on Solstice but since this cruise began in Vancouver and ends in Seattle to do the B2B you have to have a day separating your 2 cruises...the normal Seattle to Seattle Solstice cruises are no issue for a B2B

 

There is no problem sailing between a Canadian and a US port. That's why one-way Alaska cruises sail between Vancouver and Seward or Whittier, and not between Seattle and Seward/Whittier.

Edited May 10, 2016 by NancyIL

[Redtravel]

Do those passengers stay in BC until the next cruise picks them up? If so, where do they stay? Is Celebrity footing the cost for this? It sounds like somebody wasn't paying attention to the law. Whose responsible for this?

[NancyIL]

Really? What makes you think everyone did not know in advance?

 

I think the OP just wanted to know and they are not one of the 200.

 

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.

[NancyIL]

Do those passengers stay in BC until the next cruise picks them up? If so, where do they stay? Is Celebrity footing the cost for this? It sounds like somebody wasn't paying attention to the law. Whose responsible for this?

 

I suspect Celebrity will pick-up the tab for transportation to Seattle, as well as a hotel somewhere. Celebrity is responsible.

[jagoffee]

Never mind.

Edited May 10, 2016 by jagoffee

[cruisestitch]

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.

[lvz2cruz]

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.

 

Maybe the passengers knew they would have to do this but for them airfare was such a big expense they figured since they were there they could do both cruises and see Hawaii and Alaska with just one airplane ticket. Coming from the midwest or south the airfare can cost more than the cruise so this is cost efficient even with paying for a hotel one night in between.

I doubt Celebrity just informed them today.

[NancyIL]

?? So you do not believe the 200 passengers and Celebrity knew in advance that they were departing?

 

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.

[lvz2cruz]

Do those passengers stay in BC until the next cruise picks them up? If so, where do they stay? Is Celebrity footing the cost for this? It sounds like somebody wasn't paying attention to the law. Whose responsible for this?

 

Let's say you live on the east coast and are going on a Hawaii cruise. You realize the next itinerary on the ship is Alaska and for the price of one airline ticket you can see both.

Some of the Bermuda itineraries rotate with New England and Canada so people can travel once and see both in two weeks. Kind of like the ships in the Caribbean who do one week western and the next week eastern.

I can't see expecting Celebrity being responsible for people booking back to back.

[Gonzo70]

Do those passengers stay in BC until the next cruise picks them up? If so, where do they stay? Is Celebrity footing the cost for this? It sounds like somebody wasn't paying attention to the law. Whose responsible for this?

 

It is quite possible the effected passengers were provided with the option of cancelling one of the cruises, or if they wanted to do the back-to-back they were informed they would have to end the second leg in Victoria rather than complete the trip to Seattle. It is unlikely this was just discovered mid-cruise. Assuming my hypothesis is correct, debarking in Victoria simply was the planned end of the cruise for these passengers. No costs to be footed by anybody or responsibility to be assigned. Now in the off chance this situation was not discovered until after the first cruise had started, IMHO Celebrity should bear the extra costs - but I think it is unlikely that is unlikely.

[NancyIL]

Let's say you live on the east coast and are going on a Hawaii cruise. You realize the next itinerary on the ship is Alaska and for the price of one airline ticket you can see both.

Some of the Bermuda itineraries rotate with New England and Canada so people can travel once and see both in two weeks. Kind of like the ships in the Caribbean who do one week western and the next week eastern.

I can't see expecting Celebrity being responsible for people booking back to back.

 

I'm going on a Hawaii cruise, followed by an Alaskan cruise. I KNOW that I can't board in Honolulu and disembark in Seward, so I'm staying on for the return cruise to Vancouver. The cruise line SHOULD catch illegal b2b cruises...eventually.

[NancyIL]

It is quite possible the effected passengers were provided with the option of cancelling one of the cruises, or if they wanted to do the back-to-back they were informed they would have to end the second leg in Victoria rather than complete the trip to Seattle. It is unlikely this was just discovered mid-cruise. Assuming my hypothesis is correct, debarking in Victoria simply was the planned end of the cruise for these passengers. No costs to be footed by anybody or responsibility to be assigned. Now in the off chance this situation was not discovered until after the first cruise had started, IMHO Celebrity should bear the extra costs - but I think it is unlikely that is unlikely.

 

We won't know what the passengers knew and when - until some of the 200 affected passengers tell others who post here! :D

 

**ETA: the OP said: "We have friends on board who were told to disembark in Victoria BC." To me - that doesn't sound like a choice was given before the cruise departed.

Edited May 10, 2016 by NancyIL