Posts: 430
Threads: 12
Joined: Jan 2026
Reputation:
60
1. You are representing yourself if you are the Keeper and the NtK is addressed to you.
2. You are being held liable for the charge you if their NtK is addressed to you.
3. It is none of their business who was driving and there is no legal obligation on the Keeper to identify the driver to an unregulated private parking firm.
4. If the Notice to Keeper is addressed to you, then yes, you are the (registered) Keeper.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain
Posts: 430
Threads: 12
Joined: Jan 2026
Reputation:
60
It would help if you could provide access to their "evidence". However, it is the corrupt kangaroo court of the IAS that we are dealing with here, so don't get your hopes upon that this will be a successful appeal.
You can respond to their case with the following:
Quote:The operator’s prima facie case confirms rather than resolves the central defect. The stated contravention remains “Failure to Register for the Duration of Stay”, and the only contractual wording quoted by the operator is that the registration must be entered on a tablet located inside reception. The operator accepts that the leisure centre was closed, so that method of compliance was inaccessible.
It then asserts that, if the centre was closed, drivers “should not be parking” on the site. That is not evidence of a contractual term; it is merely the operator’s retrospective opinion. The operator has not identified any wording on the signage expressly stating that parking is prohibited whenever the centre is closed, nor was the charge issued for unauthorised or out-of-hours parking. A requirement to register inside reception is not equivalent to a prohibition on parking outside opening hours.
The operator cannot cure the impossibility of complying with the stated registration requirement by substituting a different alleged restriction after the charge has been issued. It must prove the precise term identified on the Notice to Keeper was prominently communicated, capable of performance and breached. Its own evidence establishes that the only stated registration method was inside closed premises, while its newly asserted prohibition is unsupported by any identified contractual wording.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain
Posts: 430
Threads: 12
Joined: Jan 2026
Reputation:
60
No change to the advice given.
Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. - Mark Twain
