Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining our half year results presentation. For those of you who don't know me, I'm Dhruv Gehlot. I joined the group just a few weeks back, and I run the strategy and investor relations function. Now, moving on to the results presentation. Today, I'm joined by Adam Winslow, our CEO, Neil Manser, our Group CFO, and Lucy Johnson, MD of the Motor Business, who will take you through today's presentation, following which we will open for Q&A. At this point, over to Adam now. Thanks, Dhruv. Good morning, everyone. Look, first, let me start with the key messages. At the Capital Markets Day in July, we presented a diagnosis of where the group is, what needs to be fixed, and what success looks like. While we're in the early stages of that plan, work is underway on all work streams, and we're starting to see early signs of improvement across the group. As expected, this initial progress isn't yet reflected in today's results, as these results reflect decisions and actions principally taken last year. They do not, therefore, yet represent the true underlying earnings power of the group. While the motor strategy is in the process of being implemented, I'm pleased that in the first half, motor returned to profit and showed a 12-point improvement in the current year loss ratio compared to the first half of 2023. During the first half, we saw an expected decline in policy count as we continued to reprice the book and trade with discipline, writing business above a 10% net insurance margin. As outlined in July, we have a plan to return to growth in motor, and to that end, it's positive to see our PCW book started to grow policy count in the second quarter. Our non-motor business continued to grow across home-owned brands and commercial SME. Overall, non-motor delivered double-digit premium growth at an attractive margin of 11.6%. Our capital position remains strong and above our target of 180%, ending the period with a solvency ratio of 200%, following positive capital generation in the first half. The board has reviewed the progress the group has made and concluded it's appropriate to pay a dividend of two pence per share. Overall, as I said, we're in the early stages of our turnaround, and whilst our progress is not likely to be linear, and inevitably there will be challenges to deal with, I remain confident that we can deliver the targets I set out at our recent Capital Markets Day. I'll now hand over to Neil for the financial update. Thanks, Adam. Let me start with the results overview on slide six. As Adam said, the headline for this half is that we delivered strong premium growth, returned to profitability, and had good capital generation. Written premiums were up 54% through a combination of pricing actions in motor, the partnership with Motability, and double-digit premium growth in non-motor. The Net Insurance Margin was 1.8%, and you can see the split of this between motor and non-motor, our revised reporting segments on the top right of this slide. Operating profit was 64 million, 157 million better than last year, primarily due to the improvements in motor. We exited the half year with a strong solvency ratio of 198% after the 2p per share dividend we're announcing today. Overall, a profitable first half, and we expect to see further improvement in the motor result, in particular, in the second half of the year. Turning to motor now on slide seven. Premium in motor was up 77%, with the bulk of the growth coming from the Motability partnership, which commenced in Q3 last year and so is not in the half year comparative. If I exclude Motability, premium growth was 10%, reflecting higher average premium, but on a lower policy count, and Lucy will share more on motor trading after me. As I've said before, 2024 represents a transitional year for earnings in motor, with the first half result still impacted by business written in the first half of 2023. Now, despite this, we have begun to see the motor result benefit from the pricing actions we've taken, and you can see this in the current year claims ratio, which was 12 points better than the first half of last year. Prior year reserve movements were broadly neutral, with a small strengthening coming from third-party damage. I'd repeat what I said back in March, that I see limited opportunity for prior year releases in the short term. The combination of higher premiums and a lower expense ratio delivered a 23 point improvement in the net insurance margin. So following the operating loss of last year, we've returned to profitability with a GBP 3 million operating profit. Let's turn to motor average premiums on slide eight, and here we've updated the chart we showed you at the last couple of results. As you can see, average written premiums in the first half were broadly stable with the fourth quarter of last year. However, average earned premium is still rising, as you can see from the dark gray line on the chart, and this is further to go in the second half of this year. I've just talked about the year-on-year motor loss ratio improvement, and on the right, you can see the impact on the motor current year net insurance margin, which improved six points versus the second half of last year. During the first half of this year, we continued to write at a net insurance margin above 10%, and this will support the mechanical earn through of margin through 2024 and into 2025. So let's move on to non-motor on slide nine. As I said earlier, we're now reporting home, rescue, and commercial direct products in one segment, in line with how we run the business. Non-motor delivered written premium growth of 14% during the first half, which is ahead of our growth target of 7%-10%, and own brand policy count was broadly stable this year. Adam will talk through the individual product trading performances later on. The net insurance margin for non-motor was strong at 11.6% or 10.1% normalized for event weather. Now, the reduction versus last year was due to a combination of higher weather-related claims this year and lower prior year releases. Overall, non-motor delivered a strong result in the first half of 2024, with double-digit premium growth, a net insurance margin of 11.6%, and an operating profit of GBP 61 million. Let's move on to operating expenses on slide 10. The headline here is that the first half saw a two-point reduction in the operating expense ratio versus the half year last year, and this was the result of good cost control and higher earned premium. Overall, operating expenses for ongoing operations were GBP 278 million, an increase of 11% compared with the first half of 2023. Now, this was primarily due to costs, including within levies associated with the Motability partnership and higher amortization. I talked about both of these features at the full year results. If we look at controllable operating expenses and exclude Motability, these were 3% lower than last year, and Adam will talk more about cost progress in a minute. As I look ahead to the full year, I'd expect the premium impact to be less pronounced in the second half, and we expect the operating expense ratio for the full year to be broadly flat compared with twenty twenty-three. So let's move on to capital and then dividends on slide 11. Now, let me first deal with the miscalculation in the year-end reported capital figures. Very disappointing that this happened, and as you'd expect, we've already taken action to ensure the controls around this specific area have been strengthened. The corrected year-end solvency coverage is 188%, which is still above the 180% we target. Overall, capital generation in the first half has been good but did benefit from some one-offs, including market movements. If I exclude market movements and the one-offs, I'd estimate capital generation net of capital expenditure was around seven points in the first half of the year. We're announcing a dividend of two pence per share, and on a post-dividend basis, we end the half year with a strong ratio of 198%. As a reminder, our revised dividend policy is that we are aiming for a regular dividend of around 60% of post-tax operating profit. So to summarize on slide 12 before I hand over to Lucy: First, we delivered strong premium growth in the first half across both motor and non-motor. Secondly, we saw a significant improvement in the first half net insurance margin due to the earn through of higher premiums in motor and another strong result in non-motor. And thirdly, we ended the first half with a strong solvency and have declared a 2p per share dividend. Thank you, and over to Lucy. Thank you, Neil. Good morning, everyone. I want to start by providing an overview of the key messages I'll be sharing today. First, as I outlined at Capital Markets Day, our strategic focus remains on developing insurance technical excellence within motor and in order to drive for sustained, profitable growth. I remain confident in our strategy, and our refreshed team are in full execution mode, delivering the important changes which will enable us to trade effectively. Secondly, our experienced team and new capability has enabled us to monitor and respond to the market as we continue to see claims inflation that's elevated but improving, whilst also observing some reductions in market new business premiums, particularly in Q2. Thirdly, against this market backdrop, we have traded with discipline, prioritizing margin over volume. While we continue to see policy numbers decline, the rate of decline is improving through half one, and we're seeing positive trends in the early period of half two. Fourthly, as I laid out at Capital Markets Day, we have a combination of motor initiatives which are starting to deliver, with acceleration expected in the second half of the year. And finally, as Neil said earlier, 2024 is a transition year for motor earnings. We expect further improvements in the current margin to come through the second half of this year. At our Capital Markets Day, I shared our refreshed focus in insurance technical excellence within motor in order to drive for sustained, profitable growth. We are prioritizing our effort across each of these four elements: pricing and underwriting, specifically in technical pricing accuracy, customer experience, which is targeting improvements to build brilliant digital customer journeys and strong renewal outcomes, regaining leadership in claims cost control, and returning to our position as the leader in distribution through launching our Direct Line brand on PCWs. This focus on insurance technical excellence should generate improved competitiveness, increased conversion, loss ratio benefits, and combined with the reduced expense ratio from our cost out program, should lead to sustained profitable growth. I remain confident in our motor strategy. The team are engaged, excited, and in full execution mode. The rebuilt, experienced motor team have made a number of important changes to how we trade, which enable us to fully understand the external market and connect the dots internally, which in my experience is essential to succeed in the market. We have new data sources that are embedded that are enabling us to track market movements daily. We monitor and actively respond monthly on pricing adequacy, and the alignment between claims, underwriting, technical pricing, and actuarial is working effectively. These changes enable us to trade with confidence and discipline through the motor market cycle. And so turning to half one, I wanted to share some color on the motor market and our navigation of it. Overall, we have continued to observe elevated claims inflation in the market, in line with our expectations of high single digits. On claims severity, inflation remains elevated compared to this time last year. However, this has moderated in the last six months due to improvements in parts availability, paint inflation, and used car inflation across all fuel types. In addition, our average key to key times continue to outperform the market, which is providing our customers with better outcomes when they need us most. On claims frequency, it has been widely reported that the market was about 10% - 15% lower compared to pre-COVID, despite miles driven being almost back to pre-COVID levels. However, because of pricing and underwriting actions we have taken in 2023, we have seen a bigger reduction in claims frequency compared to pre-COVID in the first half of 2024. On total loss, our customer remediation is now materially complete, having been provided for in the 2023 results, and we continue to monitor and respond proactively to FCA and FOS guidance on vehicle valuations. Moving on to premium. As a reminder, in the eighteen months prior to half 1 2024, the market responded to record-breaking sustained levels of inflation, driven by supply chain and labor shortages, inflated used car prices, and general market inflation. In the first half of this year, customers were still facing high levels of year-on-year price increases, which kept shopping levels and quote demand high. We've now seen some competitors begin to reduce new business prices month on month, particularly in the second quarter. Again, against this competitive market backdrop, with our experienced team, we have remained disciplined and prioritized margin, which our results today demonstrate is beginning to earn through. Turning to Slide 17. We have shared before that we responded to inflation later than others in the motor market as we focused on rapidly restoring margins in 2023. While these necessary actions have started to deliver margin benefit, they are an important reminder of the context we operate in, and combined with our business's historic focus in direct distribution, this has led to our own brands in-force policies reducing by 7.5% in half 1 2024. The chart on the left shows that our discipline has led us to losing volume, albeit the rate of reduction slowed in the second quarter. In addition, our PCW distributed policies were stable across the first half and returned to growth in Q2 this year. We have a well-established PCW business with Churchill as our lead brand today, supported by other brands, and we look forward to launching Direct Line, our most recognized brand, onto PCWs. Across our PCW brands, we have improved our product set and are now offering customers a wider range of choice. Our retention rates have turned a corner since April. We have implemented new technical pricing models and data enrichment sources, and we now operate with a well-defined and managed underwriting footprint, which aligns with our pricing capabilities. In the weeks that have followed half one, we have seen the rate of reductions of policies continue to slow, and whilst we'll always trade with discipline, we will be well positioned to deliver growth during 2025. In the previous slide, I shared the winning strategies that contributed to the growth of PCW distributed policies in Q2. On top of these items, the team have continued to ramp up the pace of execution, which will support performance in 2024 and beyond. Firstly, we are driving significant value through our PCW pricing capability by increasing new business conversion whilst maintaining margin. Our click-to-sale conversion has increased alongside driving additional revenue through a 50% increase in the proportion of Churchill motor customers that choose to take rescue at the point of sale. We have also lowered premium finance deposits for customers, which has increased premium finance take-up, as we know for our customers that the first deposit amount can be critical when choosing an insurance provider. Our newly launched Churchill app now has over 16,000 downloads, and I, just like our customers, am happy that I can make policy changes and see my policy details with ease in the app. Sadly, I can also say with confidence that our in-app claims notification functionality works well. And while it was absolutely not my fault, I was able to register my claim, upload photos, and be allocated a repairer within five minutes. Our Direct Line branded app has also just launched, which again demonstrates our growing ability to deliver. In a competitive market, this new capability to deploy a steady stream of initiatives is critical to being able to deliver sustained, profitable growth in motor. Before I hand back to Adam, I'd like to close this section with an update on our plans for the second half and what this means for our full year outlook. In the second half of the year, my team will remain focused on continually improving our insurance technical excellence. We'll continue to prioritize data enrichment initiatives and complete the phased rollout of our next generation of technical pricing models. The plans we told you about to drive an increase in retention, such as improving retail and technical pricing capability and supporting our contact center colleagues with enhanced processes and discounting tools, should also start to bite in the second half of the year. Following the rollout of our Churchill and Direct Line apps, we will continue to simplify customer journeys by expanding the adoption of eDocs and driving greater use of digital, which is quicker for our customers and more efficient for us. The combination of the delivery of PCW pricing capability improvements in the first half and continual improvement in technical pricing gives us confidence in our ability to win on PCWs. And all of this delivery will support the successful launch of Direct Line on PCWs, for which we are developing our plans and are in build mode. As I shared at the start, we remain confident in our strategy and expect that we will see further improvement in the net insurance margin as the higher margin business continues to earn through. I'll now hand back to Adam. Thank you, Lucy. So turning to slide 21. Our ambition remains for DLG to become the customer's insurer of choice. As I said up front, we're in the early stages of our turnaround, but I'd like to highlight a few of our achievements in the first half. I've recruited an experienced and impressive new leadership team. Our most recent joiner is Dhruv, our new Chief Strategy and Investor Relations Officer. The rest of the team are joining us during Q4, and all have a track record of execution in this market. In the first half, we completed a root and branch strategy review across our entire group and decided to focus our portfolio on key lines where we see the greatest opportunity for targeted, profitable growth. As a result, we've moved other personal lines into non-core and are managing them consistent with our strategy of doing fewer things better. We've created a bottom-up cost execution plan, detailing the levers to support our target to deliver at least 100 million in Gross Run -Rate Cost Savings. We've expedited our work on the new target operating model and have mobilized best-in-class experts to help us simplify and streamline the business. We've taken important steps towards improving customer digital adoption. As Lucy just said, having released our new Churchill app, which now has over 16,000 downloads. This was built and delivered in just 12 weeks, and this capability enabled us to swiftly launch a Direct Line app, a Direct Line app only last week. In Rescue, our plans to expand through partnerships are off to a good start, and we plan to actively grow this channel further. Commercial Direct, we've expanded our SME footprint by helping tradespeople to protect their premises, whether a showroom, workshop, office, or their home, demonstrating our ability to grow our presence in underserved segments. In summary, we've started to make progress, and whilst there's a lot more to do, we have a clear strategy and plan to follow, so turning to non-motor on slide 22. We delivered a strong result and see substantial opportunity for further growth. Non-motor delivered double-digit premium growth, a net insurance margin of 11.6%, and operating profit of GBP 61 million. Let's take a closer look at each of these businesses, starting with home. Home, as you know, is the second largest personal lines market in the UK, with GBP 6.4 billion of Gross Written Premium, and we already operate at scale with a 9% share. The market has been challenging over the past three years, with weather events and high claims inflation at a time where little or no meaningful rate was being applied. Against that backdrop, we managed the period well, pricing ahead of the market while maintaining strong retention and delivering positive earnings for the group. As market inflation has returned, our competitiveness has improved. Across our own brand portfolio, we saw a pleasing increase in new business sales alongside higher average premiums. As a result, we've delivered three consecutive quarters of own brand policy count growth and premium growth of 21% in the first half. This growth has been achieved while continuing the rollout of our new technology platform, which is progressing well. We're writing Privilege policies on the new platform, and we plan to start writing Churchill and Direct Line policies on it by the end of this year. Turning to Commercial Direct on slide 24. Our portfolio covers landlord, van, and SME, which includes insurance for tradespeople, office professionals, and other small businesses. We've consistently achieved strong premium growth in commercial and grew 14% in the first half. This was primarily driven by landlord and SME, which make up over 60% of our portfolio and have been delivering consistently healthy margins. Landlord policy count was stable through the first half, and we delivered 16% premium growth year on year through a combination of rating action and better serving the needs of our customers, with increased take-up of our landlord emergency and rent guarantee add-ons. In the van market, conditions are pretty similar to motor in terms of market pricing and claims inflation. Against this backdrop, we've been disciplined and have taken the required rating action to protect margins and therefore step away from some less profitable segments. In SME, we grew policy count by 4% since year-end, and in the first half delivered 21% premium growth. In June, we launched premises cover for tradespeople, which should contribute to higher average premiums and drive future profitable growth. As I set out in July, expanding our pricing and underwriting capabilities, targeting underserved segments of the market, and offering compelling products while enhancing our customer proposition with lean and efficient digital servicing are the foundations for our growth ambitions in Commercial Direct. Finally, let's look at Rescue on slide 25. As you know, Green Flag is a well-established top three player in the rescue market. In the first half, Rescue delivered slight growth in premiums, and we're confident that our planned investment in our own patrol network will enhance efficiency and accelerate growth across both partnerships and direct channels. In Direct, premiums grew 5% due to improvements in our pricing capabilities, leading to higher average premiums. We also saw some improvement to our new business conversion. In the summer, we launched a new marketing campaign, which showcases the speed and value of Green Flag while offering customers the chance to win their premium back, all of which was designed to deliver higher quote volumes in this channel. As you've heard me say before, we have an exceptional service offering where customers appreciate our fast response times and excellent network. This should improve as we increase the size of our own patrol fleet and continue to target the expansion of our partnership volumes to increase scale efficiency. The planned expansion into new partners is progressing well. We have a pipeline of activities, and we look forward to sharing an update with you about these in due course. This represents a positive first step, and we have teams assembled who are actively looking at further opportunities to build on this momentum. Finally, our sales of linked policies continue to broadly track our own brand motor policy count, although we saw linked sales return to growth in the second quarter, following enhancements to the motor sales journey, which you just heard Lucy describe. So overall, progress across all three rescue channels, and this strategy is expected to enable us to grow ahead of the market and win share from the larger market incumbents. Moving on to costs, where we're in the early stages of delivery. Cost is a key component of the delivery of our 13% net insurance margin target. Only eight weeks ago, I told you about the cost-out program and key savings planned, spread across three opportunity areas. Since Hugh Hessing, our new Chief Operating Officer, joined us in July, we're focused on delivering our new target operating model, and we're using an expert third party to help us drive and execute a reduction in spans and layers to simplify and streamline the business. I'm confident in our ability to deliver at least GBP 100 million of run rate gross cost savings by the end of 2025, with a strong desire to go beyond that. So we're focused on delivering the three key objectives that we've already communicated to the market. We're targeting 7%-10% premium growth for our non-motor business. I'm confident on delivering at least GBP 100 million of run rate gross cost savings by the end of 2025, as well as delivering our 13% net insurance margin target in 2026. But what does that mean for this year? In motor, this year is a transitional year for earnings, and we expect further improvement to come through in the second half. In non-motor, we expect to maintain the good performance from the first half into the second half, and on costs, we anticipate our operating expense ratio to remain broadly flat year on year. So to close today's presentation, I'd like to remind you of our key messages. We're in the early stages of our turnaround strategy, and we've seen early signs of progress, but there's a lot more work for us to do. The business has returned to profit in the first half. Our non-motor business continued to grow and delivered double-digit premium growth. Our relentless focus on cost control helped us reduce the operating expense ratio and identify some quick wins to bring this number down further. Our positive capital generation, strong solvency, and progress on turnaround has enabled us to declare a dividend of GBP 0.02 per share. I remain confident that our new strategy should deliver profitability, growth, and enhanced shareholder returns. Of course, this progress is only possible with the hard work of our dedicated people, and I'd like to thank them once again for all that they do day to day for DLG and most importantly, for our customers. Thank you for listening, and we'll now take your questions. We will now open for Q&A. First, we'll take questions from the room before moving to the operator for questions online. Can I request everyone to keep to two questions, and please mention your name and company so that it can get captured? Can we start at the back with Faizan and then just move across? ... Hi there, Faizan Lakhani from HSBC. I wanted to dig into the reserve releases. Clearly, you mentioned short term, you don't expect a great deal, which makes sense. What do you define as short term? Is that by 2026? And if not, within that 13% NIM target, how much have you sort of implicitly assumed for reserve releases? And sort of second part to that as well, have you made allowance for the JCG guidelines, the Supreme Court verdict, you know, the pickup in whiplash tariff already within your assumptions in that one? And second one's on growth and policy count. Are you trying to back solve for a 10% NIM when thinking about sort of competitiveness within the motor market? And just trying to broadly understand as well, your average premium at Q2 is roughly in line with a drop as the, you know, broader market, yet your policy count dropped significantly within the first half of the year. Is there a business mix impact within that? Have you changed anything in terms of trying to go out and get business? Just try and understand what's going on, how do I sort of marry up pricing versus sort of policy count? Thank you. Great. Neil, why don't you take the first one, and Lucy and I'll take the second one, please. Yeah, I'll try. I think there were three questions in your first question. So let me... If I forget one, forgive me. So I think short term, we're saying, as I look at the reserves today, we would not expect there to be, or the opportunity for reserve releases is low. So that's as of today. If that message change, I'm sure that message will change. Secondly, we fully reserve for expectations for JCG at the year-end. So that was for us, that was a 2023 event. It was a 2024 event. That was already fully reserved, 'cause we look forward to what the expectations will be for those changing guidelines. And then on the third one, which is within the, what's the assumption within the 13% NIM? I mean, that's... It's a normalized assumption. I think you should take my view on a low opportunity for prior reserve releases to roll forward into that assumption. And on your growth and policy count question, look, I'd say on a macro point, you know, we are absolutely going to prioritize value over volume. I think we were pretty clear at that at Capital Markets. But Lucy, perhaps you can talk specifically about motor. Yeah. Yeah, maybe worth reiterating a couple of points. I think from the presentation, just to call them out, we, we have a different starting point to the marketplace. We talked about coming late to the inflation recognition, and also we've had a historic focus on the direct channel, and both of those things leave us in the position that we are today. I hope I've been clear about the broad range of initiatives that the business is focused in on to catch up with the marketplace. So if you remember the four quadrants of activity, but fundamentally, what those things are trying to do, and what they will do, is that they will make us more competitive, they will enable us to convert more business, and they will enable us to retain more business. And that's where we get the growth from. And then on top of that, of course, what we have as a major initiative is Direct Line on PCWs. I remind you, look, the position is different in non-motor, where we're seeing, for example, three consecutive quarters of growth in our home book, strong margins and strong underlying growth. Can we just go on the back? Hey, it's Darragh Quinn from RBC. You spoke about your claims inflation expectations still staying in high single digits for 2024. Can you talk a bit about your bodily injury claims experience at a half year? The reason I'm asking is because at the full year of 2023, I think you called out more BI claims and also more severe ones. So maybe talk about, you know, what have you seen in terms of BI frequency and severity. And I guess just, you know, an overarching point as well, what are your expectations for inflation as a whole for 2025 as you see it today? The second question, it's on a dividend. Now, I think the payout ratio is somewhere around 75% of operating EPS, which is a bit higher than a 60% policy. Is that a case of you kind of, you know, front-loading some of the full year dividend at the interims? And I guess in a similar vein, I mean, to the extent that you're wanting to show confidence in the underlying earnings, is excess capital returns a possibility at all at this full year, or is it completely out of the equation for now? Thanks. Why don't, Neil, you take the first one? I'll take the second one, please. So I would say, on BI and specifically, I mean, as you understand. I'm sure you're aware, large bodily injury claims are low frequency, high severity events. So you get periods of very benign, and then you get periods of quite a lot coming through. We've seen, I would say, over the course of the last eighteen months, we've seen quite a lot of variability month by month on quantum. The factor I think we're seeing at a market level, which I hear from third parties in the market, is there is a market level more individually large BI claims out there. So the kind of the average severity of these very large claims has definitely gone up. Now, part of that might be Ogden related, and we might see a release of that, depending on where the Ogden rate comes out. But I think there is a higher propensity now for very large BI claims in the marketplace. On the dividend question, look, the ratio is based on a full year number, not a half year number. I think, look, the board considered the underlying capital generation, the absolute solvency, and the encouraging early signs of progress that you've heard us each speak about and wanted to reflect their confidence in the direction of travel by paying the 2p dividend or by announcing the 2p dividend today. Look, I can't speculate on excess capital return. I'm not gonna prejudge at this stage board decisions which will be made in the future. Andreas. Andreas van Embden from Peel Hunt. Just wanted to discuss the economics and your thoughts around transferring or moving the Direct Line brand onto PCWs, 'cause-... Could you maybe just share what your assumptions are around cannibalization? Is there any assumption around that cannibalization of policy volumes as you move part of that business into PCWs? And also on the loss ratio, have you assumed any dilution in that loss ratio? Typically, PCWs have a higher loss ratio than I assume your direct channel. How are you going to manage that process? Could you just discuss? I think what I ultimately want to try and figure out is whether you will be writing at the same margin through your direct channel as PCWs, or will there be a difference? Thank you. And look, we did discuss some of these things in more detail at capital markets, but I'm going to pass to Lucy for the first question and Neil for the second. Yeah, and maybe it is a repeat of Capital Markets somewhat. But just to say, I mean, we as we think about doing something significant, like putting Direct Line on PCWs, we of course establish a business case, and there's a number of assumptions that go into that. Loss ratio, cannibalization is another great one that you can go to. And I think what's also helpful is we've got an established direct book, PCW book, as you point to, and therefore we're very aware of both the way in which customers shop today and also the resulting economics of that. And we've carefully modeled it, of course. We're aware of the sensitivities and very confident that all of that routes out in support of the Group NIM target of 13% in 2026. Yeah. Not forward-looking. Neil. I think that's the answer to the question, which is as you model it through, in terms of what the impact on the overall loss ratio margins are. I would think about the 13% target as the endpoint, and all of these are factors into that. Yeah, and look, any change- Well- We make, we are going to clearly consider any change in the margin targets that we have already published and that we are targeting, in this case, in 2026. Yeah. Coming back to the question, are you writing at the same margin assumption for PCW as your direct channel? So we don't- Your Direct Line. Yeah, I mean, I think when I consider my business and the margins that I'm writing at, I consider it as a business as a whole, and I have a bunch of different levers. Some of it, as you point out, are the channel differences between them, but I have product differences, I have mixed differences. And so I can understand why you really want to kind of point to that differentiation, but I guess I would say in the round overall, I have a very clear job, which is to write to my target margins, and I'm confident that I can do that. Will? Thanks, Ruth. Will Hardcastle, UBS. You've said previously, I think, that the second half of 2023 was written at... Motor was written at 10% NIM. Obviously, a lot of that was before your time at the business. I guess it's just, do we still stand by that view, or has anything changed on that? And secondly, coming back to the reserve point, do you feel like you're adding reserve confidence or buffers here, or it's simply there's limited release to come through because the reserves don't have that to support it? And I guess... Or is there something linked with a change in reserve release pattern, perhaps, that's pushing that out, and it will come through later? Thanks. I think they're both for you, Neil. So yes, sorry. I was thinking about the second one. The first one, so do we still stand by the 10% margin for the first half of last year? The second half of last year, sorry. There are always going to be ups and downs because it's a written basis versus when it earns through. When I think of the main variation is: Do you think that the claims are coming through in line with expected? And I would cast your mind back to the chart that Lucy showed at the Capital Markets Day, which showed if you look at the actual versus expected for claims performance over the last period of time, it's pretty much within a tramline of expectations. So I think that's the first question. On the second question, I would just say that I think the reserves at the moment are, they are probability weighted best estimate. That is the reserving philosophy under IFRS 17. That is what they are. I wouldn't want to say there are particularly more margins put in. We are reacting to things we see in the market. For example, the JCG thing from a previous question, reacted that at year-end 2023, put away reserves associated with that. So I think we're just reacting to what we see when we see it and trying to forward think about where the best estimate are for these reserves. Thanks, Will. Andy, did you have a question? Good. We move on. Thank you. Morning, it's Abid Hussain from Panmure Liberum. Can I just go back to the motor volumes question? So there's a shrinkage of 7.5% since the year-end. Can you just give us some color on who you're losing market share to, and when do you expect the underlying growth to come back? I mean, I'm not looking for sort of for precise, but sort of just a rough sort of gauge of when do you think you might get back to growth? Yeah. And linked to that, just following on from the previous question, the PCW distribution angle, are you finding that the customers are much more price sensitive and hence the volume shrinkage was more than you expected? That's the first question. The second question is on the regulatory backdrop. Do you think that the government will clamp down? I know there's been a lot of speak on clamping down on ancillary products, given the value for customers there. What do you think the outlook there? And then sort of linked to that, on premium finance, have you shared what your APR is on premium finance? Thank you. There's two questions with some sort of- Yeah, why don't you take one A and B? I'll do two. I'm not sure which ones are two. Anyway, I'll get started, and then. Exactly. Let you know when you want to chip in. I'll chip in. Yeah. So I think it's back to volumes to start with. Okay. So I think your first part of the question was around who we're ceding volumes to, and we monitor that like any organization does, and of course, it is a mixture of players in the marketplace. There's no one player, and it's broadly distributed against, you know, main players according to their size and scale. Maybe slightly biased to those that are pushing for volume at any given time. So nothing remarkable really about what we're seeing there. You then asked about driving for growth. Very important question, of course, and I can't predict the future on that. I think what I've hopefully shared at CMD and again today is that we've got that range of initiatives that enables us to be confident in growth. I know we want to be focusing on DL and PCWs, but really it is the initiatives across the value chain, given our starting point, that enables us to drive for that profitable, sustained growth, and that gives me confidence. We talked about, as you said, the PCW business had turned around into Q2. I don't think we shared in the presentation, but that trend's continued since the few weeks since the half year end, and so therefore, I'm very mindful of giving confidence, and I think what I can say is that I am confident that we will achieve growth during twenty twenty-five. I think on the regulatory backdrop, look, very clear, we are a regulated business. We absolutely want to operate within all regulatory parameters and prioritize good customer outcomes. There is a fair value outcome as a consequence of Consumer Duty, which we keep front in mind, and therefore your question about ancillary fees and income is something that we absolutely keep under continuous review for all of our products. In terms of the precise APRs, there is a range of different APRs we provide, but the point I would draw you back to is that, you know, we want to operate, within all regulatory frameworks and provide our customers with good outcomes, good and fair outcomes. Thanks, Alex Evans at Citi. Firstly, just on the motor loss ratios, I think previously you were talking about the 12-point earn through, just given the premiums that you'd written. It looks like on your slides, frequency's come down since Q4. You talked about moderating claims inflation. So why shouldn't we be seeing a bit of a faster improvement in the first half, and have your written loss ratios developed from the start of the year to sort of now? And then secondly, just back to the reserving. I mean, I think everyone appreciates 2024 is a transitioning year. Why not just take a one-off hit and be comfortable with the reserves and the investors as well? Thanks. So why don't you take one, I'll take two, Lucy? Yeah, I mean, I think the answer is on the loss ratio improvement, that there's a bunch of moving parts, and that I just draw you back to the fact that we have been, we continue to write above that 10% margin, and that we are confident in that earn through as it comes through in the second part of the year. I don't know if there's anything you'd add on that, Neil? No. No. Okay. On the reserve question, look, I, I'd draw you back probably to the prior answer. You know, which is, you know, we are comfortable with our reserving philosophy and approach. You know, there were some very minor changes, I think, in the first half that are detailed in the disclosures. And yeah, as I said, look, we keep that under constant review, but we're comfortable with where we are. Barrie? Hello, Barrie Corns from Panmure Liberum. I've just got two straight questions, if I may. First of all, Adam, you talked about new colleagues going to join you in Q4. Do you think there's a need for cultural change within Direct Line? And if so, how are you going to achieve that? And the second question I had, I think you have a introductory relationship with Tesla, and you're obviously a leader in insuring electric vehicles, battery electric vehicles. I just wondered how you see the outlook for insuring these vehicles, bearing in mind values seem to be dropping very fast, and complexity of repairing them. Thank you. Thanks for the question. I think I'll take the first one, and you perhaps the second. In terms of new colleagues, you're right, a number of new colleagues are joining. You know, we absolutely think about culture, ways of working within the business, and I think some change is necessary to improve, for example, accountability, speed of decision-making, and performance management. I think those were themes we talked about at Capital Markets. I think the upside of the new leaders is I think they will act as excellent role models for the business, and you know, that's something we will continue working on, because ultimately, delivering the targets that we have set require teams and people, not individuals, and so the whole business has to step up and step in in support. What I would say is, you know, people wanted, I think, clarity, direction, and action to be taken. We know that from our own engagement surveys, and so what we announced at the CMD in terms of the strategy has been very well-received internally, and so we build on those foundations with each and every new joiner. Lucy? On electric vehicles, it's a really good question. Actually, I think it's a great chance to reinforce that I, I think that success in electric vehicles, is dependent on the pieces that we're trying to put together for the motor business overall. So whilst they are unique in many ways, if you think about that value chain of technical excellence, the granular, granularity, apologies, of the analysis of understanding everything about them that drives frequency and severity of crashes so that you can optimize from a claims performance, but also price and underwrite accurately, is what we're doing across the whole portfolio. That being said, one of the first questions I asked the team was to show me the EV performance when I joined. I mean, without focusing on Tesla, I guess I can say I'm comfortable with the performance that we are writing the business at. It's an exciting part of the market moving forward. I'm looking forward to us doing a good job in EVs, but more so because I think that will demonstrate technical excellence across the whole of the motor market, rather than just on EVs specifically. And perhaps just to build on that, you know, if I think about our Motability partnership, there is a large proportion of that book that is increasingly becoming EV-oriented. So the opportunity to underwrite and learn more and more happens every day for us. Yeah. We are making considerable changes in our repair centers to ensure there are skilled technicians, level three, level four, that can enable us to conduct the repairs with safety and with quality, which, again, is something that we need to plan and prepare for as more people make the transition from internal combustion to EVs, and I think we're really well-placed in that transition. Thank you. ... If there's no questions, can we go to the line, please, first, before I go back to you as well? Thank you. We have our first question from Barrie Cohen from Ariel. Please go ahead. Yeah, good morning. So I have a question, just a point of just a clarification on two charts, 'cause I'm not quite sure. They're slightly different numbers, but they seem to be talking about the same thing. So if you compare slide six and slide eight, and you look at the motor, no, sorry, net insurance margin. Slide six says negative three. Slide eight says negative two. Which one of those numbers should we be looking at, and why would they be different? Neil, that's one for you. Yes, please. Yeah. Barrie, the difference is just prior year. So one is the current year net insurance margin, and one is an all-in net insurance margin. And which is which? So the negative three is all in. The negative two is current year. That's the difference between the slides. Okay. So if we look at slide eight, and we take a look at, like, what you're projecting for, like, the 2024 outlook, you go from a negative eight points to a positive 12, which kind of implies a positive four-point total for the year, and a delta of six points the first half to the second half. I'm a little bit confused. Quite honestly, I'm a little confused about, like, the results that you printed this morning, and I'm a little, certainly confused for the year-end, right? So if you read the transcript from the first half of 2023, you talk about the fact that you are writing motor margin consistent with a net insurance margin of 10%. And even if that was wrong by 50%, you were only writing for 5, you're still not writing at that margin based on this math. So all along the way, you keep on telling us you're writing at 10% or better. My question is, like, after a year of writing at a 10% margin, how are you printing a -3%? And why should we not be seeing, like, a 10% margin at the end of the year? So that's one question. My second question is a marker, if you will, and I think it's about time we got it. What is the profit in pounds that we are going to have to see before we see our capital come back to us? Like a hard pound profit number, not a percentage, not some other nonsense, but what is it gonna take for us to get our money back? Neil, why don't you take the first? I'll take the second. Let me try the first one, Barrie, and it might be we need to have a more detailed conversation-... after this. But if I try and triangulate the points, so, we said last year that from, I think we implied it from kind of July, August time, we are writing to a 10% net insurance margin. And that will obviously earn through over a period of time. Also, and I think we said at the time that was not an ultimate, on an ultimate basis, and we do reserve at 75% to start with, so there will always be a bit of a time lag in there. So I wouldn't expect us to be printing a 10% net insurance margin for this year at any point in time because of the way that earns through. So what we're trying to do with the chart is give you an indication of how that mechanically earns through over the course of into 2024 and then potentially into 2025. So as we're trying to put the pieces together, of course, we always backtest. Are we confident that the ultimate outworking of the business written will be close to 10%? Yes, it will be, but it will take a period of time to work through the books because of how it earns through and then how the percentile of the reserving works through the book. And, Barrie, in terms of your second question, I think we've got time to catch up, and that might be a better time to have a more in-depth conversation. But, you know, my focus is on our strategy, our plan, and delivering our targets. If we deliver those targets, we can create substantial value for all of our stakeholders, but we have never specified that in a pound amount, frame, or specific timeline. So I think if that was the question, then perhaps we can build on that offline. Next question. The next question is from Anthony Yang, from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning, and, thank you for taking my question. The first question is, I think you mentioned the, the outlook on NIM, for 2H 2024 in non-motor business. It's like, you're gonna likely to maintain that. So does that mean, we should view the 1H 2024 level at the, normalized, level going forward, given the reserve strengthening reporting there? That's my first question. Thanks. Look, if I take that, I think, look, I think that's the second half outlook for the non-motor business, and, you know, while, you know, the direction of travel is positive, I would say, look, as we go into autumn and winter, particularly with our home book in mind, then there is always a weather effect, that it's impossible for me sitting here today, Anthony, to be specific and forward-looking to know what's going to happen. So there is always a seasonality effect. If you put that to one side, I think the underlying activity and trends are positive, and we've tried to convey that message. Faizan, do you want to take this question before we go back? Thank you. This person have less parts, hopefully. With the mic. The mic. Turn on. Hi. Come through? Can you try now? Yep, yeah, thank you. My question is on the Solvency II walk. You had a two-point strain from capital requirement. Just thinking about the policy count growth this year, ex-Motability has actually shrunk. Could you just explain where that SCR intensity has come from and going forward, how we should think about that? And the second question, what is the combined ratio of the Motability business? If you can provide some sort of framework on how that is relative to your written NIM on motor as a whole? Thank you. Neil, why don't you take the first. I'll take the second. Okay, so on the first one, I mean, I would put it into context that I think it was a ten million increase in the SCR on a one point three billion number. So, I mean, the SCR is obviously sensitive to market assumptions, a number of assumptions, so I would say a ten million increase is actually flat on the SCR. It's worth saying that obviously a lot of the SCR is in relation to the back book and the reserves rather than the front book. So it's a mixture of your exposure and obviously, premium has increased this period, even if policy count is down, so the exposure is up over the period. So it's not just policy count, it's exposure, and also obviously, back book and investments have a big part to play in the total SCR. But the half year movement, I would say, I would see that as a zero movement. I think, look, we're not going to detail the combined of a specific partner. What I can say, and in terms of sort of how I think about Motability, that it is a really important strategic relationship, important right across DLG. And I draw you back perhaps into some comments I think that were made at the time we did the deal, which would give you some sort of sense of margin sensitivity in that respect. But I think it's, you know, it's wrong to look at that in just those terms. We earn from the underwriting side, but we also earn from the repair side. Hence my comments about, you know, when you think about the Motability deal, it's not purely on the market rate that we think about the value in its totality. I understand that. I guess my worry is that your combined ratio potentially get worse. Because it's a fairly significant part, even post quote share, I guess. But it's hard to disaggregate and understand what your underlying margin is, even if the NIM is sort of broadly in line. I guess that's where I'm trying to understand the-... dynamics there. I draw you back to the fact that, you know, when we thought about the targets we were going to publish in the CMD, as part of the CMD, then it's not like the Motability partnership was new at that point. It incepted effectively about a year ago, I think it was September last year. So, you know, we have been working now for a reasonable period of time, and therefore, you know, consistent with Lucy's prior answer, you know, each of those component parts, whether that's the DL question, the PCW question, the Motability question, goes into forming and underpinning the group 13% net insurance margin target for 2026. Operator, can I just check if there is any other questions online? We have no further questions from the phone lines. Given there's no further question, can I hand it back to you, Adam, for any closing remarks? Look, I simply wanted to say thank you very much for joining us today and making the time to hear the presentation. We'd be delighted to follow up with you individually, and I wish you a very good rest of the day, so thank you for coming.