Big Cat sightings in Surrey - puma or misidentification?

My mate works for the council and he's been getting calls from residents in the Guildford area reporting large felids - described as black or tawny, moving like a big cat, definitely not a dog. Three separate sightings in the last month within a few miles of each other.

Conventional wisdom is "it's obviously an escaped exotic pet or someone's puma breeding project gone wrong." But could these actually be indigenous wild cats we've forgotten about? Ancient Britons might have had larger feline populations before habitat destruction. Or am I just being daft?

Surrey big cats are legendary at this point - there's been reports for decades. The issue is there's literally zero physical evidence. No bodies, no confirmed scat, no DNA, no clear photographs. If you've got a breeding population of large predators, you'd find evidence eventually - roadkill, livestock predation patterns, territorial markings. The lack of evidence suggests either hoaxes or misidentification of known animals.

Britain genuinely did have larger wild cats until relatively recently - lynx populations lasted until the medieval period in some areas. It's not mad to think a relict population could exist in isolated regions. But Surrey is way too populated and developed for that. Too many people, too much surveillance, nowhere to hide long-term without leaving trace evidence.

could these actually be indigenous wild cats we've forgotten about?

Honestly unlikely but theoretically possible in remote areas like Scottish Highlands. Surrey is basically suburban London - there's absolutely nowhere a large predator population could sustain itself without being detected. Ask your mate if they've had any reports of livestock kills or missing pets correlating with the sightings. That would be actual physical evidence rather than eyewitness reports.

I've lived in Surrey for years and the big cat sightings are probably misidentified dogs or foxes in poor light. A German Shepherd at dusk could look like a puma if you're already primed to expect one. Confirmation bias is mental - once you expect to see something, your brain fills in gaps to match expectations.

Why does everyone immediately go to "misidentification" when it's clearly something unusual? If three separate council calls describe similar animals, that's consistent witness testimony. Not definitive proof, but worth investigating. Has anyone done a proper search of the areas involved?