2
« on: July 10, 2024, 10:08:24 am »
As im unsure of the signage im not sure I can use that in the appeal?
this is what I have so far:
This Parking Charge Notice ("PCN") was issued to me as the registered keeper of the vehicle, and I am appealing as such. BP Stansted is not “relevant land” for the purposes of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (as it is covered by airport bye-laws), so the operator cannot transfer liability to the keeper. Furthermore, even if (which is not the case) the BP station is relevant land, the PCN does not comply with the requirements of the POFA, Schedule 4, paragraph 9. As there is no legal requirement for the registered keeper to identify the driver, I will not be doing so.
MET cannot hold a registered keeper liable. As a matter of fact and law, MET (as a longstanding BPA Parking operator) will be well aware that they cannot use the POFA provisions because this is not 'relevant land'. If the Airport wanted to hold owners or keepers liable under Airport Byelaws, that would be within the landowner's gift and another matter entirely, but not only is that not pleaded, it is also not legally possible because MET is not the Airport owner and your 'parking charge' is not and never attempts to be a penalty. It is created for MET’s own profit (as opposed to a byelaws penalty that goes to the public purse) and MET has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only. The registered keeper was not that driver and cannot be presumed to have been, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency.
Does that cover landholder authority sufficiently.
Just want to say thank you very much for the replies, its been so useful!