If, contrary to expectations, at the time of the parking violation, DD.MM.YY, TIME unto DD.MM.YY, TIME, you were not the driver of the vehicle with the official license plate M-AB123, we as the registered owner request that you inform us of the driver at the relevant time using the form below within the payment deadline.

Please note that we will verify your information for plausibility. If false information causes us damage, we will hold you liable for compensation. In cases of false information that suggest fraudulent intent, we reserve the right to file a criminal complaint.As long as you, as the vehicle owner, do not provide sufficiently concrete information about a possible driver different from the registered owner—information that enables us to pursue our claims against that person—we are entitled to continue asserting our claims against you as the owner.

Please note that if we have to enforce our claim against you in court, according to the ruling by the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) dated December 18, 2019, Case No. XII ZR 13/19, the vehicle owner bears a secondary burden of disclosure regarding the identity of the driver in cases of parking violations. In this ruling, the BGH decided that, due to the fact that the driver is typically unknown to the parking lot operator, it is sufficient for this secondary burden if the operator assumes a claim against the owner as the driver of the vehicle.If the owner wishes to effectively dispute having been the driver—and therefore having entered into a contract with us—they must disclose who else could have used the vehicle during the relevant time. Following the precedent set by the BGH in similar cases, the vehicle owner must specifically state what knowledge they have regarding the possible use of the vehicle by third parties and what inquiries they made into this.

A mere assertion that others theoretically had access to the vehicle is not sufficient (BGH, Judgment dated October 6, 2016, Case No. I ZR 154/15 “Afterlife”; on the transferability of this case law see BGH, Judgment dated December 18, 2019, Case No. XII ZR 13/19, para. 35).By disclosing the driver who committed the alleged violation, we would assert our contractual claims against that individual.

Please also note that, independent of our payment claims, the vehicle owner may be held responsible as a "disturber" for injunctive relief if they do not name a responsible driver different from themselves when requested to do so (see BGH, Judgment dated December 18, 2015, Case No. V ZR 160/14).