Stuck Onboard During Cruise???

[harkinmr]

11 minutes ago, sverigecruiser said:

 

But why shall they bring their luggage, passport and wallet when they, according to you, won't be allowed to leave?

 

I recommend them to bring those things because they won't be allowed to board again after they have left the ship. 

You are talking in circles, and misinterpreting what I am posting.  I can't help you in that regard.  But once again,  they CAN stop you.  It's THEIR RULE and you will not be allowed to disembark the ship.  It says so right in their terms and conditions.  If you or anyone insists on testing the rule, then be sure to bring your personal belongings with you to the gangway.  If you really think you're going to force your way off the ship, you better be prepared because you ain't getting back on.

I am absolutely stumped as to why you keep pushing this and have regurgitated the same question over and over again when it has been answered already.  I think you have said that you clearly intend to abide by the rules on shore excursions, so why are you pushing the opposite so continuously.  Do your own research, or consult a maritime lawyer, or whatever, and come back with something that shows that my assertions are incorrect.  I am not going to do your leg work for you.

Edited April 21, 2021 by harkinmr

[sverigecruiser]

1 hour ago, harkinmr said:

  If they push it too far after being warned, I, for one, will enjoy seeing them being restrained by ship's security, confined to their cabin or the ship's cell, and summarily dumped at the next available port.

 

 

I don't try to argue with you (right now...) but why should the cruiseline do this? I'm only trying to understand how you think so it is a serious question to you.

 

What's the cruiselines gain in that scenario?  They restrain the passengers in one port and force them to leave in next. Shouldn't it be much better for the cruiseline to let them leave in the first port? Why lock them in and give them food for an extra day? That doesn't make sense, for me.

[MoCruiseFan]

On 4/17/2021 at 1:50 PM, SouthLyonCruiser said:

From some of what I have been seeing; how true is it that, unless you have a cruise line sanctioned excursion, you are not allowed to leave the ship?

We have rebooked, for the second time, an Alaskan cruise for next year. 

It we are stuck on the ship because we don't have a cruise line sanctioned tour booked, we will be cancelling.

OK

[MoCruiseFan]

On 4/18/2021 at 3:35 PM, sverigecruiser said:

 

Thank you for showing me that but I can't see anywhere in that text that they are allowed to force anyone to stay on the ship.

 

 

Removal of certain onboard privileges, ->> which may include being detained, quarantined or confined in a stateroom or holding cell <--;

[sverigecruiser]

4 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

You are talking in circles

 

Defenitely wrong. I have been extremely straight.

 

1. People shall follow all rules and I defenitely follow all rules.

 

2. This discussion started when I asked about some kind of confirmation that the cruiseline can force someone to stay on the ship because I was amazed that they can do that. Noone has given me any confirmation. I have agreed that I may be wrong but so far I have seen no indications that I am. I should have no problem to agree to being wrong if that should be the case.

 

3. A cruiseline can write any kind of rules they want and have their passengers to sign that they agree. Local laws still overrule thoose rules  and in many (all?) places you can't sign a contract saying that someone is allowed to keep you somewhere if you wants to leave. Of course you can sign it but it won't be valid if local laws say something else. If needed the local police will help with that.

 

3. If you break the rules and leave the ship without an excursion you won't be allowed back onboard again.

[All-ready2cruise]

I think some of this is determined by the contracts and agreements the cruise lines will/do have with the ports of call.  If the agreements are that all passengers must stay with the tour group and not venture off on their own then that is the agreement and must be adhered to. 

 

If you go off on your own, you're putting the agreement between cruise line and tour management in jeopardy and the cruise line may not be permitted to return to the POC.  

 

Does that not seem answer the question? 

[AstoriaPreppy]

On 4/18/2021 at 2:26 PM, IrieBajan54 said:

So is CDC saying that the car cabin filter is good enough with a total stranger?

The CDC has been clear that cabs, Uber and Lyft with drivers/strangers are a major issue.

Literally from their site on how drivers can protect passengers: "Avoid using the recirculated air option for the car’s ventilation during passenger transport; use the car’s vents to bring in fresh outside air and/or lower the vehicle windows."

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/organizations/rideshare-drivers-for-hire.html

 

[sverigecruiser]

5 minutes ago, All-ready2cruise said:

I think some of this is determined by the contracts and agreements the cruise lines will/do have with the ports of call.  If the agreements are that all passengers must stay with the tour group and not venture off on their own then that is the agreement and must be adhered to. 

 

If you go off on your own, you're putting the agreement between cruise line and tour management in jeopardy and the cruise line may not be permitted to return to the POC.  

 

Does that not seem answer the question? 

 

This I absolutely agree with. Local authorities may have decided, probably in discussions with the cruiselines, that noone is allowed to leave the ship unless they are on a cruiseexcursion with "a bubble".

 

If someone insist to leave local police will have to deal with that.

[sverigecruiser]

37 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

I am absolutely stumped as to why you keep pushing this and have regurgitated the same question over and over again when it has been answered already.  I think you have said that you clearly intend to abide by the rules on shore excursions, so why are you pushing the opposite so continuously.  Do your own research, or consult a maritime lawyer, or whatever, and come back with something that shows that my assertions are incorrect.  I am not going to do your leg work for you.

 

I can say exactly the same thing to you!

 

The strange thing is that we seem to agree about the most important thing, the rules shall be followed!

[All-ready2cruise]

1 minute ago, sverigecruiser said:

If someone insist to leave local police will have to deal with that.

Right. I'm quite sure both parties would want to avoid getting local police involved. 

[coffeebean]

4 hours ago, harkinmr said:

Honestly, it is a lost cause on this one coffeebean. It is black and white that the cruise line can detain anyone violating, or “attempting” to violate a rule (i.e., trying to leave the ship in violation of shore access restrictions). I tried numerous times to explain this to no avail. The poster appears to believe that the cruise line cannot forcibly restrain someone that attempts to leave the ship, despite all the evidence to the contrary.  It is what it is. And the only proof that poster will likely accept is the inevitable challenge that will come up on future cruises. That, above anything else, will send the message loud and clear. 

Agree.

[harkinmr]

18 minutes ago, sverigecruiser said:

 

Defenitely wrong. I have been extremely straight.

 

1. People shall follow all rules and I defenitely follow all rules.

 

2. This discussion started when I asked about some kind of confirmation that the cruiseline can force someone to stay on the ship because I was amazed that they can do that. Noone has given me any confirmation. I have agreed that I may be wrong but so far I have seen no indications that I am. I should have no problem to agree to being wrong if that should be the case.

 

3. A cruiseline can write any kind of rules they want and have their passengers to sign that they agree. Local laws still overrule thoose rules  and in many (all?) places you can't sign a contract saying that someone is allowed to keep you somewhere if you wants to leave. Of course you can sign it but it won't be valid if local laws say something else. If needed the local police will help with that.

 

3. If you break the rules and leave the ship without an excursion you won't be allowed back onboard again.

Do your own research.  I can't help you anymore.

[sverigecruiser]

9 hours ago, harkinmr said:

Do your own research.  I can't help you anymore.

 

No need for me to research anything.

[sanger727]

On 4/21/2021 at 2:22 PM, sverigecruiser said:

 

This I absolutely agree with. Local authorities may have decided, probably in discussions with the cruiselines, that noone is allowed to leave the ship unless they are on a cruiseexcursion with "a bubble".

 

If someone insist to leave local police will have to deal with that.

 

It's not a police issue (at least not in the US). It will be a border patrol issue. Local police enforce local and state laws, not illegal entry into the US (federal law). 

 

I think the part you keep skipping over in your "they can't make me stay on the ship" argument, is that IF they are permitted by the contract to detain you in your cabin, then how exactly are you going to get off the ship? I imagine the Captain and cruise line can get into whole heaps of trouble if they knowingly help you illegally enter the country. So that could be why they wouldn't let you.

 

As far as the only example of these rules being violated - the person left the ship on an excursion and then left the excursion. Apples and oranges to you leaving without permission. 

[cabincop]

As much as I’d rather do my own excursions I’ll do whatever to go on a cruise. I wonder how they’re going to handle the time to explore on your own part of the ship tours. 

[sverigecruiser]

4 hours ago, sanger727 said:

 

It's not a police issue (at least not in the US). It will be a border patrol issue. Local police enforce local and state laws, not illegal entry into the US (federal law). 

 

 

You know that better than me so I'm sure that you are right. The way I see it is that it should be the local police because it's not about illegal entry, it's about a private company detaining someone against their will which most likely isn't allowed according to local laws. (I understand that some private companies might be allowed to do that.)

[sverigecruiser]

4 hours ago, sanger727 said:

 

I think the part you keep skipping over in your "they can't make me stay on the ship" argument, is that IF they are permitted by the contract to detain you in your cabin, then how exactly are you going to get off the ship? I imagine the Captain and cruise line can get into whole heaps of trouble if they knowingly help you illegally enter the country. So that could be why they wouldn't let you.

 

 

I'm not talking about illegaly enter the country. If someone isn't allowed to enter the country then local authorities can say that the cruiseline shall not let the person leave the ship.

 

 I'm talking about someone wanting to leave the ship and the cruiseline say no. If they detain you in the cabin I guess one thing to do is call the police and say that you are detained in your cabin and want help to get out. Here a private company is not allowed to lock someone in anywhere except under some circumstances when they can do it until police arrives.   

 

I understand that what's correct here may not be correct somewhere else and I have said "local laws" because of that.   

[complawyer]

2 hours ago, cabincop said:

As much as I’d rather do my own excursions I’ll do whatever to go on a cruise. I wonder how they’re going to handle the time to explore on your own part of the ship tours. 

i would hazard a guess that if these excursion restrictions remain in effect, ncl will cancel any shore excursion that includes free time to explore on your own. if they dont do that, it would make no sense not to allow people to get off the ship and book other tours on their own, or just grab a cab and do sightseeing.

 

im with you, however, if im limited to only ncl excursions, (other then their outrageous prices) so be it