Is the best way to explore South America by rail?
Simon Calder answers your questions on train getaways, drip pricing and getting compensation
Q What’s your view on South American rail adventures?
Robin B
A Bluntly, I wish there were more of them. During the 19th century, railway engineers worked wonders to create some astonishing lines across the continent. In the late 20th century I was lucky to travel on a few, including a steam train from the Paraguayan capital, Asuncion, to the city’s airport, and a high-altitude, overnight adventure through Bolivia. But now, as the international rail guru Mark Smith said: “Most countries have no coherent national rail network.” Long-distance buses and budget flights are the norm. Probably the best-known surviving line is in Peru: connecting the Andean city of Cusco – hub of the Inca Empire – with the ceremonial ruins of Machu Picchu (actually to Aguas Calientes, the scruffy town at the foot of the mountain). It is a spectacular journey with a formidable conclusion, though I have never actually been able to buy a ticket on it due to heavy bookings. The line from Cusco to Puno, the city on Lake Titicaca, is also worthwhile. But unlike trains that you find on other continents, these Peruvian trains are luxury conveyances aimed squarely at upmarket tourists.
I prefer “normal” rail adventures where you meet the local people as they travel. Argentina is a reasonable place to start, with links from the capital, Buenos Aires, to both Mar del Plata and Rosario – with some trains extended to Cordoba and Tucuman. Uruguay has a microscopic network. And in Brazil, by far the largest nation in South America, there is just one intercity passenger line: from Vitoria to Belo Horizonte. “The journey is very scenic and it’s a pleasant way to spend the day,” said Smith.
If you can extend your definition of South America to Panama, the transcontinental train from Panama City to Colon is a gem – taking you from the Pacific to the Atlantic, parallel with the Canal, in about an hour. And while we’re talking about Latin America: Cuba has an interesting rail network, while Mexico’s Copper Canyon railway takes you through superb scenery from Chihuahua to the Pacific.
Q You’ve been writing about “drip pricing” and the government’s plans to act on extra charges made by airlines. Shouldn’t it be compulsory that the flight cost includes a seat allocation? Just think of the horrendous costs for families that need to sit together.
Kenny W
A In the King’s Speech this week, the government signalled its intent to tackle “consumer harms” caused by the application of “dripped fees”. The Department for Business and Trade (DBT) says it regards “a dripped fee to be any fee added after the product and its base price was presented together”. The DBT believes airline passengers are particularly vulnerable to unfair practices, including extra charges for luggage and seating. A report from the department declared that airline passengers were very likely to encounter dripped fees that count as consumer harms. These are defined as extra charges that are more than 25 per cent of the original fare, and charges presented late in the check-out process.
Carriers classify such add-ons as “ancillaries”. Unsurprisingly, they disagree that they conceal these extras, and state them clearly through the booking process. I tend to agree. Sir Richard Branson’s Australian venture, Virgin Blue, had an excellent slogan: “You’re only buying the flying.” In other words: we will safely transport you from A to B, but if you want anything more than a seat you will have to pay extra.
In practice, even the most ancillary-aware airlines allow a small backpack that fits under the seat in front. But if you want a specific seat, you will need to pay for it. Tickets always include seat allocation – but if you don’t pay the airline will choose for you or, in the case of British Airways, you can select for free from 24 hours ahead. In my experience, BA and easyJet will facilitate groups travelling together.
For families: fortunately, the law is on their side. Civil Aviation Authority rules specify that under-12s should be seated next to at least one parent. UK airlines tell me they comply with this requirement without charge. Again, British Airways goes further and assigns family seating just ahead of general check-in opening. Overall, I believe the opportunity to pay only for the elements of a flight that you need far outweighs the negative aspect – when a £50 flight doubles in price because you want to check in a bag and reserve a specific seat.
Q My airline has just told me that the inbound flight departing at 3pm has been cancelled and switched to another flight at 10am. I chose to pay extra and travel at 3pm, not 10am, because I wanted to leave for the airport at a reasonable hour. Now I shall have to rearrange it for 5.30am. Shouldn’t they reimburse the extra we paid for the 3pm flight?
Stephen G
A How annoying – and, sadly, unexceptional. Airlines often put multiple flights on sale and then monitor the uptake. If there is insufficient demand, they will typically cancel one or other of the flights. As long as they do this at least two weeks ahead, they have no obligation to pay cash compensation.
“Cancel” is the key term here. If an airline merely moves the departure to five hours earlier, with the same flight number, there is no legal requirement to offer you any options at all (though in my experience Ryanair allows a full refund if the switch is three hours or more). But your flight has been axed, which means the airline must offer a range of options.
The first of these is a full refund. All other things being equal, it would be good to take the cash and immediately book the earlier flight at the lower fare – leaving you with an early start but some money back to compensate. Unfortunately, things are rarely equal. The act of cancelling a flight immediately means seats are scarce on the earlier departure, pushing up fares.
The next option is to switch to a flight at a time of your convenience at no extra fare. This could include, for example, staying an extra night and flying back on the 3pm next day, if that flight has survived the cull. But as the airline can fly you back on the original day, it is not obliged to pay for your overnight accommodation. Neither is it required to offer you a seat on a different carrier, another of the potential options.
So all I can do is suggest you ask for the original fare difference back – and, assuming this request is declined, choose a rival airline next time.
Q Please can you advise if you will need an “Etias” to travel to Europe in 2024?
Lynda A
A I can confidently assure you that you will not need a permit under the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (Etias) until 2025 at the earliest.
The aim of the system is to improve the border security of the EU and the wider Schengen Area. The Etias scheme emulates the US Esta, Canada’s eTA and the UK’s ETA (which is just entering into service). Travellers arriving from “third countries” will be required to supply information in advance: all the usual personal/passport details, together with declarations about education, health and some criminal convictions. To pay for the scheme, there will be a €7 (£6) fee for the Etias permit, which lasts three years.
The European Union claims Etias will be a “simple, fast and visitor-friendly system” that will “save travellers time and hassle”. It is hard to see how filling in a form and making a payment will save time and hassle. But that is what the UK negotiated for British travellers to become subject to under the Brexit withdrawal agreement.
Etias should have been implemented years ago, but like many EU projects, it has hit some obstacles. The system is dependent on the European Union’s broader Entry Exit Scheme. This is an EU database that will replace manual passport stamping with electronic registration. That will not be ready before late 2024, and Etias is currently set to start in spring 2025.
Once the Entry Exit System is up and running, it is likely that there will be a “soft launch” of Etias, with the system becoming mandatory only six months later. If that is the case, British travellers to the EU will not need to invest in an Etias for another couple of years.
Even when Etias finally arrives, it will not be required for trips to Ireland – which is outside the Schengen Area, along with Bulgaria, Cyprus and Romania.
Email your question to s@hols.tv or tweet @simoncalder
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments