In order to justify their charges JAS Parking have come up with a new concept; the fictitious pre-estimate of loss. Unlike a genuine pre-estimate of loss, where you are required to make some kind of accurate estimate, in the fictitious pre-estimate of loss you can make up what figures you like as long as you retro-fit them to the required target figure.
Here is an example of how it works. Here are JAS's pre-estimate of loss calculations for a POPLA appeal submitted circa July 2014.
![]()
The POPLA appeal was lost because 'IT system install' costs were not an allowable head of loss.
Here are JAS's new submissions circa January 2015.
![]()
You see how easy it is if you use the Fictitious pre-estimate of loss method? Simply remove any item which the POPLA assessors previously complained about, and artificially increase the other heads of costs by random amounts until the desired total (in this case £94) is reached.
Previously JAS parking have stated that it takes between 10-15 minutes for their attendants to issue a parking charge. This means their hourly wage at 15 minutes per ticket must be around 4 x £32.70 or £130.80. The Prankster expects a surge of applicants for the post of parking attendant at JAS parking tomorrow morning.
Previously JAS parking has stated it costs £3.50 to get DVLA details as they use a third party who adds £1 to the cost. The Prankster fails to see where the other £13.90 is incurred.
In the 2014 case JAS parking stated the cost of a POPLA appeal includes 2 hours of a senior manger's time and one hour of a director's time to check the appeal. The Prankster has seen their evidence pack and judging by the quality suspects that the 3 hours were spent playing tetris rather than checking the appeal. In any case, POPLA stated this was far too long to spend checking the appeal. In the 2015 case, JAS parking cannily removed the description while increasing the cost.
The Prankster suggests that JAS leaves the BPA and joins the IPC. In the IPC appeals process operator evidence is not made available to the motorist, leaving the operator free to lie as much as they like without fear of awkward questions being raised by The Prankster.
Happy Parking
The Parking Prankster
Here is an example of how it works. Here are JAS's pre-estimate of loss calculations for a POPLA appeal submitted circa July 2014.
Here are JAS's new submissions circa January 2015.
Previously JAS parking have stated that it takes between 10-15 minutes for their attendants to issue a parking charge. This means their hourly wage at 15 minutes per ticket must be around 4 x £32.70 or £130.80. The Prankster expects a surge of applicants for the post of parking attendant at JAS parking tomorrow morning.
Previously JAS parking has stated it costs £3.50 to get DVLA details as they use a third party who adds £1 to the cost. The Prankster fails to see where the other £13.90 is incurred.
In the 2014 case JAS parking stated the cost of a POPLA appeal includes 2 hours of a senior manger's time and one hour of a director's time to check the appeal. The Prankster has seen their evidence pack and judging by the quality suspects that the 3 hours were spent playing tetris rather than checking the appeal. In any case, POPLA stated this was far too long to spend checking the appeal. In the 2015 case, JAS parking cannily removed the description while increasing the cost.
The Prankster suggests that JAS leaves the BPA and joins the IPC. In the IPC appeals process operator evidence is not made available to the motorist, leaving the operator free to lie as much as they like without fear of awkward questions being raised by The Prankster.
Happy Parking
The Parking Prankster