Quindell scotches report of major contract loss

Print This Post

28 November 2014


Stock exchange: shares up in early trading

Alternative business structure Quindell has quashed a news report of more problems for the AIM-listed company which led to a late dive in its share price yesterday.

The share price was up sharply in early trading, making up some of the loss seen yesterday, when it closed down 20% at 57p.

The report claimed that the company had lost a major contract and was suffering significant cash flow problems – a longstanding concern of investors given its practice of recognising income from personal injury cases before actually receiving the cash, while at the same time paying upfront for cases.

In a statement issued this morning, Quindell said that “contrary to speculation, it has not lost a major contract with a large claims management firm based in the North West of England and relationships with partners and customers remain strong. Further, the company confirms that the other negative statements in the same article are also untrue”.

Quindell’s rollercoaster share price had been on the rise since last week’s low point of 44p. In early 2014 it was as high as 660p.

It was also confirmed this week that former chairman Rob Terry and outgoing finance director Laurence Moorse had both given up the right to repurchase shares handed over to an American funder in the controversial sale and repurchase agreement that caused so much of a furore in the markets last week. This left Mr Terry with £6m from the arrangement.

The share price was also buffeted this week when Canaccord Genuity, until recently Quindell’s joint broker, stopped recommending that investors buy the shares, and called on stand-in chairman David Currie to carry out a review of the business.



Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

Algorithms and the law

Jeremy Barnett

Our aim is to start a discussion in the legal profession on the legal impact of algorithms on firms, software developers, insurers, and lawyers. In a longer paper, we consider whether algorithms should have a legal personality, an issue which will likely provoke an intense debate between those who believe in regulation and those who believe that ‘code is law’. In law, companies have the rights and obligations of a person. Algorithms are rapidly emerging as artificial persons: a legal entity that is not a human being but for certain purposes is legally considered to be a natural person. Intelligent algorithms will increasingly require formal training, testing, verification, certification, regulation, insurance, and status in law.

August 22nd, 2017