Parking firm not bound by Protection of Freedoms Act

[EdVince]

I have previously received helpful advice on this topic. I received a PCN three months after the alleged "offence" - the first notification I'd received. I appealed to the firm on the basis that a PCN must be served within fourteen days. This was rejected and the case is now with POPLA. Astonishingly, the parking firm states "the parking charge was not issued under Protection of Freedoms Act (POFA). The Appelant's comments regarding the PCN being issued incorrectly are not relevant in this case". They state that they are following Fairlie v Fenton (1870), and that the car was parked on private land. They say they have written authority to operate and issue PCNs from the landowner.
This looks to me like a cynical attempt to get around the law in circumstances where the parking firm has fallen short of its responsibilities. Under POFA they have to request keeper details and issue the PCN within fourteen days - they took something nearer to 90 days.
I would welcome any comments. It appears they want to have their cake and eat it.

[ostell]

They do not have to use POFA but they wrote to the keeper of the car (?) and not the driver, who they hopefully don't know.

If they want to use keeper liability then they have to use POFA.