Missed Railjet connection due to late Trenitalia service - what are my chances for claiming back additional ticket cost.

[BRX]

Before getting into the details I should say that I knew this was a risky connection, and my backup option was to buy the additional tickets that I did end up buying.

The purchased itinerary was:
- Trenitalia IC arriving 1616 at Venezia Mestre
- Trenitalia Regionale departing Ven. M. at 1626, arriving Udine 1828
- Railjet leaving Udine 1844 for Austria.

The IC was about 30mins late meaning the connections at Venezia and Udine were both going to be missed. However there was still time to get on the same Railjet as we would have boarded at Udine, in Venezia (which is what we did).

The Trenitalia desk at Venezia M told me that I couldn't get on the Railjet because it's a different company. They just said I could take the next Regionale to Udine and weren't interested in the fact that this would mean getting into Austria about 4 hours later than planned & after midnight.

I think the Agreement on Journey Continuation potentially applies as we were making an international journey. But would we have had to continue to Udine before being offered any alternatives? It's not clear what the "next" applicable service would have been, because there aren't any options that wouldn't have involved a night train until the next morning.

So, was I given the right advice by the Trenitalia counter and do I have any chance of claiming back the cost of the additional Railjet tickets bought to cover Venezia-Udine?

 

[befated]

According to Seat 61, the Agreement for Journey Continuation requires the 'new' replacement connection to be with the same operator as originally booked:

• To qualify for help under the AJC:
  Both trains have to be run by signatories to the agreement.
  You have to be making an international journey, not a domestic one.
  You must have allowed reasonable period of time between trains, meaning at least the minimum applied by official journey planners.
  You may need to get proof of the delay from the delayed operator, which they are obliged to give you.
  Onward travel has to be on the same operator on the same route. It is either the station staff or the train manager for the onward train you gives you permission, you should ask at the interchange station.​

Unfortunately I read this as meaning the Trenitalia counter was correct.

 

[30907]

Did OeBB insist on the new ticket then?

 

[BRX]

Did OeBB insist on the new ticket then?

Well, I initially thought I'd be able to go and ask before departure but then realised the Railjet doesn't start from Mestre. So there wasn't an opportunity to find out before getting on board.

Perhaps we could have just got on the train, and gone and asked, but I thought safer to buy before boarding.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Sep 2026 ==

According to Seat 61, the Agreement for Journey Continuation requires the 'new' replacement connection to be with the same operator as originally booked:

Unfortunately I read this as meaning the Trenitalia counter was correct.

This particular situation is perhaps covered by the spirit of those rules but not the letter of them.

Objective of the AJC​

The main objective of the AJC is to support passengers in reaching their final destination in case a train is delayed or cancelled, and they therefore miss one of their booked connecting trains.

Passengers holding different tickets for separate transport contracts making an international journey should have no extra cost if they miss their connection due to a delay or cancellation.

Agreement on Journey Continuation (AJC)

www.cer.be

 

[Watershed]

How did you buy the tickets - under a single transaction or as separate transactions? I'm guessing separate transactions?

Presumably you at least bought the Trenitalia ones as a part of a single booking? If so, they would be considered a through ticket, and so you would have the protections of the (revised) PRO at least as far as Udine.

The timetable depends on which day you were travelling on, but if it was a Sunday, then looking at next Sunday's timetable it appears there would have been a 17:14 Regionale from Mestre arriving into Udine at 18:51. Since that would have resulted in less than an hour's delay in reaching Udine, I don't think the right to be re-routed would be engaged.

 

[BRX]

One transaction (trainline) but two tickets, one from Trenitalia and one from OBB.
That's correct about the next train to Udine - the issue is that it misses the connection for the last (day) train of the day scross the border into Austria.

 

[Watershed]

One transaction (trainline) but two tickets, one from Trenitalia and one from OBB.
That's correct about the next train to Udine - the issue is that it misses the connection for the last (day) train of the day scross the border into Austria.

Unfortunately in that case I think you are "SOL" for recovering any additional costs from either operator. Trenitalia were only obliged to accommodate you on another of their trains to Udine, which they did. ÖBB were not obliged to let you use their service for free to minimise the delay. So this is one for your travel insurance, if it covers these costs (many policies wouldn't).

The draft EU Regulation regarding through ticketing should help in situations like this, as combinations of tickets would be regarded as single contracts provided they are bought in the same transaction. This is still far from the level of passenger rights we have in Britain, but it's a step in the right direction.

In the meantime, I would approach any connections like this with "caution" knowing you may be exposed to irrecoverable costs if you miss them...

 

[AdamWW]

In the meantime, I would approach any connections like this with "caution" knowing you may be exposed to irrecoverable costs if you miss them...

Which indeed is what the OP said right at the start.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Sep 2026 ==

The draft EU Regulation regarding through ticketing should help in situations like this, as combinations of tickets would be regarded as single contracts provided they are bought in the same transaction. This is still far from the level of passenger rights we have in Britain, but it's a step in the right direction.

Indeed a step in the right direction, but I am curious as to the logic that someone should only get rights if they are able to buy tickets at the same time.

It seems a somewhat unreasonable restriction given that different operators tend to have different booking horizons.

I find this sort of thing a bit frustrating because the actual cost of accommodating delayed passengers presumably isn't large, though of course operators lose out by not being able to get someone to pay twice for the same journey (and the second time likely at a premium price).

 

[Watershed]

I am curious as to the logic that someone should only get rights if they are able to buy tickets at the same time.

It doesn't make any sense but when you consider the amount of lobbying from state operators that has had to be overcome to even reach this position, it seems like somewhat of an improvement on the status quo. Sadly I doubt it will get much better before it becomes EU law.

It seems a somewhat unreasonable restriction given that different operators tend to have different booking horizons.

Agreed, but we are hardly immune from that kind of issue here in Britain either. At least here it is 'only' the increased cost of tickets you face (if the cheapest through Advances aren't available when one operator releases reservations for example) rather than a risk of being stranded with no recourse.

I find this sort of thing a bit frustrating because the actual cost of accommodating delayed passengers presumably isn't large, though of course operators lose out by not being able to get someone to pay twice for the same journey (and the second time likely at a premium price).

I think it simply comes down to the parochial attitude that most state railway operators have. They aren't interested in the fact that better through ticketing and clearer rights would lead to increased journeys (especially international ones) and revenue, they are only interested in their narrow domestic priorities. More to the point they are not interested in anything that will make it easier for Open Access operators to compete.

 

[AdamWW]

It doesn't make any sense but when you consider the amount of lobbying from state operators that has had to be overcome to even reach this position, it seems like somewhat of an improvement on the status quo. Sadly I doubt it will get much better before it becomes EU law.

I suppose it has the advantage of sounding reasonable so long as you don't actually think about it.

Like a lot of political decisions sadly.

Agreed, but we are hardly immune from that kind of issue here in Britain either. At least here it is 'only' the increased cost of tickets you face (if the cheapest through Advances aren't available when one operator releases reservations for example) rather than a risk of being stranded with no recourse.

True but I don't know how you fix that, whereas giving rights (as we do) for through journeys even if not booked together just requires the will to offer it.

 

[doc7austin]

Who is the official train operator the Railjet between Venice and Udine in Italy ?

 

[BRX]

Who is the official train operator the Railjet between Venice and Udine in Italy ?

OBB I would assume?

 

[rvdborgt]

Who is the official train operator the Railjet between Venice and Udine in Italy ?

IIRC that's ÖBB Italia. The ticket should show the operator.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Presumably the situation is the same as why that rule applied in the UK too - that is, it's not reasonable for the operator who has been paid to carry you to profit from your misfortune, so they are required to accommodate you, but it's not reasonable for another operator who has not been paid for your journey at all to be required to do so?

 

[BRX]

Presumably the situation is the same as why that rule applied in the UK too - that is, it's not reasonable for the operator who has been paid to carry you to profit from your misfortune, so they are required to accommodate you, but it's not reasonable for another operator who has not been paid for your journey at all to be required to do so?

However, it means there are all sorts of situations such as mine where the consequence is that the passenger has to shell out (whether for a new ticket or overnight accommodation) when there was actually an easy solution: just let them get on a train that's travelling anyway, and the problem disappears.
And of course it makes international rail travel really unattractive to people who are happy flying instead (even if the journey time is competitive).

 

[ricohallo]

Who is the official train operator the Railjet between Venice and Udine in Italy ?

I recall seeing Rail Cargo Austria listed as the operator on the timetable posters at Tarvisio Boscoverde.

Edit: I found it. It lists Rail Cargo Carrier Italy - Gruppo OBB as the operator.
Found by going to this page: https://prm.rfi.it/qo_prm/QO_Parten...7&lin=&dalle=04.00&alle=08.00&ora=04.00&guid=

Then click Scarica il formato PDF del Quadro Orario at the top right to download a PDF file of the departure poster, then you'll see it listed in the  Legenda at the bottom.

It's of course possible to do the same for the departures in Venice and Udine. It lists the same there too.

 

[30907]

However, it means there are all sorts of situations such as mine where the consequence is that the passenger has to shell out (whether for a new ticket or overnight accommodation) when there was actually an easy solution: just let them get on a train that's travelling anyway, and the problem disappears.

With respect, did you attempt that, or simply assume that you couldn't?

 

[Starmill]

With respect, did you attempt that, or simply assume that you couldn't?

Well if you have a read of the thread you will see that they did attempt it...

You can purchase a ticket onboard a Railjet, but if you join the train without a ticket, this costs extra. Are you really saying that you'd have got on and asked for a freebie, knowing that by far the most likely outcome would be to be charged the onboard surcharge?

 

[BRX]

You can purchase a ticket onboard a Railjet, but if you join the train without a ticket, this costs extra. Are you really saying that you'd have got on and asked for a freebie, knowing that by far the most likely outcome would be to be charged the onboard surcharge?

Yes this is basically it.

I'd made two official solution attempts - the first was to ask the train manager on the late running Italian IC. He just said I would have to ask at the desk at the station. So the second was to do that, also without success.

I had hoped that one of these attempts might at least produce a bit of paper confirming the delay and the fact that the intended connections would be impossible as a result. If I'd had such a bit of paper (and ideally the advice that I should show it to the Railjet staff) then I might have attempted boarding without tickets to see if we'd just be waved on.

As is often the case, the situation unfolded without leaving a great deal of time to research the options. Once at the station, the twenty minutes or so that were available were mostly used up in finding the ticket desk and waiting in a queue for it. Inbetween all this I was googling on my phone to see what OBB's policy was on boarding without a ticket, and I'd worked out that it was probably ok to buy on board, but probably at an increased price compared to buying online. It didn't really seem worth the risk seeing as no advice I'd been given so far suggested that we'd be allowed to use that train without additional cost.

The point really is that the "journey continuation agreement" stuff is pretty flimsy and there's no real structure in place to give passengers confidence that they are covered (or give them help when things go wrong). It means that combining tickets from different operators is kind of risky unless you factor in fairly generous time buffers. Which kind of defeats the purpose of having a high speed network.

I actually bought these tickets from Trainline (normally I'd go direct to the operators) because I thought doing them as one transaction would provide some extra protection (it would at least demonstrate that the itinerary was valid). But once I got to the end of the process, it told me I was being sold two separate tickets and connections couldn't be guaranteed. I noticed that Trainline then offered me some kind of insurance for an extra £10 or so, but I didn't buy it because I didn't have time to go through the details of what it actually covered. I wonder whether it would have covered this scenario.

 

[30907]

Well if you have a read of the thread you will see that they did attempt it...

I read it as they asked TI staff.

You can purchase a ticket onboard a Railjet, but if you join the train without a ticket, this costs extra. Are you really saying that you'd have got on and asked for a freebie, knowing that by far the most likely outcome would be to be charged the onboard surcharge?

I would have asked before boarding.

BTW how much is the surcharge?

 

[BRX]

I would have asked before boarding.

The Railjet starts from Venezia Santa Lucia, and we were boarding it at Mestre. So there would only have been a minute or two to find the train manager and ask them the question, which was not a totally straightforward one. If they had said "no" then the options would have been to pay the surcharge (the size of which was unknown to me at that moment) or to miss the train, pay for a night's accommodation, and probably have to buy a load of new tickets for the following day that may have run into the 100s of euros in cost.

Bear in mind this is me dealing with the situation as a rail enthusiast with quite a lot of experience of european rail travel and prior knowledge about operators, with the OBB and trenitalia apps (and user accounts) already installed on my phone - and also with a full understanding of the consequences of missing the connection because I had studied the timetables fairly closely.

What would have happened to a regular passenger? I think they'd have been told to get the next Trenitalia train to Udine. There, they would have been told that there were no more Railjet trains across the border that day. If lucky perhaps they'd have been put on a series of connecting trains including a night train which would have delivered them to their destination well after midnight. I suspect they'd simply have been told sorry there's nothing we can do. They'd have had to find a hotel for the night and then rebook trains for the next day at significant expense.

 

[Starmill]

I read it as they asked TI staff.

Yes because there are no OEBB staff to ask...

I would have asked before boarding.

How? You have, what, 30 seconds to find them and explain everything. You may not even be able to find them before they begin closing the doors. If you do find them and they say "Trenitalia ticket not valid", which is by some way the most likely outcome, and is something they are used to saying regularly, they may then say you can't board at all, unless you pay the surcharge.

What would have happened to a regular passenger? I think they'd have been told to get the next Trenitalia train to Udine. There, they would have been told that there were no more Railjet trains across the border that day. If lucky perhaps they'd have been put on a series of connecting trains including a night train which would have delivered them to their destination well after midnight. I suspect they'd simply have been told sorry there's nothing we can do. They'd have had to find a hotel for the night and then rebook trains for the next day at significant expense.

Indeed. There is a chance that flexibility would have been offered for your Udine - Austria ticket (I'm assuming this is what you held?) a day later, either as a matter of customer service given the missed connection or as a provision of the AJC. Equally there's a chance OEBB may have charged you again and left you to see if you could recover the money for that, which at least would face some serious practical barriers.

Nobody would have been willing to cover the cost of the overnight accommodation, unless you have a very good travel insurance policy or a case handler looks at your claim in the round with your claims history and standing as their customer, and approves it as a matter of customer service.

I would be tempted to submit a claim for what you actually paid to a travel insurer just to see. It depends on how much you paid for the insurance, the wording of the policy, the value of the claim, whether you've made claims before, and how long you've been their customer. If it were a premium policy and I'd been a customer for several years having never previously made a claim it might be worth a go. If it were a £25 bargain policy recently taken out I'd ignore it and save my time.

 

[doc7austin]

What would I have done in the OP's situation: I'd have boarded the Railjet in Venezia, but would have approached the train staff proactively.
It is very likely that the train staff would not have issued a penalty fare. This is an edge case and most conductors won't punish travellers here.

 

[BRX]

I would be tempted to submit a claim for what you actually paid to a travel insurer just to see.

Yes I might do this, with low expectations attached.