Woman Faces £170 Fine After Relative's 14-Second Airport Stop
A Lincolnshire mother is embroiled in a contentious dispute with East Midlands Airport after a family member borrowed her car and stopped briefly on double red lines. Marianne Marshall, 42, from near Sleaford, now faces a £170 fine or potential court action, despite being 50 miles away at the time of the incident.
The Incident and Initial Fine
According to CCTV footage, the vehicle was stationary for just 14 seconds on a road with double red lines near the airport's terminal. The stop occurred as different family members were using the car to pick someone up from the airport. They had intended to use the designated rapid drop-off zone, which allows a 30-minute stay for a £5 charge.
Marianne explained that her family paused briefly to ensure the person they were collecting was ready, stopping outside a short-stay car park. The car remained there for 58 seconds, with no one exiting, before proceeding to the paid drop-off area.
Escalation to £170 Penalty
In October, VCS Parking Enforcement issued a £100 fine, which could have been reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days. However, Marianne was unaware which family member was driving at the time, and they could not recall the details. She submitted an appeal, stating she was at her daughter's dance exam in Lincoln during the incident.
The appeal was rejected due to insufficient evidence proving she was not at the airport. When Marianne requested CCTV footage from the parking company managing the drop-off zone to identify the driver, they declined, citing GDPR concerns. The fine subsequently increased to £170.
Threat of Court Action
Matters escalated further when a bailiff company employed by VCS sent a letter on February 26, threatening court action if the fine remained unpaid. Marianne expressed frustration, calling the situation "ridiculous" and criticizing the lack of discretion from both the airport and the parking company.
"It just feels very disproportionate that somebody can stop on a side road and it ends up costing £170," she said. "You get less for speeding. I completely understand that areas need to be kept clear for emergency vehicles, but in this case, it was 58 seconds and absolutely nobody was harmed."
Airport's Defense of Enforcement
East Midlands Airport has defended the actions of the third-party parking enforcer. Ioan Reed-Aspley, head of corporate affairs, responded to Marianne's MP, emphasizing the importance of red route enforcement for safety and traffic flow.
"The roads immediately outside the terminal are among the busiest parts of the airport estate and are used continuously by buses, emergency vehicles, taxis, private cars, and operational service vehicles," he wrote. "Stopping or waiting in these areas, even briefly, can quickly create congestion, obstruct sightlines, and increase the risk of accidents."
Reed-Aspley added that the location is the entrance to a fuel storage area and must be kept clear at all times for operational reasons. A no-stopping sign was reportedly visible on a lamppost behind the vehicle.
Marianne's Dilemma and Conclusion
Faced with the prospect of court, Marianne is considering paying the £170 and splitting the cost among the family members involved. "I don't want to go to court, so I think I will have to pay the £170," she said. "But the whole thing just feels ridiculous."
The parking company was contacted for comment but did not respond. This case highlights ongoing tensions between airport enforcement policies and drivers seeking leniency for minor infractions.
