Frp Advisory Share Discussion Threads

[buffetteer] 09/12/2015 09:16

Fair point !

[nehpets81] 08/12/2015 23:32

Well, the problem is it is so unspecific that it is hard to tell. I thought perhaps they meant they are in a position to mitigate against these changes to some extent and that taking advantage of these markets suggests they might snap up operators who are terminally struggling. If they are to gain from the changes, surely they would have specifically said so rather than wording it so ambiguously.

[buffetteer] 07/12/2015 14:46

neh
Do you not think that the second paragraph in their response showed confidence that their model will gain from the changes ...I do

'The notion of extending the small claims limit has been a topic of debate for some time and following the acquisition of Colemans LLP and its class leading Legal Processing Centre in August 2015, the Group has an operational capability designed specifically in anticipation of such changes. As such the Group is well positioned to take advantage of these market changes.'

[nehpets81] 07/12/2015 14:21

Agree with Adam here, the company's response where they stated that the changes will have no effect on the business before they are implemented was just stating the obvious. The fact they did not mention the year after the proposed changes come in means that people are likely to assume the measures will have a detrimental effect (otherwise surely the company would have stated they wouldn't).

For what it's worth I have banked my rapidly reducing profits here any may re-enter when there is a bit more clarity surrounding the situation.

[adamb1978] 07/12/2015 11:13

The real problem with this over the last week or so has been FRP's bungled response to the autumn statement, rather than the statement itself. It was very poorly drafted and didn't allow investors to understand the % of the business impacted by this, and the 'benefits' part was explained well enough.

That said, as a holder with a very long-term view on this, I'm likely to top up. My view prior to this noise was that the co was undervalued and now its 20% cheaper

[buffetteer] 07/12/2015 10:36

then its a buying opportunity

[masurenguy] 07/12/2015 10:32

I just can't see why last weeks autumn statement constitutes negative news for this company.

[scotchbroth] 07/12/2015 09:12

The Investors Chronicle article also said:-

"Fairpoint's response (to George Osborne's speech) was more bullish. The acquisition of Colemans in August had prepared it for changes to the small claims market, and could even allow it to benefit thanks to the margins and volumes at which it currently processes small claims. However, Simpson Millar, the law firm Fairpoint acquired in 2014, does offer PI legal services, generally focused on higher-value claims."

Considering the consultation was referring to MINOR whiplash injuries, and presumeably LOW VALUE claims, I thought the article strange in coming to a sell conclusion based purely on a regulatory dogfight, but with potential upside to earnings (albeit in Fairpoint's view).

[shaunstar] 06/12/2015 22:41

Well im glad this board is quiet - always a gd sign ;-)

Any thoughts on the recent pull back? I topped up too early, damn IC! Nevermind, i think its an over reaction as the story here is all about growing the consumer law side of the business and it seems to me the personal injury part is very small - and of no great consequence in the scheme of things.

[penpont] 04/12/2015 19:31

Negative article in the IC today, may be responsible in part for the drop:

IC VIEW:
This consultation - the findings of which will be implemented in 2017 - will be fought vigorously by personal injury firms arguing the proposed changes represent an unsubstantiated assault on victims. That said, a regulatory dogfight is unlikely to be good for share prices in the sector, and we exit our profitable tips in NAHL and Fairpoint accordingly. Sell.

[tudes100] 01/12/2015 00:45

Took the opportunity last week to open a modest holding. Like the business re-engineering story & think there is considerable opportunity in legal services as the market is just so fragmented. Nice to see HH increasing their holding.

[speedsgh] 30/11/2015 17:26

Looks like Hargreave Hale took advantage of last week's weakness to increase their holding above 18% threshold.

NOTIFICATION OF MAJOR INTEREST IN SHARES -

[thewheeliedealer] 29/11/2015 21:12

Hi all,

One of my twitter mates went to an Equity Development meeting recently and made some notes including FRP which he kindly let me share on my Website. It's fairly short but you might find it useful,

cheers WheelieD

[speedsgh] 27/11/2015 12:13

New Equity Development flash note just been released...

Still motoring -

Fairpoint’s shares fell yesterday due to concerns over how proposals in the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement could affect the performance of its consumer legal services operation. As per today’s RNS, there is no impact on expectations for the current year or FY16. Management briefings will put any future impact into perspective.

CONTEXT
The Chancellor’s spending review and Autumn Statement referred to an intention to reform “the compensation culture around minor motor accident injuries.” He hopes to cut claims by over £1bn pa and the average cost of motor insurance by £40-50 pa.

How could this affect Fairpoint?
 The timing of any implementation, currently planned for April 2017, will not
affect FY15 or FY16 results
 All relevant work-in-progress in our forecasts will be concluded well before
this deadline
 Any changes are still subject to detailed consultation

Although the exact details of the proposals are thus yet to be determined, in outline the government seeks to restrict access to compensation for sufferers of minor whiplash; specifically remove the right to general damages for minor soft tissue injuries.

We see any crackdown on fraud as net positive for creation of sustainable revenue streams. Those genuinely injured will still be entitled to claim for ‘special damages’ to include the cost of necessary treatments and loss of earnings.

More injuries will have access to the small claims court, due to a planned increase in the upper limit for these claims from £1,000 to £5,000. This has been a ‘hot’ topic of legal debate for some time and Fairpoint is well-positioned operationally post its August 2015 acquisition of Colemans LLP and its Legal Processing Centre.

As the latter now handles all group small claims court work any increase in the upper limit would see a higher proportion of its business processed in this way, and enable it to capitalise upon an existing platform with both operational capacity, and a proven ability to deliver consistent results at stable profit margins. Over the medium to longer term any higher upper limit may be positive news.

Apparently one of Colemans’ senior staff members has contributed to regulatory
discussions over this issue since 2009. Fairpoint thus believes it is well prepared for any change, having already reviewed the implications of the possible new price bandings and how it can structure its own processes to maintain its competitive advantages.

[pj 1] 27/11/2015 09:42

It certainly would, But ive yet to hold a share that has delivered that on request lol

[rogash] 27/11/2015 09:20

PJ1 Reg Hoare managing director MHP financial who I presume are their spokepersons.I have had replies from them before.It would be nice to see one or two director buys now?

[pj 1] 27/11/2015 09:15

rogash, thanks for that, it saved me a phone/call/ email. Can I ask who responded?

[wjccghcc] 27/11/2015 09:10

Umm, it doesn't say that. It says there is no impact for this year or next year since the legislation doesn't come into force until 4/17.

[rogash] 27/11/2015 09:07

I asked frp what is the exact impact of the new legislation. I received a very quick response stating that as the rns clearly states, there is no impact.

[adamb1978] 27/11/2015 08:32

9.1x PE for the year about to end so still very cheap

[adamb1978] 27/11/2015 08:31

Agreed that whilst the tone is positive, the announcement could have been clearer. The "well positioned" wording though implies that it wont be a material impact (and almost implies that the changes could be a benefit, though I'm not sure how)

[felix99] 27/11/2015 08:23

the big thing as I understand will be on profitability on such claims. If more goes to small claims then you don't get your legals back from the other side as I understand. That will be major part of any claim currently and probably a relatively large item compared to the whiplash compo?

[masurenguy] 27/11/2015 08:06

Yes, what is really needed is an approximate figure that relates to the current revenue derived from whiplash claims. If this is comparatively insignificant then it is irrelevant but if it is not then they need to publicly disclose what alternative legal work they have identified in order to replace it. The comment that "the Group has an operational capability designed specifically in anticipation of such changes. As such the Group is well positioned to take advantage of these market changes." is totally ambiguous and does not provide any transparency into the matter.