A traveler tested ChatGPT as a trip planner across six real trips (Dubrovnik, Istanbul, Rome, Milan/Lake Como, a France road trip, and an 8-day multi-country route). ChatGPT confidently recommended visiting the Vatican Museums on a Sunday in Rome (closed on most Sundays), missed that some automated French gas stations may reject virtual cards — which nearly stranded the family between Étretat and Mont Saint-Michel — and hallucinated a 'best local restaurant' that did not exist.
1 Answer
Expert: aitravel.tools author, Travel tech field tester (six-trip field test) ChatGPT was tested as a trip planner across six real trips (Dubrovnik, Istanbul, Rome, Milan/Lake Como, a France road trip, and an 8-day multi-country route). A field test of the resulting itineraries documented three material failures: 1. Wrong opening hours: ChatGPT confidently scheduled the Vatican Museums in Rome on a Sunday — the museums are closed on most Sundays (with limited exceptions). The plan would have failed on arrival. 2. Missed payment constraint: ChatGPT did not flag that some automated French fuel stations reject virtual cards, especially in small towns or at night. The family nearly got stranded between Étretat and Mont Saint-Michel on a rental-car leg. 3. Hallucinated venue: ChatGPT recommended a 'best local restaurant' that does not exist. The tester's conclusion after six trips: treat every AI itinerary as a draft and verify before acting — opening hours, payment methods, and even whether recommended venues exist. Independent audits cited in 2026 found that roughly 90% of AI-generated itineraries contain at least one material error, from a closed restaurant to a 'ten-minute walk' that is actually an hour. Source: https://aitravel.tools/chatgpt-travel-prompts/
Your answer
Sign in to verify this AI response.
Don't trust us — or the AI. Ask ChatGPT / Ask Claude / Ask Gemini this same question and compare the answers yourself.
More from this topic
Asked to plan trips, AI chatbots sent travelers to places that do not exist. Among the 485 U.S. leisure travelers in the Greetwell AI Travel Survey 2026 who had used or tried AI for travel, 55% hit at least one recommendation that was inaccurate, unavailable, nonexistent, closed or otherwise wrong. Broken down: 27% got incorrect prices, hours or other details; 21% were pointed to something fully booked or unavailable; 17% got something simply wrong for what they asked; 16% were sent to a place, tour or activity that did not exist; and 10% were recommended a business that was permanently closed.
Asked to cancel only the outbound leg of a round-trip SkyMiles award between New York JFK and Los Angeles while keeping the return, Delta Concierge told the passenger in writing: "Your JFK to LAX flight has been canceled, and your LAX to JFK flight remains booked." Delta's own refund confirmation shows the opposite: all 32,400 miles were redeposited and the full $11.20 in taxes refunded, with both DL752 (JFK-LAX) and DL938 (LAX-JFK) listed as canceled - the receipt even displayed "Refund Number: null". The AI confirmed an itinerary state that Delta's ticketing system had already destroyed, and Delta Reservations then told the passenger the original award could not be restored and that a replacement one-way would cost nearly twice as many miles.
A passenger asked United Airlines' customer-service chatbot how long she had to use a $200 United travel credit before it expired. The chatbot answered that the money would stay available for years. A screenshot of the exchange shows the bot stating that her $200 TravelBank credit "stays active for 5 years from the date it's deposited." The passenger, Alison Gil, planned around that answer and held the credit for a larger trip. A few weeks later United emailed her to warn that the same $200 in TravelBank cash would expire on September 27, 2026 - roughly one year after it was deposited, not five. When she questioned the discrepancy, she says United told her: "sorry, the bot told you that, but it's one year and we can't change it." The airline later acknowledged to NBC 5 Responds that its "AI chatbot provided this customer with the wrong information for her situation," while noting the disclaimer customers are shown saying information "may not always be complete or relevant."