3/26
Passenger claims in practice
International passenger claims often involve several undertakings and different types of remedies. The following two cases illustrate the practical importance of identifying the relevant contract, the issuing undertaking, the carriers involved and the carrier responsible for assistance, as well as of distinguishing between reimbursement, delay compensation and assistance costs.
Case 1: Berlin–Brussels – who should handle the claim?
A passenger planned to travel from Berlin to Brussels via Amsterdam and purchased two separate tickets from SNCB: an SNCB train-linked ticket (TLT) “SuperSparpreis” for Berlin–Amsterdam and an integrated reservation ticket (IRT) for the Eurostar service from Amsterdam to Brussels. When the Berlin–Amsterdam IC train was cancelled, DB Customer Service in Berlin re-routed the passenger via Mönchengladbach, Herzogenrath and Liège and sold an additional ticket for Herzogenrath–Brussels (for 39,20 EUR). On the alternative route, a further 90-minute delay left the passenger stranded at Liège-Guillemins at 00:30 a.m. the following day, when the station was already unstaffed. As no assistance –accommodation, meals or refreshments – was available, the passenger took a taxi home for 290 EUR.
How the claim was handled
The passenger claimed delay compensation and reimbursement of the taxi costs. SNCB paid 53 EUR in delay compensation and a flat-rate contribution of 100 EUR towards the taxi, then forwarded the case to DB. DB reimbursed the unused Liège–Brussels section of the additional ticket but referred the remaining claims back to SNCB. Dissatisfied, the passenger submitted the case to the Belgian National Enforcement Body (NEB), which considered it to fall within the competence of the German NEB, the Eisenbahn-Bundesamt (EBA). EBA asked DB to clarify, in particular, the distinction between selling and issuing the original Berlin–Amsterdam ticket.
For the Berlin–Amsterdam ticket, SNCB was the issuing undertaking, identified by code 1088, while DB and NS were the successive carriers. Under the CIT Agreement concerning the Relationships between Transport Undertakings in respect of International Passenger Traffic by Rail (AIV), the issuing undertaking handles claims for delay compensation and reimbursement relating to the relevant contract and subsequently allocates the costs among the carriers involved. The undertaking that sells a ticket is not necessarily the issuing undertaking.
In its response to EBA, DB explained the same distinction by referring to Articles 18 and 19 of Regulation (EU) 2021/782 and to the definition of the issuing undertaking in the TAP TSI. The EBA accepted DB’s explanation and closed the administrative proceedings without finding an infringement by DB. This decision did not determine whether all claims against the other undertakings had been satisfied.
Two tickets – two contracts
The disruption of the Berlin–Amsterdam contract therefore did not entitle the passenger to reimbursement of the separate Eurostar ticket. SNCB’s 53 EUR payment represented 50% of the 100 EUR fare and 50% of the 6 EUR reservation charge. The additional Herzogenrath–Brussels ticket was used only as far as Liège. DB refunded the fare corresponding to the unused Liège–Brussels section. The EBA proceedings did not determine whether SNCB’s contribution towards the taxi was sufficient.
The case illustrates why the ticket vendor, issuing undertaking and contractual carriers must be identified separately: the individual contracts and the role of each undertaking determine who handles the claim and how costs are allocated.
Case 2: Bratislava–Frankfurt – may passengers arrange their own alternative transport?
The second case concerned a passenger holding a through-ticket issued by ZSSK for Bratislava–Vienna–Frankfurt. After the Vienna–Frankfurt ICE was cancelled, ÖBB, as the carrier on the spot and therefore responsible for providing assistance under the CIT AIV, offered an alternative rail journey via Salzburg and Munich, with arrival at approximately 03:00 a.m. When the train to Salzburg was shown as delayed, the passenger expected to miss the last onward connection there and independently travelled by airport train, plane and bus via Stuttgart, reaching Frankfurt at approximately 02:00 a.m. The passenger subsequently claimed 50% delay compensation and reimbursement of the alternative transport and refreshments costs.
Reimbursement, compensation and re-routing
Because the ticket had already been used between Bratislava and Vienna, either partial reimbursement of the unused part – potentially difficult to calculate for an integrated reservation ticket – or 50% delay compensation could be considered. Reimbursement under Article 18 and compensation under Article 19 of Regulation (EU) 2021/782 are distinct remedies and should not be combined for the same ticket.
Article 18(3) allows passengers to arrange alternative public transport by rail, coach or bus where re-routing options have not been communicated within 100 minutes. Here, however, an alternative rail journey had been offered, and air transport is not included in this provision. There was therefore no statutory right to reimbursement of the independently arranged journey. Nevertheless, as the costs appeared reasonable compared with possible accommodation and assistance costs, reimbursement could be considered as a commercial gesture on a case-by-case basis.
Refreshments as assistance
The refreshments claim required separate treatment. Article 20 of Regulation (EU) 2021/782 requires meals and refreshments in reasonable relation to the waiting time where they are available or can reasonably be supplied. Where the carrier responsible for assistance fails to provide them, reasonable documented expenses should be reimbursed. The issuing undertaking receiving the claim should forward the documentation to the carrier responsible for assistance (carrier on the spot), by analogy with the AIV procedure for accommodation costs.
Practical lessons
The two cases show that claims handling starts with identifying the relevant contract or contracts and the role of every undertaking. Claims departments must then distinguish between reimbursement, delay compensation, self-arranged re-routing, assistance expenses and commercial gestures. This is essential for transparent and efficient handling of international passenger claims.