Jianpu Technology Inc. Securities Class Action Investigation

Feb 17, 2021 | Securities Class Action Archive

Jianpu Technology Inc. Investors With Losses Greater Than $50,000 Encouraged To Contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is investigating potential securities claims on behalf of shareholders of Jianpu Technology Inc. (“Jianpu” or the “Company”) (NYSE: JT) to determine whether Jianpu may have issued materially misleading business information to the investing public, thereby harming investors. 

On February 16, 2021, Jianpu announced the results of the Company’s “review of certain matters relating to transactions carried out by [its] Credit Card Recommendation Business Unit . . . with third-party business entities.”  

The findings of the review, according to Jianpu, “generally cover the fiscal years 2017-2019.”  The Company stated that “[t]he [r]eview found that certain transactions involved third-party agents (including both upstream agents and downstream suppliers) with undisclosed relationships, and some transactions lacked business substance (‘questionable transactions’).”

Jianpu announced that “[a]s a result, certain revenue and associated expenses were inflated or inaccurately recorded in the financial statements.  Evidence suggested that certain employees from the Credit Card [Business Unit] may have known about or been involved in certain of the questionable transactions that resulted in inflated sales commissions to such employees.  In relation to the questionable transactions, the [r]eview found that certain employees improperly altered supporting documents that were provided to the Company’s external auditor.”

Further, regarding the “overall financial impact of the questionable transactions on its financial statements,” Jianpu stated that it “. . . anticipates the total amount of overstated revenue for the fiscal years 2018 and 2019 to be approximately, RMB 90 million and RMB 164 million, respectively, representing approximately 4.5% and 10.1% of the total revenue previously reported by the Company for such years, and the adjustment to overstated cost and expenses together with the reserve for potential credit loss to be approximately RMB 90 million and RMB 130 million for the fiscal years of 2018 and 2019, respectively, resulting in a minimal net profit impact for the fiscal year 2018 and RMB 34 million of net loss impact for the fiscal year 2019.” [Emphasis added.]

On this news, the Company’s share price fell $0.60, or 13%, closing at $3.94 per share on February 16, 2021.

Jianpu investors who have suffered losses greater than $50,000 are encouraged to contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. to discuss potential legal claims by completing Kehoe Law Firm’s Securities Class Action Questionnaire or by sending an e-mail to [email protected] or [email protected]. 

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

 

 

 

 

Is Your Vehicle The Subject Of a Defect Investigation?

Feb 17, 2021 | Car Problems Car Complaints, Consumer Protection

NHTSA Active Vehicle Defect Investigations 

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making consumers aware that monthly reports of National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) recalls and active vehicle defect investigations can be viewed by clicking “NHTSA Monthly Reports: Recalls and Investigations.”

Investigations are grouped according to type of investigation (i.e., Preliminary Evaluation, Engineering Analysis, Recall Query, and Defect/Recall Petition) and identify the products under investigation, the alleged problem, and the investigation status.

For details on specific investigations, consumers can enter the investigation’s “Action#” in the NHTSA SAFETY ISSUE ID box, after selecting the “search by NHTSA ID” link on the NHTSA “Safety Issues & Recalls” page (click here.)

Types of NHTSA Defect Investigations

The types of defect investigations are defined by the NHTSA as follows:

PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (“PE”)

Initial phase of a NHTSA investigation, a PE is prompted after a review of consumer complaints and/or manufacturer service bulletins suggest a safety defect may exist. The results of a PE determine whether the investigation will be upgraded to an Engineering Analysis or closed. Most PEs are resolved within four months.

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS (“EA”)

Second and final phase of a NHTSA investigation, an EA is undertaken if data from a PE indicate further examination of a potential safety defect is warranted. The results of an EA determine whether a safety recall should be initiated or the investigation should be closed. Most EAs are resolved within one year.

RECALL QUERY (“RQ”)

NHTSA monitors recalls to ensure that the scope, completion rate, and remedy are adequate. If recall adequacy comes into question, an RQ is opened to determine if the scope of the recall should be expanded or an adjustment in existing remedies is required.

DEFECT OR RECALL PETITION (“DP” OR “RP”)

NHTSA may be petitioned to investigate an alleged safety defect or whether a manufacturer has successfully carried out the requirements of a recall. If the petition is granted, NHTSA opens an appropriate investigation. If the petition is denied, the reasons for denial are published in the Federal Register.

VEHICLE OWNERS AND LESSEES AFFECTED BY AUTOMOTIVE DEFECTS OR SAFETY RECALLS ARE ENCOURAGED TO CONTACT KEHOE LAW FIRM, P.C., [email protected], FOR A FREE, NO-OBLIGATION EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL LEGAL CLAIMS.  

Source: NHTSA.gov

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.