That NtK is not PoFA compliant and so the
known registered keeper (RK) cannot be liable for the
unknown (to GroupNexus) driver. Their Notice to Keeper (NtK) does not conform to PoFA paragraph 9(2)(a) as it does not specify a "period of parking".
In
Brennan v Premier Parking Solutions (2023) [H6DP632H] it was determined that a single point in time is not a "period of parking" and that whilst it does not have to be the whole period of parking, there must be a minimum period stated. As there is a minimum consideration period for all private parking terms and conditions to be able to be read, it therefore means that a minimum period of parking must cover at least the minimum consideration period, which in most cases is at least 5 minutes.
Basically, what you need to do now is appeal the PCN as the Keeper. As any initial appeal is going to be rejected, we keep it short and sweet. Once rejected you will have 33 days from the appeal rejection to make an appeal to POPLA which will be more comprehensive.
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 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.
Use 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) does not fully comply with ALL the requirements of PoFA 2012, you are unable to hold the keeper of the vehicle liable for the charge. Partial or even substantial compliance is not sufficient. There will be no admission as to who was driving and no inference or assumptions can be drawn. GroupNexus 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. GroupNexus have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.