An official document from Ferrocarrils de la Generalitat Valenciana (FGV) confirmed that the company operating the metro and suburban trains in Valencia did not receive any specific warning from regional authorities about the impending disaster in October 2024. The natural disaster resulted in the deaths of 230 people. The document, obtained by EL PAÍS, was submitted to the court and became a key element in the investigation led by Judge Nuria Ruiz Tobarra from Catarroja.
At the time of the tragedy, emergency services were managed by then head of the Department of Justice and Home Affairs, Salomé Pradas, who is now the main defendant in the case. Her deputy was Emilio Arguso, who is also under investigation. According to Pradas and representatives of the regional government, the delayed response was due to a lack of timely information from national bodies such as the Confederación Hidrográfica del Júcar (CGH) and the State Meteorological Agency (Aemet). However, the court repeatedly rejected this argument, noting the presence of relevant information and refuting the claim of an ‘information vacuum.’
In its response to the court, FGV clarified that aside from general weather warnings, the company did not receive any special instructions or specific recommendations from the emergency department regarding threats to the València Sud rail complex. This reply was given to an official inquiry from the judge, who wanted to know whether FGV had received any notifications between October 24 and 29, 2024.
During the investigation, the court also identified the driver who accompanied Salomé Pradas on the day of the disaster. Now, the prosecution, represented by the PSOE, has requested that this person be summoned as a witness.
Questions regarding the actions of emergency services and interagency coordination remain in focus. As noted by EL PAÍS, the lack of direct notification to the transport company became one of the key episodes in the case of the large-scale tragedy. Amid this investigation, the issue of insufficient mobilization of rescue resources has already been raised: for example, only 19 out of 121 forest firefighters were involved in elimination of flood consequences, which sparked a fresh wave of criticism toward the regional authorities.
