Cruise Critic saved us.....thanks to all

[Qcruise]

We were booked and paid for our Koningsdam cruise from San Diego to Vancouver coming up late April.  We also booked after much discussion on these boards an overnighter aboard the Oosterdam upon debarking the Koningsdam in order to get us back to Seattle.  Much talk on these boards as to whether the "Jones Act" is in violation by us getting off the one ship to board another to overnight to Seattle.  It was confirmed at that time that it was not in violation as the first cruise was porting in Victoria Canada prior to debarking in Vancouver the following cruise was OK.  Then HAL changed our port from Victoria to Seattle on the Koningsdam for a media event.  So apparently this is when we now are in violation of the Jones Act as now it looks at the two cruises as a round trip Seattle......and we don't know this until yesterday when someone on our roll call thread again speaks a warning to us.  At first I was annoyed by this but it did spur us into another call to HAL.  Needed to elevate it to a supervisor in order to get an answer but it was confirmed.  At this point we needed to duke it out with the travel agency for a refund who usually charges a $100 dollar fee for such things.  An hour on hold with them calling HAL we did get our refund with no penalties and were told that they learned something today.  Had we turned up to board the Oosterdam we're told we would be subject to arrest or fine as it breaks the law,  even if we had no idea.  If not for CC and the knowledge it provides people like us would have real issues.  Thanks to all for your help and this is why we are here.  I do think HAL has responsability here as they should have allerted us as to this potential problem.  We are now taking the train into Washington that evening.

[kazu]

6 minutes ago, Qcruise said:

If not for CC and the knowledge it provides people like us would have real issues.  Thanks to all for your help and this is why we are here. 

 

Your entire post is lovely but I chose to snip this as I am so glad that CC and your roll call was of help to you and saved you from what could have been an ordeal 😄 

There are a lot of knowledgeable people on these boards and I know that over the years, I have learned a lot 🙂 

 

How nice of you to post this 😄 

[Homosassa]

Unless you consider yourself cargo, the Jones Act doesn't apply in your case.

Edited February 12, 2020 by Homosassa

[iancal]

Lots of great info on theses boards.  You do have to sift through.  We have been warned off a few dogs and we have been recommended more often to some great ships.  Plus first rate advice as to what cabins to book and what not to book.

 

The Oz/NZ board gave us a heads up on an late booking offer that allowed us to save 30 percent plus by booking in Australia vs our NA on line TA.  Also had various heads up on price reductions and last minute cruise offers.  Not to mention multiple excellent private excursions...some booked and arranged by other cruisers.

Edited February 12, 2020 by iancal

[CruiserBruce]

1 hour ago, Homosassa said:

Unless you consider yourself cargo, the Jones Act doesn't apply in your case.

Agree. It is the PVSA...the P stands for "Passenger".

[martincath]

4 hours ago, Qcruise said:

... We also booked after much discussion on these boards an overnighter aboard the Oosterdam upon debarking the Koningsdam in order to get us back to Seattle.  ...It was confirmed at that time that it was not in violation as the first cruise was porting in Victoria Canada prior to debarking in Vancouver the following cruise was OK.  ... At this point we needed to duke it out with the travel agency for a refund who usually charges a $100 dollar fee for such things.  ... I do think HAL has responsability here as they should have allerted us as to this potential problem. 

OP - the most useful piece of 'ammo' in getting your refund was the fact that the add-on cruise was illegal from day one. Victoria made not a jot of difference! As soon as you moved from a San Diego-Vancouver itinerary to a San Diego-Seattle one, your cruise became illegal because you were not stopping at a port outside North America. Canadian and Mexican port stops - indeed, virtually everything in the Caribbean too - only allow you to legally make a ROUND TRIP cruise. The PVSA exemption is specifically termed a 'Closed Loop', i.e. you end up exactly where you began (violations have been levied againt ships which even docked at a different pier within the same harbour area, e.g. Cunard did a not-quite-closed-loop from Brooklyn to New Jersey - still run by the same port authority, but different enough for CBP to fine them!)

 

For a legal one-way between two different US ports on a foreign-flag ship, you need to stop somewhere off the continent - South American mainland and/or ABC islands are how cruises bringing ships through the Panama Canal are made legal, so for San Diego to Seattle you'd either have to make a double passage through the canal and back with stop at an ABC, somewhere on the pacific coast of South America like Peru/Ecuador, or else go even further across the Pacific to e.g. Kiribati to reach a compliant port.

 

Nobody who has even the slightest clue about the PVSA - and frankly, any travel agent taking bookings for cruises in North America should be ashamed of themselves if they are not familiar - would have let you add on the Seattle extension. HAL, like all cruiselines, does not code their system to reject cruises when booked - you might have a string of B2B2B2B2Bs that have a Distant Foreign Port in there somewhere - but instead they run reports that flag violations at some point down the line. Usually folks do therefore get notified, but I can recall many instances of that notification coming within a month of departure when you'd already have hotels, flights etc. booked and run into lots of hassle and potential costs.

 

Enjoy the train - they have better beer than you could have gotten on the cruise 😉

 

Edited February 12, 2020 by martincath

[puppycanducruise]

I'm glad you found out the truth before your cruise.

There's a lot of good information here on Cruise Critic.

[Himself]

This board is very good for accurate information

[Caribbean Chris]

8 hours ago, Homosassa said:

Unless you consider yourself cargo, the Jones Act doesn't apply in your case.

Some of us board as passengers and disembark as cargo, as the old cruise director joke goes in reference to over-eating.

[Shmoo here]

10 hours ago, Qcruise said:

We were booked and paid for our Koningsdam cruise from San Diego to Vancouver coming up late April.  We also booked after much discussion on these boards an overnighter aboard the Oosterdam upon debarking the Koningsdam in order to get us back to Seattle.  Much talk on these boards as to whether the "Jones Act" is in violation by us getting off the one ship to board another to overnight to Seattle.  It was confirmed at that time that it was not in violation as the first cruise was porting in Victoria Canada prior to debarking in Vancouver the following cruise was OK.  Then HAL changed our port from Victoria to Seattle on the Koningsdam for a media event.  So apparently this is when we now are in violation of the Jones Act as now it looks at the two cruises as a round trip Seattle......and we don't know this until yesterday when someone on our roll call thread again speaks a warning to us.  At first I was annoyed by this but it did spur us into another call to HAL.  Needed to elevate it to a supervisor in order to get an answer but it was confirmed.  At this point we needed to duke it out with the travel agency for a refund who usually charges a $100 dollar fee for such things.  An hour on hold with them calling HAL we did get our refund with no penalties and were told that they learned something today.  Had we turned up to board the Oosterdam we're told we would be subject to arrest or fine as it breaks the law,  even if we had no idea.  If not for CC and the knowledge it provides people like us would have real issues.  Thanks to all for your help and this is why we are here.  I do think HAL has responsability here as they should have allerted us as to this potential problem.  We are now taking the train into Washington that evening.

I'm not sure I'm following all the itinerary stuff.

 

The first cruise was San Diego to Vancouver with the port preceding Vancouver being Victoria?  And now that port is Seattle?

 

The second cruise was Vancouver to Seattle (on a different ship)?

 

If I have that correct - Booking the two original cruises does not violate the PVSA (not Jones Act).  

 

Changing Victoria to Seattle on the first cruise still does not violate the PVSA.

 

The PVSA does not apply to your cruises since both cruises are on different ships.  It also doesn't apply on a cruise that starts in a US port and ends in a foreign port.  The first cruise would be San Diego to Vancouver.  The second cruise is Vancouver to Seattle.

 

The PVSA only applies to B2B cruises on the same ship that the first cruise begins in a US port, and the second cruise ends in a different US port.

 

Edited February 13, 2020 by Shmoo here

[Btimmer]

We are in a similar situation.  We depart San Diego RT to Mexico and then arrive in Seattle (where we live) on the Maasdam, but can't disembark, but need to finish in Vancouver, BC and then make our own way back to Seattle.

[ceilidh1]

4 hours ago, Shmoo here said:

I'm not sure I'm following all the itinerary stuff.

 

The first cruise was San Diego to Vancouver with the port preceding Vancouver being Victoria?  And now that port is Seattle?

 

The second cruise was Vancouver to Seattle (on a different ship)?

 

If I have that correct - Booking the two original cruises does not violate the PVSA (not Jones Act).  

 

Changing Victoria to Seattle on the first cruise still does not violate the PVSA.

 

The PVSA does not apply to your cruises since both cruises are on different ships.  It also doesn't apply on a cruise that starts in a US port and ends in a foreign port.  The first cruise would be San Diego to Vancouver.  The second cruise is Vancouver to Seattle.

 

The PVSA only applies to B2B cruises on the same ship that the first cruise begins in a US port, and the second cruise ends in a different US port.

 

I agree with the above. If you are on two different ships, I don't believe you are in violation:

 

https://seatravel.wordpress.com/2008/05/08/passenger-services-act-united-states/

In addition, passengers may travel between 2 U.S. ports if they travel on 2 different ships as Passenger Services Act violations are ship-specific. A violation occurs when a ship (not two ships) transports passengers between two different U.S. ports.

 

https://www.cruisecritic.com/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.

Passenger Z's remedies are to book the Alaskan portion of the trip on a different ship or by including a third segment that ends at a foreign port as the final destination.

[Two4Sea]

The OP was going to do Konigsdam San Diego Apr 28-Victoria May1-Vancouver May 2 connecting to Oosterdam Vancouver May 2-Seattle May 3.

Then the schedule was revised to Konigsdam San Diego Apr 28-Seattle May1-Vancouver May 2 connecting to Oosterdam Vancouver May 2-Seattle May 3.

 

HAL alleges a sub detail of the PSVA prohibits the likes of the Seattle-Vancouver-Seattle round trip with less than a 24 hour layover. This was discussed in the Konigsdam roll call. Shmoo's post on the change of ship however counters that. Makes me wonder if I am ahead or behind HAL's staffer on the subtleties of the Act and how much he would recommend trusting that the CBP officer on duty that day is also up on whichever subtlety is correct. I once tried to ask an a US officer at Vancouver's pier for an advance interpretation on extended medications, I couldn't even get one asked out to the public side of the partition to talk to. Tried again at the NEXUS office at the airport and was directed to a phone where all the officer would say is that it would be up to the officer that processed me. You've got to go along with their procedures.

 

Back to the PSVA, remember these rules date back to when business travelers slowly zipped around the coasts on steamships the way we quickly zip across states on a jet today. Back then a Canadian ship considering competing between two US ports would just stop by an enroute Canadian city for 15 minutes if that's all it took to circumvent the act. If you repealed the Act that sort of non US company/non US staff competition would start up again. It's a messy issue. It's not one sided either, Canada has an equivalent to the PSVA. I can sail HAL out of Vancouver to Alaska exactly because it is going to Alaska.

 

Bill

[strickerj]

I'm glad it worked out for you, but I think some of your fears may have been unfounded - the cruise line is assessed the fines for PVSA violations, so at worst you would have been denied boarding had they flagged your itinerary. You wouldn't have been personally fined and you certainly wouldn't have been arrested for it. 🙂

[sail7seas]

23 hours ago, Qcruise said:

We were booked and paid for our Koningsdam cruise from San Diego to Vancouver coming up late April.  We also booked after much discussion on these boards an overnighter aboard the Oosterdam upon debarking the Koningsdam in order to get us back to Seattle.  Much talk on these boards as to whether the "Jones Act" is in violation by us getting off the one ship to board another to overnight to Seattle.  It was confirmed at that time that it was not in violation as the first cruise was porting in Victoria Canada prior to debarking in Vancouver the following cruise was OK.  Then HAL changed our port from Victoria to Seattle on the Koningsdam for a media event.  So apparently this is when we now are in violation of the Jones Act as now it looks at the two cruises as a round trip Seattle......and we don't know this until yesterday when someone on our roll call thread again speaks a warning to us.  At first I was annoyed by this but it did spur us into another call to HAL.  Needed to elevate it to a supervisor in order to get an answer but it was confirmed.  At this point we needed to duke it out with the travel agency for a refund who usually charges a $100 dollar fee for such things.  An hour on hold with them calling HAL we did get our refund with no penalties and were told that they learned something today.  Had we turned up to board the Oosterdam we're told we would be subject to arrest or fine as it breaks the law,  even if we had no idea.  If not for CC and the knowledge it provides people like us would have real issues.  Thanks to all for your help and this is why we are here.  I do think HAL has responsability here as they should have allerted us as to this potential problem.  We are now taking the train into Washington that evening.

I am very surprised that HAL made a booking which  violates PVSA...  the passenger part of Jones Act,  Jones applies  to cargo

 

HAppy you got it worked out and will suffer no penalty  Cruise line should not confirm a booking in violation of  law,  IMO

 

 

Hope you have  a great cruise.

 

Thank you for your post.  It could be very helpful info for someone who is no aware of PVSA and Jones Act.

 

Edited February 13, 2020 by sail7seas

[martincath]

13 hours ago, Shmoo here said:

...The second cruise was Vancouver to Seattle (on a different ship)?

Shazbat - I totally missed the opening sentences with a second ship involved. Shmoo's absolutely correct - instead of being screwed by incompetence when you first booked OP, you've actually had the opposite happen! Different ship = restart the clock, and that's absolutely definitive. The PVSA is a per vessel piece of legislation - not a per line one. It would be called the PLSA if it was concerned with multiple ships within the same line...

 

The only bits I actually got right were that the Victoria-Seattle change was irrelevant (first cruise is one-way ending outside the US, so no PVSA relevance regardless of route) and that you get better beer on the train.

 

I'd now be demanding getting put back on the one-nighter, a refund of your train fare, and at least a token OBC to cover HAL faffing you around.

[Qcruise]

1 hour ago, martincath said:

Shazbat - I totally missed the opening sentences with a second ship involved. Shmoo's absolutely correct - instead of being screwed by incompetence when you first booked OP, you've actually had the opposite happen! Different ship = restart the clock, and that's absolutely definitive. The PVSA is a per vessel piece of legislation - not a per line one. It would be called the PLSA if it was concerned with multiple ships within the same line...

 

The only bits I actually got right were that the Victoria-Seattle change was irrelevant (first cruise is one-way ending outside the US, so no PVSA relevance regardless of route) and that you get better beer on the train.

 

I'd now be demanding getting put back on the one-nighter, a refund of your train fare, and at least a token OBC to cover HAL faffing you around.

No thanks.....we're done.....too much ambiguity on this subject.  We have our train tickets and we are done.  Others were in the same boat so to speak and also bailed on the second cruise.  

[Shmoo here]

11 hours ago, Two4Sea said:

The OP was going to do Konigsdam San Diego Apr 28-Victoria May1-Vancouver May 2 connecting to Oosterdam Vancouver May 2-Seattle May 3.

Then the schedule was revised to Konigsdam San Diego Apr 28-Seattle May1-Vancouver May 2 connecting to Oosterdam Vancouver May 2-Seattle May 3.

The original Konigsdam cruise was San Diego to Vancouver (with a stop in Victoria), correct?  The new itinerary is San Diego to Vancouver (with that stop now being Seattle), correct?

 

Either one of those cruises is legal.  If the original SD-Van was changed to a SD-Seattle and a new Seattle-Van cruise added, then the SD-Seattle is now in violation for EVERYONE who was booked.  And they'd have to sail that cruise with no passengers.

 

Since the first cruise is SD-Vancouver on one ship, and the second cruise in question is Vancouver-Seattle on a DIFFERENT ship, the PVSA is not in effect.

 

 

Edited February 13, 2020 by Shmoo here

[Shmoo here]

15 hours ago, Two4Sea said:

HAL alleges a sub detail of the PSVA prohibits the likes of the Seattle-Vancouver-Seattle round trip with less than a 24 hour layover. This was discussed in the Konigsdam roll call.

There is no Seattle-Vancouver-Seattle round trip.  The PVSA only looks at where a passenger gets on a specific ship and debarks that same ship.  

 

Since both of the original cruises were on different ships the PVSA should never had entered the conversation.

 

 

[Boytjie]

One: nobody gets arrested for violating the PVSA. The cruise line gets fined and they likely pass it on to the passenger.

 

The cruise originally started in Seattle and ended in Vancouver. The new itinerary does the same. The stop in Vancouver vs Seattle is irrelevant.

[Shmoo here]

9 minutes ago, Boytjie said:

One: nobody gets arrested for violating the PVSA. The cruise line gets fined and they likely pass it on to the passenger.

 

The cruise originally started in Seattle and ended in Vancouver. The new itinerary does the same. The stop in Vancouver vs Seattle is irrelevant.

The original first cruise started in San Diego, and ended in Vancouver with a stop in Victoria as part of the itinerary.

 

The original second cruise started in Vancouver and ended in Seattle.

 

Both cruises were on different ships.

 

The first cruise itinerary was changed.  Seattle replaced Victoria.

 

HAL, apparently, told OP that, with the new itinerary on the first cruise the "B2B inside the whole trip was a Seattle to Seattle round trip without a 24 hour break between the cruises, it was illegal according to the PVSA"  Which is, of course, untrue.

 

 

[Boytjie]

3 minutes ago, Shmoo here said:

The original first cruise started in San Diego, and ended in Vancouver with a stop in Victoria as part of the itinerary.

 

The original second cruise started in Vancouver and ended in Seattle.

 

Both cruises were on different ships.

 

The first cruise itinerary was changed.  Seattle replaced Victoria.

 

HAL, apparently, told OP that, with the new itinerary on the first cruise the "B2B inside the whole trip was a Seattle to Seattle round trip without a 24 hour break between the cruises, it was illegal according to the PVSA"  Which is, of course, untrue.

 

 

 

According to the HAL website, the cruise ends in Vancouver after calling on Seattle. HAL would violate the PVSA if they tried to sail from San Diego to Seattle without visiting a distant foreign port.

 

 

 

[Shmoo here]

18 minutes ago, Boytjie said:

 

According to the HAL website, the cruise ends in Vancouver after calling on Seattle. HAL would violate the PVSA if they tried to sail from San Diego to Seattle without visiting a distant foreign port.

 

 

 

Exactly.  The original (first) cruise on the K'dam was San Diego to Vancouver with a call at Victoria.  The second cruise was from Vancouver to Seattle ON A DIFFERENT SHIP (Oosterdam, I believe).

 

HAL changed the Victoria stop to a Seattle stop, so the first cruise is now San Diego to Vancouver, with a call at Seattle.

 

The second cruise remains a Vancouver to Seattle cruise.

 

HAL is apparently saying that "within the overall trip" (regardless that it's on two different ships) is a Seattle to Seattle round trip without a 24 hour layover between the two cruises and is,therefore, illegal.

 

And, again I say, that's untrue.  The PVSA doesn't even enter the picture because the two different cruises, on two different ships don't even fall under the PVSA umbrella.  They either begin or end in a foreign port and they don't violate the PVSA.

 

 

Edited February 14, 2020 by Shmoo here

[Boytjie]

2 minutes ago, Shmoo here said:

Exactly.  The original (first) cruise on the K'dam was San Diego to Vancouver with a call at Victoria.  The second cruise was from Vancouver to Seattle ON A DIFFERENT SHIP (Oosterdam, I believe).

 

HAL changed the Victoria stop to a Seattle stop, so the first cruise is now San Diego to Vancouver, with a call at Seattle.

 

The second cruise remains a Vancouver to Seattle cruise.

 

HAL is apparently saying that "within the overall trip" (regardless that it's on two different ships) is a Seattle to Seattle round trip without a 24 hour layover between the two cruises is illegal.

 

And, again I say, that's untrue.  The PVSA doesn't even enter the picture because the two different cruises, on two different ships don't even fall under the PVSA umbrella.  They either begin or end in a foreign port and they don't violate the PVSA.

 

 

 

I am only addressing the changed original cruise.

 

Look at the itinerary again! Seattle is a stop before Vancouver, in place of Victoria. It is legal.

Edited February 14, 2020 by Boytjie

[Shmoo here]

1 minute ago, Boytjie said:

 

I am only addressing the changed original cruise.

 

Look at the itinerary again! Seattle is a stop before Vancouver, in place of Victoria. It is legal.

I never said it wasn't.  

 

I'm just pointing out that OP was told (by HAL, apparently) that since their trip would include a "little roundtrip from Seattle to Seattle WITHOUT A 24 HOUR (OR MORE) LAYOVER between the two cruises" it was illegal under the PVSA.