Aviva Share Discussion Threads

[joe say] 16/3/2018 09:58

Be careful RF - they'll probably scam you with an exit fee (as the term no penalty for leaving means you're liable for £120 in their dictionary)

[my retirement fund] 16/3/2018 09:03

Just begun steps in transferring our house and car insurance from these dodgy crooks. Been using an app called quidco if anyone has heard of it. Amazed at some of the deals.

[joe say] 16/3/2018 08:05

Hopefully the dragged octagenarians will be the board members themselves

[catsick] 16/3/2018 01:41

Project mayhem at the 2018 agm ! Octagenarians being dragged out by security kicking and screaming at the crooks onstage!

[yupawiese2010] 15/3/2018 16:45

Bond managers negative comments in respect of cancelling pref shares.

[joe say] 15/3/2018 12:54

cheers yupa - makes interesting reading

Since discovering the failings, Aviva Investors and its senior management have worked with the FCA in an exceptionally open and cooperative manner and have committed significant resources to investigating and addressing the weaknesses in its control environment, making significant improvements, which include enhancing governance, strengthening its control framework and seeking to embed an appropriate culture under the leadership of a new management team.

Enhancing corporate governance - really ?

an appropriate culture - ditto

[yupawiese2010] 15/3/2018 12:48

Joe S.

Overall I agree with you comments regarding the FCA, they don't have much muscle especially in respect of blatant insider dealing, but they did fine Aviva £17 million as recently as 2015.

[catsick] 15/3/2018 11:03

Given the massive fines the banks are paying for miss selling running into billions with all the lawyers in the world doing no win no fee aviva are going to look pretty silly saying this was sold as irredeemable but now because interest rates fell we are going to redeem it. There will be all sorts of material outstanding from eons ago and just one email or piece of paper proving they were marketed to people with the assurance that they could not be redeemed will scupper them and open the floodgates of lawyering jackals

[joe say] 15/3/2018 08:19

FCA round for a cup of tea and a friendly chat more like

If ever a body was unfit for purpose - it's them (banks, PPI, xmas shopping clubs, PFG, insider dealing etc etc)

[yupawiese2010] 15/3/2018 08:11

F.C.A. in dialogue with Aviva.

[yupawiese2010] 14/3/2018 20:03

As an ordinary shareholder Im truly ashamed of the boards action in trying to have the pref shares cancelled at par, when you have potential pensioners having their retirement savings fleeced from them, through no fault of their own in this truly deplorable manner.

As an outsider looking to insure a house, car etc would I trust the Company to deal in an open fair manner should a claim arise. If the Company cannot treat their own pref holders fairly, no of course I wouldn't' I would immediately insure the respective items with another Company.

For my part if it ever came to a vote, I would vote to support the pref holders, the uplift for us ordinary share holders is minimal, to think that I might be forcing purely innocent pensioners into the poverty trap is truly repugnant to even think about, "I don't intend to have blood on my hands."

[joe say] 14/3/2018 16:38

Time for the institutions to step up - as they are 'required' to do

Some hope in Rip Off UK

[stemis] 14/3/2018 15:53

So Dennis and topvest, do you totally ignore the T's & C's when you make a major purchase/commitment?

It doesn't say anything in the T&C's (i.e. the prospectus) about cancelling the prefs at par. Clearly if their intention had been to give themselves the option to pay off the prefs they wouldn't have called them irredeemable and would have included the terms of redemption in the prospectus. Then the market could have priced them accordingly, But they didn't. Instead they are relying on an interpretation of company law to do it by claiming it's not 'redemption' but 'cancellation'. Well to holders of prefs the economic consequence of those are exactly the same. That sort of sharp practice might be legal, but then when you have the statement on your web site

Today, we believe we’re among the leaders in our industry. We are responsible owners who encourage greater transparency and sustainability and better corporate behaviours that help to reduce the risk for our clients.

hxxps://www.avivainvestors.com/en-gb/individual/about-us/responsible-investment.html

perhaps we are entitled to expect better.

[joe say] 14/3/2018 15:33

No - it doesn't simply come down to the legal documentation

There is a morality issue here, as well as a legal responsibility to be clear with both investors and lenders.

That Aviva has effectively duped people should be reprehensible - and director heads should roll

Awful way to do business - and I hope they pay the resultant price

[ianood] 14/3/2018 10:51

dennis - I'm not being Mr Nasty but it all comes down to the legal documentation that supports the individual issues. Indeed it seems that the GA issue may well be entirely differently claused to other AV issues. My point is if they are performing within their rights under the documentation, there is no case to answer and shareholder's interests come first.
As I said, these are not retail products and therefore people may suffer for the lack of research undertaken by their advisors - maybe that's where their efforts should be channeled - time will tell.

[dennis russell] 14/3/2018 10:18

ianood - no other issuer of Preference shares seems to agree with Aviva, indeed Ecclesiastical was quite dismissive. I am a substantial equity holder myself, and I do not want my company to become a pariah

[ianood] 14/3/2018 09:14

So Dennis and topvest, do you totally ignore the T's & C's when you make a major purchase/commitment?

Sorry, but buyers of pref shares, convertibles and irredeemable stock are playing in professional waters. These are not vanilla products as buyers of building society perps also found out. You cannot realistically expect AV's shareholders to pick up the can for investor's, or probably more likely, their advisor's lack of integrity and understanding.

[topvest] 13/3/2018 20:51

Yes, really bad judgement shown by management who have been shown up to have dodgy ethics. You can't do a good deal with a bad person. Sell!

[dennis russell] 13/3/2018 18:07

I am a longterm holder of AV equity, I have an AV pension plan, and have car and house insurance with AV - but Iam appalled at the bad publicity for this pension company being generated by AV's plan to destroy other people's pension plans. I hope AV will back off before any more harm is done.

[edmundshaw] 09/3/2018 19:29

swarb.co.uk/house-of-fraser-plc-v-acge-investments-limited-hl-1987/

Bloomberg appear to be citing the wrong legal precedent. The case above looks almost identical to the Aviva situation and is quite old.

In the prospectus for GA prefs, p.6f Clause 4(iii) in particular, a reduction in capital is allowed for (for the GA preferences at least), so I think preference shareholders don't really have a legal leg to stand on. If you buy a financial product like prefs, you really need to read the prospectus and understand it or have a broker who can advise. It is not a redemption of irredeemable prefs, it is a cancellation.

I have not looked at the prospectus for the AV.A/B prefs.

Not saying it is a nice tactic or very fair. But it is thre in black and white (_IF_ you know where to look).

[stewart64] 09/3/2018 14:36

Puts this one firmly in the value league as far as price to earning goes. But unlike rivals Standard Life and Legal and General (which I also hold) without slightly more racy price to book ratio.

[stewart64] 09/3/2018 14:24

Most pleasing thing about the accounts was the improvement in earnings. After tax of 1646m brings in a price to earning of 12.7 off a Market cap this afternoon of 20.91 billion. Hargreaves makes adjustments to 14.5, a massive improvement from 33. A slight fall in the price to book to 1.09 off Equity of 19.135 billion.

Don't like the presentation of the accounts...all bullet points and sectorial information. I nearly gave up cutting to the chase on page 41, the consolidated financial position and the reconciliation of profit page 32. Wish companies would start with an old fashioned balance sheet and income and expenditure account, then do the analysis.

[villarich] 09/3/2018 13:36

SP has woken up a day late

[speedsgh] 09/3/2018 09:53

Hargreaves Lansdown: Aviva needs to prove itself long-term -

Insurer Aviva (AV.) reported mixed results and Hargreaves Lansdown believes that the newly slimmed-down group needs to prove it can deliver long-term growth.

Aviva reported operating profits up 2% in 2017 to £3.1 billion driven by ‘exceptional gains’ in life insurance and fund management. The board also announced a final dividend of 19p per share, taking the full year payout to 27.4p, an 18% increase on last year.

But analyst Nicholas Hyett said it was ‘not all plain sailing’ due to deteriorating underwriting performance and climbing expenses in the life business.

‘[Chief executive] Mark Wilson’s move to simplify Aviva has done wonders,’ he said. ‘However, with the groundwork now complete the next job is to prove a slimmed down diversified insurer can deliver long-term growth as well as cash today.

‘The group’s targeting over 5% earnings growth a year from 2018, if that’s deliverable there’s scope for the already sizeable 5.8% dividend yield to swell over the years to come.’