LIVERPOOL - 2
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mmmmm, A lot of unfounded allegations there. I fly through Liverpool several times a month and have seen no deterioration in Security Screening since the charge was introduced. And the charge is optional, you do not have to pay it.
The security queues are longer in length, due to less queuing space in the security comb area, but not longer in time.
Liverpool Airport has incurred extra security costs which they have been unable to pass on the the low-cost carriers.
Perhaps you would like the situation at Manchester and Heathrow, introduced at Liverpool, where Airport taxes and charges can be in excess of £50 per person.
The security queues are longer in length, due to less queuing space in the security comb area, but not longer in time.
Liverpool Airport has incurred extra security costs which they have been unable to pass on the the low-cost carriers.
Perhaps you would like the situation at Manchester and Heathrow, introduced at Liverpool, where Airport taxes and charges can be in excess of £50 per person.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Liverpool
Age: 66
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also hear extremely reliably that there is still, allegedly, a missing baggage/theft from baggage issue occurring at EGGP, despite several employees resigning pre-inquiry a few months ago (if I remember correctly they were found to be innocent...for the record m'lord) and the denials of the airport management.
I hear from the same source (within the law enforcement community) that the airside baggage areas are not monitored by CCTV at all - at least that's the excuse given. Ludicrous really when some bags can sit there in trolleys for a good while.....
both baggage areas (arrving and departing) are covered by cctv cameras which are constantly monitored by security and by the airport,just because the bags are found to be tampered with (allegedly) when they pax retrieve them doesnt mean the alleged theft took place at lpl they could have been "tampered" with at the point of departure? but that has never been mentioned
I hear from the same source (within the law enforcement community) that the airside baggage areas are not monitored by CCTV at all - at least that's the excuse given. Ludicrous really when some bags can sit there in trolleys for a good while.....
both baggage areas (arrving and departing) are covered by cctv cameras which are constantly monitored by security and by the airport,just because the bags are found to be tampered with (allegedly) when they pax retrieve them doesnt mean the alleged theft took place at lpl they could have been "tampered" with at the point of departure? but that has never been mentioned
Disappointed
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So exloadie, these things go missing from bags at every other airport, but never at Liverpool, is that what you're saying? Despite the fact that Liverpool is the only common departure/arrival point in the admittedly limited cases I am aware of?
Anyway, I've re-read my post and it seems rather bile-laden and mudflinging, partially unintentionally. Part of it came from days worth of standing in a long, cramped security queue whilst there was a completely empty and well staffed lane just next to me...
Bitter? Me?
I would be interested - as a counter to some of the positives and good points raised here regarding the express lane - to see the actual figures of how many people are actually using the lane, and therefore just how much of those supposed security costs (which, again, I would love to see the actual figure in impartial black and white) the airport company are recouping. Especially when it's offset against the costs the airport have paid out to install those fancy barriers, the numerous ticket machines, employ the extra member of staff standing at them, and to do the necessary structural work to segregate the two queues. Oh and to continually dig up the bus stops for whatever reason.
Rather than just be told it's too recoup some of the charges, I'd rather not blindly follow what Peel Holdings et al say, and be provided with firm figures.
I actually agree totally with Eurboy's "When you're paying FR, W6 and EZ prices, what do you expect at the airport, beyond the minimum safety requirements?". I guess that's absolutely spot on and cheers for putting it in those simple terms!
A no frills airport for no frills airlines
Anyway, I've re-read my post and it seems rather bile-laden and mudflinging, partially unintentionally. Part of it came from days worth of standing in a long, cramped security queue whilst there was a completely empty and well staffed lane just next to me...
Bitter? Me?
I would be interested - as a counter to some of the positives and good points raised here regarding the express lane - to see the actual figures of how many people are actually using the lane, and therefore just how much of those supposed security costs (which, again, I would love to see the actual figure in impartial black and white) the airport company are recouping. Especially when it's offset against the costs the airport have paid out to install those fancy barriers, the numerous ticket machines, employ the extra member of staff standing at them, and to do the necessary structural work to segregate the two queues. Oh and to continually dig up the bus stops for whatever reason.
Rather than just be told it's too recoup some of the charges, I'd rather not blindly follow what Peel Holdings et al say, and be provided with firm figures.
I actually agree totally with Eurboy's "When you're paying FR, W6 and EZ prices, what do you expect at the airport, beyond the minimum safety requirements?". I guess that's absolutely spot on and cheers for putting it in those simple terms!
A no frills airport for no frills airlines
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: MCT
Posts: 888
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Mr Ceannairceach
You said earlier
"
Airport security staff are employed to prevent restricted items and unauthorised persons going into the restricted zone as outlined in various Aviation Security Acts. So it shouldn't be easy for a "rogue member of staff" to take something in as all persons (including staff), vehicles and goods going into the restricted zone must be screened.
Nothing coming out of the restricted zone has to be screened.The security staff are not employed to physically check people going out although anyone with suspicions should report them. However HMRC and the Police will be interested and may carry out targeted or random checks on restricted zone exit points from time to time.
Hope this helps you calm down
Suzeman
You said earlier
"
Also, one has to wonder if the security operatives from the deathly-quiet express lane would be better employed keeping an eye on staff coming from airside areas with suspiciously bulging clothing?
And also it begs the question - if people are taking things out with such ease as is alleged - how easy would it be for a rogue member of staff to take something airside?"
And also it begs the question - if people are taking things out with such ease as is alleged - how easy would it be for a rogue member of staff to take something airside?"
Nothing coming out of the restricted zone has to be screened.The security staff are not employed to physically check people going out although anyone with suspicions should report them. However HMRC and the Police will be interested and may carry out targeted or random checks on restricted zone exit points from time to time.
Hope this helps you calm down
Suzeman
. Also anyone from LTN like to comment Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought there was an ongoing pay dispute with threats of strike action.
Has it been resolved ?
Has it been resolved ?
Was it not reported on Look North West?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 894
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LJLA = ripoff
There is now a £1 toll charge for using a taxi at the airport! Are there any depths that the management will not sink to in order to squeeze a little more profit from passengers? This is nothing other than corporate greed.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North of England
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is private land, so they can charge what they like. Besides, taxi's have to pay extra for travelling through the mersey tunnels, and pass that onto their passengers, so i guess the taxi drivers will do the same when using the airport.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: outer hebrides
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What of EZY in LPL?
... it seems a move into Manchester is imminent for EZY, how will this affect LPL in the long term and the short term.
Ref: Management trying to squeeze more profit out of the pax with the taxi charge well LPL has yet make a profit since Peel have taken control! More fool you if you get in one of those taxi to town when a bus will get you there just as quick and for 1/6 of the price!
Ref: Management trying to squeeze more profit out of the pax with the taxi charge well LPL has yet make a profit since Peel have taken control! More fool you if you get in one of those taxi to town when a bus will get you there just as quick and for 1/6 of the price!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Merseyside
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I understand the charge was introduced so the airport could control the taxis using the taxi ramp. There were instances of people being ripped off and "cherry picking" by some of the more inscrutable drivers and now they have to have a "pass" for the taxi ramp and fee of £1 every time they use it, which of course is passed on to the pax. The airport can now withdraw passes from those drivers who misbehave and deny them access to the lucrative airport business!
