Quindell sells Nationwide Accident Repair Services for £7.1m and settles US Navseeker case

Quindell has sold its entire investment in Nationwide Accident Repair Services.

The company has raised about £7.1 million by dropping the business after selling its 10.9 million shares for 65p a share. Last November, Quindell said that its stake in National Accident Repair Services was not for sale.

In an announcement to the London Stock Exchange, the claims outsourcer also said that it was in the process of settling a case out of court in the US over its purchase of Navseeker, a telematics company.

Navseeker took legal action against Quindell after claiming that the company had used its intellectual property without compensation despite not having full control of the business.

“The settlement, which remains subject to final approval by the Court, has been made without admission of liability,” said Quindell.

“The Company has been advised that the Plaintiffs’ claims had no merit and the litigation was being strenuously defended. However, given the alternative of an expensive and protracted continuation of US based litigation, the Board has determined that settlement is the best course of action in the circumstances. Notwithstanding the Board’s belief in the strength of its defence to the litigation, its outcome would still have been subject to the usual uncertainty that is an inherent part of any civil litigation.”Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000167 EndHTML:0000002330 StartFragment:0000000541 EndFragment:0000002314

Quindell has sold its entire investment in Nationwide Accident Repair Services.

The company has raised about £7.1 million by dropping the business after selling its 10.9 million shares for 65p a share. Last November, Quindell said that its stake in National Accident Repair Services was not for sale.

In an announcement to the London Stock Exchange, the claims outsourcer also said that it was in the process of settling a case out of court in the US over its purchase of Navseeker, a telematics company.

Navseeker took legal action against Quindell after claiming that the company had used its intellectual property without compensation despite not having full control of the business.

“The settlement, which remains subject to final approval by the Court, has been made without admission of liability,” said Quindell.

“The Company has been advised that the Plaintiffs’ claims had no merit and the litigation was being strenuously defended. However, given the alternative of an expensive and protracted continuation of US based litigation, the Board has determined that settlement is the best course of action in the circumstances. Notwithstanding the Board’s belief in the strength of its defence to the litigation, its outcome would still have been subject to the usual uncertainty that is an inherent part of any civil litigation.”

Mark Dugdale