@DrSatan, thank you for the link to that appeal decision. Whilst it will cause concern to any English, unregulated parking operator to think very carefully about initiating any claim in the Scottish courts, it was slightly alarming to read the appeal judge's ideas about the Keeper being required to identify the driver when there is no legal obligation to do so.
Surely, in Scottish law, there is the same right that a defendant is under no obligation to incriminate themself and the burden of proof lies with the claimant.
Also, the idea that that the parking operator had the right to "assume" that the Keeper must also be the driver is surely an error in law, even in Scotland. To suggest that had the operator sought to confirm with the Keepers insurance company that they were the named driver on the insurance certificate does not prove that the Keeper must therefore also be the driver, even in Scotland. I'm fairly sure that, as in England and Wales, anyone with third party insurance can drive any car with the owners permission.
I have such third party liability cover on my own insurance policy as probably do hundreds of thousands, if not millions of other motorists in the UK. Being named on an insurance certificate is in no way, shape or form, evidence that the Keeper must also have been the driver.
Anyway, I wonder how the decision on costs for the appeal will go.