From N500 to N3,500 for a brief stop and as much as N50,000 for overnight parking, the sharp increase in parking charges at the Murtala Muhammed Airport Terminal Two (MMA2), Lagos, has triggered outrage among airport users. While motorists describe the new rates as excessive and burdensome, especially at a time of economic hardship, the terminal operator, Bi-Courtney Aviation Services Limited, maintains that the policy is designed to discourage long-term parking and restore the facility to its original purpose as a short-stay car park.
The controversy has ignited a debate over whether the measures are necessary for efficient airport operations or an unfair burden on passengers and visitors.
Joshua Uche, an airport user, questioned the rationale behind the new rates after paying what he described as an exorbitant amount for a few hours of parking. He argued that rather than imposing blanket charges, the terminal operator should adopt a tiered system that allows motorists to park for a reasonable period before attracting higher fees.
“I paid N53,000 the other day for seven hours parking. What is remaining from the minimum wage? If truly it’s about long-stay parking, then they should set certain hours a car can be parked at a normal rate, which if exceeded, they should be charged at higher rates or even tow them out, as you normally tow those parking outside. How difficult is this for a measure?”
Mary Ajayi expressed frustration over the sharp increase in parking fees, noting that charges have risen dramatically within a relatively short period despite what she sees as a lack of corresponding improvements in facilities and services at the terminal. She contrasted the situation with the nearby Murtala Muhammed Airport Terminal 1 (MM1), where parking rates have remained largely unchanged.
“Under two years we went from paying N500 at MMA2 to N3,500, no renovations, nothing. Meanwhile, for MM1, two years ago it was N500 and it’s still around that figure. Tollgate is now N500. The extortion is just too much.”
For Isaiah Adelabu, the increase is unjustifiable and reflects a failure by airport authorities to effectively manage long-term parking. He maintained that vehicles occupying parking spaces for extended periods could be removed to alternative locations rather than making all users bear the cost through higher fees.
“This decision is wicked, insane and unacceptable. Those overstayed vehicles could be towed away to an arranged location. The Airport Authority can’t claim innocence for those involved in ‘permanent’ parking.”
Similarly, Ibrahim Sulaiman argued that the new parking regime unfairly affects motorists who only need brief access to the terminal to drop off or pick up passengers. He called on government authorities to intervene, stressing that users have little choice but to enter the airport premises and pay the charges.
“This is simply wrong and inexcusable. Government must wade into this and reverse this lawlessness, especially for public facilities. No one has monopoly of lawlessness. Every pick-up user must drive in and is charged. So how does one pay N3,500 for five minutes parking?”
Speaking during a broadcast interview, the Head of Corporate Communications, Bi-Courtney Aviation Services Limited Ajoke Yinka-Olawuyi, said the terminal’s car park was originally designed for short-term parking to facilitate passenger drop-offs and pick-ups. However, she said the facility had increasingly been used as a long-term parking lot, leading to congestion and making it difficult for genuine airport users to access the terminal.
“The whole essence of this is not revenue. It is not because of the economy or any other factor. It is to reinstate and restore the facility back to the purpose for which it was intended, which is short-stay parking. We discovered that the facility was being misused, with some vehicles parked for weeks, months and, in some cases, over a year.”
According to her, the abuse of the parking facility created serious operational challenges, including gridlock around the terminal’s drop-off zones and difficulties for passengers seeking parking spaces.
“At times, we would have as many as 300 vehicles parked overnight for extended periods. This affected accessibility to the terminal and created congestion around our drop-off zone. People who simply wanted to drop off passengers found it difficult to access the terminal.”
Responding to concerns that innocent users are being punished for the actions of a few motorists who abuse the system, Yinka-Olawuyi said the management considered various options before settling on the current tariff structure.
“When we were considering this review, we had the option of eliminating overnight parking entirely and reverting strictly to hourly parking. But when you apply the hourly rate over a 24-hour period, the amount comes to significantly more than N50,000. The N50,000 overnight parking charge is actually a more considerate and moderated option.”
She maintained that the increase was introduced as a demand-management measure and not as a revenue-generating initiative, stressing that management was primarily focused on improving the experience of terminal users.
“We have the thoughts of people in mind. We do not want to make people suffer. What we want is to return the parking facility to what it was intended for , a short-stay car park, not a garage.”
On complaints that the tariff hike came without adequate notice, the Bi-Courtney spokesperson said the company had begun sensitising users months before implementing the revised charges.
“We started giving notice in February. We placed notices in the car parks, distributed handbills and informed users that there would be a tariff review. The first increase took effect in March, but it did not achieve the desired result because the abuse continued.”
Yinka-Olawuyi explained that the company later introduced a higher festive-period tariff after observing that the earlier review failed to discourage long-term parking.
“The initial tariff did not solve the problem. People were still staying for extended periods and passing the cost on to passengers. During the festive season, congestion became worse, so we introduced another tariff structure, and it worked. That was what informed the decision to retain it.”
She cited several cases of motorists abandoning vehicles at the terminal for unusually long periods, including one vehicle that remained parked for more than three years.
“There have been instances where people left vehicles in the car park for over a year. In one case, a vehicle remained there for more than three years before we had to tow it into storage at our own cost. That is clearly not the purpose of an airport car park.”
The spokesperson also argued that reducing congestion has enhanced security and operational efficiency within the terminal.
“What we have observed since introducing the measure is that the congestion has reduced significantly. People can now drive into the car park and easily find parking spaces. The chaos that previously existed is no longer there.”
Despite public calls for a reversal of the policy, Yinka-Olawuyi indicated that the company has no plans to reduce the charges, arguing that doing so would likely lead to a return of the parking challenges the measure was designed to address.
“No, it will not go down. The moment you take it down, we will go back to where we were coming from. The problem we are trying to solve will return.”
She nevertheless insisted that the company’s objective remains providing a seamless and secure airport experience for passengers and other terminal users.
“We are here for the passengers. We want people to enjoy a seamless passenger experience. Everything about the terminal was designed with the passenger in mind, and what we are trying to do is preserve that experience for genuine users of the facility.”
As the debate continues, the disagreement highlights the challenge of managing limited airport infrastructure while meeting the expectations of the travelling public. For many users, the steep charges remain difficult to justify, especially in the absence of what they consider corresponding improvements in services.
For Bi-Courtney Aviation Services, however, the policy is a necessary step to reclaim parking spaces, reduce congestion and enhance the passenger experience. With the company ruling out a review of the tariff for now, the discussion is likely to persist, reflecting wider concerns about the cost of accessing public facilities and the need for solutions that balance operational efficiency with public convenience.
One Comment