Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Business
Miles Brignall

Airport parking: £100 fines in Bristol ‘could be unenforceable’

Bristol airport
Bristol airport has defended the charges imposed by its contractor, VCS. Photograph: Richard Wayman/Alamy

Are private fines sent by Bristol airport’s contractor to motorists who pick up passengers outside its designated, paid-for, drop-off and pickup zone unenforceable?

It looks as though they may be, if an eagle-eyed Guardian reader and a leading consumer solicitor are correctly interpreting the bylaws that govern the airport.

If they are right, hundreds of motorists who paid the £100 demands for stopping outside the designated pickup zones at Bristol airports – and perhaps others – may be due refunds.

Bristol airport has denied that this is the case and said it is confident that the contract operates in accordance with the “relevant legislation”.

In August, Guardian Money featured the case of Dave Fitzheslop, who was sent a £100 demand, later increased to £170, by Bristol airport’s parking contractor, VCS. He had stopped at a red traffic light at the airport on his way to pick up his wife. At that exact moment, he says, she came out of the terminal, spotted him sitting there and jumped into the car. Once the light turned green they exited the airport and drove home.

When an enforcement charge notice arrived, he assumed that there had been a mistake as the CCTV photos clearly showed him stopped at the red light. However, his appeal was twice turned down, and the airport has since defended VCS’s approach.

After the Guardian piece was published we were contacted by Steve Williamson, a former local government officer whose wife had a similar experience a few years ago at the hands of VCS, this time at Humberside airport.

“To help with the appeal I looked into the means by which airports can control activities including parking on their land,” he told Guardian Money.

“In the case of Humberside they had adopted bylaws under the Airports Act 1986, which designated the operational area in which they could control activities. I am not a lawyer but it was clear from reading the legislation that the power to impose charges for non-compliance was through the courts for breach of bylaws, and not through a contract parking charge between the customer and the airport authority’s agent.”

His wife made this fact clear in her appeal to VCS and he says the charge was dropped. Bristol has very similar bylaws in place.

Guardian Money also contacted the consumer lawyer Gary Rycroft, a partner at Lancaster-based Joseph A Jones & Co Solicitors, who agreed with Williamson.

“The legal rule under common law is that bylaws are only enforceable through fines and prosecution in the magistrates court,” he said. . “My view is that private parking invoices issued by VCS on behalf of Bristol airport are at odds with – and indeed in direct conflict with – the prosecution and enforcement regime set out in the Airports Act 1986, and for that reason I do not believe they are enforceable.”

VCS, the parking contractor at the centre of dispute, has not responded to repeated requests for comment.

A spokesperson for Bristol airport told Guardian Money: “The airport has a legitimate confidential contract with the operator to manage the safety and operation of our roadways and car parks. We are confident that the contract operates in accordance with the agreement and the relevant legislation.”

Derek Millard-Smith, the approved solicitor to the British Parking Association and its members, of which VCS is not one, said the ability of the parking firm to enforce these civil demands will probably depend on whether the roads in question are part of the zone that is governed by the airport’s bylaws.

Millard-Smith, a partner at JMW Solicitors, said he had not been asked to examine Bristol’s situation so was unable to offer an opinion.

“Prohibitions at car parks and traffic areas are determined by the landowner and not the company enforcing them,” he added. “Prohibitions arise for a variety of reasons which can evolve over time through unfortunate incidents and regular risk assessment. These prohibition reasons can include avoiding obstruction/congestion, through ensuring pedestrian safety, to managing security concerns (which has become an increased risk at airports).”

The Guardian has been unable to find a map showing the roads/area governed by the bylaws. We have asked the airport for one but it has not responded.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.