On the 29th October the driver entered the car park, found a space, and entered the restaurant to collect their food. The time of the order on the receipt was 15 minutes after entering the car park. The car park and restaurant was very busy and there was some delay in getting parked. The driver remembers the drive through eventually had to be closed to allow the queue to clear, before being reopened after the queue had been served.
The driver did not notice any signs on their visit but has since checked on google street view and there appears to be a sign on entry to the car park. There are also signs around the car park but none between where the driver parked and the main entrance of the restaurant.
The driver can't recall how long it took for their food to be prepared after ordering or how long it took to leave the car park after vacating the space. The exit ANPR picture does clearly show cars in front and behind the driver, again confirming how busy it was.
I, the registered keeper, have now received a "Notice To Keeper" and would be grateful for any advice on how I should proceed.
Many Thanks
Google Street View entrance to car park
As long as you follow the advice, you won't be paying a penny to MET. However, it will be a protracted period before this is all over. It will eventually lead to a county court claim but as long as it is defended, it will either be struck out or discontinued.
There is no evidence of "parking". Only evidence of time on site, which is not the same. Therefore it is not PoFA compliant and only the driver can be liable. There was a very recent case that reached a hearing and the judge threw the case out precisely because the ANPR images are not evidence of "parking" and the Notice mentions that the charge relates to a period of "parking".
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. MET 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. MET have no hope at POPLA, so you are urged to save us both a complete waste of time and cancel the PCN.
Could be worth a try and go back and speak to the manager and ask to cancel due to the upheaval.