We prefer to take a holistic approach - looking at the case as a whole, rather than focussing on what the OP assumes are the relevant points/questions.
When did you first become aware of the conviction?
If it was less than 21 days ago, you should be able to simply have the conviction quashed by making a statutory declaration under s. 14 Magistrates' Courts Act 1980. AFAIK lodging an appeal to the Crown Court should not affect that - although quashing the conviction (on the basis that you were not aware of the court proceedings) would negate the need for an appeal.
Nothing that you have told us suggests any viable defence. However, in the Magistrates' Court at least, it is common practice to do a deal with the prosecutor to plead guilty to the underlying driving offence in exchange for the prosecutor agreeing to drop the s. 172 charge. This is often done after a stat. dec. in cases where the RK moved house and failed to update their V5C and consequently didn't receive or respond to a NIP/s. 172 requirement.
If you are too late to do a stat dec, there seems to be no reason in principle why you could not do the same deal with the prosecutor in the Crown Court.
N.B. Some posters like to tell OPs that they *must not* respond to a NIP that is not addressed to them. Such posts are becoming less common as we ban the posters for posting bollox, but the reason why responding to a NIP that is not addressed to you is potentially a bad idea is that when you receive your own NIP addressed to you, which imposes a legal obligation on you to provide the information, you might think that it is simply a reminder, or that you had somehow complied with your obligation in relation to your notice when you provided seemingly the same information in response to somebody else's notice. The High Court has clarified, that you still have to respond to your own notice, and that there is a material difference between admitting to being the driver in response to a notice addressed to you - which is admissible as evidence that you were the driver, and naming yourself as the driver in response to a notice not addressed to you, which is arguably not admissible as evidence that you were the driver.
Whether having your licence revoked causes you hardship is irrelevant under the New Drivers Act.
