Easy one to defeat... as long as the
unknown drivers identity is not revealed. There is no legal obligation on the
known keeper (the recipient of the Notice to Keeper (NtK)) to reveal the identity of the
unknown driver and no inference or assumptions can be made.
The NtK is not compliant with all the requirements of PoFA because the land is not "relevant land" which means that if the
unknown driver is not identified, they cannot transfer liability for the charge from the
unknown driver to the
known keeper.
Lullingstone Country Park is council owned land under statutory control. As such, PoFA does not apply. Here is an interesting article about the Local Government Ombudsman warning Kent County Council about issuing PCNs under PoFA at this very location:
Ombudsman urges councils to check legislation supporting their parking policiesUse the following as your appeal. No need to embellish or remove anything from it:
I am the keeper of the vehicle and I dispute your 'parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a complaint about your predatory conduct to your client landowner.
As your Notice to Keeper (NtK) cannot rely on PoFA 2012 due to the fact that the location is not "relevant land", you are unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. ECP has relied on contract law allegations of breach against the driver only.
The registered keeper cannot be presumed or inferred to have been the driver, nor pursued under some twisted interpretation of the law of agency. Your NtK can only hold the driver liable. ECP have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
