Nahl Share Discussion Threads

[eezymunny] 23/3/2016 08:33

"Whiplash claims are not a significant factor in their results". On what basis do you say that topvest?

[salchow] 23/3/2016 08:15

I would have thought there would still be a very large market for claims of above £5,000. After all what is £5,000 nowadays in a legal claim context - absolute peanuts. I have explained that a broken arm 25 years ago created a claim that paid out £10,000 at that time!

Also if claims of less than £5,000 go to the small claims court will that make much difference. From my experience in past years (things may have changed) you could not get costs awarded for you in the small claims court so if someone sued you then you asked for this court. Expensive lawyers would then probably not want to get involved with such claims. However, there is still a claim to be made and while you or I may be confident about appearing before a court many people are not and they will need someone to represent them. This is where someone like NAHL can come in and offer a standardised service at a cheap cost. Surely it is better for someone to put in a claim for a couple of thousand and have to pay part out in fees rather than make no claim at all. Of course, very small claims for whiplash may become impossible but I find it hard to imagine that there is not still plenty of business to seek. The Government have already commented that there is nothing in the proposed legislation to prevent persons making valid claims for injuries suffered.

The main problem with this share is that there is nothing likely to make people want to buy for some considerable time. With the continuing doubts I cannot imagine too many dividend seekers going for this. All that holders can do is put it away and forget it.

[topvest] 22/3/2016 20:59

Whiplash claims are not a significant factor in their results. Non-road traffic and medical negligence are by far the biggest areas. They haven't been very clear in dealing with the issue of explaining, but are these two latter areas impacted by the different small claims procedure or not?

from the below it looks like they are.....presumably this means that lawyers are maybe not taking on some of the work that was referred to them previously...

"In November 2015, the Chancellor, in his Autumn Statement, announced, inter alia, proposals to restrict consumers' eligibility for compensation for low value whiplash injury, along with plans to consult on transferring PI claims of up to GBP5,000 to the small claims court. The proposals will be subject to a detailed period of consultation and we anticipate there will be some short-term market volatility whilst the regulatory position is clarified. We have seen a number of law firms decide to withdraw from the PI market as a consequence."

[eezymunny] 22/3/2016 20:26

But corrientes. 2016 is largely irrelevant. What mattes is how much profit will drop as and when these whiplash claims are outlawed (2017 onwards most likely). The current situation is a nonsense. Every driver in every little bump claims, and is as good as guaranteed to get a payout of a couple of grand. It's just cheaper for the insurers to pay out than to contest. I know people in the claims industry. The whole thing is a shambles and that's why the gov is planning to stop it. NAH should IMO give a clear indication of how much they make from whiplash claim so that you shareholders can get a handle on things. Given their silence on the matter, and the lack of director buying, I'm inclined to think that a very big % of their profits come from these claims. I may of course be wrong.

[corrientes] 22/3/2016 16:28

They expect PI profits to drop in 2016 but overall only anticipate a marginal reduction. If you annualise Fitzalan and Bush earnings with higher margins,you can see where this is going, and a drop in whiplash isn't going to be a killer.

2017 is still a long way ahead and if there were doubts about future income, I would have expected a more conservative dividend policy to accompany a so-called profits warning.

[wilk1] 22/3/2016 16:14

I've made some very eezymoney over on Cpx today. The stock that keeps on giving, up 30% now

[salchow] 22/3/2016 15:42

EezyMunny - you could also say whiplash stuff made only a small part of profits. Why would you think it made such a large part (I know you say total guess). Common sense tells me that people will still claim for accidents which happen every day of the week without involving whiplash and will still need to be represented. Wasn't it something about claims of less than £5,000 being affected? Surely there will be a vast number of claims above this. My son sustained a broken arm when he fell in a play area 25 years ago and even that long ago it turned out to be worth around £10,000. Even for claims of a couple of thousand surely it only needs someone to get organised, standardise all procedures and help submit them for a fee that will be well covered by the claim.

[oshy92] 22/3/2016 14:14

Another TV interview here:

www.fmp-tv.co.uk/company/nahl-investor-relations-news-and-videos/

[eezymunny] 22/3/2016 14:03

Underlying op profits they state as £15.6m

The personal injury division delivered pbt of £15.6m

ie remaining bits of biz haven't delivered much at all, albeit not full year contributions yet.

If whiplash stuff made profits of £12m (total guess, the company has disgracefully IMO chosen not to tell you. I think this is perfectly plausible) that would leave the company making perhaps sub £5m pbt. Market cap £88m. Not cheap some would say (P/E 22?).

[wilk1] 22/3/2016 13:15

£2.18, not bad when my first buy was £3.50 ish. Been in and out a few times, I had to add and subtract about 50 trades to get to that price. Cpx has made up for it nicely though.

[imranawan] 22/3/2016 12:56

Out of interest what's your average now wilk1?

[salchow] 22/3/2016 12:44

battlebus2 - it must be quite a while since Legal and General sold out. I have a print out of holdings at 16.03.15 on which they don't feature. Since the initial price fall there have been some other sales but also increases in holdings by J P Morgan, Schroders and Polar Capital.

[wilk1] 22/3/2016 12:29

It will be the largest dividend payment I've ever had. Over £2k - bloody hell

[pictureframe] 22/3/2016 12:23

Nice yield

[corrientes] 22/3/2016 12:19

Too much being made of the so-called 'catastrophic' losses from whiplash claims which will turn out to be a damp squib.

[wilk1] 22/3/2016 12:18

Blue close anyone ?

[battlebus2] 22/3/2016 11:45

Sold entirely last year. Directors interview worth watching

[imranawan] 22/3/2016 10:53

battlebus2 when did Legal and General sell out, and have they now disposed of their position entirely?

[battlebus2] 22/3/2016 10:09

Legal and general selling out seems a good move now.

[wilk1] 22/3/2016 09:27

Fortunately, my other large holding is up 14% this morning so I'm a little to the upside. I did add here again at 182.25p

[djbilywiz] 22/3/2016 09:21

Decided to sell this morning, not feeling the vibe. A good business, put under strain by government proposals. Will be keeping an eye out for clarification and how this will impact the business and consider getting back in on a positive outcome.

[salchow] 22/3/2016 08:41

I would think it difficult to quantify the precise loss of business when the new rules have not yet been formalised. If they gave percentages how would that help? You would still have no idea of the ultimate effect. Whatever the new rules people are not going to cease to make accident claims and will want to be represented. Accident claims will surely continue to be an important area of economic activity. If I were running the business I would be looking at how to adapt to the new rules and would certainly not be anticipating a collapse of business. I think the people who run the business are well positioned to adapt.

Obviously, the immediate prospects are not what they were before last years announcement but the fall in the price reflects that. If anyone is concerned that this is not the case then they should get out of this share.

[eezymunny] 22/3/2016 08:31

Indeed imranawan. The 2016 numbers are pretty much irrelevant. What matters is how profitable they will be if all/most of the small PI claims business disappears from 2017. That they have given no indication at all is really poor form IMVHO.

[imranawan] 22/3/2016 08:24

Agreed it would have been helpful to quantify the level of contraction in NAH profits. Without this you can't value the company accurately. Note 2 provides a breakdown of the segments and PI is by far the largest segment. FRP at least quantified the potential impact on the business. I just can't see how they'll be able to grow overall earnings given the uncertainty over PI business.